Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Celtic:

Zaluska, Izaguirre, Van Dijk, Brown, Guidetti (Griffiths 80), Stokes, Mulgrew, Denayer, Lustig (Matthews 63), Johansen, Wakaso (McGregor 70).

Subs not used:

Fasan (GK), Ambrose, Scepovic, Kayal.



Inverness CT:

Brill, Raven, Shinnie, Vincent (Mckay 70), Warren, Draper (Draper 82), Meekings, Watkins, Tansey, Tremarco, Williams (Christie 70).

Subs not used:

Esson (GK), Ross, Devine, Polworth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Was at the game and met various officials of Celtic who all said that we were the best Scottish team they have played at Celtic park this season. TBH if it wasnt for us not playing the whistle I feel

Tactically, Hughes nailed this. Putting Tremarco in (who I thought had his best game in an ICT shirt) and putting Shinnie further forward was causing Celtic no end of problems. After about 10 mins, we

...and soon will be terrific

On the face of it a one nil loss at Parkhead is not bad but it seems clear from the commentary that a bit more belief in the attacking ability of the team and this was a game we could have won.  Celtic are no great shakes at the back and ealier pressure might have produced a different outcome.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying just to contain Celtic rarely works.  Wonder if we'll change the system and give it a real go in the last half hour?

We certainly did have a real go in the last half hour and I think if we had taken one of the chances we would possibly have taken another.

Our defence was strong and unyielding throughout the game Celtic were really frustrated by the number of blocks and numbers of defenders breaking up the attacks.

True they had the edge in the first half but they were the more tired of the two teams at the end of the game.

 

We may have lost but if ( again) if we had taken some of our chances the game would have been ours.

A good display ICT, we deserved a draw

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Never a bad result at Parkhead looks like we had backs to the wall for quite a time surprised we started without a recognized striker a bit of lack of belief . Still on to next weeks game and hopefully 3 pts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never a bad result at Parkhead looks like we had backs to the wall for quite a time surprised we started without a recognized striker a bit of lack of belief . Still on to next weeks game and hopefully 3 pts

Think Hughes sees Marley Watkins as a striker? He's the one banging them in recently so don't see it as lack of belief tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Gin. We started on the back foot and looked to be clinging on for most of the first half. As the second hlf wore on, we realised we were still in it and had a go. At the end of the day we were unfortunate not to take a point, mainly due to Celtic not killing the game earlier. Billy should have scored. He was not unlucky, he mishit his shot. Tremarco was unlucky when keeper clawed away his effort. Overall, a 1-0 defeat is the best one if you are going to lose. Another striker would have gained us a point. Food for thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Gin. We started on the back foot and looked to be clinging on for most of the first half. As the second hlf wore on, we realised we were still in it and had a go. At the end of the day we were unfortunate not to take a point, mainly due to Celtic not killing the game earlier. Billy should have scored. He was not unlucky, he mishit his shot. Tremarco was unlucky when keeper clawed away his effort. Overall, a 1-0 defeat is the best one if you are going to lose. Another striker would have gained us a point. Food for thought.

Wonder where Sekajja was?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We were set up too negatively to start.  Watkins did well but was on a hiding to nothing first half.  Why was Vincent ( a natural central player) playing on the right and Watkins (a natural wide player) playing central striker?  The second half was much better. Wrong tactics - we should have played two up front from the start.  Hopefully Hughes will learn from this.  Defence were strong, and even though we lost we should approach upcoming games with plenty of confidence.  Deila said we were the best league team they'd faced, and he was right.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We were set up too negatively to start.  Watkins did well but was on a hiding to nothing first half.  Why was Vincent ( a natural central player) playing on the right and Watkins (a natural wide player) playing central striker?  The second half was much better. Wrong tactics - we should have played two up front from the start.  Hopefully Hughes will learn from this.  Defence were strong, and even though we lost we should approach upcoming games with plenty of confidence.  Deila said we were the best league team they'd faced, and he was right.

I personally thought that the team selected today was actually quite a positive one purely on the basis that it was the best team on current form. I wasn't at the game today but I will have to agree with you about Vincent playing on the wings as I don't think he is as comfortable out their than he is in a central role which we seen him play last weekend very well but he may have move about during the game so I can't really make any comments about that.

Marley Watkins is our top goalscorer and he has the pace and strength to hold up the ball so surely it makes sense to play him up top while he's on form. Listening on the radio today it sounded like he could have put us in front in the first half, so surely it wasn't all bad him playing up front.

Billy Mckay needed to start on the bench today and possibly a few more games. Harsh as that may sound, but you have to look at the positive aspect of bringing him into the game late, we should have had a late equaliser but it wasn't meant to be. Hats off to Yogi though, going to celtic park and not playing Mckay from the start is a bold move but it was the right decision.

End of the day, I would rather lose narrowly 1-0 than get horsed 5-0 and 6-0

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Always difficult to get the balance between containment and having a go at Celtic park right. The best policy seems to be contain for 60 min and grab a goal late, but the risk is to sit too deep. Sounds like we were too deep in the first half, like at Ibrox. Conceded the goal at a bad time, but came out fighting in the last quarter. So, the plan NEARLY worked and, but for poor finishing, we'd have nicked a point. Agree that getting d!cked 6-0 playing an open style would have been more damaging. We can take Hamilton next week!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Always difficult to get the balance between containment and having a go at Celtic park right. The best policy seems to be contain for 60 min and grab a goal late, but the risk is to sit too deep. Sounds like we were too deep in the first half, like at Ibrox. Conceded the goal at a bad time, but came out fighting in the last quarter. So, the plan NEARLY worked and, but for poor finishing, we'd have nicked a point. Agree that getting d!cked 6-0 playing an open style would have been more damaging. We can take Hamilton next

Having watched the highlights I have to agree. A bit more clinical in the finishing department and we could have had a point at least. Hopefully we will sort out the Accies like last time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tactically, Hughes nailed this. Putting Tremarco in (who I thought had his best game in an ICT shirt) and putting Shinnie further forward was causing Celtic no end of problems. After about 10 mins, we had one break and ended up with a four on three because of the pace that Watkins, Williams and  Shinnie could pass and go at. Sure we had to defend, but again did that well and it's something you would expect to do at Celtic. The goal was avoidable, and apart from that I felt comfortable that we would get out with a draw yesterday. Not to be, but a massively impressive performance.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Had my doubts about the way the team was set up at first, but overall I think it worked pretty well but for a few individual player lapses. Against another team, where we were likely to have a lot of pressure, I'd like Hughes to have stuck with McKay to allow him to try to play his way through the goal drought, but against Celtic it made more sense to start with a forward player - Watkins - who would provide more pace on the counter-attack. Allowing Shinnie to play in a more advanced role, and more centrally, also worked fairly well: Christie could have played the same role but wouldn't have offered what Shinnie offered tracking back, and while Shinnie did almost put us in trouble a couple of times with misplaced passes, overall I felt that he was one of our best players, and seemed to be everywhere.

 

In the end, though it did feel like a bit of a chance missed. I can understand that Watkins was maybe trying to conserve his energy, and he did have a very good second half, but I felt that he could have chased down and pressed the ball more in the first half, especially as it became clear that he could completely own Denayer for pace. There were also a few too many times where we just turned away from Celtic instead of trying to build any sort of direct attack: the most infuriating was a free kick near the left touchline about 40 yards from the Celtic goal, which just got played backwards into our own half and ended up putting our defence under pressure. Lastly - and I'm surprised no-one has mentioned this yet - Draper's decision to simply stop with his hand in the air appealing for a free kick that never came in the build-up to the goal was absolutely criminal: Stokes simply strolled past him and set up Guidetti for a neat finish.

 

We did play well for the last half hour - Hughes got his subs right, although I'd like to have seen Doran on a little earlier - and Christie offered more options and movement in the middle of the park, without quite having the creative impact that we've seen he's capable of. I'd have him in from the start against Hamilton, I think, though: I know that Vincent apparently had a very good game last week, but yesterday, once again, I couldn't see what he offered beyond a lot of running around and rather predictable passing in the middle of the park. I'm probably missing something though, as plenty of people seem to rate him.            

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Had my doubts about the way the team was set up at first, but overall I think it worked pretty well but for a few individual player lapses. Against another team, where we were likely to have a lot of pressure, I'd like Hughes to have stuck with McKay to allow him to try to play his way through the goal drought, but against Celtic it made more sense to start with a forward player - Watkins - who would provide more pace on the counter-attack. Allowing Shinnie to play in a more advanced role, and more centrally, also worked fairly well: Christie could have played the same role but wouldn't have offered what Shinnie offered tracking back, and while Shinnie did almost put us in trouble a couple of times with misplaced passes, overall I felt that he was one of our best players, and seemed to be everywhere.

 

In the end, though it did feel like a bit of a chance missed. I can understand that Watkins was maybe trying to conserve his energy, and he did have a very good second half, but I felt that he could have chased down and pressed the ball more in the first half, especially as it became clear that he could completely own Denayer for pace. There were also a few too many times where we just turned away from Celtic instead of trying to build any sort of direct attack: the most infuriating was a free kick near the left touchline about 40 yards from the Celtic goal, which just got played backwards into our own half and ended up putting our defence under pressure. Lastly - and I'm surprised no-one has mentioned this yet - Draper's decision to simply stop with his hand in the air appealing for a free kick that never came in the build-up to the goal was absolutely criminal: Stokes simply strolled past him and set up Guidetti for a neat finish.

 

We did play well for the last half hour - Hughes got his subs right, although I'd like to have seen Doran on a little earlier - and Christie offered more options and movement in the middle of the park, without quite having the creative impact that we've seen he's capable of. I'd have him in from the start against Hamilton, I think, though: I know that Vincent apparently had a very good game last week, but yesterday, once again, I couldn't see what he offered beyond a lot of running around and rather predictable passing in the middle of the park. I'm probably missing something though, as plenty of people seem to rate him.            

 

This is pretty much how I viewed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see the game or anything but i did see the match review. Could of got something out of the game. You can look at it 2 ways. Happy not to get skelped at CP or unhappy because we did put in a great effort and could/should of got a result.

 

Big game next weekend against Hamilton. Win and get back into top 3. Top 3 is definitely a realistic target.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy