ALSY

Rory for Duff :o Can't criticise Brew for being too cautious

Wilson for Cowie. Suppose that makes sense given that Rooney is now playing Cowie's starting role, but I always like to see Don on the field. Haven't really heard Mcbain mentioned at all this half.

Att. 3595. Thought we might get more than that for a first game of the season (says he, sitting at home). Wonder how many Hamilton took up? Sounding more encouraging this half, Rooney's contribution in particular.

HT 0-1. Really doesn't sound like we played much football there - didn't hear Blackie's name mentioned with any reference to creativity or build-up play, and Imrie seems to have been pretty anonymous too, whereas both were very effective last week. Several references to Duncan carrying an injury and being below-par - maybe Brew shoud be thinking about bringing Rooney on early and moving Cowie back, with Black sitting in a bit more, provided he can time his tackles. May also be a case for introducing Wilson for Mcbain quite early if we don't start creating more. Shame Duff seems to have been culpable for the goal - we're crying out for confidence in central defence, and i hope it doesn't affect him too much. Sure we can come back though - I predicted a 3-2 win and maybe the goal will open the game up and I'll be proven correct.

@rse

Ah - for some reason the link the Rebel posted works for me. Now tuned in. County seem to be turning their season around! 2-0 up already...

Don't know if I'm being thick, but I can only find either the open all mikes programme or the Rangers game through the BBC website. My computer doesn't seem to want to connect to Scotty's link, so I'm making do with the open all mikes stuff. Rebel - not sure of the Hamilton line-up (same as Monday's is as much as I know), but the full ICT line-up is: Fraser Tokely McGuire Duff Hastings Imrie Cowie Black Duncan McBain Barrowman Either Cowie or Imrie may be supporting Barrowman up front, and Imrie played down both the right and the left at different times last weekend, so I'm not sure that the formation I've posted is exactly correct, but the personnel is.

Oddly enough, Paul Hartley, one of the players chosen to model the strip, usually has all three but appears to have shaved them off for this shoot. Or perhaps they were 'sticky on' all along and blew off in a stout west-coast breeze...

Yeah, I predicted he'd start on the bench on the merged Rooney thread. Makes a lot of sense - the players made last week's formation work really well because of Barrowman's willingness to hold his position and the support Imrie and Cowie offered him. 1 up front isn't necessarily negative. Also might not be fair to throw Rooney in the day after his arrival with everyone waiting to see what he can do. Hope he gets at least 20 minutes in the 2nd half though, as long as the game's going to plan.

According to Sportsound, Rooney starts on the bench and Jamie Duff makes debut - I assume a straight swap for Granty, with the rest of the line up the same as last week. edit: Scotty (added lineups)

Same feelings as most other posters - this is a bold bit of business which suggests the club is being more ambitious in building for the future. Really hope it pays off for us. It's also nice to be taken slightly by surprise (ie by the permanent deal & length of contract), as every potential piece of club business appears to have been prevaricated over in full public view in the past couple of years. Will be interesting to see what Brew's tactics are for tomorrow - was he intending to stay with one up front against Hamilton, and will this change now? Gut feeling is Rooney may still start on the bench.

Tenner says he gets sent off on Saturday.

Looking forward to the new term? Don't get carried away, Ross...

Excellent point. There's nothing to be gained by continuing to criticsie or express doubts now a new season has begun. Yesterday was a promising start for Brew: his tactics were correct, the team looked motivated and worked tirelessly, it wasn't just long ball stuff and two of his signings (Imrie and Barrowman) were among the stand-out performers.

Got to say the tactics and motivation looked excellent yesterday. It took the team about 10 minutes to find their feet and Aberdeen had slightly more of possession (exaggerated to 20 minutes by Tangoman post-match). At first we seemd to lack a little width, but as soon as Imrie started getting the ball in wide positions, we dominated. Cowie provided most of the support for Barrowman, but occasionally he dropped deeper and Blackie pushed up. This flexibility, and the fact that we pressed Aberdeen really hard when we didn't have the ball, meant they couldn't really pin us down and couldn't develop any fluency in their own play. If this is a formation we are going to use regularly, then Barrowman looks tailor-made to play on his own up front. He's a classic goal-hanger, hardly dropped back at all yesterday, but he was constantly looking for the ball, dragging the defenders around with him and received the ball well with his back to goal. Also seems to have reasonable pace, although it was difficult to judge how much skill he has beyond sticking the ball in the net. As for the rest of the team: thought Imrie's workrate was superb and he showed a few flashes of great ball control at speed. Definitely looks most effective as a winger IMO - he looked genuinely dangerous on a few occasions; Cowie saw less of the ball than he did for much of last season, but he still worked really hard, closing down opponents and creating options for his team-mates; Duncan was superb in the second half in particular when we had to defend a bit more - read the game excellently, making important interceptions and tackles and not misplacing too many passes; Hastings for me deserved more than the 3 stars most supporters have given him. Now and again he let attackers in behind him a little too easily (as did Tokely on the other side, but like Duncan he made some vital interceptions in the second half and also showed an aggressive streak which I've never seen before in him and which seemed to wind up the Dons players; McGuire didn't do a great deal wrong but he really does lack the dominance in the air that we've missed since Dods left - as someone else pointed out, he's prone to let the ball bounce and then misjudge it, and another thing which irrritates me is his tendency to barge into the backs of players when he's challenging for a kick-out, thus giving away free kicks. Yesterday wasn't a perfect performance - not enough fluency from midfield to front and still a tendnecy to let opponents in too easily at the back - but the fight from the players was superb, the tactics and formation were well thought-out and effective, and although there was some long-ball stuff, there were also some genuine attempts to play the ball on the ground and build patiently. Early days, but I'm more confident than I was 24 hours ago,

Do you not think Black mistimes a few too many tackles to play as our deepest midfielder? Maybe I'm doing him an injustice based on times I've seen him, but against quicker players he's tended to slide in late a bit too often - this has contributed to his poor disciplinary record IMO. I'd prefer to see Duncan mopping up behind him and passing short for Black to do the link-up work. Possibly I've also got a blind spot where McBain is concerned, but I'd rather see Imrie and Cowie as the wide players with McAllister given his chance alongside Barrowman up front. Last season's defence should probably get one more chance - maybe McGuire will miraculously recover his "new Willie Miller" potential of ten years ago. So: Fraser Tokely McGuire Munro Hastings Cowie Black Duncan Imrie McAllister Barrowman Wilson as an early sub with Cowie going central if that midfield isn't working.

Don't see why a 6 month limit should put the club off - if he is the next Stokes and gets us a few goals before January, that could go a long way to keeping us up. Would also mean we wouldn't be paying a % of his wages for a full year. 6 months might buy us time to bring Wood and McAllister on a bit.

That crossed my mind too. Brewster might well be holding his fire to see how the likes of McAllister and Duff perform if they're given chances in the early games. He was able to bring in players at the last minute last season when he had to, after all - although I'd prefer better signings than McGuire and Malkowski this time around. If that what he's doing, though, it's a risky strategy for the sake of a few quid.

Don't think my heart will stand it if it's still 0-0 after 89 minutes - I'll be waiting for Lovell to teleport in from Grangemouth, pull off his Falkirk strip to reveal an Aberdeen shirt and stick the ball under Mikey Rory to start and score for me - the sooner he gets off the mark, thebetter his chances of making it this season, IMO. If not Rory, then Barrowman.

I've thought for some time that having a pool of full time referees in Scotland might be a good thing, and this dispute has convinced me even more. The duties of the job could surely be expanded to include training of up-and-coming referees, a personal skills development programme and some form of ambassadorial work for scottish football or promotion of health and fitness, for example in schools. Although referees do have a difficult job and work hard to get where they are, I still feel the fees being quoted are too high for what is currently very much a part-time job, carried out mostly, it would appear, by men who have well-paid main jobs. Inevitably, refereeing must impinge on their main jobs to some extent. For example, a friend and fellow teacher works alongside an SFA Grade 1 referee. This guy apparently gets a fair amount of time off for various refereeing commitments and there is some degree of resentment among the staff who are asked to cover his classes. I imagine this resentment would increase if they felt he was being paid ?575 per game and still looking for an increase on top of his teacher's salary. By making the job full time for, say, a pool of 15-20 referees, the SFA would prevent the possibility of the posts being filled by men who might be compromising both their main jobs and their refereeing skills; they would allow greater scope for training and development, thus (hopefully) improving the standard of refereeing in Scotland; and they would also be job creating and spreading the wealth a bit (my woolly socialism has always been a bit outraged that lawyers and teachers and ministers are being paid for their hobby when others could be given a full time job instead).

Will be there. Meeting my Dons-supporting brother pre- and post- match so will get the alternative view quickly. Already braced for barely-suppressed smugness, but maybe, just maybe, it'll be my turn this time...

Ta. Same old, same old from Russell on the passing front, then? Not encouraging about Black, though. At least he didn't lamp anyone. Or did he?

We still know who you are...

Thanks for so much info and analysis, Harry. One question: Were we opting for the long ball again during the first half? ExiledICT's post suggested this and my heart sank when I read it. Given that nearly all our quality lies in midfield, I think we will go down if we start this p*sh again this season.

F** me. The level of eedjitry among Scottish football pundits is something to behold. Did they also refer to Brewster's shrewd use of substitutes? Didn't sound like there was too much of the old "aesthetically pleasing short passing game" going on against Burnley. 1 out of 3 in the Sunday Herald have us going down, btw. Fair enough. No-one seems to think Killie are in much danger though. Is it unthinkable a Jim Jeffries team could be relegated?