Back McLeish

[Rolling hIlls]

Enough said.  A hero imo and he is getting slated on here for no reason.  The famous tartan army my arse.  As soon as the chips are down we want to get rid of a genuine legend in the game.  Not me.

[tartanmartin]

#Ecksit

[hampden_loon2878]

1 hour ago, Rolling hIlls said:

Enough said.  A hero imo and he is getting slated on here for no reason.  The famous tartan army my arse.  As soon as the chips are down we want to get rid of a genuine legend in the game.  Not me.

Yes a hero but for me the frustration seems to be with the SFA, i dont think anyone would argue that the TA have been as loyal as can be through some real dire years. Personally i dont think mcleish will lead us anywhere, i do think some have been harsh on him however sometimes its good to listen to the fans

[Texas Pete]

I’ll back him until next month at least. 

He hasn’t done a great deal wrong in my opinion. We were always going to lose to Peru, Mexico, Belgium and Portugal so people slating his recent record should remember he had no say in these fixtures. 

The main things I would call him on was failing to change things earlier against Israel and for persisting with his 3-5-2 formation. His solution for playing Tierney and Robertson in the same team isn’t working and if he doesn’t change it for Albania we will be in trouble. The 4-4-2 he played last night looked pretty solid. In the first half anyway. 

If we win our Nation’s League group and secure a playoff then McLeish will have done a good job, regardless of the result/performance in Haifa.

 

[Texas Pete]

2 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Yes a hero but for me the frustration seems to be with the SFA, i dont think anyone would argue that the TA have been as loyal as can be through some real dire years. Personally i dont think mcleish will lead us anywhere, i do think some have been harsh on him however sometimes its good to listen to the fans

Too many are quick to blame the manager when their team loses. 

The players were absolute pish on Thursday night. They have to take a fair bit of the blame for that performance. 

I’m not suggesting McLeish is a fantastic manager but I’m still fairly confident we’ll win our Nations League group. If we do then it’s job done as far as I’m concerned. 

If McLeish fails to correct his errors and we lose in Albania and fail to beat Israel heavily enough to win the group then he should be sacked. 

[Templeton_Peck]

Is this thread a wind up??

[1ANDYP]

Time to get behind the team in Albania and against israel at hampden. I know its hard and performances pish. But as fans we should be doing our best to get behind them. 

[Scotland Ever More]

Aye do what we did with Levein when the warning signs were there. Back him until it's too late and be out the running for qualifying after 4 games in the campaign.

[Chripper]

12 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

I’ll back him until next month at least. 

He hasn’t done a great deal wrong in my opinion. We were always going to lose to Peru, Mexico, Belgium and Portugal so people slating his recent record should remember he had no say in these fixtures. 

The main things I would call him on was failing to change things earlier against Israel and for persisting with his 3-5-2 formation. His solution for playing Tierney and Robertson in the same team isn’t working and if he doesn’t change it for Albania we will be in trouble. The 4-4-2 he played last night looked pretty solid. In the first half anyway. 

If we win our Nation’s League group and secure a playoff then McLeish will have done a good job, regardless of the result/performance in Haifa.

 

What an odd thing to say.

"Persisting"? You mean, for two matches? 

As opposed to genuinely persisting with 4 at the back (for 20 years)  and continuously being humiliated?

We should be playing with 3 at the back for the next couple of campaigns, at the very least.

[Squirrelhumper]

12 minutes ago, Scotland Ever More said:

Aye do what we did with Levein when the warning signs were there. Back him until it's too late and be out the running for qualifying after 4 games in the campaign.

Yup, it's entirely predictable.

Depressing.

[McTeeko]

20 minutes ago, Scotland Ever More said:

Aye do what we did with Levein when the warning signs were there. Back him until it's too late and be out the running for qualifying after 4 games in the campaign.

You’re being generous there. I’d say we were out after 3 games - two home draws v Serbia and Macedonia and the defeat in Cardiff. 

[Texas Pete]

16 minutes ago, Chripper said:

What an odd thing to say.

"Persisting"? You mean, for two matches? 

As opposed to genuinely persisting with 4 at the back (for 20 years)  and continuously being humiliated?

We should be playing with 3 at the back for the next couple of campaigns, at the very least.

I really meant persisting with it for most of the Israel match. 

I don’t necessarily have a problem with playing 3 at the back but playing Tierney as a CB and Robertson as a WB isn’t working. Do you seriously think we haven’t qualified for 20 years because we weren’t playing with wing backs? If your players suit 4 at the back then that’s what you should play. Robertson is one of the best LBs in Europe. As a wing back he’s fairly average so far.

Against Israel we were being overrun in midfield and our 2 wing backs were ineffective. We might as well have went to a 4-5-1 with Tierney playing at left mid. Or even Robertson playing there and Tierney at LB. 

4 at the back worked pretty well for most of the match last night. Particularly with 2 inexperienced centre backs. 

[Return of Yermaw]

since Vogt's and our very obvious decline, you will always get a fair few backing the manager to the hilt. We could go on a winless run of 21 games and some would still trot out the lines of "give the manager time", "its the players who are on the park", "who else is there?", "can't chop and change everytime", "can only do so much with what we have" etc etc etc. Mental. 

 

 

 

[Return of Yermaw]

2 hours ago, Rolling hIlls said:

Enough said.  A hero imo and he is getting slated on here for no reason.  The famous tartan army my arse.  As soon as the chips are down we want to get rid of a genuine legend in the game.  Not me.

the TAMB jaiky speaks .......

[Chripper]

22 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

I really meant persisting with it for most of the Israel match. 

I don’t necessarily have a problem with playing 3 at the back but playing Tierney as a CB and Robertson as a WB isn’t working. Do you seriously think we haven’t qualified for 20 years because we weren’t playing with wing backs? If your players suit 4 at the back then that’s what you should play. Robertson is one of the best LBs in Europe. As a wing back he’s fairly average so far.

Against Israel we were being overrun in midfield and our 2 wing backs were ineffective. We might as well have went to a 4-5-1 with Tierney playing at left mid. Or even Robertson playing there and Tierney at LB. 

4 at the back worked pretty well for most of the match last night. Particularly with 2 inexperienced centre backs. 

Why do people think our players suit playing 4 at the back? Evidence would suggest that we're absolutely hopeless at it. I hate harping back to the 90s, but back then we had  structure, we were compact and we were hard to beat. Did we have better defenders back then? Take out Colin Hendry and I would say no, that being the case, there's no reason why it couldn't suit us. We should at least give it a chance before reverting to a tried and failed formation/tactics. Fine, we had a far superior midfield back then, but with a good manager he can mould a three out of either McTominay, McGinn, Armstrong, etc.

It'll take the players time to get used to the formation, and that will only happen if McLeish stops flip-flopping and stick with the 3. 

You can't really gauge the match last night as Portugal were dropping back and letting us have the ball in our own half. 

Edited October 15, 2018 by Chripper

[kumnio]

28 minutes ago, Chripper said:

Why do people think our players suit playing 4 at the back? 

Maybe the fact that they play it every week, maybe that’s too logical. 

[stevenmcn]

8 minutes ago, kumnio said:

Maybe the fact that they play it every week, maybe that’s too logical. 

Yeah, but apart from that lol. 3 at the back is crazy. We've barely enough decent cbs for 2 positions let alone 3.

[Texas Pete]

12 minutes ago, stevenmcn said:

Yeah, but apart from that lol. 3 at the back is crazy. We've barely enough decent cbs for 2 positions let alone 3.

Exactly. One of or CBs in the back 3 isn’t even a CB. 

Tierney is average at CB at best and shouldn’t be playing there.

[Texas Pete]

55 minutes ago, Chripper said:

Why do people think our players suit playing 4 at the back? Evidence would suggest that we're absolutely hopeless at it. I hate harping back to the 90s, but back then we had  structure, we were compact and we were hard to beat. Did we have better defenders back then? Take out Colin Hendry and I would say no, that being the case, there's no reason why it couldn't suit us. We should at least give it a chance before reverting to a tried and failed formation/tactics. Fine, we had a far superior midfield back then, but with a good manager he can mould a three out of either McTominay, McGinn, Armstrong, etc.

It'll take the players time to get used to the formation, and that will only happen if McLeish stops flip-flopping and stick with the 3. 

You can't really gauge the match last night as Portugal were dropping back and letting us have the ball in our own half. 

Friendlies are the time to experiment. Not important Nations League matches. 

If we had played a 4-5-1 against Israel we would have had a more solid midfield and wouldn’t have had 2 players out of position. I’m not saying we wouldn’t still have lost for certain but we would have had a better chance. 

We should be letting Robertson do what he has been doing for Liverpool for the last year. That’s what he’s excellent at. 

McLeish didn’t really have an option to play 3 at the back last night. Souttar and Tierney had both withdrawn. 

[Rolling hIlls]

1 hour ago, Return of Yermaw said:

the TAMB jaiky speaks .......

Nicest think i have been called on here.  

[ceudmilefailte]

2 hours ago, Texas Pete said:

Too many are quick to blame the manager when their team loses. 

The players were absolute pish on Thursday night. They have to take a fair bit of the blame for that performance. 

I’m not suggesting McLeish is a fantastic manager but I’m still fairly confident we’ll win our Nations League group. If we do then it’s job done as far as I’m concerned. 

If McLeish fails to correct his errors and we lose in Albania and fail to beat Israel heavily enough to win the group then he should be sacked. 

Strongly disagree with the first line, the manager has to shoulder the blame. If the players are pish he has played them in the wrong position/formation.

He also has to install confidence and belief and the desire to win. He has to get them to want to play for him or at least their country,which should be easy.

If any of the above aren't in place then it's his fault.

You could even blame him for the pre-match preparations put in place by the SFA.

Got to disagree with the qualification for the playoffs as job done,  only qualification for the finals is job done. Scraping past Albania and Israel to get our selves is into a play off is hardly an achievement 

Will agree with last sentence though.

In case your getting annoyed I do agree with everything you post that I don't disagree with.

Edited October 15, 2018 by ceudmilefailte

[Texas Pete]

2 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Strongly disagree with the first line, the manager has to shoulder the blame. If the players are pish he has played them in the wrong position/formation.

He also has to install confidence and belief and the desire to win. He has to get them to want to play for him or at least their country,which should be easy.

If any of the above aren't in place then his fault.

You could even blame him for the pre-match preparations put in place by the SFA.

Got to disagree with the qualification for the playoffs as job done,  only qualification for the finals is job done. Scraping past Albania and Israel to get our selves is hardly an achievement 

Will agree with last sentence though.

In case your getting annoyed I do agree with everything you post that I don't disagree with.

McLeish has to shoulder a lot of the blame but the players should be able to adapt to a system. I agree that Tierney and Robertson were played out of position and both shouldn’t have been. Obviously if he wants to play both then one of them will be. Almost every player on Thursday was poor and didn’t do what was asked of them. McLeish should have recognised this and done something about it earlier than he did.

You can’t sack a manager for one bad competitive game though. He has to be given time. 

Winning our Nations League group would be job done in terms of the Nations League, not in general. 

As you’ve said yourself, the target is qualification and we still have a decent chance of doing this. As I mentioned earlier, as long as we win our Nations League group, McLeish should be given the qualifying campaign as well. 

If we go to Albania and get our arses handed to us again and then end up not winning the group then I will be the first to call for him to go. 

[Blackpool78]

2 hours ago, Texas Pete said:

 

He hasn’t done a great deal wrong in my opinion. We were always going to lose to Peru, Mexico, Belgium and Portugal so people slating his recent record should remember he had no say in these fixtures. 

 

 

he had a say in the Belguim and Portugal fixtures as he was manager then 

[Chripper]

1 hour ago, kumnio said:

Maybe the fact that they play it every week, maybe that’s too logical. 

Yes, all of our defenders in the past 20 years have played in a flat back four with their clubs, and yes, they look decent against lesser teams, but when they come up against International teams that are akin to European Cup teams they fall flat on their faces. 

There's a good reason why none of our central defenders play regularly in the top leagues or the latter stages of European competitions.

[Chripper]

1 hour ago, stevenmcn said:

Yeah, but apart from that lol. 3 at the back is crazy. We've barely enough decent cbs for 2 positions let alone 3.

That makes no sense.

So, we have awful central defenders, so the solution is to play less? Why not just play with one, or none.