Leaderboard

Unfortunately his one tactic turned out to be "trust in luck" (against DU Fletcher missed 4/5 fairly easy chances and against St. J we should have been 1 down before Consi was sent off so that worked well) and then Duk was suddenly on fire, Clarkson was strutting his stuff and Shinnie was a real driving force Unfortunately none of those 4 (including luck) have turned up this season - Duk is looking like a less effective Sam Cosgrove, Shinnie (as you often intimate) is running around like a headless chicken because he's playing in the wrong role, and Clarkson can take a good dead-ball kick but can't often pass to the guy in the red shirt standing 10-15 yds (aul mannies term) from him. We've got a really good centre-forward who is being run into the ground chasing long balls launched hopefully in his direction - he's a striker like Joe Harper..in the penalty area, with a smidgen of goal he'll score (ie the 2 against Livi) because his movement is excellent but Robson asks him to chase about after hopeful balls down the channel or compete with guys 4/5 inches taller than him. I really wanted Robson to succeed but he's shown himself to be too much like Goodwin - my tactics are right and even when all the evidence is showing me that I'm wrong, I'll continue doing it because it'll eventually come OK and I'll be proved right - and as obstinate (Baron not being picked because he's not signed a new contract (I'm assuming that's the reason)...just cutting your nose off etc).

Getting ready for his big move north next week…

Worse if it was BBC Scotland

Ugh. Comments like this should be banned! hard no, we moved on for a reason.

If Taylor was their no5,he was very good

I agree mostly, but Robson's tactics are very clear regardless of how shite they are. Draw them out, and then fast ball in behind for Miovski to score from. If the ball falls short then Shinnie and Ramadan.... McGrath pick up the scraps and move it quickly to Duk or drive into the box or whatever. Clarkson is giving away passes because he has to use the ball very quickly in order for this tactic to work. The stupid thing is, it's got such a low success rate, for very obvious reasons (because you have to play a pinpoint sixty yard pass - that everyone's expecting - between a deep defence and goalkeeper without even glancing over your shoulder first). Yet nobody at the club is pointing this out to Robson. Just as nobody pointed out to Goodwin that Ramadani was shite playing between midfield and defence and playing Barron ahead of him (on the pitch) was playing to his weaknesses and running him into the ground (exactly the same as Shinnie). The two tactics are extremely easy to identify, extremely easy to rectify and - most importantly - extremely difficult to justify. That's why it's clear, to me, that we have nobody at the club capable of asking the manager to justify his decisions, and explain why they aren't working and how, with current personnel, they could possibly work. It's not acceptable that two managers can come in and continually, stubbornly, make the same mistake every week and not be held to account. It'll be pure luck if the next guy doesn't end up doing the same, because we've got no structure of accountability. We're needlessly blaming and then sacking managers because we're not getting the opportunity to tell them to stop, take a breather, and try something different until it's too late and the players have lost every ounce of confidence.

Yep, we're saying the same thing basically. The guys in the background aren't good enough, exacerbating the problem of the manager not being good enough. Our strategy is clearly to take many of the functions "in house", like recruitment, to make things easier on the manager allowing us to hire guys that don't want the control someone like McInnes did. That seems to be the strategy anyway, and it's one that I agree with personally. The point is that the building blocks should transcend the manager, and whenever he leaves we're not throwing everything out and starting again like we had to with every manager from McInnes backwards. If we're insisting on that strategy then the guys in the background have to be doing their jobs to the highest possible standard. They have to be very good. That seemed to be the case in hiring Mowbray, and I'm assuming the Miles lad is also of that ilk (there isn't a recruitment person in the world that isn't hit or miss). The point is that we're in no position to be appointing a new coach until we get that backroom sorted. Glass was hung out to dry by us not having anything in place when he joined, with Robson we've just got a recruitment team, which is only half the job. We could argue that Gunn is there, and he might be great to work for and with, but nobody that's good at their role could sit through the mistakes that Goodwin made and now Robson is making and call themselves fit for purpose. At some point, you have to be calling the manager in and showing him very clearly that he's doing exactly the same thing every week and asking what his strategy is and telling him very clearly that if he continues and it fails then he's out of a job. If Robson can't explain himself to a layperson then he shouldn't be in a job. Goodwin played Ramadani as a holding midfielder every week, Robson plays Clarkson there every week and neither of them are being held accountable by anyone. Without fixing the problem, we'll be sacking the next guy in January 2025 for exactly the same reason. I feel sorry for Robson for the same reasons I did Glass (less so Goodwin, who'd had a few jobs already), as the club has failed them by not having the right pieces in place before hiring managers to their first position. It's completely unacceptable. Whoever is sitting watching this shite unquestioned every fucking week within pittodrie needs canned immediately.

I wanted Glass to stay too. That's not to say he wasn't making mistakes - he didn't have the players to play how he wanted, however you have to adapt when that's the case. I also think he gave Scott Brown too much power - when Brown was fit, he played, and he played in central midfield and roamed where he wanted because he was Scott Brown, and Glass was never gonna reign in his mate. However, he was trying to play possession football, he was pretty attacking and aggressive against the Old Firm, his substitutions generally worked well which showed he was reading the game well, and given a few transfer windows he could have shaped the squad nicely, while Scott Brown naturally would have retired into the dugout. Since then Goodwin and Robson have been a downgrade, and we're back to where we were when we decided McInnes had to go. Just bored shitless with the same old guff every week.

I think you've just answered your own question! There's absolutely no way on earth that Robson is being held to account for his tactics, even in the form of a devil's advocate, by anyone at the club. That's not good enough. I don't know, or care, whether it's Gunn or anybody else's job, but someone has to assist the inexperienced guy during his period of failure. Surely this was the whole strategy, hence Glass, Goodwin and now Robson? We get an inexperienced coach with some good attributes (Robson seems fairly decent at motivating a team), and then give them the support to build on the others. They haven't done that. In order to back a manager, you have to, and you have to have a plan and a strategy and you have to give him more than one window, and especially not just one window with a massive turnover of players and a hit and hope signing policy from across Europe (a bit harsh, I know!). But I'm not saying the above for the benefit of Robson. I'm saying it because I said it for Glass, to a lesser extent Goodwin and now the same problem occurs with Robson, so I'm making this point for the next guy we get in. Robson has to be held to account for his own obvious failings, and I point them out every week. However, the club have to take a huge portion of the blame for the failure and if they don't, it's just going to continue to happen.