Jump to content
PASTA Mick

Scottish Players in Action 18/19

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Tartan Chris said:

Going by last 5-10 years playing in bottom half of premier league regularly is pretty good going for any player being called regularly by Scotland.

He obviously isn't good enough for any of the top 6 who are a league apart now and not much difference between teams between 7th-14th imo as Burnley have shown recently.

Yes but let's remember he was bought from the Championship. Besides it is by no means a given because a player plays in the EPL that they will succeed. We have a fair few Scots play in the EPL who have not cut the mustard for us or disappointed. I stand by my point. I don't see all the fuss about him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bazmidd said:

This just confirms you literally do not have a scooby doo pal eh. Either that or you have to be on the complete wind up on here. Some of your comments, opinions and ideas are hilarious tbf.

And finally sanity returns. You been hiding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of Cairney's problem is that he's not really good at the defensive side of things. With the ball at his feet he's a good player, but he's not great at putting his foot in, and he's not quick enough to make things happen by himself. At Fulham, now in the Prem, he's not really been able to get involved, particularly with Ranieri now playing a 451 with 2 deep defensive mids. Cairney's been playing all over the place, trying to find a spot for him, even as a winger which he just doesn't have the pace for. Schurrle's not the quickest, but he leaves Cairney for dead.

In our team, we've got 2 defensive mids and one behind the striker. In theory the position is kind of available. Christie's been in there the last couple of games and done well, but before that it's been heavily rotated. McGregor, Armstrong, Paterson, Russell.. and you've got to think Snoddy would be in with a shout there too given he's sorted out his club form.

So Cairney does have an opportunity to stake a claim. But the position he's best at no longer exists in his club side. So he's a little bit in trouble imo. A move might not be the worst idea.. or just suck it up, get relegated and play attacking mid in the Championship again next season. Hardly ideal for him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bazmidd said:

This just confirms you literally do not have a scooby doo pal eh. Either that or you have to be on the complete wind up on here. Some of your comments, opinions and ideas are hilarious tbf.

We are sticking with the same tactics, the same formation and the same tired formula that's been tested and failed so many times that it's pretty much in our DNA. So much so that we are literally programmed to accept a 4 at the back system and dismiss anything else as being too foreign or too out of date (Even though a vast percentage play with a 3 at the back)

Oh so, I want to try something new, I am thinking outside the box. I want to try something radical. Is that really so bad? We played Tierney at right back, even though he's never played there before. No one had an issue with that. Patterson at right back (He's never a right back in a trillion years) and people accepted it.

It would appear to me that people are so stubborn that they'd rather 100% fail with the same old system than try something that might work. That to me is insanity personified. 

That to me is hilarious, pal.

Scooby doo? The early 2000's called, they want their diss back.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chripper said:

I want to try something radical. Is that really so bad?

No, but you do need a good reason to try something radical. Right now we've been promoted from our Nations League group and looked decent in the last two outings. Does that require a revolution?

1 hour ago, Chripper said:

We played Tierney at right back, even though he's never played there before. No one had an issue with that

I did. :) and do. He's a waste of a shirt there for the most part. He offers nothing going forwards and that hinders the man playing ahead of him. Ok, he can tackle, but he has problems when people go down the outside as his good foot isnt readily available. It was somewhat similar when Ryan Jack played at right back. "did ok defensively but offered nothing else". I'd be very happy to never see Tierney at right back again. It's not his position.

1 hour ago, Chripper said:

It would appear to me that people are so stubborn that they'd rather 100% fail with the same old system than try something that might work. That to me is insanity personified.

If we were standing still in time, and had the same players and the same opposition, then you might have a point. This squad is already significantly different from the last, even Forrest looks a different player from the Forrest of the last 7 years. 451 is still a perfectly fine formation. lots of successful sides play it, i think every team in the top 6 of the EPL either plays it every week or has played a good percentage of games with it this season.

1 hour ago, Chripper said:

a vast percentage play with a 3 at the back

Who and where? Like i said, top of the EPL is basically all 451/433 variants.. same for Juve, Bayern, Real and Barca. Atletico are weird in that they play 442. The only team with a regular back 3 i can think of is PSG. So who's the vast %?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, andyD said:

 

 

Who and where? Like i said, top of the EPL is basically all 451/433 variants.. same for Juve, Bayern, Real and Barca. Atletico are weird in that they play 442. The only team with a regular back 3 i can think of is PSG. So who's the vast %?

Tottenham play three at the back so all you have to do is find us a Harry Kane and a Deli Ali and we have cracked it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, andyD said:
Quote

No, but you do need a good reason to try something radical. Right now we've been promoted from our Nations League group and looked decent in the last two outings. Does that require a revolution?

I take your point, but it feels like a sticking plaster over a bullet wound. Yes, we've been promoted in the Nations League, etc, but I don't think it'll improve anything. I still don't think we are able to play with just two central defenders. I'm in the minority with that opinion.

Quote

I did. :) and do. He's a waste of a shirt there for the most part. He offers nothing going forwards and that hinders the man playing ahead of him. Ok, he can tackle, but he has problems when people go down the outside as his good foot isnt readily available. It was somewhat similar when Ryan Jack played at right back. "did ok defensively but offered nothing else". I'd be very happy to never see Tierney at right back again. It's not his position.

It makes you wonder which clever clogs looked at him and said "Ahh! Left back!". Didn't he play as a striker in the hearts youths? I think right back is the position that we're crowing out for. My vision would be to play with a right midfielder in the right wingback position.

Quote

If we were standing still in time, and had the same players and the same opposition, then you might have a point. This squad is already significantly different from the last, even Forrest looks a different player from the Forrest of the last 7 years. 451 is still a perfectly fine formation. lots of successful sides play it, i think every team in the top 6 of the EPL either plays it every week or has played a good percentage of games with it this season.

In the previous two matches for Scotland Forrest has had the creative freedom to drift in the middle, which is what he does with Celtic. I'll give McLeish credit for doing what the previous Scotland managers have failed to do, which is give Forrest (and Fraser) freedom to roam.

Quote

Who and where? Like i said, top of the EPL is basically all 451/433 variants.. same for Juve, Bayern, Real and Barca. Atletico are weird in that they play 442. The only team with a regular back 3 i can think of is PSG. So who's the vast %?

I had a quick look at the EPL fixtures last weekend. 6 teams plays a variant of the 3 at the back. Wolves are doing really well with it.  5 used in the SPL last weekend. Plus many teams play it in the Bundesliga, La Liga, Serie A.

Am I saying that most top teams play with a three? No, definitely not, but that's the point, top class teams don't have to, as they have brilliant defenders. The point of a 3 is to make things compact, make space sparse and make it as difficult as possible for the opposition to score.

Scotland fans, en mass have the attitude of "Ach well, we played three at the back for two matches, we didn't win both, so let's go back to the four." Look at Wolves, and to a lesser extend Livingston. Those play with three at the back in every single match. You can't keep chopping and changing. Wolves just beat Spurs 1:3. Do Wolves have the best defenders in the EPL? No. They know what's expected of them, and because of this they're only 6 points behind Man United.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Chripper said:

 

No having a go, but 6/20 isn't a 'vast percentage''.

Wolves play a back 5, rather than a back 3, no? They have out and out wingers with actual fullbacks behind them. Feels a stretch to call it a back 3. The teams i can think of who do play 3 at the back.. bournmouth did against man utd. and i dont think they will again given how that went. Fulham and huddersfield, the bottom two clubs. can't think of the others, but i assume since you didn't mention them, they're down the bottom too. ;)

My problem with us playing 3 at the back is the lack of depth we already have in the position.

We can just about field 2 decent centerbacks now. Given some younger players have emerged recently who are not doing disastrously. But we're short of quality cover for them, so having to have another starter and another 2 cover (since presumably 1 cover steps up to start) means we're really calling up folk in the hope they wont screw up, not because they've played well earnt it and are ready. that's not an approach that begets secure and steady defending.

Add in that not a one of them plays regularly in a back 3. and it feels like asking for trouble.

Nor do we have any actual wingbacks.

Nor do we have a selection of decent defensive mids to sit infront of the back 3 and protect it.

So i'm left thinking we don't really have the personnel over much of the pitch to do the job well right now. Sure we could shoehorn some folk into positions and hope for the best, as evidenced by you putting Robertson in defensive mid, but when he was out a month back talking about how he was struggling a bit because he wasnt used to playing wing back rather than fullback, i'm sure you can appreciate the problems we'd be making for ourselves by trying to put players into positions they're not familiar with.

So yeah, it feels like a bad idea. Not because it's different, but because of all those reasons above.. we don't have the players and the ones we do have don't know the system, nor the positions they'd be asked to play.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, andyD said:

No having a go, but 6/20 isn't a 'vast percentage''.

Wolves play a back 5, rather than a back 3, no? They have out and out wingers with actual fullbacks behind them. Feels a stretch to call it a back 3. The teams i can think of who do play 3 at the back.. bournmouth did against man utd. and i dont think they will again given how that went. Fulham and huddersfield, the bottom two clubs. can't think of the others, but i assume since you didn't mention them, they're down the bottom too. ;)

My problem with us playing 3 at the back is the lack of depth we already have in the position.

We can just about field 2 decent centerbacks now. Given some younger players have emerged recently who are not doing disastrously. But we're short of quality cover for them, so having to have another starter and another 2 cover (since presumably 1 cover steps up to start) means we're really calling up folk in the hope they wont screw up, not because they've played well earnt it and are ready. that's not an approach that begets secure and steady defending.

Add in that not a one of them plays regularly in a back 3. and it feels like asking for trouble.

Nor do we have any actual wingbacks.

Nor do we have a selection of decent defensive mids to sit infront of the back 3 and protect it.

So i'm left thinking we don't really have the personnel over much of the pitch to do the job well right now. Sure we could shoehorn some folk into positions and hope for the best, as evidenced by you putting Robertson in defensive mid, but when he was out a month back talking about how he was struggling a bit because he wasnt used to playing wing back rather than fullback, i'm sure you can appreciate the problems we'd be making for ourselves by trying to put players into positions they're not familiar with.

So yeah, it feels like a bad idea. Not because it's different, but because of all those reasons above.. we don't have the players and the ones we do have don't know the system, nor the positions they'd be asked to play.

Well, it is a percentage. ;)

No. Wolves play 3-4-2-1, have done all season. Yeah.... :lol: That's the thing about statistics, they can easily be contorted. But yes, the scrappy teams/lesser teams play with a variation of three... which, let's be fair, are what we are.

So, what you're saying Is that because we have decent center backs we should play less of them? Fine, let's just play one center back or none. :P That's pretty much the point of playing with a three. If you have two good central defenders then yes, you play with a four, but when you don't so you don't.  Back in the 90s when we played with a three we didn't have great central defenders, which is the reason we played with a three.

As for wingbacks, I think Tierney would be fine. As for the defensive midfielders, I agree that we don't have players for that position, now that Brown has retired, which is why Robertson would make a good fit.

I totally get your points, it does sound like I'm trying to put square pieces in round holes and hoping that they'll fit, but I do think that it could work. I have faith that it would work if McLeish sat down with the players, talked about it and then went to work on it.

It's not going to happen, though. From here on in I can see 4-3-3 being the norm... unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt Ritchie playing left wingback in a 3 for Newcastle.

God knows what I would be called if I suggest he play left wingback. But Rafa gets away with it. ;)

Edited by Chripper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chripper said:

Matt Ritchie playing left wingback in a 3 for Newcastle.

God knows what I would be called if I suggest he play left wingback. But Rafa gets away with it. ;)

David beckham played rwb against Scotland... he was rotten, Neil McCann bossed him.

if we had Franco baresi sweeping up behind Paulo Maldini and Claudio gentile I might be tempted to try 3 at the back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

David beckham played rwb against Scotland... he was rotten, Neil McCann bossed him.

if we had Franco baresi sweeping up behind Paulo Maldini and Claudio gentile I might be tempted to try 3 at the back.

Baresi, Maldin and Gentile? Are you suggesting that you need three world class defenders to make a three work? I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean. It's like saying a team can't play with a 4 unless you have Maldini, Baresi, Beckenbauer and Roberto Carlos. :P

My ambitions are modest, I'll be happy to qualify for anything, we don't have to win it.

As for Beckham playing right wingback against Scotland. I assume you mean in the 2000 play offs? If so, you're wrong:

http://www.englandfootballonline.com/Seas1990-00/1999-00/M0764Sco1999.html

I can see why you thought that, though. We pinned England back so much in that match that it seemed that England were playing with 4 fullbacks during parts of that match.

Edited by Chripper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chripper and friends,

Any chance you could create your own thread to have your mind numbingly boring tactics/formation debate and leave this thread to folk who want to discuss Scotland players in action?

Much obliged. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Marky said:

Chripper and friends,

Any chance you could create your own thread to have your mind numbingly boring tactics/formation debate and leave this thread to folk who want to discuss Scotland players in action?

Much obliged. 

 

There is the Livingston thread. But yes, you are correct.

Back on topic:

No idea whether or not Ritchie is still interested, but he's doing well at wingback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One goal and at least one assist for Fraser tonight. Not sure about the first but I think he had a hand in it. Shame Bournemouth are struggling as his form deserves more.

I know they're very keen on McGregor, and previously Tierney, so Howe clearly thinks there are treasures in Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Marky said:

Chripper and friends,

Any chance you could create your own thread to have your mind numbingly boring tactics/formation debate and leave this thread to folk who want to discuss Scotland players in action?

Much obliged. 

 

It's got ridiculous, I think I have just about managed to hold my breath now.

Third performance of the week over 8 for Scottish players on who scored by Ryan Fraser. Don't thing there is any argument now that he is our best left sided midfielder even allowing for the fact he has only played more than half an hour in 2 of Bournemouth's last 5 games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

It's got ridiculous, I think I have just about managed to hold my breath now.

Third performance of the week over 8 for Scottish players on who scored by Ryan Fraser. Don't thing there is any argument now that he is our best left sided midfielder even allowing for the fact he has only played more than half an hour in 2 of Bournemouth's last 5 games

You would think there must be a top 6 team interested in signing him. He was instrumental in all three goals Bournemouth scored tonight and is probably the main reason they ain't fighting relegation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff from Fraser. 5 goals and more assists than any other player (equal with Hazard) at the halfway point of the season. 

Anyone know who the last Scot to score 10 or more in an EPL season was? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mrniaboc said:

Great stuff from Fraser. 5 goals and more assists than any other player (equal with Hazard) at the halfway point of the season. 

Anyone know who the last Scot to score 10 or more in an EPL season was? 

Steven Fletcher season 2012/13 - scored 11 goals for Sunderland.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

What a game Fraser is having, won the free kick for the first goal, gets an assist with the second goal and scores Bournemouths third.

He's the best player we have at the moment.  Our team should be set up to get the best out of him.

Hopefully one of the top 6 in England, or someone else in the Champions League, comes in for him in the next 18 months.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PASTA Mick said:

He's the best player we have at the moment.

You don't think a certain Andy Robertson fits that description ?<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, PASTA Mick said:

He's the best player we have at the moment.  Our team should be set up to get the best out of him.

Hopefully one of the top 6 in England, or someone else in the Champions League, comes in for him in the next 18 months.  

I'd agree with that. Our most important man going forward, despite Forrest's recent heroics.
We should do whatever we need to get the best out of Fraser.

His numbers this season surely have to catch someone's eye.
more goals and more assists than eriksen
more goals and more assists than willian
he's pretty much on a par with sane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ErsatzThistle said:

You don't think a certain Andy Robertson fits that description ?<_<

Robertson is a cracking player but if I could only sign one for Celtic it would be a very easy decision, even if Tierney wasn't at Celtic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×