I think that's a little disrespectful to St Mirren though. Despite their poor league position, they actually looked a fairly competent side when we played them up here earlier in the season and we were still finding our feet a little. They didn't look crap last night either. If anything we brought them down to our level.
I mentioned it last night, but I'm not sure how you would have adapted tactics to suit last night? We changed to a four at half time, but with that midfield and Main up front we were always going to be in a battle. I can't think of a single formation that would have got anything out of that.
In terms of our depth of squad, I think it is still fairly reasonable. But in any team you're going to have big players who you struggle to replace. Ferguson, McRorie and Wright fall into that category for me, and with an unfit Cosgrove so does Watkins. We've got a good first 16, which I think is acceptable. We can afford one of Ferguson or McRorie missing, with McGeouch stepping in, but not both. Campbell would be fine learning the game in a three too. Wright, under normal circumstances, should be coverable by McGinn or Watkins and so on. The question is, do we want to build a squad that has the depth for these unusual situations? I'd argue that we shouldn't. As we've seen, by building that squad depth, it inevitably means that players are not match sharp when required. We just don't need Ojo for example, or Hernandez, or Main, or Edmondson (his signing was fine as we started the season with two out) as they are always going to be lacking in fitness when called upon. We often talk about square pegs in round holes, but look at the second half last night, we had everyone playing in a position they should be comfortable in (Hoban at right back, but he's actually good at fitba so it's fine). I'd far rather see a tighter squad and actually playing square pegs in round holes and sometimes accepting that we just have too many injuries. For example, we could have had Hoban in midfield last night and Ojo could have been in space. If we get to the stage where we think that Main is the answer then (in normal circumstances) move Ferguson, or McLennan, or a lamppost up there instead. Obviously the youngsters have a part to play here, but I think the loan system probably allows them a better experience than sitting on our bench, so that should take priority even if it leaves us short on occasion.
I sort of agree about Joe, but a captain just shouldn't make that much difference. Guys like Hayes, Hoban, Considine etc don't need a captain to inspire them or shout at them and of any of them are good enough to be a captain then they'll have assumed that role anyway through talking and shouting throughout the game. I think captain is largely ceremonial these days. A source of pride.