Home and away part 2

[topcat]

Scratching my head why QP could only muster 340 fans. Wasn't Firhill their home ground for a while. Isn't Glasgow there home toon. Isn't Ochilview further from there traditional base. Even at Hampden there support is usually 500+ Must really be the telly coverage. Its the only thing I can really think would keep them away.  

[lady-isobel-barnett]

1 hour ago, topcat said:

Scratching my head why QP could only muster 340 fans. Wasn't Firhill their home ground for a while. Isn't Glasgow there home toon. Isn't Ochilview further from there traditional base. Even at Hampden there support is usually 500+ Must really be the telly coverage. Its the only thing I can really think would keep them away.  

Surprising but maybe only by 100 or so. Total crowd last night was very similar in size to the 4-0 game (also televised). It does highlight the absurdity of ticketing arrangements for Friday night.

[Weebaw1]

2 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

As I was corrected earlier. TV money goes to the SFPL and is pooled between all 42 clubs 

So Sevco scum benefit by around £1,200 from our game?

Thats unacceptable. I’ve sworn never to give them another penny.

[Weebaw1]

Last night’s game was absolutely superb. Great entertainment, both sides giving everything and the JL stand kids rocking throughout.

Surely we’re in charge. They had 4 injuries and we only 1(although Banzo had been magnificent up to his departure).

But we need to watch their number 11.

A wee mention to Fitzy who, when he suddenly switched on perhaps inspired by JL choir, looked like a world beater.

[Anniesland Jag]

Really enjoyed that despite our glaring defensive frailties.Not really sure how Dools can sort this out before Friday given our very limited defensive options….the reality is he can’t so expecting a very frantic goal fest again and penalties.

[Anniesland Jag]

1 hour ago, topcat said:

Scratching my head why QP could only muster 340 fans. Wasn't Firhill their home ground for a while. Isn't Glasgow there home toon. Isn't Ochilview further from there traditional base. Even at Hampden there support is usually 500+ Must really be the telly coverage. Its the only thing I can really think would keep them away.  

There was a very good “Beards through the ages”documentary last night on BBC 4……that might explain it .

Edited May 10 by Anniesland Jag
M

[exiledjag]

Given the absurdity of the SPL  play-off system which is designed to benefit the SPL team who finish in 11th place (excepting PTFC) I don't think either team would want extra time and penalties.

The system in England and in our lower leagues is much fairer.

 

[Muscat Jag]

7 minutes ago, exiledjag said:

Given the absurdity of the SPL  play-off system which is designed to benefit the SPL team who finish in 11th place (excepting PTFC) I don't think either team would want extra time and penalties.

The system in England and in our lower leagues is much fairer.

 

Unfortunately the SPFL don't give a flying **** about fairness. 

[laukat]

I see a lot of comments on how good Fitzpatrick was last night but I think I must have seen a different performance from everyone else. 

Yes he's exciting in attacking positions. He still more often than not picks the wrong option but at least last night he was getting more right than wrong however I think he's at least partly to blame for Queen's 2 & 3rd goals.

At the second goal, he's on the edge of the box marking Boateng but he just stands and watches the ball doesn't realise Boateng has peeled away to the middle and when the ball breaks to him Fitzpatrick is nowhere. If you look further back in the lead up to the goal he's next to Oakley as Queens gain possession in their half and at no point does Fitzpatrick make any attempt to match his run leaving Holt outnumbered.

At the 3rd goal he's the first player in a position to challenge Dom Thomas. Doolan says in his interview that he told the players to keep Thomas off his left foot and force him to go right. Fitzpatrick shows him infield onto his left rather than showing him right and then chasing down the Queens player near the touchline.

To my mind we looked better and Fitzpatrick looked better defensively and in attack when we had Lawless on the park and playing a 4-4-2. Once we shifted back to 4-2-3-1 there was too much distance between Holt and Fitzpatrick as Fitzpatrick isn't disciplined enough to compress the space and make the 4-2-3-1 a 4-5-1 when we lose the ball. Both the Queens 2 & 3 goals start from Thomas picking up possession in the same area of the field.

Hopefully he can learn and adapt. If I was the Queens Park manager and Fitzpatrick is starting on Friday then he's the person I would be looking to exploit.

[Dick Dastardly]

46 minutes ago, Anniesland Jag said:

Really enjoyed that despite our glaring defensive frailties.Not really sure how Dools can sort this out before Friday given our very limited defensive options….the reality is he can’t so expecting a very frantic goal fest again and penalties.

Defence looks much better with Holt in the middle. Fitz looked good, so could he perhaps start on the right wing and Lawless at left back allowing Holt to move to the centre. Only issue is that Stevie would be up against Thomas (11) who is the danger man.

[QXBoy]

How lucky were we to have one of Scotland's "top" referees officiating last night?

Cannae see a blatant foul - but no' very good at telling the time (thankfully)!

[Third Lanark]

25 minutes ago, laukat said:

I see a lot of comments on how good Fitzpatrick was last night but I think I must have seen a different performance from everyone else. 

Yes he's exciting in attacking positions. He still more often than not picks the wrong option but at least last night he was getting more right than wrong however I think he's at least partly to blame for Queen's 2 & 3rd goals.

At the second goal, he's on the edge of the box marking Boateng but he just stands and watches the ball doesn't realise Boateng has peeled away to the middle and when the ball breaks to him Fitzpatrick is nowhere. If you look further back in the lead up to the goal he's next to Oakley as Queens gain possession in their half and at no point does Fitzpatrick make any attempt to match his run leaving Holt outnumbered.

At the 3rd goal he's the first player in a position to challenge Dom Thomas. Doolan says in his interview that he told the players to keep Thomas off his left foot and force him to go right. Fitzpatrick shows him infield onto his left rather than showing him right and then chasing down the Queens player near the touchline.

To my mind we looked better and Fitzpatrick looked better defensively and in attack when we had Lawless on the park and playing a 4-4-2. Once we shifted back to 4-2-3-1 there was too much distance between Holt and Fitzpatrick as Fitzpatrick isn't disciplined enough to compress the space and make the 4-2-3-1 a 4-5-1 when we lose the ball. Both the Queens 2 & 3 goals start from Thomas picking up possession in the same area of the field.

Hopefully he can learn and adapt. If I was the Queens Park manager and Fitzpatrick is starting on Friday then he's the person I would be looking to exploit.

Their second goal should not have stood as it was a clear foul on Turner

[laukat]

5 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Their second goal should not have stood as it was a clear foul on Turner

Agree but we still need to defend better

[elevenone]

Some league as Dundee part with manager.

[Muscat Jag]

1 hour ago, QXBoy said:

How lucky were we to have one of Scotland's "top" referees officiating last night?

Cannae see a blatant foul - but no' very good at telling the time (thankfully)!

The ref was quite right to add on the time he did. Even played about a minute after Graham's goal. Qp's time wasting in injury time was comical. The tactic seemed to be foul a Thistle player and lie down injured for 2 minutes. Pretty sure it happened about 3 times. 

[Lenziejag]

3 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Surprising but maybe only by 100 or so. Total crowd last night was very similar in size to the 4-0 game (also televised). It does highlight the absurdity of ticketing arrangements for Friday night.

I think the crowd in the 4-0 game was over 4,000 but that was Easter weekend so May we’ll have been people home for the weekend ?

[laukat]

3 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I think the crowd in the 4-0 game was over 4,000 but that was Easter weekend so May we’ll have been people home for the weekend ?

Crowd in the 4-0 game was 3783 and that was probably boosted by it being Easter and the offer of a £10 entry if accompanied by a season ticket holder. 

To get 3754 last night without either of those factors is decent amount as 3400 of those were Thistle supporters. Perhaps a few that got attracted by the £10 entry have stayed with us?

You could also add at that for the 4-0 game we had a serious possibility of winning the league whereas last night was just the first of a very unlikely shot at promotion.

[Third Lanark]

1 hour ago, laukat said:

Agree but we still need to defend better

Completely agree we really do

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, laukat said:

I see a lot of comments on how good Fitzpatrick was last night but I think I must have seen a different performance from everyone else. 

Yes he's exciting in attacking positions. He still more often than not picks the wrong option but at least last night he was getting more right than wrong however I think he's at least partly to blame for Queen's 2 & 3rd goals.

At the second goal, he's on the edge of the box marking Boateng but he just stands and watches the ball doesn't realise Boateng has peeled away to the middle and when the ball breaks to him Fitzpatrick is nowhere. If you look further back in the lead up to the goal he's next to Oakley as Queens gain possession in their half and at no point does Fitzpatrick make any attempt to match his run leaving Holt outnumbered.

At the 3rd goal he's the first player in a position to challenge Dom Thomas. Doolan says in his interview that he told the players to keep Thomas off his left foot and force him to go right. Fitzpatrick shows him infield onto his left rather than showing him right and then chasing down the Queens player near the touchline.

To my mind we looked better and Fitzpatrick looked better defensively and in attack when we had Lawless on the park and playing a 4-4-2. Once we shifted back to 4-2-3-1 there was too much distance between Holt and Fitzpatrick as Fitzpatrick isn't disciplined enough to compress the space and make the 4-2-3-1 a 4-5-1 when we lose the ball. Both the Queens 2 & 3 goals start from Thomas picking up possession in the same area of the field.

Hopefully he can learn and adapt. If I was the Queens Park manager and Fitzpatrick is starting on Friday then he's the person I would be looking to exploit.

Of course, there is another way to look at this. Knowing how Fitzpatrick plays, we adjust our tactics to suit. 
In order to have Holt at centre back, I wonder if it is worth starting Hodson at left back ?

[Lenziejag]

17 minutes ago, laukat said:

Crowd in the 4-0 game was 3783 and that was probably boosted by it being Easter and the offer of a £10 entry if accompanied by a season ticket holder. 

To get 3754 last night without either of those factors is decent amount as 3400 of those were Thistle supporters. Perhaps a few that got attracted by the £10 entry have stayed with us?

You could also add at that for the 4-0 game we had a serious possibility of winning the league whereas last night was just the first of a very unlikely shot at promotion.

Ok. Was it the Ayr game that was over 4k. I am sure one of them was.

[scotty]

23 minutes ago, laukat said:

Crowd in the 4-0 game was 3783 and that was probably boosted by it being Easter and the offer of a £10 entry if accompanied by a season ticket holder. 

To get 3754 last night without either of those factors is decent amount as 3400 of those were Thistle supporters. Perhaps a few that got attracted by the £10 entry have stayed with us?

You could also add at that for the 4-0 game we had a serious possibility of winning the league whereas last night was just the first of a very unlikely shot at promotion.

The season ticket wasn't valid for last night so that makes the attendance more impressive.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

38 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Of course, there is another way to look at this. Knowing how Fitzpatrick plays, we adjust our tactics to suit. 
In order to have Holt at centre back, I wonder if it is worth starting Hodson at left back ?

Brownlie playing off his wrong foot at LCB is a worry, so that's an option very worth considering. Holt to his credit has been rather effective getting forward but defending is the key issue at the moment and the Muirhead/Holt pairing, shaky as it can be, is the best we've got.

Another option is to go with three at the back. The Stenny pitch suits a narrower formation and if Bannigan out we'd have little personnel changes to make to the starting line up. The downside could be sending out the wrong message. There's no way we should be playing for a draw and there's an increased tendency to sit back if you've got an extra centreback. Worthwhile tho' later in the game if we increased our lead.

Edited May 10 by lady-isobel-barnett

[JeanieD]

Worth pointing out that at 3-1 a defensive substitution was made - which invited pressure with inevitable results. To play in such a manner on Friday would be almost laughably foolish ..................... then again....................

[laukat]

I wouldn't be changing the 4 at the back. Apart from the first 15 minutes where Murihead and Brownlie were leaving things to each other they were fine. 

Problem last night was in front of the back 4. Bannigan getting injured as Thomas breaks forward for the 1st is really unlucky as he would have got back in to help. If you watch the replay by the time Thomas shoots Tiffoney got back and Turner was just arriving and both of them started from higher up the pitch than Bannigan. Second and third goals were again more about what the midfield and Fitzpatrick don't do. Back 4 aren't doing anything massively wrong. The whole of the second half Queens never really looked like created anything else.

If we are looking at tinkering with formation it would be tempting to start 4-4-2 as per the start of the second half particularly if Bannigan is injured. Turner isn't a strong defensively as Bannigan so having 4 across the midfield and not any large gaps between midfield 4 and back 4 was making it very difficult for Queens. Queens don't have a target man to win balls flick ons or vary their attack so with 2 banks of 4 to get through it does curtail their options to trying to go outside our fullbacks. Equally Graham and Tiffoney were working really well as front pairing.

Really wouldn't want Hodson playing leftback against Dom Thomas. We need the natural left foot of Holt to counter Queens best asset. 

So its either go with 4-2-3-1 with preferably Bannigan alongside Docherty and if not Hodson  or go 4-4-2 with Turner in beside Docherty. On the plus side I think we may have discovered in playing 4-4-2 with Graham and Tiffoney a plan B.

 

[Anniesland Jag]

4 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Defence looks much better with Holt in the middle. Fitz looked good, so could he perhaps start on the right wing and Lawless at left back allowing Holt to move to the centre. Only issue is that Stevie would be up against Thomas (11) who is the danger man.

Would be more inclined to put Hodson at left back and Holt in mid defence dropping  Brownlie and leaving McMillan and Muirhead as is.Wee Stevie best on right and up front and causing havoc as we undoubtedly need more creativity and goals .

Edited May 10 by Anniesland Jag