+ Visit Aberdeen FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 68

Thread: Aberdeen v Motherwell

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    21,494
    We don’t have those kind of strikers.

    He’s improved a fair bit but I’m still not convinced

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by donsdaft View Post
    We don’t have those kind of strikers.

    He’s improved a fair bit but I’m still not convinced
    I'm not in anyway advocating him playing behind the strikers. I do think he had that kind of role at Saints.

    He's done okay for us recently, but we have to move on from players who are okay.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,580
    Much better today. Miovski took his goals really well today. 2 new central defenders i thought did ok on Wednesday and continued that today. Onwards and upwards now Dons.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    5,788
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDeeDon View Post
    I'm not in anyway advocating him playing behind the strikers. I do think he had that kind of role at Saints.

    He's done okay for us recently, but we have to move on from players who are okay.
    I can see what you are saying in regards to him playing behind a striker at St Johnstone,I’m sure he had a really good game against us and scored which resulted in McInnes wanting to sign him.

    Not sure if he has ever played that position for us but we really need to get away from signing players who have a good game against us,done it with Main and JET as well and I’m surprised we have never tried to sign Van Veen on that basis.Glad we haven’t though.

    Don’t agree with giving Kennedy a new contract, we can and should be able to do better than him.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by rico94 View Post
    I can see what you are saying in regards to him playing behind a striker at St Johnstone,I’m sure he had a really good game against us and scored which resulted in McInnes wanting to sign him.

    Not sure if he has ever played that position for us but we really need to get away from signing players who have a good game against us,done it with Main and JET as well and I’m surprised we have never tried to sign Van Veen on that basis.Glad we haven’t though.

    Don’t agree with giving Kennedy a new contract, we can and should be able to do better than him.
    Just re-read my earlier post. No I wouldn't be giving him a deal.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    5,788
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDeeDon View Post
    Just re-read my earlier post. No I wouldn't be giving him a deal.
    Maybe you should re-read your earlier post

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    2,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofrgmsdad View Post
    Flashscores says that Well made 6 subs. Is that right and if so why were they allowed more than the permitted 5?
    I didn’t know it was a thing but apparently Hayes was classified as a concussion substitution so both teams were allowed to make an extra substitution. Well did but we chose not to

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    1,184
    My vague recollection is that when Kennedy first signed he would have a go at going past people, but then that all stopped and he'd always turn back and make a pass. Then they eventually admitted he'd been playing with a back problem. It looked like at the start of this season he was starting to take people on, but I agree he seems to have reverted.

    I'd keep him as a squad player maybe, but agree he ought not be first choice, unless he can demonstrate that's he got more in his locker than he's showing.

    That said, he does always seem to give 100%. That drive is worth something and as recent weeks show, not everyone has it. He has also shown he can take a decent free kick. So I think there's a player in there, just a question of whether we can work out his best position and he can show that capability consistently.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Zone View Post
    I didn’t know it was a thing but apparently Hayes was classified as a concussion substitution so both teams were allowed to make an extra substitution. Well did but we chose not to
    Is that a permanent thing? I read it was to be trialed for a season back in 2021.
    Why both teams, as well?

  10. #60
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4,854
    Quote Originally Posted by Donanddusted View Post
    Is that a permanent thing? I read it was to be trialed for a season back in 2021.
    Why both teams, as well?
    Both teams get an extra sub to prevent any jiggery pokery. Obviously there would never be any of that in Scotland.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •