DoofersDad

4 for Partick tonight. 30 mins ago they were 11th and now they are 7th. 37 games from the start of the season - crazy but great.

Having a good laugh at County winning - must be a first!

Someone said he thought it was that Canadian who played for us. Was it Richard Hastings?

It's all quite entertaining but I still think whoever finishes 11th will win the 2 leg play off.

For a number of reasons there is just something appealing about The Rangers, Hearts and Hibs all being in the division below us. Much as it sticks in the throat, I can't help but say " Come on you Staggies!" Now, where's the mouthwash?

They've got a bridge and castle too.

St Johnstone lost and Villa won.

Absolutely. He wouldn't be in my starting line up at the moment but there is no doubting his talent. It's interesting to watch him in the warm up routines before a match when he is as good as anyone in playing the 1,2 with the coach and burying the ball in the back of the net. It doesn't happen on the park though and when he does have the opportunity to shoot he is more likely to pass. He is a good passer of the ball and his ball control is good. He has the ability to drift past players from time to time but doesn't do it enough. It maybe sounds silly but sometimes with the way he moves and his natural balance he reminds me a bit of George Best. But - and it's a big but, he doesn't pressure the opposition enough when they have the ball, as Caleyboy says, he doesn't fight hard enough for the 50:50 balls and he doesn't take enough responsibility for making things happen when he's on the ball. It is hugely frustrating because he has the potential to be a superb player. I think you have to accept that his physique is what it is and I agree with Ronaldo that it needs a good manager to get him to believe in himself and motivate him to show more aggression in his game. It may actually be Latapy rather than Hughes who can convince Nick of his ability and what he needs to do to realise his potential. Until he does toughen up mentally I can't see him featuring too much in Hughes' line ups.

We were very definitely 2nd best against a pretty lacklustre Utd side. Makeshift defence did well but it was dull, dull stuff. Free kicks in the opponent's half being played backward. Loads of sideways and backward passing and little penetration. Only 2 efforts on target. This slow passing build up allows opponents to get back in numbers and have a wee rest as we pass the ball sideways and back in the hope of finding a way forward. There is precious little goalmouth action, few chances are created and undue pressure is placed on the back four and the keeper. It's football Jim, but not as we know it.

Was it not simply to allow the crowd to show their appreciation to Ryan Christie who had scored on just his 2nd start and had been named as the sponsor's MOTM? No disrespect to Nick but a nice gesture to Ryan.

Oh well. Now that the European dream is over I suppose we can expect Hughes to start experimenting with the way we play.

We have come from being in a position of 2nd in the top flight to one where we have had 3 record defeats in 2 months and people think this thread has run it's course! Unbelievable! I would have thought there was plenty of scope for lively and constructive discussion. If people don't like the thread or are bored of it, the answer is simple - don't read it. If you do read it but are happy with current form and results then either give some constructive arguments as to why you hold that view or refrain from posting.

That's what I like to see. A poster treating those with different viewpoints with respect whilst offering well argued justification for his own point of view. Caleyboy, you say that if we don't like it we should GTF. OK, lets Get The Facts. Hughes took over at a point when the team's performance and status was at it's highest level in the history of the club. Since then our results have represented relegation form. In March we lost 5 - 0 at Parkhead. That equalled our worst ever loss in the SPL The following month with no lessons learnt we did even worse by losing again at Parkhead but this time 6 - 0. Not only did this beat the unwanted record equalled in March, it equalled the worst defeat in the history of the club. March also saw us suffer a record home cup defeat. In all the years we were in the lower leagues and for all the years we were holding on in the bottom 6 of the SPL, the heaviest home cup defeat had been 3 - 0. It is now 5 - 0 When a club at the top of its game and with an excellent squad of players gets a new manager, some loss of form may be expected before things pick up again, but you don't expect to suddenly collapse to relegation form and suffer a series of record defeats. Personally I think it is perfectly reasonable to be concerned about this and to voice that concern. There are several on this forum who seem determined to vilify those of us who are expressing concerns. I assume that those who dish the abuse out are perfectly happy at the transformation in the club's results and the new records set since Hughes has taken over, but it would be really nice if they could, for once, explain why they are apparently happy with this state of affairs. If these facts don't concern you, then please tell us why! It would be far more positive than aiming mindless abuse at those of us who care enough about what is happening at the club we love to voice our concern.

This thread's begining to get on my Wick

What did Maud have to say about that? Was she annoyed at dropping two points? No she was preoccupied with her evening match with Keith. I hope that went better than when she fought William.

Ah yes, must be positive so let me rephrase. What Hughes said was positively awful.

If you weren't concerned before, you should be now. That's scary stuff. He dismisses the implied criticism by scoffing at the alternative of kicking it up the park and giving it back to Celtic to come back at us again. Well, to be honest I would rather give them the ball well in their half when we have 8 or 9 players behind the ball than on the edge of our box with only the keeper to beat. Getting the ball up in the opposition half removes the immediate danger and gives us a chance to pressure them into mistakes. But Hughes is quite clear that there is nothing wrong with the tactic of passing it around at the back - if it doesn't always work it is because the players are simply not good enough at it and need to get better. There was a fair bit of blaming the players in that interview - players heads going down and not sticking to the game plan when we went 3 - 0 down. Was going 3-0 down in the game plan? Was there no change to the game plan when it was clear it wasn't working? That must be one of the most uninspiring interviews I have heard for a long time.

I welcome Davie's post as a constructive contribution to the debate. I share the concern about a schism in the support but can we please not question people's loyalty.It seems to me that there are probably 3 broad camps all of whom have the best interests of the club at heart. At one extreme you have those who want Hughes to go now because they are convinced he was the wrong appointment from the word go, whilst at the other extreme there are those who feel it is too early to even express any concerns about his performance to date. In the middle are those who feel it is too early to consider sacking him but who are concerned about what they are seeing. That is 3 broad views but the reality is it is a continuum of viewpoints between the two extremes. I think Davie's contribution is important because it actually helps to clarify why so many of us are concerned. I think we all share the vision of "a successful team playing passing football that entertains people and encourages them to fill seats in the stadium". But hang on a bit - we were 2nd in the league when Hughes took over. Weren't we a successful team playing passing football that entertained people? Of course, the vision must surely be to be more successful and play more entertaining football, perhaps by passing more and I think we all accept that some change is involved. But the issue here is not the vision per se, it is the practical limit of the vision and the strategy of achieving that. No doubt Hughes will learn to regret the Barcelona comments if he hasn't already done so. Of course we would love ICT to play like Barca but we all know it is not going to happen. There has to be some realism here. It is sobering to reflect on last nights Champions' League semi final between Bayern Munich and Real Madrid. Following his success at Barcelona Pep Guardiola is trying to instill the same style at Bayern and is having some success because they have world class players. However, they were humbled last night. An extraordinary statistic is that Bayern made 656 passes to Real's 287. For all those passes they only managed 4 shots on target. The message is clear. There may well be scope to have the side playing more of a passing game than in the Butcher era but this is surely a thing of evolution and not revolution. The concern many folk have is that Hughes has made radical changes for some games. Rather than rebuilding the playing style, we should have been building on the success we already had - success which was to a large extent built around the strengths of the current squad. Davie states "Hughes has had very few weeks where two (or three) games have not been the norm, so there's little time for coaching in there. there have been injuries and accumulated fatigue. It takes time, and that's what he should get." But that, surely, is the very reason why he should not have been experimenting with the playing style at this time. It does indeed take time but he has not given it any time - he's gone straight in and changed things at precisely the time when stability was needed. Going back to the stated vision it is important to remember this is not just about a passing game, it is about a passing game which entertains. A radio summariser on Sunday reported that the one time Inverness broke out of defence a passing movement ended with Draper passing the ball back to the keeper. That is not what I call entertainment and it will not fill empty seats in the stadium. I have no problem with the vision as Davie describes it, but the high flying status of the club when Hughes took over combined with the difficulties he describes called for a softly softly approach to change with tweaks here and there to build on what we already had. I also agree with Davie that things will be more difficult if a significant number of fans decide they won't buy season tickets next year. That is, of course, another reason for a softly softly approach to change Some fans will continue to support the team come what may, but we all know that many who come to watch will only come if the team is playing well and winning - that's life. Davie mentions that Hughes doesn't have a budget for increasing the playing staff, but that has no bearing on the slump in performance this season. We still have same players - it is the manager that is different. Indeed, because we have the same players and they are contracted for next season as well is a further reason for a softly softly approach to change - we will not have a squad hand picked by Hughes to suit his way ideal way of playing. By all means give the guy some time and I would support Davie's call for fans to get behind him and the team, but let's not pretend there is nothing to be concerned about.

Can't wait to see what the next colour is

Thanks for pointing this out. I agree that the main blame cannot be laid at the doors of the 2 clubs - much as I dislike both of them. The alarmimg statistic is that only 3 people (can't call them "fans") were arrested despite the number of police and availability of CCTV. As long as people behaving in this abhorant way are allowed to get away with it they will continue to behave in this way. I can understand decisions to play games behind closed doors but isn't that evidence of a complete failure of our criminal justice system? These games should be open to genuine fans but if high policing levels are deemed to be necessary then someone has to pay for it. In my book people found guilty of these crimes should be the ones to pay. If punitive fines were levied on these thugs then that could go towards paying the policing costs. In this day and age it should also be possible to effectively ban these folk from grounds for good using electronic recognition. It pains me to say it but I am increasingly concerned about the attitudes of the police these days. There is a lack of willingness to get involved and make arrests. No wonder statistics for violent crime are down. This ties in with comments on another thread about the lack of action by police over a criminal assualt on one of our fans at Parkhead at the weekend. Meanwhile I have seen speed traps and cars stopped for speeding on the approach to the Kessock Bridge works at a time of day when traffic flow is low and there can be no realistic reason why it is not safe to use that stretch of the dual carriageway as normal. The clubs are often held accountable for the behaviour of their "fans" but realistically they have little influence on what they do. It is the police's job to enforce law and order and it 's about time they started doing what they are paid for.

The Hughes' defence committee's arguments get more absurd by the minute. In order to get to the final, the players had to win a semi-final. This was played in a much bigger ground than our own and was mostly occupied by fans from the opposition. They had also played at the final venue against Celtic with a large and voiciferous opposition support. In the semi-final the team got through by winning a penalty shoot out by scoring some pretty impressive spot kicks. Having watched those, there is absolutely no way Aberdeen would have set up for a penalty shoot out. I very much want Yogi to suceed. I can understand the argument that Yogi should be given time despite the disappointing results and perfomances, but what I can't understand is this attitude of denial and absurd justifications for things not going as we would like. I would love to see a constructive defence of Hughes but sadly nobody can offer one. Hopefully the final few games will give some objective evidence that Hughes might be able to take the club forward next season.

There seem to be parallels here to recent concerns about an inapropriate song from our fans. Haven't seen any update on that and whether the club actually took any action at the end of the day. On that occasion, fans expressing concern were criticised for not having reported it to the authorities at the time. Clearly fans have reported the Parkhead incidents appropriately but the appropriate authories appear to be unwilling to do their job even when specifically informed of criminal activity. OCG is right to suggest we reserve judgment on the response of Celtic in this matter. It may be that Celtic take things up with the police and the unacceptable inaction on the day may yet be addressed. Failing that a formal complaint should be addressed to the police by the club. The lad who brings the drum has added a great atmosphere to matches and helps many others get involved with the chanting. The atmosphere created must be a help to the team. It would be a real shame (but very understandable) if the incident put him or anyone else off from bringing a drum to games. Some of our fans give great support to the club and it really is important that the club be seen to support the fans when incidents like this happen when fans are giving their support to the club.

Good to see a new member getting right to the key issue. When the Board contracted Hughes it was presumably on the back of a plan / strategy for taking the club onwards and upwards. The question is whether the work that Hughes is doing is consistent with what was agreed with the Board. If it isn't, the the Board would be entirely right to dismiss him. But if what is happening is consistent with the longer term agreed plan then the Board should stick by him. Of course, we are not party to what has been said and agreed and therefore we are in no position to argue whether or not what we are witnessing is consistent with the strategy. But that does not mean to say that fans who are worried at what they are seeing should not be free to voice their concerns. Exchange of views is, after all, what a forum is all about. It seems to me that this thread would be better titled "Is Hughes doing a good job". I think there are many people who share my view that managers are often sacked far to early and need to be given time to see their ideas through, but who also have serious concerns about what is happening with the team at the moment. Numerous concerns have been raised in this thread and on several others and often these concerns have been raised in a very objective way. It is not personal. It is not Yogi bashing. It is fans who want what is best for this club raising genuine points of concern. On the contrary there have been hardly any posts onjectively justifying a view that Hughes is doing a good job. It is all very well for folk to raise concerns but, as I say, it is the Board who know whether what is happening is consistent with what was agreed between them and Hughes when they gave him the contract. There really can be little doubt that fans are perfectly justified in feeling they are being short changed at the moment and therefore I think it would be reasonable for the Board to be rather more forthcoming about what their hopes and aspirations are for Hughes' tenure as manager and how they square what we are currently witnessing with that. I am not saying that Hughes should be sacked or even that he is doing a bad job, I am simply saying that I can't square what I am seeing on the park now as a reasonable stepping stone to what I want to see on the park in the future.

Couldn't he have waited till after the game to get his legs waxed?

Would they not still be in contract till the end of the season? It seems mad not to have a full bench and at least if one of the youngsters who is not going to be offered a new contract were to be needed on the pitch for some reason it would be an opportunity to sell themselves. No way would they let the club down. If there genuinely were no other in contract players available then the youngsters' contracts should not have been terminated so quickly. This smacks of poor management however you look at it. Absolutely agree with IHE - an explanation is needed.