Jump to content
KiwiScot

****Official Lappinitup Match Thread - Celtic v Norwich****

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

McLean's going to have to sit a lot. His propensity to go on a solitary press (can't fault his engine, but can occasionally fault the deployment) will have to be kept in check.

I'm not one of the posters who constantly trash McLean, but I really cannot see him having the discipline for that role if we really are playing 4-1-4-1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canarybubbles said:

I'm not one of the posters who constantly trash McLean, but I really cannot see him having the discipline for that role if we really are playing 4-1-4-1.

Which is another reason why I wonder if we've got a deep-lying playmaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We’ve a few players missing - Hayden and Sara, but also Byram, Gibson and Dowell; it’s concerning that Byram hasn’t been fit given his history, Dowell was due to be back this weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cantwell really seems to be a big part of Smith's plans this season. I can understand why. At his best he's probably better at linking midfield and attack than anyone else we have. But it's a huge amount of trust we're placing in his character based on the last two seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canarybubbles said:

Cantwell really seems to be a big part of Smith's plans this season. I can understand why. At his best he's probably better at linking midfield and attack than anyone else we have. But it's a huge amount of trust we're placing in his character based on the last two seasons.

Well, the first of those two seasons he was integral to achieving the league title on the bounce back. Yes, lost form last season - we still don't know why. Though it's worth noting in the first few games of last season no player covered more ground or made more tackles.

My only real worry is the latter stages of the season when he will no doubt be attracting interest as a freebie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, astro said:

look at me, it’s all about me…..

Really, of all the posters you picked CC?

F3ck some people are cowards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoping anyone in the stadium will be able to share their opinion on the safe standing.

Looks a reasonable championship attacking lineup. Sinani and McCallum come on down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

Aarons   Omo   Hanley   McCallum

                        McLean

Sargent    Cantwell     Sinani    Rashica

                            Pukki

This is how I read that team sheet. 

No. 

Cantwell deeper alongside McLean. 4-2-3-1.

Edited by Terminally Yellow
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, astro said:

look at me, it’s all about me…..

Don't be an absolute penis all your life. Take a day off.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

We’ve a few players missing - Hayden and Sara, but also Byram, Gibson and Dowell; it’s concerning that Byram hasn’t been fit given his history, Dowell was due to be back this weekend.

Byram is a concern but will become a major concern if Aarons does end up leaving. Good news is he's starting so looks like it's very unlikely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, chicken said:

Well, the first of those two seasons he was integral to achieving the league title on the bounce back. Yes, lost form last season - we still don't know why. Though it's worth noting in the first few games of last season no player covered more ground or made more tackles.

My only real worry is the latter stages of the season when he will no doubt be attracting interest as a freebie. 

Buendia, Skipp and Pukki were integral to achieving that league title. We also had a decent defence by Championship standards. Cantwell was tangential.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

Buendia, Skipp and Pukki were integral to achieving that league title. We also had a decent defence by Championship standards. Cantwell was tangential.

Stop being daft.

Yes, he's no Buendia, but after Pukki and Buendia he was out most important attacking outlet. He was third highest scorer behind them. Therefore he was integral.

He also contributed 7 assists that season. From what I can see, that is 2nd only to Buendia.

39 appearances to boot.

Remove him and you lose 13goals - enough to put our goal difference and goals for columns down to 4th place. How that would reflect in terms of points... I could go that detailed. Only needs to be 10/11 points and we'd be in the play-offs not Champions.

As they say, the table doesn't lie, and nor does what would happen if you removed those 13 goal involvements not to mention the good link up play.

Edited by chicken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chicken said:

Stop being daft.

Yes, he's no Buendia, but after Pukki and Buendia he was out most important attacking outlet. He was third highest scorer behind them. Therefore he was integral.

He also contributed 7 assists that season. From what I can see, that is 2nd only to Buendia.

In any case, I'm not questioning his quality, I accept he's a very good player. I'm questioning his character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

Cantwell really seems to be a big part of Smith's plans this season. I can understand why. At his best he's probably better at linking midfield and attack than anyone else we have. But it's a huge amount of trust we're placing in his character based on the last two seasons.

Sinani too 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, chicken said:

Stop being daft.

Yes, he's no Buendia, but after Pukki and Buendia he was out most important attacking outlet. He was third highest scorer behind them. Therefore he was integral.

He also contributed 7 assists that season. From what I can see, that is 2nd only to Buendia.

39 appearances to boot.

Remove him and you lose 13goals - enough to put our goal difference and goals for columns down to 4th place. How that would reflect in terms of points... I could go that detailed. Only needs to be 10/11 points and we'd be in the play-offs not Champions.

As they say, the table doesn't lie, and nor does what would happen if you removed those 13 goal involvements not to mention the good link up play.

Yes, but it doesn't work like that. If Cantwell hadn't played, someone else would have taken his place. You can't assume that he would have zero goal involvements. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, canarybubbles said:

In any case, I'm not questioning his quality, I accept he's a very good player. I'm questioning his character.

No, you weren't. You were rubbishing his contribution to the last promotion season where we won the title.

Like I say, 13 gaol involvements. Take that out of our side and we were in the play-offs in terms of goals for and goal difference. We relied heavily - as many pointed out, on our attacking threat as it wasn't like we were resoundingly brilliant at the back in terms of goals conceded.

Whether you like it or not, he was integral to our team being better offensively than defensively. Ultimately, that won us the title and his all round play as well as goal contribution was massive. Not as "good" or as "much" as Buendia or Pukki, but behind them, the next most important attacking player we had. More assists than Vrancic and McLean. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Bore off you humourless pillock

Someones touchy. 

Upset he didn't get to start the match thread. Or post the team news..... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

Yes, but it doesn't work like that. If Cantwell hadn't played, someone else would have taken his place. You can't assume that he would have zero goal involvements. 

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that either. Mainly because you said he wasn't integral, he was. The question wasn't whether we had someone better to take his place - because we didn't. This entire line of argument is just daft. 

Who did we have that could have replaced him? Placheta, Hernandez and Martin. So do please tell me which of those would be better than Cantwell? I love Hernandez, but he wouldn't have done it... the other two? Nope.

So yes, in that squad, that year, he was integral to the squad.

Last year, yes, and in many ways, he cost us a fighting chance of staying up. Had we had the Cantwell we had seen in previous seasons, we'd have had a much better attacking option than Placheta. Him on one side and Rashica on the other, or behind Pukki as Dowell did in the latter stages of the season.

Edited by chicken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chicken said:

No, you weren't. You were rubbishing his contribution to the last promotion season where we won the title.

Like I say, 13 gaol involvements. Take that out of our side and we were in the play-offs in terms of goals for and goal difference. We relied heavily - as many pointed out, on our attacking threat as it wasn't like we were resoundingly brilliant at the back in terms of goals conceded.

Whether you like it or not, he was integral to our team being better offensively than defensively. Ultimately, that won us the title and his all round play as well as goal contribution was massive. Not as "good" or as "much" as Buendia or Pukki, but behind them, the next most important attacking player we had. More assists than Vrancic and McLean. 

Sorry, I couldn't resist highlighting that typo. Absolutely brilliant! Dare I say it, has Cantwell got himself out of jail with this re-emergence? 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheGunnShow said:

Sorry, I couldn't resist highlighting that typo. Absolutely brilliant! Dare I say it, has Cantwell got himself out of jail with this re-emergence? 😉

Hahaha, yes, though I fear we'll lose him for nothing, which whilst some fans would probably make jokes about driving him off themselves, he has been very central to our relative success. Had he continued his form the length of last season we may have been looking at a very different season. Not single-handedly, but just look at highlights of that first premier league season. How we could have done with that Cantwell, or even the Cantwell of the bounce back season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Someones touchy. 

Upset he didn't get to start the match thread. Or post the team news..... 

Nope, it was clearly a joke at his own expense... some of us enjoy a bit of self deprecating humour...

Also, apparently you gave match threads to me... shouldn't you be getting touchy with KiwiScott? Though you might want to ask first, he might not want you that close...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First 8 minutes and we haven't got going yet. Celtics movement a bit too good at the moment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, canarycop said:

First 8 minutes and we haven't got going yet. Celtics movement a bit too good at the moment

We were pretty slow getting going against Cambridge as well, slightly worrying for next week.

Edited by overthebordercanary
edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

We look second best so far 

Barely 10mins in... what took your optimism so long?!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chicken said:

Barely 10mins in... what took your optimism so long?!! 

Well there isn’t anything to applaud. Our midfield is looking way off the pace 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...