Reason for Optimism - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Reason for Optimism


Caledonian Craig

Recommended Posts

After a mixed double header of friendlies I think there is more cause for optimism than not.

Okay a win and a defeat was mixed return but when you take into account we have perhaps unearthed a couple of youngsters ready for the centre of defence in the form of McKenna and Hendry plus other youngsters looking like they are ready to cement a place in our side then there is hope. Look at the team churned out against Hungary and only Mulgrew and McGregor fall into the veteran category. Aside from them we fielded a team aged mostly in their early 20s in the form of Robertson, Hendry, McKenna, McGinn, Forrest, McGregor and Fraser whilst Armstrong and Phillips aren't exactly old crocks either. Also off the bench came more youngsters in the form of McBurnie and Christie with the likes of McTominay and Jamie Murphy also involved in the double header. Those players make a firm basis for our team for the next few years - so yes there is reason for optimism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

After a mixed double header of friendlies I think there is more cause for optimism than not.

Okay a win and a defeat was mixed return but when you take into account we have perhaps unearthed a couple of youngsters ready for the centre of defence in the form of McKenna and Hendry plus other youngsters looking like they are ready to cement a place in our side then there is hope. Look at the team churned out against Hungary and only Mulgrew and McGregor fall into the veteran category. Aside from them we fielded a team aged mostly in their early 20s in the form of Robertson, Hendry, McKenna, McGinn, Forrest, McGregor and Fraser whilst Armstrong and Phillips aren't exactly old crocks either. Also off the bench came more youngsters in the form of McBurnie and Christie with the likes of McTominay and Jamie Murphy also involved in the double header. Those players make a firm basis for our team for the next few years - so yes there is reason for optimism.

Agreed

So much so that I renewed yesterday after deliberating the above for a few days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reasons for negativity..

Matt Philips as a center forward. Depressing that McLeish would consider it, let alone do it. McBurnie looks the natural guy to step up as back up for Griffiths, but we benched him after 77 minutes for a winger who's just not cut out for leading the line. Yes, he scored against a very poor Hungary side, but it wasn't because he was well positioned, it took a lucky bounce off someone's arse onto Philips boot. But the goal means that instead of giving experience to a promising young striker who had an ok debut, we're going to persist with a tired old failure playing out of position.

Formation.. 352 or.. 5311. It's a horrible formation that doesn't make use of the players we have, exposes us in positions where we lack depth and stifles our ability to create enough good chances.

Even with the emergence of McKenna and Hendry we're struggling for 6 centerbacks (3 starters, 3 squad). Mulgrew and Berra are coming to the end of their international careers, Hanley is still questionable and Lindsey hasn't been capped. If we start down the path of needing 3 starting centerbacks then we're shooting ourselves in the foot 1 months from now. We could put Tierney in there, but it seems like a massive waste when he and Robertson could give us an incredibly strong left side pairing.

There's no place for any of our wide men. Fraser, Burke, Christie, Forrest, Snodgrass, McKay, Rithie, Murphy.. all get pushed into that floating number 10 slot, ahead of the midfield 3 and behind a lone striker. We have pace and crossing ability on the flanks for the first time in a long time, and we're playing a formation without any wide men. It's laughable.

The lack of wide players also means we have to play thru the middle most of the time. Robertson did a great job of getting up and being an attacking outlet against Hungary, but better opposition will track him better and probably double up on him. He can't do it alone. Playing 5 thru the middle (midfield 3, striker and a number 10) means that the opponent can just play narrow and leave very little space to play thru, making it really hard to fashion chances. Even in the win against a poor Hungary we saw this. We had more posession because we couldn't find an obvious way thru and yet they had more shots and more shots on target. Against better sides that task of penetrating thru the middle becomes even harder.

The lack of a half decent wing back (something Hutton would still be good at) means that we crowbarred Fraser in there. I like Fraser as a player and he'd be my first choice on the right flank, but not at the back. Yes, Bournemouth have used him there 3 times this season.. but 2 were in the cup against weaker sides and only once in the league, now that they're safe and with their regular right back injured. Better sides would rip him a new one.

Central midfield lacks balance. The first half against Costa Rica was stilted. 2 defensive mids with 3 central players ahead of them leaves very little option for working the ball forward. Our plan after that was to just player 3 dynamic center mids and hope they managed to magic something out of nothing. That's not a game plan. 3 dynamic mids will leave us caught on the counter against good sides. We'll get punished for the lack of screen infront of the back line. We have 2 good defensive mids in McDonald and McTominay, but we didn't give them anything around them for the little time we put them on the pitch.

Players failing to reproduce their club form.
Ritchie.. poor, played 1 good thru ball all day and did little else. Negatives outweigh the positives.
Forrest.. floated around, did nothing.
Cairney.. quiet.. yanked after 45 minutes.
Paterson.. not a right back any more. Both he and his manager say he can't defend.

I'm not even going to go into the various thing McLeish has said after each game.. but they're generally not very helpful or straight up delusional (suggesting if he'd just player McArthur we'd have beaten Costa Rica?!).

 

So after the two games, I believe we have potential to do ok in the squad. The players are there.. but i don't believe at all in the manager or the system.. and those two things can turn good players into bad ones. It's not that I'm expecting us to fail, it's that i'm looking at what McLeish has done so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, andyD said:

Reasons for negativity..

Matt Philips as a center forward. Depressing that McLeish would consider it, let alone do it. McBurnie looks the natural guy to step up as back up for Griffiths, but we benched him after 77 minutes for a winger who's just not cut out for leading the line. Yes, he scored against a very poor Hungary side, but it wasn't because he was well positioned, it took a lucky bounce off someone's arse onto Philips boot. But the goal means that instead of giving experience to a promising young striker who had an ok debut, we're going to persist with a tired old failure playing out of position.

Formation.. 352 or.. 5311. It's a horrible formation that doesn't make use of the players we have, exposes us in positions where we lack depth and stifles our ability to create enough good chances.

Even with the emergence of McKenna and Hendry we're struggling for 6 centerbacks (3 starters, 3 squad). Mulgrew and Berra are coming to the end of their international careers, Hanley is still questionable and Lindsey hasn't been capped. If we start down the path of needing 3 starting centerbacks then we're shooting ourselves in the foot 1 months from now. We could put Tierney in there, but it seems like a massive waste when he and Robertson could give us an incredibly strong left side pairing.

There's no place for any of our wide men. Fraser, Burke, Christie, Forrest, Snodgrass, McKay, Rithie, Murphy.. all get pushed into that floating number 10 slot, ahead of the midfield 3 and behind a lone striker. We have pace and crossing ability on the flanks for the first time in a long time, and we're playing a formation without any wide men. It's laughable.

The lack of wide players also means we have to play thru the middle most of the time. Robertson did a great job of getting up and being an attacking outlet against Hungary, but better opposition will track him better and probably double up on him. He can't do it alone. Playing 5 thru the middle (midfield 3, striker and a number 10) means that the opponent can just play narrow and leave very little space to play thru, making it really hard to fashion chances. Even in the win against a poor Hungary we saw this. We had more posession because we couldn't find an obvious way thru and yet they had more shots and more shots on target. Against better sides that task of penetrating thru the middle becomes even harder.

The lack of a half decent wing back (something Hutton would still be good at) means that we crowbarred Fraser in there. I like Fraser as a player and he'd be my first choice on the right flank, but not at the back. Yes, Bournemouth have used him there 3 times this season.. but 2 were in the cup against weaker sides and only once in the league, now that they're safe and with their regular right back injured. Better sides would rip him a new one.

Central midfield lacks balance. The first half against Costa Rica was stilted. 2 defensive mids with 3 central players ahead of them leaves very little option for working the ball forward. Our plan after that was to just player 3 dynamic center mids and hope they managed to magic something out of nothing. That's not a game plan. 3 dynamic mids will leave us caught on the counter against good sides. We'll get punished for the lack of screen infront of the back line. We have 2 good defensive mids in McDonald and McTominay, but we didn't give them anything around them for the little time we put them on the pitch.

Players failing to reproduce their club form.
Ritchie.. poor, played 1 good thru ball all day and did little else. Negatives outweigh the positives.
Forrest.. floated around, did nothing.
Cairney.. quiet.. yanked after 45 minutes.
Paterson.. not a right back any more. Both he and his manager say he can't defend.

I'm not even going to go into the various thing McLeish has said after each game.. but they're generally not very helpful or straight up delusional (suggesting if he'd just player McArthur we'd have beaten Costa Rica?!).

 

So after the two games, I believe we have potential to do ok in the squad. The players are there.. but i don't believe at all in the manager or the system.. and those two things can turn good players into bad ones. It's not that I'm expecting us to fail, it's that i'm looking at what McLeish has done so far.

From what I can see the players are not there...  we have two international class players that both play the same position, a number of journeymen and a few promising youngsters... that’s all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Malcolm said:

From what I can see the players are not there...  we have two international class players that both play the same position, a number of journeymen and a few promising youngsters... that’s all.

I know where you're coming from..

But..
Gordon's a solid international level keeper. McGregor is good enough.

The defense i'll give you is a bit of a mess. Mulgrew and Berra are, as you say, journeymen who are in the twilight of their careers. But they're not terrible at the same time. I look at the Costa Rica and Hungary sides and I don't see anyone significantly better. Gonzalez is decent, but in and out at a fairly poor Serie A side. Duarte is at Espanyol, but so injury prone you don't know if he will be fit one week to the next. Right back is up in the air, tho we do have a steady EPL player in Bardsley, and left back we're international class all over. Hendry has come into the starting 11 at Celtic, so will likely pick up European experience from next season and may replace Mulgrew longer term, and McKenna will likely move away from Aberdeen in the next 18 months, despite his new contract.

Central midfield we have a guy who's pushed his way into the Man Utd side, and a few with decent champions league experience. It's only once you get past that that you get teh guys who are basically untested at the top level; McGinn, McLean, McDonald, Cairney, McGeough. You could also argue we have steady English Premier League players in Fletcher and McArthur, but personally i would have neither anywhere near the squad.

Out wide we're ok. Fraser and Ritchie are regular premier league. Snoddy was keeping Hull up by himself last season. We have the option of using Robertson as a wide midfielder, with his top class deliveries. Forrest fails to perform for us most of the time, but he's another regular champions league participant.

Up front.. Griffiths ticks that champions league box, but it's a bit threadbare behind him right now.

But as a starting 11:

Gordon (regular Champions League)
Bardsley (regular EPL)
Mulgrew (experienced oldhand)
McKenna (Promising youngster)
Tierney (regular Champions League)
Fraser (regular EPL)
Armstrong (regular Champions League)
McTominay (breaking into top end EPL)
McGregor (regular Champions League)
Robertson (regular top end EPL)
Griffiths (regular Champions League)

We have good players playing at the top level. Compare that to the Costa Rica side for example and we're playing much more competitive club football than they are.

The tools are there to qualify. We lack a bit of depth in some areas, but the key thing is to use what we have well.
So far I haven't seen anything to suggest that McLeish is going to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in terms of players it’s comfortably the best for 20 years, although we miss a Barry Ferguson. I’m not sold on 3-5-2 but it could yet work well for us. The danger is will be three games in and we realise it doesn’t work and then we go on an unbeaten run but can’t make up the lost ground. I’d like to see the 4-5-1 with Tierney left back and Robertson left midfield, tried. Robertson plays very high up the park with Liverpool anyway so no great change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Malcolm said:

From what I can see the players are not there...  we have two international class players that both play the same position, a number of journeymen and a few promising youngsters... that’s all.

 

How many international sides sport 11 top-end players? Really just the big boys (Germany, France, Argentina, Brazil etc).

Northern Ireland and Wales are two prime examples of teams making do with what they have and doing pretty well. A couple of top class players, a mix of journeymen and a few good youngsters should be enough to get us to a tourney. It all comes down to the organisation and the management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

We’ve had the players to make the last couple of euros. Nothing’s changed but we need a bit of luck and stronger management. 

Not convinced by McLeish but he’s all we’ve got.

I’m not sure we quite had the running power in previous squads. As Strachan used to say, we needed about a dozen passes to score a goal, with the likes of Morrison, Bannan etc being nice footballers.  We now can burst into the box and score easier goals, and i think this will make a difference. We can also get about the pitch and win the ball back with our current group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see much reason for optimism either. 

Playing Matt Phillips up front was depressing.

3-5-2 is horrible and doesn't suit us at all.

18 hours ago, Malcolm said:

From what I can see the players are not there...  we have two international class players that both play the same position, a number of journeymen and a few promising youngsters... that’s all.

Pretty much agree. Except, you've missed out the core of the current Celtic team. Having 6 players playing together at Champions league level is a big plus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil Bardsley isn't the answer to anything, coming back from injury but on the bench for last four games hardly inspires confidence I keep saying Patterson isn't a right back but I would sooner have him there than Bardsley. Fascinated by Frasers performance at right last week be interesting to see what happens if he continues there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/04/2018 at 6:27 PM, andyD said:

Reasons for negativity..

Matt Philips as a center forward. Depressing that McLeish would consider it, let alone do it. McBurnie looks the natural guy to step up as back up for Griffiths, but we benched him after 77 minutes for a winger who's just not cut out for leading the line. Yes, he scored against a very poor Hungary side, but it wasn't because he was well positioned, it took a lucky bounce off someone's arse onto Philips boot. But the goal means that instead of giving experience to a promising young striker who had an ok debut, we're going to persist with a tired old failure playing out of position.

Formation.. 352 or.. 5311. It's a horrible formation that doesn't make use of the players we have, exposes us in positions where we lack depth and stifles our ability to create enough good chances.

Even with the emergence of McKenna and Hendry we're struggling for 6 centerbacks (3 starters, 3 squad). Mulgrew and Berra are coming to the end of their international careers, Hanley is still questionable and Lindsey hasn't been capped. If we start down the path of needing 3 starting centerbacks then we're shooting ourselves in the foot 1 months from now. We could put Tierney in there, but it seems like a massive waste when he and Robertson could give us an incredibly strong left side pairing.

There's no place for any of our wide men. Fraser, Burke, Christie, Forrest, Snodgrass, McKay, Rithie, Murphy.. all get pushed into that floating number 10 slot, ahead of the midfield 3 and behind a lone striker. We have pace and crossing ability on the flanks for the first time in a long time, and we're playing a formation without any wide men. It's laughable.

The lack of wide players also means we have to play thru the middle most of the time. Robertson did a great job of getting up and being an attacking outlet against Hungary, but better opposition will track him better and probably double up on him. He can't do it alone. Playing 5 thru the middle (midfield 3, striker and a number 10) means that the opponent can just play narrow and leave very little space to play thru, making it really hard to fashion chances. Even in the win against a poor Hungary we saw this. We had more posession because we couldn't find an obvious way thru and yet they had more shots and more shots on target. Against better sides that task of penetrating thru the middle becomes even harder.

The lack of a half decent wing back (something Hutton would still be good at) means that we crowbarred Fraser in there. I like Fraser as a player and he'd be my first choice on the right flank, but not at the back. Yes, Bournemouth have used him there 3 times this season.. but 2 were in the cup against weaker sides and only once in the league, now that they're safe and with their regular right back injured. Better sides would rip him a new one.

Central midfield lacks balance. The first half against Costa Rica was stilted. 2 defensive mids with 3 central players ahead of them leaves very little option for working the ball forward. Our plan after that was to just player 3 dynamic center mids and hope they managed to magic something out of nothing. That's not a game plan. 3 dynamic mids will leave us caught on the counter against good sides. We'll get punished for the lack of screen infront of the back line. We have 2 good defensive mids in McDonald and McTominay, but we didn't give them anything around them for the little time we put them on the pitch.

Players failing to reproduce their club form.
Ritchie.. poor, played 1 good thru ball all day and did little else. Negatives outweigh the positives.
Forrest.. floated around, did nothing.
Cairney.. quiet.. yanked after 45 minutes.
Paterson.. not a right back any more. Both he and his manager say he can't defend.

I'm not even going to go into the various thing McLeish has said after each game.. but they're generally not very helpful or straight up delusional (suggesting if he'd just player McArthur we'd have beaten Costa Rica?!).

 

So after the two games, I believe we have potential to do ok in the squad. The players are there.. but i don't believe at all in the manager or the system.. and those two things can turn good players into bad ones. It's not that I'm expecting us to fail, it's that i'm looking at what McLeish has done so far.

I got fed up reading at “Its not that I’m expecting us to fail”

:D:D:D:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...


×
×
  • Create New...