Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
jagfox

Dundee vs Partick Thistle - 6 pinter?

Recommended Posts

Dundee probably have enough to stay top 5 but their form has been poor but seem to be sticking by their inexperienced manager. They haven't won in 5 since beating...yup...you be guessed it Partick Thistle.

The Dee signed a few players in the transfer window adding a right and left back as well as ex-international Chris Berra. The right back was our former play Christie Elliott who came on as a sub last weekend.

Thistle team news isn't great so far...

 

A few fringe players got a run out in the Glasgow Cup including Alex Jones, Shea Gordon, Darian Mackinnon and Myth Austin.

We need points but with Dundee unlikely to finish below us technically not a six pointer. Still a win would be great. Harkins and Miller are away since our victory up there. Shea Gordon is just getting back to fitness and the last scorer out there is injured.

I don't see the side being changed much from the Ayr game..

Heart says 2-1 Thistle, head is saying 1-1...

MTJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can take something out of the Dundee game, and get a good result from the RR game that would hopefully give us a bit of momentum and confidence for the Dunfermline game. These 3 teams are ones that we should be beating if we truly see ourselves as a top 4 team …. I get the feeling the February fixtures will be pivotal in our season. If we do well, we might even be able to forget the awful season it has been so far? [that is perhaps stretching it a bit]

I think we could have a 0-0, but a messy, ugly, bad tempered 0-1 would be gratefully accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if the wind will have picked up but if so it'll be our third game on the trot in gusty conditions. 1st half (into wind) Gayfield absolutely embarrassingly poor. 2nd half (with the wind) Gayfield  not much better. 1st half (into wind v Ayr) rather good (lot of over top balls from Bannigan in particular well placed). 2nd half (with the wind) rather poor fare, tho' not as bad as at Gayfield. Hopefully the conditions won't be too bad.

Last time up there we took our time to get going, coming out for the 2nd half all guns blazing. Even then Dundee looked like they had weathered the storm. Left it late but what a cracking finish. More of that on Saturday but earlier, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said prior to the  0-1 home defeat if we get a grip of McGowan we have a chance!

We didn't and he more or less ran the show in the midfield. He also got forward to score the goal. 

So I am going to say the same again "get a grip of McGowan and we can win this game! 

I have been critical of Zanetta & Cardle who apparently played well against Ayr, especially first half. Perhaps if both play they can keep the momentum going and terrorise the Dundee full backs. This will also give us a chance of winning the game. 

Regarding a result - just hoping for the best 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on absolutely nothing ( other than a  feeling there was  a greater  togetherness and effort against Ayr ) I'm going .....................

Dundee1 Thistle 2

MTJ

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Rudden out I think Graham would be fine upfront on his own. I assume Gordon still needs more time to get a start but he is just the sort of attacking midfielder that would benefit from a player like Graham. Shea made a real impact when he came on last time at Dens. Maybe uncharacteristic but Gordon on the ball more or less won that game for for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

With Rudden out I think Graham would be fine upfront on his own. I assume Gordon still needs more time to get a start but he is just the sort of attacking midfielder that would benefit from a player like Graham. Shea made a real impact when he came on last time at Dens. Maybe uncharacteristic but Gordon on the ball more or less won that game for for us.

Agreed. If we're going with one up front, then the best player we have to support a lone striker is Shea Gordon. He doesn't do much in midfield other than score goals anyway!

I'd play with three at the back tomorrow (O'Ware, Brownlie and, presumably, Mayo) with O'Connor and Penrice providing the width and McKinnon sitting in front of the defence, allowing Cole and Bannigan a more forward role; with Gordon supporting Graham up front, I think we could be hard to break down, but still capable of posing a goal threat.

For me, the priority tomorrow is simple: don't lose a goal. It's past time we achieved a clean sheet. (And if we can nick a goal as well, all to the good...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Firhillista said:

Agreed. If we're going with one up front, then the best player we have to support a lone striker is Shea Gordon. He doesn't do much in midfield other than score goals anyway!

I'd play with three at the back tomorrow (O'Ware, Brownlie and, presumably, Mayo) with O'Connor and Penrice providing the width and McKinnon sitting in front of the defence, allowing Cole and Bannigan a more forward role; with Gordon supporting Graham up front, I think we could be hard to break down, but still capable of posing a goal threat.

For me, the priority tomorrow is simple: don't lose a goal. It's past time we achieved a clean sheet. (And if we can nick a goal as well, all to the good...)

I never want to see 3 at the back ever again. It was a shambles at Arbroath. If we try that, we will lose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2-0 Dundee. 

This defence will definitely concede tomorrow, and our form is the worst in the league. With no Rudden, I don't see how we will be creative enough to get the two or three goals needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I never want to see 3 at the back ever again. It was a shambles at Arbroath. If we try that, we will lose

The shambles at Arbroath had nothing to do with the formation and everything to do with a collective failure on the part of the team to deal with the conditions and the opposition.

I don't think fans who weren't there fully get what it was like: by the thirteenth minute the ball had been replaced four times ,  blown out of the park- I stopped counting after that, but they had to replace it two or three times more before half time. McCall is right, it was a face.

That's not to excuse the performance, we were appalling, but it had nothing to do with the way we set up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Firhillista said:

The shambles at Arbroath had nothing to do with the formation and everything to do with a collective failure on the part of the team to deal with the conditions and the opposition.

I don't think fans who weren't there fully get what it was like: by the thirteenth minute the ball had been replaced four times ,  blown out of the park- I stopped counting after that, but they had to replace it two or three times more before half time. McCall is right, it was a face.

That's not to excuse the performance, we were appalling, but it had nothing to do with the way we set up.

Got to disagree in general with the 3 at the back , don’t believe we’ve got the wing backs to play that system or even a ball playing centre back to push on into midfield at different points of the game .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I never want to see 3 at the back ever again. It was a shambles at Arbroath. If we try that, we will lose

Not a fan myself and McCall would rather play a back four with a holding player in front of them. 

I feel that is the way we go tomorrow. Maybe a 4-1-4-1 to start?

Fox

O'Connor Brownlie O'Ware Penrice

MacKinnon

Cardle Cole Bannigan Zanatta

Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jagfox said:

Not a fan myself and McCall would rather play a back four with a holding player in front of them. 

I feel that is the way we go tomorrow. Maybe a 4-1-4-1 to start?

Fox

O'Connor Brownlie O'Ware Penrice

MacKinnon

Cardle Cole Bannigan Zanatta

Graham

The lack of pace in our team ( Zanatta apart ) , is worrying but I think that’s probably our lineup tomorrow.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jagfox more or less says it for me and recruitment of late suggests a 4-1-4-1 (4-1-3-2 with Rodden) formation. But just to add re the Arbroath match nobody has explained to me why we started with three centrebacks and a holding midfielder. Unless the rules of the game have changed there was a 50/50 chance we could've kicked off the game playing that formation with a howling gale behind us.  

I think the only sensible return to three at the back would come about if last week's full backs were injured and at the same time we could play both Graham & Rodden up top. Given the weirdness of the Gayfield set up tho' I'm not exactly totally confident we won't go that way tomorrow.

 

 

Edited by lady-isobel-barnett
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

With Rudden out I think Graham would be fine upfront on his own. I assume Gordon still needs more time to get a start but he is just the sort of attacking midfielder that would benefit from a player like Graham. Shea made a real impact when he came on last time at Dens. Maybe uncharacteristic but Gordon on the ball more or less won that game for for us.

As he did when we wen't down to 10 against Morton at Firhill and he came on as a sub.

Edited by Auld Jag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As per other fellow jags fans on this thread 3 at the back just doesn't do it for me. 

I would prefer an old fashioned 433 or 442 with probably a slight preference for the latter. The only problem is I can't, from the midfielders we had under GC and we have under IMC. find the right balance of players for Midfield. I think we would be better defensively with the above formations but probably not so good in midfield. 

For the time being suspect we will set up  as has been suggested with 3 at the back, 5 spread across midfield  and with Rudden injured one up front with someone tucked in just behind. A 3511 formation. 

Still hoping for the best but please mark or play that little nark McGowan out of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we concede-and we always do- then we will not win.

Edited by JeanieD
canny type or spell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, exiledjag said:

As per other fellow jags fans on this thread 3 at the back just doesn't do it for me. 

I would prefer an old fashioned 433 or 442 with probably a slight preference for the latter. The only problem is I can't, from the midfielders we had under GC and we have under IMC. find the right balance of players for Midfield. I think we would be better defensively with the above formations but probably not so good in midfield. 

For the time being suspect we will set up  as has been suggested with 3 at the back, 5 spread across midfield  and with Rudden injured one up front with someone tucked in just behind. A 3511 formation. 

Still hoping for the best but please mark or play that little nark McGowan out of the game. 

Can't stand 3 at the back either.

We just seem to end up with 5 CB's and no width when we try it.

4 1 4 1 every time for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CotterJag said:

Can't stand 3 at the back either.

We just seem to end up with 5 CB's and no width when we try it.

4 1 4 1 every time for me.

Agree with that , time for McCall to get a system that works and wins games , is it only me who thinks that he hasn’t had the expected impact that we thought he would have ( 21 points from 51 points )  Got his own signings now so hopefully we’ll see an upsurge in form .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

jagfox more or less says it for me and recruitment of late suggests a 4-1-4-1 (4-1-3-2 with Rodden) formation. But just to add re the Arbroath match nobody has explained to me why we started with three centrebacks and a holding midfielder. Unless the rules of the game have changed there was a 50/50 chance we could've kicked off the game playing that formation with a howling gale behind us.  

I think the only sensible return to three at the back would come about if last week's full backs were injured and at the same time we could play both Graham & Rodden up top. Given the weirdness of the Gayfield set up tho' I'm not exactly totally confident we won't go that way tomorrow.

 

 

I thought that until the arrival of Mayo. I don't think he came to sit on the bench and I don't see Brownlie or O'Ware being dropped

For me, 3 at the back exposes us defensively, unless the defenders are uber concentrating. They need to cover for the wingbacks going forward and they need to watch for one of their own joining the midfield. So easy to be exposed 2 on 1 out wide or 3 on 2 down the middle. 

It would be 4-1-4-1 or 4-4-1-1 with the wingers supporting the front man for me, but I'm not sure we have the players for that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×