Talking Tic tacs

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

I will give the gaffer 8.5 out of 10 yesterday versus Falkirk.

As I alluded to pre-match the Bairns adopt a system of a tight defence and midfield and play it from the back - That required us to press and harry from the start - it also meant that we had to hold a high defensive line - it also meant that we had to use width when we got possession - and we had to play the ball into the feet of the forwards.

Well Mr Brewster - ya played that to the feckin tee - it was great to see us playing football again - playing the easy ball and quite a few 1-2's to boot. At times we looked like Falkirk in their own back yard. We may have fecked a few up but we kept trying to play it simple.

The substitutions won the match - although having Barrowman, Bazza and Imrie on the bench was a "luxury" choice.

I have never seen the defence keep such a consistently high line and Maguire marshalled them excellently.

I have never seen the role given to Royster before and I suspect it was a one-off but again it worked.

Benching Barrowman I suspect was a "disciplinary" decision and that appeared to work.

Benching Imrie was a kick up the pants and that appeared to work.

The only negative really pissed me off - Does Brew plan his width in a fecking mirror - I know that a lot of managers play their players on the wing of their less favoured foot - but thay also swop them too. I could not believe that Brew kept Vigurs on the right and Cowpe on the left throughout - both weer given acres of space - both were only too willing to steam down the wings - but how many times did they stop to cut back on to their favoured foot - and how many times, especially Vigurs, did they get in a deep position to cross but the delivery was poor as it was on their less favoured foot.

And then he took on Imrie on the right and Wilson on the left.

GET A FECKIN GRIP MAN - YA SWOP THEM THROUGHOUT THE GAME !!!!

[CaleyD]

I don't think the decision to start Imrie on the bench was intended as any kind of intentional "kick up the pants". During the pre-match commentary they alluded to the fact that they believe Brewster had made last minute changes....and I think that was perhaps down to getting news that Higdon was going to be missing from Falkirks squad.

If that hadn't happened then I think we would have lined up with a 4-5-1 and Imrie would have started with Woods being left on the bench.....and with Higdon to contend with we might have missed Duncan more than we seemed to in terms of breaking down plays in the midfield and supporting the back 4.

Whilst I agree that Brewster had the tactics and setup right from the kick-off I think it was a last minute decision which might have gone some way towards the apparent "attitude" being displayed by Imrie. Had the decision been made earlier then there's every chance he would have gotten over it and not shown himself up in pre-match and half-time warm ups (he was described on radio as being like a sulky kid).

Whatever the cause of Imrie starting on the bench, it seemed to fire him up in a positive manner when he finally did come on to the park though, so a pre-judged move by Brewster or not...it seems to have had a favourable effect.

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Pity - if we had gone 4-5-1 with Barrowman up front we may well have hammered them.

Does nobody else get frustrated by playing peeple on their weaker foot - shurely anyone at the game today must have seen how it hampered Vigurs.