Livi Game

[Winter of '63]

We started with a bit of energy but by the second half a dogged Livingston looked far more likely to score...once again we hardly made a decent chance or had a shot at goal. Our defensive record is impressive and the back four did well with Milne outstanding and McBeth was ok in midfield. Fitzpatrick was excellent first half and will have sore ankles tonight. 

Not much else positive. The side looked unbalanced with Turner's talents wasted and no options down the right flank. The midfield is not functioning - I thought Alston & McInroy were pretty ineffective last season but Crawford is Shea Gordon without the goals -a midfield player who is almost literally never on the ball in the entire game. 

That's my fourth game of the season - they have all been lacklustre performances and dull games. Fourth place looks the best this side will manage. With the traffic  problems getting through Charing Cross and parking issues, I haven't much enjoyed going to Firhill this season - I have a Season Ticket but need a lot more entertainment to make me want to keep going to games.

 

 

 

[jagfox]

7 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Doolans interview on the Facebook page- you can be sure he’s not getting sacked.  They wouldn’t have uploaded the interview otherwise 

Why would he get sacked after that? 

It was rubbish. I think he has the next three games.

Based on what I'm watching I'd not be upset if he left.

I am over the Rubicon on that one.

He's a great guy but i can't watch that shite for much longer.

[johnkebab71]

Awful game with pretty much no positives other than Milne. 
 

Crawford is an abysmal signing which comes more and more apparent with every appearance. 
 

Diack was like a man down and Graham wasn’t any better..2 up just doesn’t work for us IMO
 

Turner was a waste out wide. 
 

Absolute zero urgency, far too slow with literally no idea how to put positives play together. 
 

Fitz was ok but final ball was dreadful. 

Robinson had to pass instead of trying to be the hero. 
 

Not sure where Doolan goes from here as he seems out of ideas with a poor squad and his post match comments were delusional. 

Edited October 5, 2024 by johnkebab71

[laukat]

That was better than last week but we are still playing some eye bleeding football.

Roberts is an excellent shot stopper and commands his area but every week he launches the ball 3 or 4 times for no real gain and doesn't release the ball quick enough. McBeth played well today but he seems to have studied at the Aaron Muirhead school of long diagonal passes with 1 in every 4 being useful.

The formation was better today but you can still see Doolan and McDonald overthinking it. If we're playing 4-4-2 put on 2 wide players don't force Turner or DIack into a unfamiliar role when you have 2 wingers sitting on the bench. 

The game was there to be won if Doolan has chosen to be more adventurous with his subs but instead he brings on Bannigan and Stanway who are both downgrades on Turner and Crawford bit also meant no real change in formation or tactics so was largely fresh legs to see out the draw.

I'm already of the opinion that I don't think Doolan is the man to fix this. Fail to get 4 points from the next 2 and it has to be time up.

On the plus side - back 4 was solid with Ashcroft having a decent game and his clearance of the line was as good as a goal. McBeth was good at breaking up play. Everyone else was probably 6/10 so not terrible just not good.

[jaggy]

For those saying we can’t have Brian Graham playing for 90 minutes, what’s the alternative? It’s not Diack (yet) and Ablade is out for possibly 6 weeks

[lady-isobel-barnett]

I thought there was improvement from our last home game despite losing out on a couple of points. Livi look a better outfit than the Pars. However we continue to make very few scoring chances. Problems by and large are all of an attacking nature. In contrast I thought McBeth broke up play well protecting the back four, who in turn looked comfortable defensively. We just seem no further forward in the advanced areas. No penetration thru midfield and little co-ordination in attack. 

As a generalisation it's often the case the manager gets over criticised whilst the players get off lightly. But our problems are very much down to the management. We've got midfielders and forwards with proven ability. I think today's goalie, back four and defensive mid look fine.  It's up to Doolan to select five further up the field to compete in a far more effective  manner. Time is fast running out. 

 

 

[jagfox]

5 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

I thought there was improvement from our last home game despite losing out on a couple of points. Livi look a better outfit than the Pars. However we continue to make very few scoring chances. Problems by and large are all of an attacking nature. In contrast I thought McBeth broke up play well protecting the back four, who in turn looked comfortable defensively. We just seem no further forward in the advanced areas. No penetration thru midfield and little co-ordination in attack. 

As a generalisation it's often the case the manager gets over criticised whilst the players get off lightly. But our problems are very much down to the management. We've got midfielders and forwards with proven ability. I think today's goalie, back four and defensive mid look fine.  It's up to Doolan to select five further up the field to compete in a far more effective  manner. Time is fast running out. 

 

 

How did we improve in an attacking way?

Maybe slightly more direct and quicker than previous games.

Still not good enough, still boring to watch.

Never looked like scoring and one shot on target which I'm struggling to remember.

Not good enough. 

I would say first place is gone and even finishing fourth would be a challenge as things stand.

Falkirk next and I'd be delighted with a win, but based on today I still don't see how we score a goal.

If we can sort that out we could be right in the mix after a few games, but I have serious doubts we are capable of that.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

22 minutes ago, jagfox said:

How did we improve in an attacking way?

Maybe didn't express myself well. Improvement was defensively. 

[JAG1970]

Could be worse. We could have Derek Adams as manager, now languishing at the very bottom of the English league. Even less points than us and more games played. Well, I needed something to cheer me up!

[Jaggernaut]

The overall performance seemed more energetic and faster than of late, but in the end, in particular in the final third of the park, it all fizzled out. Even when the likes of Fitzpatrick or Milne go on a run at the defence, the final ball is either poor or there is nobody in a good position to receive it (well, maybe one, but surrounded by defenders). And for me there's still too much tippy tappy stuff at close quarters on the wings for no gain in territory and no openings created.

Don't get me started on set pieces.... I can start on my own: Awful. Every time I see Turner lining up to take either a free kick or a corner my heart truly sinks. I was glad to see Fitzpatrick taking over on more corners yesterday, not that they came to anything either. 

Throw-ins.... truly terrible! We take for ever, and every single time it's just to throw the ball no more than two yards and hope to get a pass back from the receiver, then it's back to the tippy-tappy stuff. There just seems to be nobody who wants to run fast and get a move going from a shy.

I remember years ago Livi beat us at Firhill with two brilliantly worked corners that left our team looking like amateurs. They almost did it again yesterday, whereas our corners..... they are the most predictable thing on show, after our throw-ins, and the inevitable fizzling out of any threat from said corners.

And yet after all that, I thought it wasn't a bad game, and we were damned lucky not to lose it at the very end (Well done, Ashcroft!). 

[chunky jag]

Poor game, first half we were the better team, with the milne volley from the corner being the best effort at goal, thought fitz had a good first half and i fancied us to go on and win it 2nd half. But we didnt show up 2nd half and if it wasnt for that great clearance from Ashcroft, we would have lost it and couldn't have had any complaints. 
 

I love Kris Doolan, i really do. But this isnt working, and i dont see it changing. 6 goals scored in 8 games, is pathetic. The fact we’ve had 4 games at firhill, without conceding, and yet remain double digit points off the top of the league, shows where the problem is, we have title winning defensive numbers, but relegation form at the other end of the pitch, where it seems like unless fitzy wants to go on a run beating 3 men, we have very little that threatens teams.

[partickthedog]

In general agreement with most of the above. Slight improvement on last 2 weeks, but overall still very disappointing and we seemed to decline the longer the game progressed.

What occurred to me was the lack of the sort of combinational play which so often produces goals. Milne and Fitzpatrick managed some of that in the first half, but no other players seemed capable of linking up with each other, and there was a complete disconnect between Graham and Diack, and also between the two of them and the rest of the team. Megwa did reasonably well, but he had no one to combine with. 

You would have thought that the necessary telepathic understanding would be built up in the good training we have every week, but that does not seem to be the case. When someone makes a break, the final pass or cross rarely finds a colleague, but perhaps they are not making the right runs?

Nothing against Bannigan and Stanway, but the final double midfield substitution was very negative. Surely that was the time to bring on Chalmers or Smith to set Livingston some new challenges and change the flow of the game.

For next week I am clinging to the hope that Falkirk may play a more open game than our last 3 opponents (Dunfermline, Hamilton and Livingston) and that will in turn encourage us to play some good open football as well. Maybe there is more danger of conceding, but we do look so much better when a game opens up rather than the attritional trench warfare to which we are sadly becoming accustomed.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

10 hours ago, Jaggernaut said:

The overall performance seemed more energetic and faster than of late, but in the end, in particular in the final third of the park, it all fizzled out. Even when the likes of Fitzpatrick or Milne go on a run at the defence, the final ball is either poor or there is nobody in a good position to receive it (well, maybe one, but surrounded by defenders). And for me there's still too much tippy tappy stuff at close quarters on the wings for no gain in territory and no openings created.

Don't get me started on set pieces.... I can start on my own: Awful. Every time I see Turner lining up to take either a free kick or a corner my heart truly sinks. I was glad to see Fitzpatrick taking over on more corners yesterday, not that they came to anything either. 

Throw-ins.... truly terrible! We take for ever, and every single time it's just to throw the ball no more than two yards and hope to get a pass back from the receiver, then it's back to the tippy-tappy stuff. There just seems to be nobody who wants to run fast and get a move going from a shy.

I remember years ago Livi beat us at Firhill with two brilliantly worked corners that left our team looking like amateurs. They almost did it again yesterday, whereas our corners..... they are the most predictable thing on show, after our throw-ins, and the inevitable fizzling out of any threat from said corners.

And yet after all that, I thought it wasn't a bad game, and we were damned lucky not to lose it at the very end (Well done, Ashcroft!). 

Not that I disagree with the rest of your post but yes, throw ins are truly terrible. May be wrong but I think we took only one shy quickly yesterday (Fitzpatrick, who then made an arse of the return ball). Losing possession too cheaply has been a problem all season and throw ins only exemplify that problem. That and slow distribution from the keeper are two parts of the game that if we worked on may help us move the ball thru midfield at a better pace. 

[MarciaBlaine]

Re: throw-ins, agree we're inept.

But it's not just the 'to you, to me' ones we do, there's also the awful 'billiards style' throw-in*, where we just loft the ball up the touchline at a narrow angle, meaning we inevitably lose momentum and usually possession. Unimaginative percentage football at its worst.

 

*Possibly a reference for the older reader! In billiards there's often a passage of the game where players nudge the 3 balls off the side cushion repeatedly, creeping up the table. There's a funny clip somewhere of Steve Davis demonstrating it while slyly wondering why billiards has never caught on as an entertainment spectacle... Draw your own metaphors there.

Edited October 6, 2024 by MarciaBlaine

[dl1971]

Agree with the majority of posters on our offensive woes. Its the midfield lack of creativity that's at the centre of it.....and it's difficult to see how that might change anytime soon. The issue of shys hardly important looking at the big picture.....also its wrong to say we are playing tippy tappy football ( we used to but not anymore ). I hate to say it but I think we probably do have to become a long ball team ( play 2 up front ) until such times we get some decent scoring midfielders in the team ( or until Lawless comes back ). 

[Lambies Lost Doo]

Midfield improvement to me seems obvious so it probably isn't. 

Turner & Bannigan as the 2.  Robinson further ahead supporting Graham.

Then we tell Chslmers to play as he did last year and get Fitzy looking up more before his crosses.

 

 

[laukat]

Now that Robinson is back our injuries are really not much of an excuse. 

MacKay and Lawless are a miss but we are well covered for wingers. Ablade looks a player but I don't think Doolan signed him to start.

So I would assume the manager can now play his preferred formation which is probably still 4-2-3-1.

It will require the manager to go with Chalmers or Smith and choose which of McBeth and Crawford doesn't start. Personally I like Crawford but I think he's more suited to 4-4-2.

With that in mind I would have thought Doolan wanted the following:

                       Roberts

Megwa-Ashcroft-O'Reilly-Milne

                 McBeth-Turner

      Chalmers-Robinson-Fitzpatrick

                      Graham

[Woodstock Jag]

4 minutes ago, laukat said:

Now that Robinson is back our injuries are really not much of an excuse. 

MacKay and Lawless are a miss but we are well covered for wingers. Ablade looks a player but I don't think Doolan signed him to start.

So I would assume the manager can now play his preferred formation which is probably still 4-2-3-1.

It will require the manager to go with Chalmers or Smith and choose which of McBeth and Crawford doesn't start. Personally I like Crawford but I think he's more suited to 4-4-2.

With that in mind I would have thought Doolan wanted the following:

                       Roberts

Megwa-Ashcroft-O'Reilly-Milne

                 McBeth-Turner

      Chalmers-Robinson-Fitzpatrick

                      Graham

So I’m more sympathetic than most to the idea of McBeth being just as good in midfield as in defence.

But I rate him well above Ashcroft at centre back, a good goal line clearance yesterday notwithstanding.

So I’d have Banzo in beside Turner.

Otherwise, broadly agree. We have the players for the preferred system. They’ve just got to start creating proper chances.

What we’re missing is effective chance creation on the right wing, having lost McMillan and Lawless. That makes it easier to shut down the left wing, and deprives Graham of clear cut chances.

So many of our goals last season… McMillan/Lawless/Fitz/Milne pelting to the by-line then cutting it back.

Just not happening this year. So all the goals are coming from set pieces.

[laukat]

44 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

So I’m more sympathetic than most to the idea of McBeth being just as good in midfield as in defence.

But I rate him well above Ashcroft at centre back, a good goal line clearance yesterday notwithstanding.

So I’d have Banzo in beside Turner.

Otherwise, broadly agree. We have the players for the preferred system. They’ve just got to start creating proper chances.

What we’re missing is effective chance creation on the right wing, having lost McMillan and Lawless. That makes it easier to shut down the left wing, and deprives Graham of clear cut chances.

So many of our goals last season… McMillan/Lawless/Fitz/Milne pelting to the by-line then cutting it back.

Just not happening this year. So all the goals are coming from set pieces.

The right wing is the main problem. I don't think it help Chalmers coming into a new team with Wasiri playing at rightback but now we have Megwa it really should allow him to show what he can do or we see what Smith can do.

I can't agree on Bannigan though. Was yesterday's man 2 seasons ago and I just can't watch the way he slows any attack down by a sideways or backwards pass. He's ok to bring on to see a game out but not a starter.

If there is an area in our squad that is lacking in depth its midfield. Turner and Robinson are more than capable with McBeth and Crawford able to do a job but the drop off to Stanway, Bannigan or Lyon is pretty big. 

[Woodstock Jag]

I guess the game is all about opinions, but I'd just note that the only game we've won emphatically against Championship opposition this season saw Banzo play the full 90 minutes alongside Kyle Turner in midfield, with McBeth playing in defence.

[JAG1970]

Slightly more zip yesterday in the first half but again no end product throughout the game. Thought the subs were more about securing a point than seeking all 3 which probably underlines Doolan’s fear at the moment.

I know he always likes to look for positives and talk things up in his post match interviews, but sadly he just comes across as a bit desperate and lacking any sense of direction. Saying if we get one goal then it will all fall into place, I’m sorry but we got 3 against a poor QP team but simply haven’t progressed. 
 

I don’t believe we’ve played “well” in any game this season. We were expected to beat Montrose and Edinburgh, were humiliated against Clyde and Alloa, scrappy draw against a poor Motherwell and a win against a poor QP. The rest of the league form has been poor, below par against Morton, Raith, Dunfermline (lucky 3 points), yesterday’s yawn fest, decent half against Ayr, Falkirk away impacted by 10 men. I can’t see a good 90 mins in any of it.

He’s fixed the defence but realistically he’s got two more games at Firhill to start getting the best out of the rest. Hopefully he does but the evidence so far says he won’t. 

[lady-isobel-barnett]

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I guess the game is all about opinions, but I'd just note that the only game we've won emphatically against Championship opposition this season saw Banzo play the full 90 minutes alongside Kyle Turner in midfield, with McBeth playing in defence.

But neither Turner nor Bannigan can tackle. If we can't break up play we then have to rely on the opposition losing the ball. That said if we don't play McBeth in midfield then I would agree that a Bannigan & Turner partnership might be the best alternative. 

[laukat]

3 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I guess the game is all about opinions, but I'd just note that the only game we've won emphatically against Championship opposition this season saw Banzo play the full 90 minutes alongside Kyle Turner in midfield, with McBeth playing in defence.

Not sure Bannigan was the reason we won that one. If I remember correctly that is the only game we have played this season were we started with recognised fullback (Nilsson) and played 2 wingers (Chalmer and Fitzpatrick). Bannigan was as much a part of winning that game as Jamie Lyon and I don't think there are many saying he should start.

For me, having a balanced formation is probably more important than trying to field the best 11 and I think thats why we looked ok against Queens Park.

McCall's big failing in my mind was sticking to a formation even when he didn't have the players to play it. Doolan seems to have done a bit of that and also tried to get his best 11 on the pitch and then figure out a formation.

[partickthedog]

29 minutes ago, laukat said:

 Bannigan was as much a part of winning that game as Jamie Lyon and I don't think there are many saying he should start.

I am happy to go against the flow and say that I would be delighted to see James Lyon start. He has started 2 games this season (has not come on as a sub) and I am sure that I am right in saying that the aggregate score while he was on the pitch was 2-0 to Thistle (1-0 v Queens Park and 1-0 v Alloa). 

Best by test!

[Fearchar]

Our throw-ins have been awful for as long as I can remember: we are given possession with a player allowed to throw the ball (not even a miskick possible, and with no restriction from the offside rule) but seem to concede possession shortly after in far too many cases.

It looks as if the most common set piece is never practised nor is it planned for - just on occasion one pair of players begins to see how to work together on it. (E.g. Lawless and McMillan last season.) I'm sure most other clubs practise both turning throw-ins to good use and even disrupting them, but Partick Thistle? No, that's too unsporting, chaps.

(Tbf, Muirhead's longer throw has been used on occasion under Doolan, but in general it is the full-back that takes it, regardless of whether his throw-ins are effective or not.)