Aberdeen 0 - 0 Cowdenbeath

Ten thousand spectators at Pittodrie Park, Aberdeen, saw a goalless draw between Aberdeen and Cowdenbeath. It was to the credit of the goalkeepers on each side that such a result was obtained. Any mistake on the part of McSevich when dealing with shots sent in by Rankin, the Fifeshire team's inside-right and the best forward on the field, would have enabled Cowdenbeath to secure both points, and, similarly, any failure by Falconer when meeting the efforts of Miller, Reid, and Lawson in the Aberdeen's front line, would have been fatal to Aberdeen obtaining even a draw. As it was, and as showing the strenuous character of the game throughout, it was significant that both goalkeepers required attention in the course of the second half - first McSevich and then Falconer - but both recovered, and were able to resume without leaving the field. Cowdenbeath's defence all round was admirable, especially the understanding between the half-backs and the backs when the former occasionally licked back to the latter. Murray and Macdonald were steady at back, and in the half-back division Glancy and Forest were outstanding. Cosgrove, Edward, and Maclachlan, the Aberdeen half-backs, were reliable in defence, but might have done more to enable the front line to get moving oftener. It was a dour game from beginning to end, and a goalless draw was a fair finish.

Source: The Scotsman, 27th December 1926

Aberdeen and Cowdenbeath had a goal-less draw Pittodrie, where there were fully 10,000 spectators. Although there were lively passages, it was a rather uninteresting game, a fact probably accounted for by a troublesome wind and the treacherous state of the ground, which was soft and making footing uncertain, affecting the play. Either team might have won, but all the circumstances considered, a draw did justice to both. Aberdeen accounted for more attacks than the visitors, but the latter were just as dangerous, and there was some good goalkeeping by both custodians, whose work was one of the redeeming features of the game. Neither team engaged in much sustained combination, but when they did, movements usually came to grief through misdirected passing. The shooting on the whole was fairly good, but there was not enough of it and generally defenders had the better of the argument with attackers. So well did the rear divisions of both team's tackle and cover up that few favourable opportunities to shoot were afforded.

McSEVICH'S FINE PLAY.

McSevich in the Aberdeen goal gave a polished display. His handling was sure and safe and he showed excellent judgment when it was necessary to leave his charge. On one occasion he practically threw himself at the feet of Wright, the Cowdenbeath centre-forward, and brought off a spectacular save, and on another occasion he was hurt in stopping a terrific shot by Forrest. If their play was lacking somewhat in repose, Jackson and Bruce (D.), the home backs, comported themselves well, their tackling being very effective and they covered up each other admirably. All three half-backs put in some good work, MacLachlan being best. The forward play suffered because of the greasy state of the pitch, but there was again a tendency for the players to hang too long on the ball. McDermid and Bruce (R.) put in a deal of good work, as did Miller, but even allowing that Falconer on occasion saved well from all three, their shooting and finishing left much to be desired as far as direction was concerned. Reid, clever at times, was kept well in band by the opposing defenders, and Lawson, who was brought in vice Smith on the left wing, quite failed to do himself justice.

STRENGTH IN DEFENCE.

Like Aberdeen, Cowdenbeath were capably served by their defence. Falconer was exceptionally clever in goal, two of his saves in particular from Miller being noteworthy. Murray was the better back in the division which rendered great service to the visitors. An experiment in playing Hopewell, the regular left back, at left half proved eminently successful, but Glancy was the best of an effective trio. Wright at centre-forward was the best of the Fife team's attackers. He was energetic and enterprising and was always a source of worry to the home defence. On one occasion he was very unfortunate in failing to score when, after beating several opponents and was about to shoot, he slipped and fell. Rankin at inside right got through much good work, his skilful manoeuvring being a feature, but Pullar and Wilson on the extreme wings did not make the most of their opportunities.

Source: Press & Journal, 27th December 1926