Back McLeish

[Texas Pete]

2 minutes ago, Blackpool78 said:

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

He was but both of those friendlies were more or less forced on us by UEFA. I suppose we could have tried harder to find more suitable opponents but how much influence would McLeish have had? Minimal I would bet. 

[Chripper]

59 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

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 Souttar and Tierney had both withdrawn. 

If I was the manager I would write off the Nations League (Let's face it, in our current predicament, if we did qualify for the next European Championship via the back door, we'll get stuffed)  and focus on the formation issue, as nothing that we've tried under the previous 5 managers have worked.

People seem to think that 3 at the back is an Alien tactic that can only be perfected by football geniuses. 

[ceudmilefailte]

1 hour 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. 

Lets forget about us and look at the teams that have qualified in the last 20 years playing 3 at the back,I would suggest that the ones that play three at the back  have had far superior players to us and would have qualified playing any formation.

Find the teams that play a back three at club level and the majority return to a back four against equal or superior level teams, having said that hardly any one plays 3 at the back there either

What worked in the 90's might not work now just like what worked in the 50's wont.

Mind you if PASTA MICK can get Provan and Doyle out of retirement we could try 4-2-4, which I always found as a  highly entertaining formation

[Texas Pete]

3 minutes ago, Chripper said:

If I was the manager I would write off the Nations League (Let's face it, in our current predicament, if we did qualify for the next European Championship via the back door, we'll get stuffed)  and focus on the formation issue, as nothing that we've tried under the previous 5 managers have worked.

People seem to think that 3 at the back is an Alien tactic that can only be perfected by football geniuses. 

That’s the spirit. Let’s not try to qualify because we won’t do very well when we get there. 

Do you go to Scotland games or are you an armchair fan? Not that I think supporters are any better than armchair  fans but I would be interested to know. 

Most supporters, particularly ones that travel would give their right haw maw for us to get to a major finals again, regardless of how we would do when we get there. 

You also have no idea how we would do. We could get into the knock out stages as that isn’t very difficult in the Euros these days. We would also have at least 2 games at home. 

[Chripper]

1 minute ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Lets forget about us and look at the teams that have qualified in the last 20 years playing 3 at the back,I would suggest that the ones that play three at the back  have had far superior players to us and would have qualified playing any formation.

Find the teams that play a back three at club level and the majority return to a back four against equal or superior level teams, having said that hardly any one plays 3 at the back there either

What worked in the 90's might not work now just like what worked in the 50's wont.

Mind you if PASTA MICK can get Provan and Doyle out of retirement we could try 4-2-4, which I always found as a  highly entertaining formation

That's the thing, though, we have tried every formation that has 4 at the back, why are people so hesitant to at least give a back 3 a chance? I'd rather try something different and fail than keep failing with the same old routine.

Football hasn't really changed since.. ever.. not fundamentally. I'm not suggesting that McLeish is the man to lead us, as it appears that he's just confused and he looks like a dead man walking, but a good manager would definitely get us gelling with a 3. I don't believe that we've ever been equipped for a 4 at the back, at least not since I've been alive.

 

[Chripper]

1 minute ago, Texas Pete said:

That’s the spirit. Let’s not try to qualify because we won’t do very well when we get there. 

Do you go to Scotland games or are you an armchair fan? Not that I think supporters are any better than armchair  fans but I would be interested to know. 

Most supporters, particularly ones that travel would give their right haw maw for us to get to a major finals again, regardless of how we would do when we get there. 

You also have no idea how we would do. We could get into the knock out stages as that isn’t very difficult in the Euros these days. We would also have at least 2 games at home. 

If I didn't know any better I would think that we haven't tried to qualify for anything since 98.

Both, I can't really make every match, so it's very much sporadic.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I've give pretty much anything for us to qualify for a World Cup of a European Championships, but it's time that we tried something different. Don't get me wrong, if we qualify for the next Euro Championships via ANY method, I'd be over the moon, but the way things are going, I can't see it.

I know, but I did say "in our current predicament". If we can't beat a team that's 94th in the world then I wouldn't really fancy our chances against decent/good/great teams.

[Texas Pete]

21 minutes ago, Chripper said:

If I didn't know any better I would think that we haven't tried to qualify for anything since 98.

Both, I can't really make every match, so it's very much sporadic.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I've give pretty much anything for us to qualify for a World Cup of a European Championships, but it's time that we tried something different. Don't get me wrong, if we qualify for the next Euro Championships via ANY method, I'd be over the moon, but the way things are going, I can't see it.

I know, but I did say "in our current predicament". If we can't beat a team that's 94th in the world then I wouldn't really fancy our chances against decent/good/great teams.

Since we’ve never achieved anything at a major finals I wouldn’t expect that to change much if we do qualify.

You do appear to be discounting 2 pretty important issues though. 

Firstly, qualifying for the Euros is now easier than ever. We have an excellent chance of qualifying if we can win our next two games. If we don’t win our next two but still scrape a playoff we would still have a half decent chance. 

If we do manage to qualify then we will have either two games at Hampden and a trip to Wembley to play England or 3 games at Hampden. We haven’t lost a competitive game at Hampden since Germany beat us in 2015. We would have an excellent chance of getting out of our group, which would be seen as a major success for us. In all of those unbeaten games at Hampden I’m pretty sure we played a back 4 in all of them. 

I am not defending the manager or players over what happened in Haifa but Israel played a lot better than a team ranked 94th in the world. They are famously bad travelers and Israel is not an easy place to go and play football. I expect a much easier game against them at home, just as I’m expecting a harder game against Albania away than we got at Hampden. 

[Rolling hIlls]

3 hours ago, Return of Yermaw said:

the TAMB jaiky speaks .......

Enough for u to reply.

[Rolling hIlls]

3 minutes ago, Rolling hIlls said:

Enough for u to reply.

In the hebs with good scotland men. Sorry for that.

[Return of Yermaw]

49 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

Since we’ve never achieved anything at a major finals I wouldn’t expect that to change much if we do qualify.

You do appear to be discounting 2 pretty important issues though. 

Firstly, qualifying for the Euros is now easier than ever. We have an excellent chance of qualifying if we can win our next two games. If we don’t win our next two but still scrape a playoff we would still have a half decent chance. 

If we do manage to qualify then we will have either two games at Hampden and a trip to Wembley to play England or 3 games at Hampden. We haven’t lost a competitive game at Hampden since Germany beat us in 2015. We would have an excellent chance of getting out of our group, which would be seen as a major success for us. In all of those unbeaten games at Hampden I’m pretty sure we played a back 4 in all of them. 

I am not defending the manager or players over what happened in Haifa but Israel played a lot better than a team ranked 94th in the world. They are famously bad travelers and Israel is not an easy place to go and play football. I expect a much easier game against them at home, just as I’m expecting a harder game against Albania away than we got at Hampden. 

we allowed them to play better than a team ranked 94th. What did it for me, and how I now believe McLeish is completely unsuited for management at this point in his life, is that it was pretty obvious to everyone from about 15 mins onwards that Israel were running through us. A competent manager would have reacted - McLeish waited till his hand was forced through Souttar being sent off in the second half before changing things. That is unforgivable - and that is before even looking at formations, team selection, camp morale, and performances for a second....

Therefore in saying that we have an excellent chance of qualifying by winning our next two games, you are suggesting that a) the formation will be right b) the correct team selection will be made c) all the players or the majority of players selected will have a good game and d) if things don't go to plan the manager will react. Twice. 

 

 

[bonny78]

Put the word BRING at the start of the title of this thread and you get the problem we re in. 

[Texas Pete]

23 minutes ago, Return of Yermaw said:

we allowed them to play better than a team ranked 94th. What did it for me, and how I now believe McLeish is completely unsuited for management at this point in his life, is that it was pretty obvious to everyone from about 15 mins onwards that Israel were running through us. A competent manager would have reacted - McLeish waited till his hand was forced through Souttar being sent off in the second half before changing things. That is unforgivable - and that is before even looking at formations, team selection, camp morale, and performances for a second....

Therefore in saying that we have an excellent chance of qualifying by winning our next two games, you are suggesting that a) the formation will be right b) the correct team selection will be made c) all the players or the majority of players selected will have a good game and d) if things don't go to plan the manager will react. Twice. 

 

 

I didn’t say we would win our next two matches. If we do though we will have an excellent chance of qualifying. 

In order to win our next two games, McLeish will certainly need to learn from his mistakes from Haifa. 

Whilst it is possible for a poor performance to make another team look better, Israel played very well on Thursday. We should still have done much better against them and McLeish should have reacted far sooner. 

I’m sure McLeish gets feedback from his employers and his assistants and if he still makes the same mistakes against Albania and Israel then he should be sacked. 

[Return of Yermaw]

36 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

I didn’t say we would win our next two matches. If we do though we will have an excellent chance of qualifying. 

In order to win our next two games, McLeish will certainly need to learn from his mistakes from Haifa. 

Whilst it is possible for a poor performance to make another team look better, Israel played very well on Thursday. We should still have done much better against them and McLeish should have reacted far sooner. 

I’m sure McLeish gets feedback from his employers and his assistants and if he still makes the same mistakes against Albania and Israel then he should be sacked. 

but I have seen nothing to explain McLeish's indecision and/or lack of action. am not even sure if he was questioned about it. in any case that is not something you learn from;  that is where he currently is mentally and physically.....

Edited October 15, 2018 by Return of Yermaw

[Third Lanark]

You know what baffles me? Those who say 3-5-2 no good because 2 players are out of position and then suggest Tierney at LB and Robertson ahead - as a winger! Robertson is used to playing with a winger in front of him not as one itself. Why is wing back seen as such a different position. I keep hearking back to England in the WC - don't remember anyone saying Trippier couldn't play wing back or Walker right central defender, yet both normally play as right backs.

[Texas Pete]

2 hours ago, Return of Yermaw said:

but I have seen nothing to explain McLeish's indecision and/or lack of action. am not even sure if he was questioned about it. in any case that is not something you learn from;  that is where he currently is mentally and physically.....

Didn’t you see him calling players over to the touch line to talk to them throughout the game?

Maybe it wasn’t clear on TV but he was tinkering. Whatever he did wasn’t enough obviously and he should have made a more decisive change earlier but he wasn’t just sitting with his thumb up his arse. 

[Tartan Shaun]

4 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

Didn’t you see him calling players over to the touch line to talk to them throughout the game?

Maybe it wasn’t clear on TV but he was tinkering. Whatever he did wasn’t enough obviously and he should have made a more decisive change earlier but he wasn’t just sitting with his thumb up his arse. 

Christ, even James McFadden and Peter Grant were giving him instructions which did ignored! 

[Bino's]

9 hours 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.

 

A 442, a 352

It's like football from the land that time forgot

[Bino's]

8 hours ago, McTeeko said:

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. 

We were out after 1

The home draw against Serbia

[Texas Pete]

1 hour ago, Third Lanark said:

You know what baffles me? Those who say 3-5-2 no good because 2 players are out of position and then suggest Tierney at LB and Robertson ahead - as a winger! Robertson is used to playing with a winger in front of him not as one itself. Why is wing back seen as such a different position. I keep hearking back to England in the WC - don't remember anyone saying Trippier couldn't play wing back or Walker right central defender, yet both normally play as right backs.

You’re only playing one player out of position I suppose if you play Tierney at LB and Robertson in front of him. One is better than two surely? 

Some fullbacks don’t adapt well to playing as a wing back as it’s more demanding physically and mentally. You are moving from the back to the front constantly and there’s no breathing space. 

It would probably be easier for Robertson to adapt to being a winger as he would only need to track back now and again instead of every time the opposition have the ball. Having said that, he’s not a winger and is the better of our left backs so I would prefer him at LB and for Tierney to be accommodated elsewhere if possible.

As others have said through, maybe both players will adapt to the system but there is zero time to experiment now. We need two good performances next month. 

[Texas Pete]

8 minutes ago, Bino's said:

A 442, a 352

It's like football from the land that time forgot

A classic 4-4-2 should be avoided like the plague but there’s nothing wrong with a 4-5-1 or a 4-4-1-1 or whatever you want to call it. 

You shouldn’t be playing with wing backs if you don’t have any good wing backs. It’s really not rocket science. 

[exile]

Even before the first competitive game, there were calls from fans that McLeish must get Scotland to beat Albania or he'd be out. But he managed that. So he is still with us. It's hard now to imagine getting rid of him, and put someone else in place before the next game, surely?

[Texas Pete]

8 minutes ago, exile said:

Even before the first competitive game, there were calls from fans that McLeish must get Scotland to beat Albania or he'd be out. But he managed that. So he is still with us. It's hard now to imagine getting rid of him, and put someone else in place before the next game, surely?

Never going to happen. 

Lots of people wanted Strachan sacked after the Georgia game but he was given another campaign.  

If we get relegated the SFA might not even sack him (although they should). 

[exile]

14 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

Never going to happen. . 

So if we're agreed that McLeish is going to lead us into the next two games then the conclusion would seem to be to back the manager. 

Edited October 15, 2018 by exile

[The White Ceelo]

13 hours ago, Texas Pete said:

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. 

That's the problem with these matches, the other team are experimenting also. How can you gauge how well the team are really playing if the opposition are trialing new players, formations etc.

I never saw the Portugal game but others are commenting on how much better we played, how can you gauge that against a team that made 6 substitutions? Did Portugal really try and had it been 6 or 7 nil, would most still feel we played better?

Sorry but until "Friendlies" are limited to 3 subs we will not see good games. If we were getting humped in any friendly Eck just needs to change 3 or 4 players almost together and at the end say we were trying something different. Meanwhile you are down £35 and leave the ground pished off.

Friendlies should be no more than £10

Fukkk, I hate friendlies 

Edited October 16, 2018 by The White Ceelo

[Malcolm]

3 hours ago, The White Ceelo said:

That's the problem with these matches, the other team are experimenting also. How can you gauge how well the team are really playing if the opposition are trialing new players, formations etc.

I never saw the Portugal game but others are commenting on how much better we played, how can you gauge that against a team that made 6 substitutions? Did Portugal really try and had it been 6 or 7 nil, would most still feel we played better?

Sorry but until "Friendlies" are limited to 3 subs we will not see good games. If we were getting humped in any friendly Eck just needs to change 3 or 4 players almost together and at the end say we were trying something different. Meanwhile you are down £35 and leave the ground pished off.

Friendlies should be no more than £10

Fukkk, I hate friendlies 

 

I don’t go to friendlies any more.... pointless.   I’d rather see the British international championship brought back very two years, although just now we would prob come last.