IT would be unfair to suggest that the players of Aberdeen and Rangers
covered their heads with blankets as they left Pittodrie, but it is true
that none of them bounced out of the dressing rooms in joyous
celebration of a job well done.
When the players admit they did not enjoy themselves, you can be sure
that the paying customers have had a miserable afternoon. Sometimes
people get the impression that a 0-0 scoreline implies a dreary,
uninspiring game. Sometimes they are right.
''It was one to forget,'' chorused a succession of players. ''What
was?'' we asked. There were mitigating circumstances. The wind blew this
way and that, swirling in sudden and unpredictable gusts and, allied to
a bumpy pitch, made ball control and passing especially difficult. But
this difficult?
Maybe we should be kind and allow that a match between teams locked at
the top of the division, with all the inevitable tensions, was bound to
be a bit strained, and when faced with awkward conditions there was sure
to be little chance of quality play.
As Aberdeen manager Willie Miller put it: ''There was a lot at stake,
a lot of passion and effort on both sides. I thought there was some good
football, but if you are a purist you would have been disappointed.'' We
were, Willie, we were.
There were so many decent players on the field we were entitled to a
bit more than passion and effort. Aberdeen, in the second half
particularly, occasionally found an extra gear, but it was only when
Scott Booth came on and Eoin Jess moved further left that there was a
sign of the kind of skills that should have been predominant.
In that late spell Aberdeen might well have won and no-one would have
quarrelled excessively with that. On territorial rights alone they had
the edge, although Rangers made better chances with fewer attacks. In
the end, however, a draw was fair enough.
Nobody had much fun. Even that ebullient, irrepressible midfield
dynamo, Stuart McCall, was less than his usual self afterwards. ''The
players on both sides were glad to hear the final whistle,'' he said.
''It was a poor game to play in, and no doubt to watch.
''The conditions were the worst we have had this season. It wasn't a
fierce wind, but it swirled all over the pitch and got stronger as the
game went on. But at the end of the day we got a point from our closest
rivals, so I suppose it is a better result for us than them.
''It is very difficult to create anything in that situation and you
don't want to give anything away. Next week can only be better.''
One of the men with whom he had a rare old tussle in the middle of the
park, Lee Richardson, harmonised with McCall's views. He, too, advised
us to forget the game as quickly as possible. ''It was a bad day for
football.''
The two players had similar opinions, too, when it came to assessing
the title race. McCall believes that any of the top challengers who gets
off on a good run now could clinch the flag. ''But as far as we are
concerned it is what Rangers do, not anyone else, that will decide it.
''If we can get our finger out and go on a winning run somebody will
have to be very good to keep with us. But if we are as inconsistent as
we have been anybody can win it.''
Richardson reckons it will be down simply to which team truly wants
the championship the most. ''It is about the will to win it now.''
The Englishman admitted that he and his colleagues were drained after
their most hectic week of the season. To face two games against Celtic
(the first abandoned because of fog) and one against Rangers in the
space of eight days was an enormously demanding schedule which could
have damaged morale had the results gone the wrong way.
To have emerged with two draws is no mean feat and might well reveal
the kind of inner strength which Richardson claims will be required in
the weeks ahead.
Said Miller: ''I feel the experience this week has shown our players
have the right attitude and fitness.''
Yet it was in defence that the stars of the day shone, Richard Gough
and Brian Irvine, with Alex McLeish not far behind. All of them stood
firm and safe against the difficulties of the afternoon and, for Irvine
and McLeish, the fact that Mark Hateley was at last subdued must have
been quite a relief.
Rangers had to leave Gordon Durie behind at the interval. ''He was
sick,'' said manager Walter Smith. ''He had been suffering from a bug
last week, but appeared fine again.''
Even so, Pieter Huistra, his replacement, produced rare glimpses of
skill down that left flank and came close to scoring with just about his
first touch of the ball. He might have done better later on when a
Mikhailichenko pass gave him room to shoot, but the best chance of the
day fell to the Ukrainian himself in the first half, when he had a clear
header from a Trevor Steven cross but failed to hit it firmly enough to
prevent Snelders making a good save.
Ally Maxwell had a fine stop from Duncan Shearer early on but was
relieved to see a tremendous overhead kick from Irvine hit the top of
the bar. That was as near as either side was to get to a goal and much
of the time was spent in the middle of the park trying to find the route
to goal.
Six players had their names taken for varying offences, three from
each side. Paul Kane, who seemed harshly treated, Joe Miller, and Jess
were the Aberdeen sinners, while David Robertson, John Brown, and
Hateley were the Ibrox defaulters.
There have been worse games this season -- I think I have been at most
of them -- but the disappointment is greater when two of the best teams
are involved. They are expected to be able to cope with the pressures
and strains and still give the clients entertainment.
There was not a lot of that about at Pittodrie.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article