Caley Stan

As is now usual, the squad contains a strong selection of midfielders but very little up front or in the centre of defence. I hadn't heard of Grant Hanley before this morning. While it's certainly good to hear we've got another central defender coming through, an international call-up for a 19 year-old with just 6 first team starts to his name highlights just how desperate we are in that position. I assume Caldwell and Berra will be the first choice pairing in defence, with Wilson and Hanley being reared to replace them. I can't think of many notable absentees. Whittaker, i suspect, has been playing with an injury for some time now and Weir only plays in qualifiers. Stephen Fletcher, though he isn't playing regularly for Wolves, is someone i would expect to be in most squads - certainly ahead of Maguire. It Seems that Levein isn't willing to forgive him for moaning to the press after he wasn't played in the last qualifiers.

I was never impressed with Hogg during my past philanderings down Leith way. He was at his best next to Rob Jones, a dominant centre-half who would step out to meet the ball while Hogg would cover behind him. They had a good understanding, something that is often more important for defenders than individual attributes. Hopefully Hogg can form a similar partnership with Grant Munro. He's got 3 or 4 seasons of regular SPL football under his belt and captained Hibs to 4th place last season so he definitely offers good experience.

As Jonathan Wilson regularly highlights, formations are neutral in themselves, none are intrinsically attacking or defensive. For many years David Moyes successfully deployed a very defensive 4-4-2 with a narrow bank of 4 deep lying midfielders and 2 very hard working forwards who came deep to look for the ball. There are also countless examples of attacking teams playing with a single striker. Barcelona, perhaps the worlds most attacking football team often play with no strikers at all. When Messi is deployed as a "false 9", he starts from the traditional centre-forward position but constantly moves deep and wide as the creative midfielders and sometimes even the full-backs move beyond him I think 4-2-3-1 works for us for a number of reasons. Firstly, the trend throughout football is to have 5 midfielders or 4 plus a deep lying second striker. By playing a "traditional 4-4-2" as Renegade suggests, we immediately cede an advantage to the opposition's midfield. Secondly, we aren't blessed with many players who are comfortable with the ball at their feet. This is the unfortunate reality in most of Scottish football. It's very difficult to take the game to the opposition when your players are prone to losing possession and we must accept this as a weakness and ensure that we have plenty bodies behind the ball when the inevitable occurs. As well as covering for our weaknesses, 4-2-3-1 has allowed us to exploit our strengths, namely, Rooney and Hayes. Rooney moves well, dragging defenders out of position. When spaces do appear, he has a great knack of finding himself in them, while Hayes' direct running is most effective on the break. This is how we got promoted and this how we started the season so well, to ditch it now because we're having a difficult run is knee-jerkism. That's not to say it shouldn't be tweaked. By moving Nick Ross into a deeper position, Butcher has made that part of the midfield more creative. Similarly, playing Sanchez behind Rooney is an attacking move. Perhaps his next move will be to play one of the new signings on the left instead of Foran. Again, an attacking move. Changes will be and are being made to try and get us of our current poor run, but they needn't include the old-fashioned cry of 4-4-2.

Robbo suggesting an early sub - Duncan for Sanchez. It does make sense on the face of it.

12th man - are you arguing that a 12 team league produces better European results than a 10 team league? If so, you're going to have to do better than that. It would be very easy to list the superior European achievements of Scottish clubs in the 80's and relate that to a 10 team league but that wouldn't prove a causal link between the two. Why would 10 or 12 make a significant difference to European performance when there are so many other factors at play?

I thought Rangers played us well last night, allowing us a fair bit of possession but never the space to do much with it. Our line-up was pleasantly surprising and Sanchez and Odhiambo came out of the block like two players who don't have many chances left. Eric looked far more comfortable playing wide right and it would nice to see him get a run there until Hayes is fit but Sanchez faded, ran up too many blind alleys and really needs to track back more if he wants to play in this team. We look far more fluent with Nick Ross playing deep with Duff rather than two out and out holders, though once again, it's very harsh on Russell Duncan. He must be the most dropped player in our history. The back 4 was solid once again - Rosscoe is always heroic in these games. We're on a bad run but we've lost none of our spirit and organisation, we just need to find the right blend in attack.

I'm taking flak over on P'n'B for making that very point. I think he's there because he works so hard, but to play him ahead of the more talented footballers on the bench is pragmatism gone to far IMO. Shouldn't moan too much though - we looked solid throughout the team and were marginally better than Well. Innes makes a difference to the defence - he might be slow and cumbersome, but positionally he's much more of a centre-half than Rosscoe and this helps Granty. Full marks to Shinnie for dealing with Humphrey after his nightmare in Sneck. Ross was our best attacking player without being particularly good. We seriously lack creativity without Hayes and i think that might see us in the bottom 6 soon enough.

5 of his 11 SPL goals have been penalties, and he hasn't scored in his last 6 SPL games. Hibs fans who travelled up to Inverness earlier in the season saw him at his most clinical, but we all know that he can be wasteful as well. I think his main appeal is the way he leads the line on his own. He never stops moving, hassles defenders and uses his body well to shield the ball. As you've pointed out, he's poor in the air and, of course, he's slow. Hibs would be a good move for him.

-Doncaster has mentioned a figure of around £3million extra for SPL2. According to HibeeJibee over on P&B (who seems to be spending every waking hour immersed in this topic) this figure amounts to a transferral of the £1.5 million currently received by the 11th/12th teams in the SPL to 1st/2nd in SPL 2. The rest apparently comes from concentrating all SFL sponssorship money into the SPL 2. The proposal basically gives 8 SFL teams the chance to sail away and leave the rest of teams in the league to rot. -I don't think quality of football is on the agenda. The chairmen are primarily concerned with increasing income in the short term. Reconstruction wasn't being discussed seriously at that level until Setanta collapsed. -It was implied on Sportsound last night that Sky/ESPN are in favour of a 10 team league. If they have given guarantees of a significantly better deal then that would explain why some chairmen were so confident of winning the vote.

I'm in favour of this proposal, but it is essential that top of the bottom 8 is given meaning. This can be done by making its winners the bottom seeds in play-offs for the last Europa League spot.

You are kidding yourself on both points. For one thing, Scottish football doesnt appeal to that wide an audience and changing the setup will not change that outside of maybe having an extra old firm game on TV outside the UK each year. and as for competitive ... a little look at who has finished first and second for the last few years will answer that one. I should clarify what i mean by "wider audience" and "tight and competitive". By "wider audience", i simply mean wider than the hardcore of season ticket holders and regular attendees who continually call for a 16 or 18 team league. Their views should definitely be considered, but clubs cannot be expected to ignore the fact that attendances and tv audiences increase when there is something at stake in a game, games which occur more frequently in tighter leagues in which most of the teams compete for either the title, European places or relegation. The fact that nobody outside the OF can challenge for the title is sad, but there are many cultural and historical reasons for that dominance and it has persisted through 10, 12 and 18 team leagues. To see how a 16 team SPL might look, it's worth looking at the Swedish and Norwegian leagues of last season. In Norway there were 30 points and 10 teams between the last Europa League place and relegation play-off position. In Sweden, 28 points and 10 teams. That's helluva lot of dead rubber and people just won't watch it IMO.

As well as less overall games, less important games, less fans and less tv money. 16/18 teams was never on the table for these reasons. Hardcore fans may be bored with playing the same teams 4 times a season, but in order to appeal to a wider audience, the league has to be tight and competitive. I thought that a 14 team league with a 6/8 split and play-offs for the final Europa League spot was a good compromise position which allowed for the expansion of the league and an increase in competitive games.

What happened to Garry O'Conner apart from making a shitload of money and getting a move to the EPL despite failing to score or even run very much? If i was advising Rooney i'd be telling him to take the Russian money while he can.

Sutherland ruled out giving the shares to the trust in last nights interview, saying something about being happy with the level of influence they currently have on the board.

I've no idea. He may well have the best of intentions. I'm a cynic who hates the rich so i'm instinctively suspicious. It does sound good on the face of it though.

Very interesting, if slightly puke inducing, interview with 'Sir David' on Sportsound. He is willing to give away his shares to someone who will make a substantial investment in the club and he's sounding well chuffed about it.

The running of the club is shrouded in such secrecy that few people would really know. It is a concern that we don't own our ground or have our own training facilities. Off the top of my head, Hibs and St. Mirren are two clubs who have managed to achieve those things without going into serious debt.

Shock! Horror! Shane! It'll be interesting to hear if he plays out on the right as he did when he came on at Tynie or right up with Rooney.

Are the BBC allowed to show more than 5 minutes of highlights per game?

Glad to hear we're opposing the 10 team nonsense. Jim Spence states that clubs in opposition "want further discussion on league sizes while also exploring new play-off proposals, such as exists in the Eredivisie in the Netherlands". This suggests a larger league with Euro play-offs may return to the agenda. I certainly hope so. Since the required majority is 10-2, what's to stop everyone else sticking it to the Old Firm by including 2nd place in the play-offs?

Like most others, i just voted for 3 defenders in the POY which gives some indication of just how under the cosh we were for long spells. We started brightly, pressing well and finding pockets of space down the left with Ross and Foran looking to create openings. After our goal, Hearts took a firm grip of possession and we found it very difficult to get out of our own half, with resolute defending and a degree of luck combining to allow us to escape with a point and our record intact. I thought our shape was slightly different yesterday. Lee Cox appeared to be stationed in the centre of a line of 4 with Nick Ross. Russell Duncan was very much a lone presence in front of the defence. Rooney was very isolated as nobody in the 4 seemed to have a licence to join him in attack in the way that Ross or Odhiambo have in the past. I think the team was set up to take a point and given the form that Hearts are in we should be happy enough with that.

Sunday service from 10am.

From glancing at SPL attendances each week, we seem to be on course to finish 9th on the end of season average attendance table ahead of St. Johnstone, St. Mirren and Hamilton - our highest ever position. Our attendances are also a lot closer those posted by Kilmarnock and Motherwell than they were when we first arrived in the SPL.

Off the top of my head, there is the infamous Lennon / Juanjo incident after which Juanjo's red card was rescinded yet Lennon escaped punishment for blatant play acting. When we beat Celtic 3-2 a few years back, Pressley gave away a penalty by hacking down Niculae who had a clear goalscoring opportunity. Don't think he was even booked. Fast forward half an hour and our own David Proctor receives a red for the same offence. This P'n'B Thread provides examples from fans of other SPL teams of bad decisions in Celtic's favour in games against their teams. You may wish to read it since, in your own words, you "wouldnt see them as im bias in favour of celtic". I'd suggest that this, and not the referees, is your problem.

Which of the following McBains is your favourite? 1. Jill McBain, played by Claudia Cardinale in Sergio Leone's epic spaghetti western Once Upon a Time in the West. 2. Muscular Simpsons action hero and 38th Governor of California, Rainier Luftwaffe Wolfcastle aka McBain. 3. Evan Hunter, who as well as writing the screenplay for The Birds used the pseudonym 'Ed McBain' in his other guise as a bestselling writer of crime fiction. I was starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel there. Are there any other famous McBains? Roy is more straightforward: Roy Jenkins, Roy Cropper or Roy Race?