A Good Dundee

[CC33]

16 minutes ago, Gedee said:

I don't agree with CC's (& others assessments) that PH got his tactics all wrong. I think on this occasion,he got it, just about right.

We came out energetic , fought for every ball against Rangers .... i didnt see that against Tims , i thought we were very slow and didnt get in about them , when we eventualy did get into celtic we had them under pressure than they were desperate for full time whistle to be blown.

[Reverend Lovejoy]

Holt and Lustig swapped tops after the game. No big deal.

[Gedee]

3 minutes ago, CC33 said:

We came out energetic , fought for every ball against Rangers .... i didnt see that against Tims , i thought we were very slow and didnt get in about them , when we eventualy did get into celtic we had them under pressure than they were desperate for full time whistle to be blown.

Aye fair enough CC

(And ye'll ken eh wisnae trying to be personal, as I like to see a full range o' diverse/extreme views on the forum. As long we try to keep within the boundary o' respect, knowing we're awe Dees together ... which I believe you do)

The game against Rangers you mention above CC, worked successfully & it seems, according to a pre-game plan. I accept the game yesterday was not approached the same way. But it's another day, another game, and against (maybe arguably) a proven much better team. And even putting all that aside ... For a range of reasons, sometimes the pre-game instructions are never carried through into the game. 

[harry94]

15 hours ago, Budgem said:

"Are you for real.
Go back and watch the first 70 min of the game .. it was shocking... game was so slow."

Yeah I'm for real bud. A dose of 'realism' might be the way to take something off a team unbeaten all season and the reason the game was 'so slow' might be a part of the game plan?!

'People like me' are realistic and chuffed that my team had the reigning champions and the only unbeaten side in the league reduced to taking the ball in the corners at the end to waste time and put on a defender for an offensive player to 'keep' the 3 points.

All about opinions though!

Get the Champers oot!

There doesn't really seem to be a consensus forming but I thought we were out from the first minute against them yesterday and gave them a battle. A couple of my Celtic friends who are a bit more reasonable said that we'd put up more of a fight than most teams this season.

I just think Celtic are rather solid tbh. They manage to take the ball down with a touch less than everybody else in the league and we spend so long chasing shadows. Even at their worst, they have a full squad of players earning 10-15x as much as some of our guys ON THE BENCH and they've went away this season to huge footballing clubs in Man City and BMG and taken a point. We went out there and made them uncomfortable and reacted to a bad set back as well as we could have and showed a bit of resilience where many teams have went on to lose by 5 or 6 in the same circumstance. The game made me feel a lot better about the season ahead.

I'd also say that to the claim that the game was very poor, that doesn't mean we didn't play well. If anything, the game was poor to a neutral because we didn't let them play how they wanted to and that's not a bad thing. There are always going to be individual things that could be done better over a 90 minute match but in general, I'm not really sure what would really have been expected.

I have been pretty mythed at the accusation that we just sat off them for the first 70 minutes. I don't really know what was being watched. If we were going to be pushing past the half way line when they retained possession, we would have been absolutely destroyed and we didn't let them play in our half. Having less spells than them in possession doesn't equate to respect or sitting off in my book. We just genuinely don't have that sort of ability so can't retain the ball as well but that's not down to a bad game plan or lack of effort.

[blueboy]

Though PH got it almost right yesterday. We unsettled Celtic for the first 70, which meant we didn't play any decent football ourselves of course, then had a good go at them. They were snatching at efforts and we made it extremely difficult for them. Don't recall Bain having any decent saves to make, in fact Gowser made the best one.

 

[Bubster]

I've not been posting much of late due to family commitments but I'm certainly not stunned to come on here and read this sort of OP from a serial critic of the team, individual players and manager.

I've spent a fair portion of the weekend at the match, watching it back and online and reviewing various forums as I’ve been trying to bury my head in something outwith my personal situation - the consensus seems to be that we battled well, put up an excellent fight and on another day could have become only the 3^rd team to take any points off Celtic domestically this season.

Theres been widespread praise in the media (certainly by the Sky Sports team) for the shift Hateley put in but reading this board you’d think he had a stinker – usual blinkered views by people incapable of backing down from their stubborn standpoint. The introduction of Ross, Wighton and El bak changed the game, quite right, but there was also a gameplan change which facilitiated them coming on in more attacking roles – if we’d played like that for 90 mins we’d have been skelped – I don’t unsderstand why people think a late, go for broke push when a goal down with 15 minutes to go is sustainable over a 90 minute game against a far superior team.

Many posters have laboured trhe point already but it’s worth repeating – there is not 1 club in this league capable of going at Celtic for 90 mins without getting an absolut hiding. To date we are the only team in the league not to have conceded 3 or more against them and have never lost to them by more than 1 goal.

Again the consensus across fans forums and the media seems to be that PH got the gameplan right, concede the ball to them in non dangerous areas, let them play their pretty passes but shut it down in and around our box and hope they’ve commited enough men forward to counter on them. It’s not pretty but it’s better than getting 4,5,6 or 7 for me. The prospect of sneaking a point or a 1-0 win makes it worthwhile. Some of you will give the stock response of “we are at home, we shouldn’t be taking that attitude or whats the point” but with the league as it is against a Celtic team who are light years ahead of everyone I’d suggest a wee dose of reality mightn’t go amiss….

We never looked in real danger of conceding which is testament to the decent defensive shift put in, not least by Gomis who some seem to want to hang, draw and quarter for an unlucky bounce off his back and forgetting the very good overall display – he’s dominated the boy Dembele twice now that I’ve seen but it’s still not enough for some…..

Cammy Kerr once again (rightly) gets the plaudits but I’d beinterested to see wha t the analysis of the first goal would have been if Gomis had made the challenge on Forrest which was decent but unsuccessful and the ball had sclaffed off Cammys back and in – I imagine we’d be seeing a very different interpretation of events and apportioning of blame…..

As an example I see Holt getting pelters for not stopping the cross that led to the 2^nd but no-one mentioning Cammy failed to stop the cross for the 1st. I’m not getting at Cammy per se – he ws my MoM – I’m simply hi9hlighting the hypocrisy and agendas against certain players exhibited by certain posters.

I’ve probably rambled on enough – I expected 0 points and a pumping, we got 0 points without the pumping so I’m finding it hard to be too upset – a point would have been a huge bonus and all 3 would have been a miracle.

Edited 20 March 2017 by Bubster

[CW 90+3 02/05/16]

18 hours ago, WeighorstsWang said:

£20 charity bet we don't.

For the first time this season on this subject, I agree with you.

That County equaliser on Saturday was the biggest goal of the season in a game not involving us.

Won't need anywhere near 40 points to stay up this season.

1 more win and maybe a draw or two should all but seal it for us.

Edited 20 March 2017 by CW 90+3 02/05/16

[thegen65]

32 minutes ago, Bubster said:

I've not been posting much of late due to family commitments but I'm certainly not stunned to come on here and read this sort of OP from a serial critic of the team, individual players and manager.

I've spent a fair portion of the weekend at the match, watching it back and online and reviewing various forums as I’ve been trying to bury my head in something outwith my personal situation - the consensus seems to be that we battled well, put up an excellent fight and on another day could have become only the 3^rd team to take any points off Celtic domestically this season.

Theres been widespread praise in the media (certainly by the Sky Sports team) for the shift Hateley put in but reading this board you’d think he had a stinker – usual blinkered views by people incapable of backing down from their stubborn standpoint. The introduction of Ross, Wighton and El bak changed the game, quite right, but there was also a gameplan change which facilitiated them coming on in more attacking roles – if we’d played like that for 90 mins we’d have been skelped – I don’t unsderstand why people think a late, go for broke push when a goal down with 15 minutes to go is sustainable over a 90 minute game against a far superior team.

Many posters have laboured trhe point already but it’s worth repeating – there is not 1 club in this league capable of going at Celtic for 90 mins without getting an absolut hiding. To date we are the only team in the league not to have conceded 3 or more against them and have never lost to them by more than 1 goal.

Again the consensus across fans forums and the media seems to be that PH got the gameplan right, concede the ball to them in non dangerous areas, let them play their pretty passes but shut it down in and around our box and hope they’ve commited enough men forward to counter on them. It’s not pretty but it’s better than getting 4,5,6 or 7 for me. The prospect of sneaking a point or a 1-0 win makes it worthwhile. Some of you will give the stock response of “we are at home, we shouldn’t be taking that attitude or whats the point” but with the league as it is against a Celtic team who are light years ahead of everyone I’d suggest a wee dose of reality mightn’t go amiss….

We never looked in real danger of conceding which is testament to the decent defensive shift put in, not least by Gomis who some seem to want to hang, draw and quarter for an unlucky bounce off his back and forgetting the very good overall display – he’s dominated the boy Dembele twice now that I’ve seen but it’s still not enough for some…..

Cammy Kerr once again (rightly) gets the plaudits but I’d beinterested to see wha t the analysis of the first goal would have been if Gomis had made the challenge on Forrest which was decent but unsuccessful and the ball had sclaffed off Cammys back and in – I imagine we’d be seeing a very different interpretation of events and apportioning of blame…..

As an example I see Holt getting pelters for not stopping the cross that led to the 2^nd but no-one mentioning Cammy failed to stop the cross for the 1st. I’m not getting at Cammy per se – he ws my MoM – I’m simply hi9hlighting the hypocrisy and agendas against certain players exhibited by certain posters.

I’ve probably rambled on enough – I expected 0 points and a pumping, we got 0 points without the pumping so I’m finding it hard to be too upset – a point would have been a huge bonus and all 3 would have been a miracle.

Cant disagree with any of that, good well balanced post IMO

[WoodStein]

16 hours ago, Ivan Drago said:

I'm naturally pessimistic Cobra so until Rachel Riley says it's impossible I'll worry. 

Then I'll kick back and enjoy Uniteds playoff campaign :-)

Once again, Ivan, I find myself entirely in agreement. 

I generally think of myself as a quietly realistic optimist....but with DFC, so many seasons of schoolboy optimism ended with a semi-final & Celtic. 

It's like having a wee mathematical equivalent of jimminy cricket on my left shoulder asking "this is Dundee FC, how can you be so sure?". 1976 & 2005....those were not good summers to be a Dee.   

....but as soon as mathematical safety is confirmed, I'll be stocking up the beer fridge & becoming a temporary Morton/Falkirk fan 

[WoodStein]

16 hours ago, Blue4evr said:

We gave them way too much respect.  My mate said he saw one of our defenders get a Celtic strip at the end of the game. If true, shocking.

Players swapping, or asking for, another player's shirt is hardly a sign of 'too much respect'...I doubt if many players have a collection of opponents shirts hanging in their house....it's more likely a swapped shirt is for a friend/relative, a young kid, one of our ball-boys/girls, or for a charity raffle.

It's not too far-fetched to think someone Kevin Holt knows asked him if he could get a jersey from one of Celtic's internationals, or specifically Lustig.

....and of course it's entirely possible that it was Lustig who asked Holt for his jersey ("dad/uncle Mikkel....any chance you could get Kevin Holt's jersey for me, he's my role model")    

[CC33]

5 hours ago, Reverend Lovejoy said:

Holt and Lustig swapped tops after the game.

It was the closest Holt got to a celtic shirt aw game

[WeighorstsWang]

Rab Douglas has a massive collection of tops he's swapped for hanging on his walls, why wouldn't you?