From what I read he was quite impressive yesterday, only blotting his text book with an error, on the stroke of half time on the left touch line, which sadly cost us a goal and the match.

I'd like to have him play alongside Munro for a bit if Maguire doesn't perform. Give him his shot.

I wasn't at the game as Im from Edinburgh and a touch short on money so do not have surplus funds to attend a football game. Anyone at the game have any opinions on the lad?

Thoughts?

I liked the look of Duff, he seemed quite composed and has the a bit of presence about him.

Someone please tell him that I remember a young Grant Munro making an even bigger howler to cost us a goal at Clyde.

So we're all in agreement. Duff did make an error but played well enough during the game and after the error to show he is certainly capable.

However Richard Offiong was allowed to run a further 40 yards to goal with no real challenge and slot the ball home.

Comments from Phil Maguire in Sunsport suggest that Brewster was more annoyed this was allowed to happen and that there was no cover behind Duff. Presumably Duff wouldnt have been in that position if Tokely wasnt a little further upfield.

I do however disagree with the newspapers assesment he was our best player. None of the players performed however Maguire headed Corcoran through on goal and he's always prone to doing similar. You should never head backwards unless you KNOW your keeper is going to get it or there is someone in space to pick it up.

Duff WILL NOT develop as a good centre half if he plays alongside maguire too much. Im sure most agree Munro came on leaps and bounds parntering Dods for 2 seasons and I feel the same could happen for Duff with Munro. He certainly wouldnt be allowed to make many mistakes with Ross and Grant beside him as im sure he'd get a healthy ear bashing.

Duff did well enough to merit more games.

But the point about nobody being behind him............we did not need anybody behind him, he was there, he was that man, he missed the ball completely, not caused by a physical challenge he simply missed the ball and as we had been attacking prior to that and he was the player mopping up nobody else was required............unfortunately he fresh aired and put Duncan and Hastings in touble.

If we keep making comments about players not going forward we will never threaten the opposition goal. We had guys forward for a free kick or corner, but they hoofed the ball forward.

Duff made an error simple as. Nobody died so we/he just have to learn from it and come back stronger.

Offiong was still allowed to run 40 yards without a challenge. Cover should always be available that high up the pitch. Im all in favour of full backs getting forward but you should be able to get back to cover your position. Not saying its Roos Tokely's fault, Duff did make the error and fresh air a simple ball he should have played out nice and easy, but a player should not be allowed to run from just beyond the half way line and on the touch line to the opposition penalty area virtually unchallenged. Brewster seemed to be annoyed about that as much as anything.

Sorry captain, we are going round in circles. He was allowed to run 40yds in on goals because Duff did make that mistake, end of story.

Do I think Duff was at fault, yes.

Do I blame him, yes.

Should he play again , yes.

whatever.

themann4thejob Posted Today, 02:49 PM

Sorry captain, we are going round in circles. He was allowed to run 40yds in on goals because Duff did make that mistake, end of story.

Do I think Duff was at fault, yes.

Do I blame him, yes.

Should he play again , yes.

whatever.

Do I think Duff was at fault, yes I do also

Do I blame him, Yes Partly

Should he play again, yes clearly

but I still don't blame him fully for the goal. If a player makes an error half way up the park at the touch line there shouldnt be a gaping hole behind him. Brewster himself thinks this. It was a basic error and probably uncharacteristic and hopefully he'll get over it and get a game next week, even if Munro is fit. drop Maguire. He would have cost us a goal if Corcoran had connected better with his shot

aaaaarrrgggghhhhhh

OK OK OK I submit, you are saying the same thing and I am giving the same answers, therefore I am going to jump off the Kessock Bridge.

Corcorran did not connect with the shot though. Offiong did and from Duffs error.

Please don't reply I have gone blind.

Dont know where you get the 'mistake at the halfway up the park' it was very nearly middle of our half and 10 yds from the touchline, and i'm sure Jamies team mates had expected him to deal with the long punt up the pitch with ease.

Dont know where you get the 'mistake at the halfway up the park' it was very nearly middle of our half and 10 yds from the touchline, and i'm sure Jamies team mates had expected him to deal with the long punt up the pitch with ease.

Oh ello, Voice of Reason the Second - thought you'd taken the last train for the coast (btw I still owe you lots of beer and will make good in the Innes this season).

Don, someone (probably you or one of the mascots) should have been covering for Jamie when he had to make that clearance in row F of the South Stand, end of story mate. Baffled that you can't see that. Oh aye, forgot, you're blind. Still, a quick swim home, eh?

That has been one of our problems for the last year. Our defensive awareness. We conceded a few goals because we simply weren't concentrating and simple long punts up the field turned into goals. The one on Saturday was a perfect example but there where a few of those last season. If your playing SPL you have to be focused 100% at all times and at times that just ain't the case.

I also feel are experienced centre-backs in paticular (McGuire especially) dont have the proper physical strength or height to compete with other teams target men e.g Colin Nish, John Sutton, Lee Miller...thats where i think we get undone alot.....i say get Blobby back up here asap . If Duff can learn from this and put it behind him i feel he could be the answer to our lack of height or real strength in the backline.

Having regained my sight and swam home....................In hindsight, maybe I should have cleared it myself.......

All good and well saying someone should have been covering, but we can only field eleven players at any given time. Lets say we play Duff at the back, he is taking care of things while we get a corner or free kick near the box, the big guys go forward, we lose the ball, it gets humped up the park........................inexplicably, our man asked to guard the home goals duffs up big style, (no pun intended)...............................so, what is the answer, do we need someone to cover the last defender. If so then he is not the last defender. Who then covers the last defender who is covering the last defender in case he also makes a mistake...................the list is goes on.

Lets all make Jamie feel better at the expense of a couple of easy targets, Duncan and Hastings, christ McGuire is even getting dragged in as well. While we are at it, why not undermine his confidence by placing three or four defenders behind him in case he makes a mistake, vote of confidence not.

This only became a problem because he missed the ball, not tackled and lost it, not under any great pressure, he missed it. I am sure he will go on to become a decent defender, it's a steep learning curve, and the process has begun.

ajs, you can focus all you want, but mistakes cost points at any level. Agree about our physical presence in the heart of the defence.

Bottom line and answer to the original question is Duff looks very assured, he played very well, made a great tackle early on, distributed the ball neatly and made one mistake which we never managed to recover from due to the whole teams lack of urgency.

I agree with Smee's comments we should be capable of scoring against hamilton at home but we wont do it playing 4 5 1 and without a shot on target in 90minutes. There was no football played by the midfield and as a result no support for the front man/men. You can't hump the ball at every opportunity and expect to create. Yes,young Duff made an error but he wasn't the reason for the defeat. I don't mind ICT losing a match if they have played football and created opportunities not only does it give you a chance of scoring but helps defensively by keeping the ball. because we play so little football we can't put the opposition under sustained pressure at home where we are expected to attack hence our appalling home record (only Gretna were worse last year) If the performance against Hamilton is how we intend to play at home it's going to be a very long hard season.

That was the real disappointment last Saturday, playing for ninety minutes without creating any clear cut scoring opportunities, and that against a team tipped along with us to be relegationn candidates. Stark contrast to the incisive play of the week before when we played well on the counter, and defended well when required.

I agree with Smee's comments we should be capable of scoring against hamilton at home but we wont do it playing 4 5 1 and without a shot on target in 90minutes. There was no football played by the midfield and as a result no support for the front man/men. You can't hump the ball at every opportunity and expect to create. Yes,young Duff made an error but he wasn't the reason for the defeat. I don't mind ICT losing a match if they have played football and created opportunities not only does it give you a chance of scoring but helps defensively by keeping the ball. because we play so little football we can't put the opposition under sustained pressure at home where we are expected to attack hence our appalling home record (only Gretna were worse last year) If the performance against Hamilton is how we intend to play at home it's going to be a very long hard season.

I was at the game on Saturday (my first for ages) - usually head south, but with a soft spot for Caley. Retirement/pension will see me stay in Inverness for games more regularly. With that out of the way - I'd just like to say that I agree with most of the comments above. Duff had a good, solid game - apart from his one mistake. A miss by the striker or a save by the goalie and it would just have been a "whew" moment. It was generally a pretty uninspiring match and what stood out for me was the 'punt the ball forward, high' tactic by Caley. It was completely ineffective against a big and beefy Accies side. Why was it persevered with? Caley had the hems on the Accies attackers throughout the match, and Jamie played his part well in that. Caley lost this match in the final third of the pitch. If the high ball tactic is used by other SPL teams then imo they'll also find Accies a tough nut to crack.

Back to Jamie Duff - he looks a good prospect. Play him again? - Yes! And yes, he was named as the sponsors motm at the end of the game. Deserved? Possibly. Thinking back to the game - I found myself saying "Good boy, Jamie" several times during the game, whether it was for timely tackles or good passes. Wanting a youngster to do well? Possibly a touch of that, yes. I hope he goes on to make a successful career with Caley.

I wasn't saying that people should be expected to cover for Duff (or anyone) all the time, and I'm not making excuses for his mistake or trying to make him feel better. The point I was making is that as Duncan and Hastings were positioned to cover then I feel they could and should have done better and the goal, even after Duff's error, was preventable.

One of the big problems with fans of this great game of ours is that they only notice when the defender or keeper makes the mistake. Midfielders and front men can make twenty mistakes in a game and go un-noticed. And they do which usually results on pressure at the back.

Jamie Duff played a great game against Hamilton and deserves to start again. Yes he made a mistake but the whole team were on an awayday and perhaps if they had been playing like the can, and taken control of the game, this one error from the lad would never have arisen.

Duff did well!

It was his first start.

We should encourge him.

It wasn't all his fault.

we should of scored!

I'd say thats the mistake part of this topic put to bed now with another assured performance yesterday v two good strikers. When others lost their way he stood up and reacted well after losing the goal.

Thats two sponsors MOM awards now. And he even got in the SundayMail team of the week.(yes i know, but i was drunk when i bought the paper, sorry)

Good to see he got over the mistake quickly as most expected he would.

M4TJ - I am in agreement with you but i have a tendancy to stick up for younger players because its encouragment early on that can make the player. So I back them to the hilt. He could have scored an OG after rounding Fraser to rattle the ball home and I'd stick up for him. And Id find an excuse!

One of the lads in the youth team the year before last rated him and Vigurs as the stars.

In saying all that I still think Maguires eror to let Corcoran in was far worse and we got lucky there. It would have been highlighted had there been a goal. Duff and Munro should be 1st choice. Maguire is too inconsistent and error prone and i think that does not breed confidence.