16 Mar 2026 11:47:55
Slight rethink from my comment on yesterday's performance.
I would gladly take that performance, along with the 3 points, from now until the season ends to give us the title.
16 Mar 2026 12:42:51
I was delighted with the game yesterday. Performance could obviously have been better, but 3 points and a clean sheet is exactly what was needed. We looked more like the team who got back into the title fight than we have in recent weeks.
Don't get the grumbles at all. 3 points and up the road. Job done.
16 Mar 2026 12:52:52
3 points were the most important thing, and the clean sheet was vital because we only scored once, but personally I would rather have scored 5, and if we had not got a clean sheet I would have been delighted. I enjoyed the home game against Killie far more than this one, and we didn't get a clean sheet in that one.
16 Mar 2026 13:59:56
Will anyone complain if we play terribly and win all of the rest of our games 1-0?
16 Mar 2026 14:09:55
For my own view, it's dire performances like yesterday that make me think we're not going to get results against better opposition. It causes anxiety.
I'd rather we pummelled teams like that and look like we're on a roll in the final straight rather than scraping a win and limping into the next one.
Yesterday was a horrid watch. St. Mirren with the free kick outside the box in the 2nd minute of extra time, and you're living on your nerves. Against the team with the worst form in the league? Shouldn't be this way.
16 Mar 2026 14:22:23
We all want style and panache, but realistically will take 1-0 slogs if we win every remaining match.
The bright way to look at things this week is a chance to go 2nd again on Saturday before Celtic play Sunday.
Hearts will do what they do, whilst for us it's about keeping the pressure on. With style if we can, if not I'll keep taking the wins.
16 Mar 2026 14:41:29
Marco, I agree 100% that the performance was dire and truly horrible to watch. But I didn't at any time think they would get a goal, as they were so poor in attack. I was more bored to tears than anything.
However, if you look at their results over the season, 20 of the 30 have had an end result where there was 1 goal or less of a difference in the score.
Only twice have they lost by more than 2 goals, so they set up and play not to lose goals and get pummelled.
I would rather we played well and hammered everyone, but at this stage in the season I would take 1-0s all day if it means we win the title. I don't know if my nerves can handle it, but I am willing to give it a try.
16 Mar 2026 14:49:42
3 points are always the only thing that matters.
The issue is, we are playing the team 3rd bottom in the league and struggled against them. Just like we did against Livi, the bottom team.
We won't always get away with it.
16 Mar 2026 14:56:52
Fair point bud, espescially given our away form
16 Mar 2026 17:24:12
When Celtic play terrible and win, we say "Oh they always find a way, and that's why they'll win the league." When we win ugly, we say "We'll never win the league with performances like that."
I really don't know, beggars belief.
16 Mar 2026 17:43:09
Blue89, exactly.
16 Mar 2026 18:09:33
Yes Blue89, that's because we have struggled to beat almost every team; we haven't played well in many of our wins, and that is not to mention the losses and draws where we have been dreadful.
Take the fact that most of our performances have been like this this year.
Whereas you use Celtic as an example, yes they have been poor this year, but they have had plenty of good performances and won very well. Can we say the same about us?
16 Mar 2026 18:43:49
When was a good performance, Bigbluejim? Poor under Rodgers, terrible under Nancy, and very fortunate in many of O'Neill's games. Look at the last half a dozen.
16 Mar 2026 19:20:44
bbj, Both teams have had their struggles this season, but the 'Celtic are better' argument doesn't really hold up. Celtic have actually lost seven times to our two. If you look at 'dominant' wins, both teams have only won by two goals five times, and by three or more goals just four times.
Even when Celtic were on that winning run a month ago, they were scraping through in injury time - hardly 'easy' wins.
At the end of the day, they're only one point ahead. If winning convincingly is the metric for being 'better,' the stats show we're basically identical. It's all about the points on the final day, so let's just see where we end up.
16 Mar 2026 19:23:54
Bigbluejim, I don't watch Celtic, but I haven't heard of any good performances from them. They've been rotten all season. On par with us performance-wise, which is why we are one point apart.
If you had asked any fan when Rohl came in if they'd take being 3 points off top at this stage, they would've bitten your hand off. We aren't in a position to complain.
16 Mar 2026 20:48:24
Blue, that's because Celtic have done it time and time again and won things. We have done it time in time again and won nothing. It's not hard to understand.
16 Mar 2026 20:51:12
Angus, of course it holds up because they have more points than us ?. That is a ridiculous comment to make. They are above us. So right at this time that makes them better. If they finish above us, end of season, it means they are better than us.
The same way if we finish above them we are better than them. Honestly, I don't know what you are thinking with that comment.
16 Mar 2026 21:05:09
Angus, factor in they started with Rodgers; he left. They appointed Mon, who turned them around, then they appointed Nancy, who destroyed all that good work and made them lose, what, 5 out of those 7 (I think) you mention. Don't recall saying Celtic were better, though, Angus. I think you fabricated that from thin air, bud.
Think we also forget how many star players they have had out for an extended time; we certainly can't say the same.
Blue89, nobody is arguing about us being 3 points behind.
I think most are stating if we keep up with these sub par performances we will continue to drop points ie Livi, Hibs, 10 man Motherwell.
Now we have 1 game a week and they have more training time. I think most would have expected a turnaround in performances, which so far we haven't, and, as someone stated on another post, we shouldn't be going to Livi, St Mirren and struggling against teams who are on terrible runs.
16 Mar 2026 22:47:16
bbj you said they had plenty of good performances (and win very well) but asked if you could say the same about us. you didn't use the word exactly but you meant they are performing better than us. so I am not lying as you say but using your words.
I said both teams have been very poor so my argument was that it is not correct to say they have had plenty of good performances and we haven't. that was all I said and gave stats to prove it.
but as you mention it when Rodgers left they had 19 points. he left same time as Martin at which point we had 8 points. so Rodgers wasn't that hindrance to them compared to Martin for us.
Nancy did poorly correct but 4 of those losses were in the league. so that is 12 points. Martin cost us 14 points in his 7 league games in charge. the one interim game cost us another 2 points. so you could argue the early part of the season was actually worse for us than them. Nancy did give us the opportunity to catch up a lot of the points deficit which Martin had left us with that is all really.
in the time since Rohl has caught up further points although I can admit a lot of those haven't been the most thrilling performances but results do count.
cant be bothered answering other points tbh as pointless (no pun intended)
oh and Storm better as in better performances, which was bbj's point I was responding to. I know the nuances of the English language can be a struggle sometimes but reading the post/thread perhaps might help.