Just In V Falkirk

[potty trained]

 

 

This is my opinion of Murray too. He was nowhere near great yesterday but was still useful to have in there.

 

In the first half in particular Falkirk pressed us high up the pitch through the middle and tried to give Balatoni and Archie no time on the ball whatsoever and Murray provided them with an option to get the ball away quickly which otherwise would've been an aimless punt up the pitch or being dispossessed in our own half. His passing isn't great but I believe we keep possession much better in midfield for him being there and giving players an option for an easy ball if they get into trouble and he has the intelligence to cover the spaces left by either full back or other midfielders going further forward.

 

Spot on. Incidentally, was that his second start in how long? I would suggest he wasn't fully match fit, was he not playing the full 90 at the start of the season?

 

 

[Colonel G]

Thought the keeper's challenge on Lawless was poor. Anywhere else on the park it would have been a free kick. Had no interest in getting the ball.

In saying that thought he was the man of the match and had about 4 or 5 good saves.

Don't even think Totten could come out and say they won on corners.

The Thistle players showed a lot more commitment than recent weeks and closed down well and worked hard to get the ball back.

[Fearchar]

....I didn't think there was much wrong with the challenges on Erskine which led to their goal or by their keeper when Lawless got injured...hope the wee man's injury is not as serious as reported....

 

I think the replay shows clearly that it there couldn't have been many questions if Falkirk's number 10 had had an early bath - a shocking assault from behind. As has been pointed out, Falkirk's players have resorted to this maltreatment of Erskine in the past, which suggests that there is a pattern emerging.

 

The wee man is going to be out with a broken cheekbone for at least 6wks.

Again, that isn't some kind of unfortunate accidental clash: force has to be applied intentionally to cause that kind of damage.

 

The real wonder is how Falkirk managed to keep 11 players on the park for the 90 minutes. It wouldn't have happened in most other European footballing countries.

[ThickAsThieves]

Again, that isn't some kind of unfortunate accidental clash: force has to be applied intentionally to cause that kind of damage.

Sorry, you're talking rubbish.

[twinny]

 

As for Murray - he's crap with the ball, but he is effective in breaking up the play and I think we need him in there.

 

Like others, I'd agree with this as well. This is what many teams that play 4-2-3-1 have, two defensive midfielders, one who tackles and one who collects the ball and moves it out of danger. This is what we have when Murray and Paton play together there. It leaves the attacking midfielder to be attacking midfielders, so we don't need to worry so much about Forbes being poor at tracking back and tacking. Forbes, Lawless, Erskine and Welsh have more freedom to be creative as a result.

[Fearchar]

(Context: my statement was "Again, that isn't some kind of unfortunate accidental clash: force has to be applied intentionally to cause that kind of damage.")

 

Sorry, you're talking rubbish.

 

An injury like that has to be caused by a concentrated impact, which is either a smash with an arm or a fist. From the replay, it looks as if McGovern turned away from the challenge, raising both his right leg and his right arm. The swing of his arm as he turned away from the ball caught Lawless in the face. Possibly McGovern was trying to protect himself from the impact, but it's my view (admittedly easier to come to from a replay) that it should have been a straight red for dangerous play.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

(Context: my statement was "Again, that isn't some kind of unfortunate accidental clash: force has to be applied intentionally to cause that kind of damage.")

 

 

 

An injury like that has to be caused by a concentrated impact, which is either a smash with an arm or a fist. From the replay, it looks as if McGovern turned away from the challenge, raising both his right leg and his right arm. The swing of his arm as he turned away from the ball caught Lawless in the face. Possibly McGovern was trying to protect himself from the impact, but it's my view (admittedly easier to come to from a replay) that it should have been a straight red for dangerous play.

I'm more inclined to accept Jackie's comments. From his wording he's obviously been told it was accidental. I doubt very much he'd let a referee convince him and i think we all know he certainly wouldn't heed a single word Pressley utters. Looks like he's either been told it wasn't a foul from a Jags player or perhaps he's had time to freeze frame the match DVD.

[jagfox]

Oh well it was pleasant to witness a clinically operated defeat of Falkirk. Particularly after the game at Grangemouth where we drew 0-0 and Bannigan receivedva nasty ankle injury.

Sadly Stevie Lawless received an injury that could keep him out for a month or two just as he seemed to be getting back to his early season form. McGovern went on to make some excellent saves from our boys.

Erskine recovered from a strong challenge which dispossed him and put him on his backside to let Falkirk break and score a decent goal.

Falkirk were pretty poor apart from a wee flurry at the start of the second half. The last twenty minutes we kept possesion without running ourselves into the ground, a tactic we seemed to employ after we regained the lead with a glancing header from Chris in the first half. It seemed to me it could be a tactical change from McNamara to not go gung-ho at every opportunity thus not leaving anything in the tank.

The goals were the icing on the cake. Two headers across the keeper scored by Conrad and the Bridge. A not too shabby finsh from Conrad followed by the cherry on top of the icing on top of the cake. We may have avoided snow in Glasgow but Erskine still slalomed through the Bairns defence then chipped the ball past a rooted keeper in to the net. Fantastic!

Good overall performance with a few tactical changes. Bannigan did well in an alien position, Murray did a good job in the first half but tailed off in the second. Hopefully a run in the team will arrest that.

Archie and Balatoni were excellent and Forbes had an influential game including his corners that led to two of our goals. Erskine was enigmatic as usual but what a player and that last goal was sublime.

It was a crucial game and the boys got the points in the bag with a bit to spare. I look forward to Saturday's game with Cowden with a sense of optomism

We believe!

[clarencegarter]

On seeing the challenge on Lawless at the game on Saturday I felt that it was 50:50 and the ref made the right call. We always moan about the ref breaking up the game and wanting to be the centre of attention so I feel this was one of his only good decision of the game. On viewing the replay I still feel its 50:50 and if it was Fox making the challenge we would be congratulating him for clearing the danger with a bouncing ball and a forward running straight at him. Its totally unfortunate that Lawless has come away with the injury that could keep him out for a period of time but not every injury is a result of someone intentionally going out the way their way to cause it.

I was also screaming for a foul on Erskine on the build up to the first goal but it appears the player did win the ball but also took a bit of Erskine. Again if it was the other way we would have been annoyed that play wasnt allowed to go on. I was baffled by some of the referee decisions but i think the two above he got right but what annoys me is the lack of consitency that refs show when he stops play for a foul when theres two players putting there shoulders together to try win the ball.

[Armand2]

That was a much needed three points. It was an important game and one I was quite confident of winning beforehand.

 

First thing was how much better we looked with a more mobile right full back. I like Muirhead and think he's got a big future but he's no full back and it's been a big factor in our recent loss of form. Although he had to switch onto his favoured foot often, I thought Bannigan had a fine game there. He's a manager's dream; versatile and seems to switch positions effortlessly with minimum fuss. I'm beginning to think he's possibly our most valuable asset in terms of future transfers. I can see definite comparisons between him and the likes of James McArthur and James McCarthy. If he could add a few more goals to his game, I think we'll have numerous clubs from England chapping on our door. Welsh did well at full back too; I remember he played there against us for Stirling Albion. I would be happy with either Bannigan or Welsh there until O'Donnell has recovered; possibly with a preference for Welsh as it would give us a bit more balance.

 

Secondly, Shug is a bit of mystery to me. I can see the theory behind playing him and his reintroduction has been something I was in favour of; however, instead of bringing stability, I feel he can be somewhat of a liability - misplaced passes, caught in possession, lunging in for tackles. PoTM made a good observation in his post regarding Shug's availability to be an option for a short pass from Archie or Conrad which in turn helped us retain possession but I don't this quality is exclusive to Shug; I think Paton can do that equally well with a better range of passing. The other factor with Shug's return has been that it has shunted Paton into a less effective position. When Shug went off, Paton's performance improved immeasurably when he returned to his sitting role in front of the defence. I think it's a case of horses for courses with Shug; for example, I see no place for him in the starting line-up on Saturday but the following week, I could certainly see why we would bring him back.

 

The people who berate Forbes are the same people who have bemoaned the fact that we have been rotten from set-pieces for years - utterly clueless. Technique-wise, he's one of the best players we've had at Firhill for years, can put the ball on a sixpence, can roll his marker all day long...but he doesn't run about like a headless chicken so he must be sh*te. Admittedly, I still don't think he's as fit as he can be but he's not had the fortune of a full pre-season. He's worth, at least, a goal a game on most days and I'd love to see him given a longer contract, if possible.

 

It's good to have Fox back in goals too as he gives us a solidity that Smith never did. Made a very good save in the first half from a shot that could have slipped in following a Falkirk free-kick towards the back post. Thought Sinclair had a bit of a lethargic game; still think he could overlap better. Archie continued his recent good form and Conrad was my Man of the Match. He's a big threat from corners as he attacks the ball very well and he finished that loose ball excellently as many centre halves would have ballooned it. Like Bannigan, I think we could make very decent money on Conrad.

 

Erskine's goal was utterly sublime, the guy has magic in his boots. I don't really know why people have less tolerance for him than others, perhaps because they know what he can do, but when he's on form, I don't think there's a better player in the league.

 

Craig led the line relatively well although wasted a couple of good chances. I still maintain that Doolan is the best striker we have and, as much as I like Craig, I would be very careful not to disillusion him at the expense of an ageing journeyman.

 

I thought the referee had a very decent game, especially in comparison to some of the complete ineptitude we've witnessed in recent weeks. I didn't think it was foul on Erskine for the Falkirk goal and I thought it was a 50/50 with Lawless and McGovern with the wee man unlucky to come off the worse. With some fractures, you can be back playing within a couple of weeks with protective head-gear but, if he requires surgery, it'll be 6-8 weeks and he'll be a big miss in that time. It gives James Craigen, who I thought played well when he came on, a chance to make a stake for a regular place.

 

Finally, a word on Falkirk; a one man team if ever I've saw one. I maintained that they weren't as bad as some of their fans were trying to make out following the first game of the season but their reliance on Taylor was abundantly clear on Saturday. If they lost him this month, which I believe is entirely possible, I wouldn't be surprised if they find themselves in a bit of trouble.

[Jaggernaut]

That was a much needed three points. It was an important game and one I was quite confident of winning beforehand.

 

First thing was how much better we looked with a more mobile right full back. I like Muirhead and think he's got a big future but he's no full back and it's been a big factor in our recent loss of form. Although he had to switch onto his favoured foot often, I thought Bannigan had a fine game there. He's a manager's dream; versatile and seems to switch positions effortlessly with minimum fuss. I'm beginning to think he's possibly our most valuable asset in terms of future transfers. I can see definite comparisons between him and the likes of James McArthur and James McCarthy. If he could add a few more goals to his game, I think we'll have numerous clubs from England chapping on our door. Welsh did well at full back too; I remember he played there against us for Stirling Albion. I would be happy with either Bannigan or Welsh there until O'Donnell has recovered; possibly with a preference for Welsh as it would give us a bit more balance.

 

Secondly, Shug is a bit of mystery to me. I can see the theory behind playing him and his reintroduction has been something I was in favour of; however, instead of bringing stability, I feel he can be somewhat of a liability - misplaced passes, caught in possession, lunging in for tackles. PoTM made a good observation in his post regarding Shug's availability to be an option for a short pass from Archie or Conrad which in turn helped us retain possession but I don't this quality is exclusive to Shug; I think Paton can do that equally well with a better range of passing. The other factor with Shug's return has been that it has shunted Paton into a less effective position. When Shug went off, Paton's performance improved immeasurably when he returned to his sitting role in front of the defence. I think it's a case of horses for courses with Shug; for example, I see no place for him in the starting line-up on Saturday but the following week, I could certainly see why we would bring him back.

 

The people who berate Forbes are the same people who have bemoaned the fact that we have been rotten from set-pieces for years - utterly clueless. Technique-wise, he's one of the best players we've had at Firhill for years, can put the ball on a sixpence, can roll his marker all day long...but he doesn't run about like a headless chicken so he must be sh*te. Admittedly, I still don't think he's as fit as he can be but he's not had the fortune of a full pre-season. He's worth, at least, a goal a game on most days and I'd love to see him given a longer contract, if possible.

 

It's good to have Fox back in goals too as he gives us a solidity that Smith never did. Made a very good save in the first half from a shot that could have slipped in following a Falkirk free-kick towards the back post. Thought Sinclair had a bit of a lethargic game; still think he could overlap better. Archie continued his recent good form and Conrad was my Man of the Match. He's a big threat from corners as he attacks the ball very well and he finished that loose ball excellently as many centre halves would have ballooned it. Like Bannigan, I think we could make very decent money on Conrad.

 

Erskine's goal was utterly sublime, the guy has magic in his boots. I don't really know why people have less tolerance for him than others, perhaps because they know what he can do, but when he's on form, I don't think there's a better player in the league.

 

Craig led the line relatively well although wasted a couple of good chances. I still maintain that Doolan is the best striker we have and, as much as I like Craig, I would be very careful not to disillusion him at the expense of an ageing journeyman.

 

I thought the referee had a very decent game, especially in comparison to some of the complete ineptitude we've witnessed in recent weeks. I didn't think it was foul on Erskine for the Falkirk goal and I thought it was a 50/50 with Lawless and McGovern with the wee man unlucky to come off the worse. With some fractures, you can be back playing within a couple of weeks with protective head-gear but, if he requires surgery, it'll be 6-8 weeks and he'll be a big miss in that time. It gives James Craigen, who I thought played well when he came on, a chance to make a stake for a regular place.

 

Finally, a word on Falkirk; a one man team if ever I've saw one. I maintained that they weren't as bad as some of their fans were trying to make out following the first game of the season but their reliance on Taylor was abundantly clear on Saturday. If they lost him this month, which I believe is entirely possible, I wouldn't be surprised if they find themselves in a bit of trouble.

 

Excellent post. I wasn't at the match, but your comments are very useful for getting a good picture of how the team played, along with the video highlights.

[Lambies Lost Doo]

I missed the game on Saturday. Gutted. But from some discussion I have to say I do get disenchanted with a lot of our support. I find the negativity of many Thistle fans quite high and of course the boo boys are always louder than the people who appreciate the players. O'Donnel, Erskine, Forbes are all great players with skill, intelligence and potential. They are not the usual Division One journey men rockets looking out to kick people and spoil the game. They should be appreciated and encouraged when things don't work out for them. I pay money to watch them.

[Blackpool Jags]

I'm naturally delighted with that score line, and the performance - from what I saw on the highlights. So many positives, despite the fact that we've had a horrific catalogue of injuries and suspensions to deal with going back to since around late October now; always key players missing. I have no doubt that the recent slump has at least in part been down to Jackie being unable to field the same side two games running.

 

I'm totally converted now to the fact that Chris Erskine is a unique talent, and one we should savour while we've got him, despite my misgivings of the past two years or so. He might fade out the picture occasionally, but can change the game at the flick of a switch. I think the only way we'll probably appreciate just how good he is, is when he's gone, and that can only be a matter of time. He's got it all: sublime control (at times), great finishing prowess, ability to score with the head and, great dribbling skills and character.

 

Slight downside on the game was that I noticed their striker (Taylor?) was often allowed to make runs into our area unmarked. They also missed one or two sitters. But, we won convincingly and that's all that matters.

 

Monni Thistle.

[Alan Murray]

Slight downside on the game was that I noticed their striker (Taylor?) was often allowed to make runs into our area unmarked. They also missed one or two sitters. But, we won convincingly and that's all that matters.

 

Monni Thistle.

 

 

Taylor is a top striker who will not be playing at this level next season. Talk of championship teams having a look - him and Brian Graham are the best strikers in the league imo.

Edited January 22, 2013 by Alan Murray

[Stewarty]

The people who berate Forbes are the same people who have bemoaned the fact that we have been rotten from set-pieces for years - utterly clueless. Technique-wise, he's one of the best players we've had at Firhill for years, can put the ball on a sixpence, can roll his marker all day long...but he doesn't run about like a headless chicken so he must be sh*te. Admittedly, I still don't think he's as fit as he can be but he's not had the fortune of a full pre-season. He's worth, at least, a goal a game on most days and I'd love to see him given a longer contract, if possible.

 

I don't recall anyone saying Forbes is 'sh*te' or requesting that he 'run about like a headless chicken'. Nor have I seen anyone question his talent in terms of passing and set pieces. Perhaps I've missed this post. If so, my apologies.

 

My concern with Forbes is that his lack of mobility means that he is often caught out of position when we lose possession. This is a quite legitimate concern. Also, there no reason why being a skilful attacker precludes you from pressing opponents. There's a wee guy called Messi who's quite good at both, as are his pals Iniesta and Xavi. This doesn't mean that they're running about like headless chickens. Quite the opposite in fact.

[Barney Rubble]

My concern with Forbes is that his lack of mobility means that he is often caught out of position when we lose possession. This is a quite legitimate concern. Also, there no reason why being a skilful attacker precludes you from pressing opponents. There's a wee guy called Messi who's quite good at both, as are his pals Iniesta and Xavi. This doesn't mean that they're running about like headless chickens. Quite the opposite in fact.

 

And there's a reason why Messi and his wee pals are playing for Barcelona, and Ross Forbes is playing for the Jags.

 

And you haven't quite grasped it yet.

[Garscube Road End]

And there's a reason why Messi and his wee pals are playing for Barcelona, and Ross Forbes is playing for the Jags.

 

And you haven't quite grasped it yet.

 

You hit the nail on the head!! Forbes is TOO good for Barcelona!!

[Lambies Lost Doo]

Taylor is a top striker who will not be playing at this level next season. Talk of championship teams having a look - him and Brian Graham are the best strikers in the league imo.

 

There's a repot on him in today's "Herald". Good spot by Pressley and they deserve to cash in and get some money for him.

[MerryHell]

There's a repot on him in today's "Herald".

 

A gardener as well?

Is there no end to that boy's talents?

[Stewarty]

 

 

And there's a reason why Messi and his wee pals are playing for Barcelona, and Ross Forbes is playing for the Jags.

 

And you haven't quite grasped it yet.

 

So, because he's a Jags player any weaknesses in his play are beyond discussion? What utter garbage. Pointing out that Forbes is a liability when teams break quickly is a completely valid point, despite your attempts shut down the conversation, and in no way invalidates the strengths to his game, which I also highlight. You clearly haven't grasped this simple and uncontroversial point.

[Barney Rubble]

So, because he's a Jags player any weaknesses in his play are beyond discussion? What utter garbage. Pointing out that Forbes is a liability when teams break quickly is a completely valid point, despite your attempts shut down the conversation, and in no way invalidates the strengths to his game, which I also highlight. You clearly haven't grasped this simple and uncontroversial point.

 

Calm down man.

 

My point is that to compare Messi and his wee pals to Forbes, Welsh and Lawless is spurious.

 

They operate in different stratospheres of the game.

 

There's a reason (or two) why Ross Forbes, Chris Erskine, Conrad Balatoni et al are Jags players.

 

If Ross Forbes was able to produce what you suggested in your previous post, then he wouldn't have been available to Thistle this season.

 

Does that help?

[Stewarty]

 

 

Calm down man.

 

My point is that to compare Messi and his wee pals to Forbes, Welsh and Lawless is spurious.

 

They operate in different stratospheres of the game.

 

There's a reason (or two) why Ross Forbes, Chris Erskine, Conrad Balatoni et al are Jags players.

 

If Ross Forbes was able to produce what you suggested in your previous post, then he wouldn't have been available to Thistle this season.

 

Does that help?

 

You're missing the point. The poster to which I was responding implied that questioning Forbes' defensive capabilities was tantamount to asking him to run about like a headless chicken. My point is that even the most skilful attackers in the world press the opposition and do so in a structured manner. That is all. Whether Forbes is in the same league as Messi is completely irrelevant. What matters is that this is an important quality for a modern attacking midfielder.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

You're missing the point. The poster to which I was responding implied that questioning Forbes' defensive capabilities was tantamount to asking him to run about like a headless chicken. My point is that even the most skilful attackers in the world press the opposition and do so in a structured manner. That is all. Whether Forbes is in the same league as Messi is completely irrelevant. What matters is that this is an important quality for a modern attacking midfielder.

You are correct tho' I feel you're maybe generalising. We have to go with a small squad so it's important that players can play when required in more than one position and more to the point depending on their starting position track back or push forward during the match and play a pressing game when prepared.

On the specific of Forbes it's fairly obvious that he struggles for pace and in turn isn't too clever with pressing or defensive duties. I doubt that side of his game will ever improve. So the question really is does Ross bring enough to the table to compensate for these weaknesses? Imo he does but it certainly helps that we have hard working midfielders beside him.

If Ross Forbes could also break up play like Paton or Rowson then we'd have one extremely valuable player on our books. The only way we're ever realistically going to get such a complete midfielder will have to come thru our youth policy.

[Stewarty]

 

You are correct tho' I feel you're maybe generalising. We have to go with a small squad so it's important that players can play when required in more than one position and more to the point depending on their starting position track back or push forward during the match and play a pressing game when prepared.

On the specific of Forbes it's fairly obvious that he struggles for pace and in turn isn't too clever with pressing or defensive duties. I doubt that side of his game will ever improve. So the question really is does Ross bring enough to the table to compensate for these weaknesses? Imo he does but it certainly helps that we have hard working midfielders beside him.

If Ross Forbes could also break up play like Paton or Rowson then we'd have one extremely valuable player on our books. The only way we're ever realistically going to get such a complete midfielder will have to come thru our youth policy.

 

I agree with a lot of this. I suppose the question of whether his strengths make up for his deficiencies will also depend on who he's competing with for a place in the team. Personally I'd play Welsh ahead of him every time. Welsh is a creative player who keeps possession well and has a goals in him; however he also has good positional sense. Forbes is a great player to have in the squad though and will no doubt make a positive contribution to our push for promotion.