Diamond Scot

Airdrie successfully flying the flag for Scotland today. Were the better team and deserved the win.

Patterson was poor but he has some credit in the bank. If he plays as poor in the next 3 friendlies then thats another matter. Ralston is miles off the standard needed. None of the subs looked good on Friday but he was just as poor. Given the option of Ralston or trying to install abit of confidence back into Patterson then id opt for the later. One thing for sure is Patterson needs a move in the summer.

The boys 20 years old ffs. He is playing reguarly in a very good league. Englands best ever striker, Harry Kane spent some time on loan at Orient, Millwall, Norwich and Leicester and had exactly a 1 in 4 goal record.

I think an above average player, playing well with confidence in the Championship is better for the national team than the same player struggling in the EPL. However a good player playing well in the EPL will be better than the above championship player. Ie McGinn / McTomminay / Gilmour are better than Armstrong / McLean however Patterson playing for a side like Leeds every week would be better than his current situation at Everton.

Not automatically better but EPL players are better than Championship players. Otherwise the championship teams would be in the EPL and vice versa. There is a reason the succesful teams are made up of top flight players. And not just top flight but the best teams from the top flight. Each player needs to be considered on their merits though.

The exact opposite of that statement is true. Its our consistent need to try and grind out results, win at all cost regardless of age group etc that has held us back for decades. Friendlys are exactly the type of games where you get gains for artistic impression as you put it. Practicing phases of play in real game situations so that players and management can learn what works, what doesnt and make tweaks for the competitive stuff.

I was only responding to Scotlad who said we didnt bring on any Norwich players. Im happy with Championship players. Its a good standard. Obviously the more top leagues players we have the better.

Thats a weird take. Are you suggesting that teams should play their best players for 90 mins every game. No subs, no rotation, no trying out anything new? Managers all over the world play their best team for an hour and then make loads of subs in friendly games. It allows them to see how the team is shaping up and then rest key players whilst giving others the chance to show what they can do. We would all rather that players didnt have bad games but thats not reality is it. Loads of people were suggesting Souttar to get a chance. He got a chance, didnt take it and is likely now back down the pecking order. So bringing him on gave Clarke information that he previously didnt have.

Would you rather we played teams ranked below us. Thrashed them and were full of confidence before getting exposed when it matters in the Euros and Nations league? Also, why play our best team for 90 mins last night. Risk picking up an injury for what reason. And also if one of them do get injured before or at the Euros then we have no idea how the replacement would do. Ie would you rather Souttar had his nightmare last night or getting chucked in against Germany because somebody got injured?

But we dont have a sitting / holding midfielder in the squad. Closest we have is Maclean and he isnt really either and a big drop off in quality to our other mids.

McLean. / Norwich The one thing id like us to work on is a formation / style that we can use when Tierney isnt playing as we dont have anybody close to being like for like. Personally id rather play a worse player who plays similar to Tierney (like Kingsley) than a better player who doesnt play the same way. (McKenna, Cooper, Souttar etc)

Saw the home top for 1st time in person the other day. Still wasnt a fan but looked better than in the pictures. I thought it looked decent on the TV

Why did we desperately need a win? We have already qualified, last night was a friendly and im sure the players will reflect on the good things and analyse the negatives and try and improve on them. Thats the point in playing the better ranked nations. They expose fralities that we then learn from. We could play exactly the same way on Tuesday and win 3-1 and fans will go away happy but we will have learned nothing. Winning brings confidence, I understand that but misplaced confidence is just as dangerous. We have alot of top top players who know they are top top players. Im sure they have confidence in themselves and each other.

Anybody even thinking about not having Clarke as manager needs their head checked. We really do have some nuggets in our support who have no understanding of football. As I said elsewhere, we havent won in 6 games. 4 of those game were against the best nations in the world, 3 of them were away from home. Clarke selected these friendlies because they are whats needed to improve.

Its all relative though. It was a friendly. I would rather get beat 4 nil but play like we did for the 1st 70 mins last night but just have an off night in front of goal than win one nil in a France away type performance where we are backs to the wall, dont look comfortable on the ball, create nothing and score from a freak 1 in a million goal. If you want to become a really top team then you have to dominate games against similar or better sides. We are learning to do that. (Spain home and at times away, Norway at home) We are also dispatching lesser sides with relative ease compared to previous years when we struggled.

I think the test for Shankland was whether he could do all the other parts of the game other than scoring. We know he can score goals. I thought that he showed that he could do those elements well last night although he did drift in and out the game. In an ideal world we would have a more rounded forward but we have 3 who have some good attributes and weaker in others. I think what Shankland showed last night that he can start up front and therefore will be on the plane. Patterson was 2nd choice behind Hickey before last night and remains 2nd choice after last night. He didnt have a good night but is still levels above Ralston.

I actually have a bit of sympathy for England fans. (Although its still funny) National flags are meant to mean something. There is zero need to change them. Do whatever you want to the top, make the trim whatever colour but why the flag? I wouldnt be happy if they changed the Saltire on our strip. I cant imagine any national fans being pleased if it happened on their shirt. The bigger issue is that the England flag has been hijacked by the far and not so far right in England so its almost become marketing negative.

Shanklands main job is to score goals but it wasnt his only job. He linked play well, occupied the defenders and held the ball up well. He did drift in and out of the game a little which would be my only concern. He missed a good chance but that happens. If we have a chance like that against Germany then I know which player id want it to fall to. Patterson isnt a patch on Hickey however previously he did offer something different going forward. On tonights showing that element, almost willful abandon going forward wasnt there which was his main strength. Take that away and he is a concern. He is very similar to Hutton in many ways. When Hutton moved to England, gradually he became more conservative which ruined him. Hutton 2007 (Italy) was his best version. Patterson could do with looking at Frimpong. By all means tighten up defensively but his strengths are direct attacking. Lose that and lose everything.

If defeats like this damage us then the players arent good enough to start with. Good players / teams learn from nights like this. Thats the entire reason we are choosing such hard friendlies. In order to make the next step we need to do the learning curve. We were excellent in several aspects of our play tonight. Not just holding our own but outplaying the Dutch in Holland. That would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. Weirdly after a 4 nil loss, im even more sure we will get out the group in the summer. Im not sure what some fans expect. You cant go from being a shambles just a few years ago, 22 years without qualifying for a tournament to qualifying for back to back Euros and totally changing the way we play football without some bumps in the road. We havent won in 6 games but 4 of those games were Spain, France and Holland away. Another was England at home. We arent expected to win any of those games. The other 2 were draws that didnt matter because he had already done the job.

Barron has looked comfortable anytime ive seen him. Not anywhere ready for the full squad but with some regular 1st team football he could easily develop into a solid squad player. He probably is showing just as much if not more promise than Ferguson was at the same age. Max Johnstone interests me. Again I dont think he is ready for the step up however if Hickey didnt make the Euros squad and the choice was between him and Ralston id be leaning towards Johnstone. Ralston has more experience but in my mind is fairly limited whereas Johnstones ability ceiling is much higher. They have played the same amount of games this year so its not like Ralston has had a full season of solid performances behind him.

Reading the vast majority of the comments on here and I feel like I watched a different game from most tonight. Yes we got beat 4 nil however we dominated the 1st half and more than held our own until they scored the 2nd and subs came on. Shankland played decent against a really good defence. He linked play well, should have scored the 1 on 1 but hit the ball so hardly totally fluffed his lines. Tierney is key to how we play. We limited the Netherlands to attempt at goal in the 1st half on their turf. All whilst creating several chances ourselves. Some of our passing play was top quality. We were off it in the final 3rd tonight, not clinical enough but id hope that will be different come the euros. Patterson looked like a player devoid of confidence. Not once did he look to take it past the full back, even with loads of space to run at them. Worryingly that is likely to have been coached out of him at Everton. He could do with a move to somewhere like Germany. Needs to get back to Alan Hutton type attacking. Gilmour was superb. Strange that McTom was playing deeper with Christie further forward when logic would suggest them switching however Clarke did say he was going to try some things. None of the subs did well.

Ferguson plays as an attacking mid in Italy. Would be slightly strange to play him deeper and play Gilmour further forward. Effectively playing each of them in each others position. Gilmour doesnt need to sit in front of the defence if we had a defensive mid playing beside him. If you watch Gilmour, a lot of his passes are sideways and backwards. Thats because he is moving around the opposition and waiting for the opportunity to pass forward. If he was playing further forward he wouldnt be making these same passes.

Gilmour plays deep because of his ability to take the ball under pressure, get turned and find a forward pass. If he was to play further forward then it doesnt play to his strengths. The further forward you play the less options there are for a forward pass. Ie if he was to play where McGinn / McTom currently do then he only really has the CF or the other attacking Mid to play to. However the main reason he doesnt play there imo is that he cant beat a man. Gilmour isnt particuarly quick over 5/10 yards, doesnt have dribbling skills, doesnt have the physical attributes that McGinn & McTom do in order to hold off a player and get a shot away etc and actually doesnt appear to have the eye for goal that the above players have. He only has 1 senior goal to his name. Glimour is a superb deep lying playmaker. He can set and control the tempo of the team. He ticks every box in that regard. He does need somebody defensively minded beside him though.

Poorly maintained grass pitches are just as big a problem as the astro pitches imo. Clubs should be forced to spend a minimum amount on their pitch and upkeep if they want to play in the top league.

But applying your logic he would be best for the organisation. He is a standard of manager Celtic wouldnt abe able to attract, has good contacts at Arsenal, Everton and Man City so ideal for the loan market and is respected as a player and manager. Should the treatment of one of his Arsenal players make any difference to your thinking. What about all the players he has treated very well?