Your starting XI against Russia - Page 8 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Your starting XI against Russia


The_Dark_Knight

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

BBC Team Selector

This was selected by fans.

I have Fraser up front, too. (In a free role)

If we really must play with a four i'd much rather it was 4-4-2 rather than 4-2-3-1.

The default is 442. I'd be surprised if many were actually suggesting Fraser was to play up front.

Can I just ask, barring your mild enthusiasm for McTominay, Fraser and Robertson, what are you positive about when it comes to Scotland? (Serious question) It seems like you are eagerly anticipating our demise so you can say "I told you so". 

If Clarke puts 3 at the back and Robertson in midfield tonight, and we lose, he will (rightfully) be slaughtered by the media and the fans. The players will lose faith and respect in him and we'd be back to where we were with McLeish. The rest of us are being realistic with what to expect, I think you need to do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

The default is 442. I'd be surprised if many were actually suggesting Fraser was to play up front.

Can I just ask, barring your mild enthusiasm for McTominay, Fraser and Robertson, what are you positive about when it comes to Scotland? (Serious question) It seems like you are eagerly anticipating our demise so you can say "I told you so". 

If Clarke puts 3 at the back and Robertson in midfield tonight, and we lose, he will (rightfully) be slaughtered by the media and the fans. The players will lose faith and respect in him and we'd be back to where we were with McLeish. The rest of us are being realistic with what to expect, I think you need to do the same.

No. It wasn't a default. You could change the formation. Mine was 3-5-2 surprisingly...

...What am i positive about when it comes to Scotland? Without doubt the best question I've been asked on here. The truthful answer is nothing. The SFA are a bunch of dinosaurs that are pretty much a puppet regime for SPL clubs. And since the SPL clubs don't care about the national team they will refuse to demand change when it comes to a limit of homegrown players, training facilities, youth structure, etc.

For some weird reason there's four leagues in Scotland, three of ten teams. Which means two or four efeats and a team could drop from 4th to 10th, which means that managers will be reluctant to throw their kids into their first XI, instead relying on older and more experienced players.

I could go on and on. Basically Scottish football is a mess, from root to branch, and no one with any power has any intention of addressing the matter.

And of course i don't want to see a demise. I want to proved wrong.

If Clarke did that (not likely) we'd probably lose tonight. But that isn't the point. We should give the system at least two full qualification campaigns, after all, Rome wasn't build in a day.

Edited by The_Dark_Knight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

No. It wasn't a default. You could change the formation. Mine was 3-5-2 surprisingly...

...What am i positive about when it comes to Scotland? Without doubt the best question I've been asked on here. The truthful answer is nothing. The SFA are a bunch of dinosaurs that are pretty much a puppet regime for SPL clubs. And since the SPL clubs don't care about the national team they will refuse to demand change when it comes to a limit of homegrown players, training facilities, youth structure, etc.

For some weird reason there's four leagues in Scotland, three of ten teams. Which means two or four efeats and a team could drop from 4th to 10th, which means that managers will be reluctant to throw their kids into their first XI, instead relying on older and more experienced players.

I could go on and on. Basically Scottish football is a mess, from root to branch, and no one with any power has any intention of addressing the matter.

And of course i don't want to see a demise. I want to proved wrong.

If Clarke did that (not likely) we'd probably lose tonight. But that isn't the point. We should give the system at least two full qualification campaigns, after all, Rome wasn't build in a day.

I guess the BBC knows you haha. Mines was set at 442, which I changed to as close to a 4321 as I could get.

I won't argue against any of those points. All I'll say is that I believe the seeds have already been sown. And I am positive enough to see the saplings. But, yes, far more needs to be done.

If you think a 352 is not what will get us a victory tonight, why are you suggesting it in this thread? I get that you are thinking long term, but you are basically saying, no matter what we do, we are going to lose. Having that defeatist attitude helps no one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

I guess the BBC knows you haha. Mines was set at 442, which I changed to as close to a 4321 as I could get.

I won't argue against any of those points. All I'll say is that I believe the seeds have already been sown. And I am positive enough to see the saplings. But, yes, far more needs to be done.

If you think a 352 is not what will get us a victory tonight, why are you suggesting it in this thread? I get that you are thinking long term, but you are basically saying, no matter what we do, we are going to lose. Having that defeatist attitude helps no one

;)

There's so much about Scottish football that's either counter-productive, not fit for purpose or just plain stuck in the stone-age. I get that there's now a few performance schools, etc, but it's almost 2020. The French, etc, we're doing this kind of things back in the 80s (and in a bigger scale). Hell, even countries like Iceleland and Denmark, etc, are miles ahead of us in terms of youth development.

There's no magic wand. We'll lose tonight no matter what system we play. There's no getting past that. We've had this system for 19 years and we're still like rabbits in headlights. I'm not saying a change in system will make everything rosey, because there's so many wrongs that we need to right, but if a change of system (and sticking to it) improves things by even 1% then we should try.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

No. It wasn't a default. You could change the formation. Mine was 3-5-2 surprisingly...

...What am i positive about when it comes to Scotland? Without doubt the best question I've been asked on here. The truthful answer is nothing. The SFA are a bunch of dinosaurs that are pretty much a puppet regime for SPL clubs. And since the SPL clubs don't care about the national team they will refuse to demand change when it comes to a limit of homegrown players, training facilities, youth structure, etc.

For some weird reason there's four leagues in Scotland, three of ten teams. Which means two or four efeats and a team could drop from 4th to 10th, which means that managers will be reluctant to throw their kids into their first XI, instead relying on older and more experienced players.

I could go on and on. Basically Scottish football is a mess, from root to branch, and no one with any power has any intention of addressing the matter.

And of course i don't want to see a demise. I want to proved wrong.

If Clarke did that (not likely) we'd probably lose tonight. But that isn't the point. We should give the system at least two full qualification campaigns, after all, Rome wasn't build in a day.

4-4-2 was the default. That means the one that is shown before you change it. The vast majority of fans will not have realised they could change the formation. Trust me, I work in web design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, mrniaboc said:

4-4-2 was the default. That means the one that is shown before you change it. The vast majority of fans will not have realised they could change the formation. Trust me, I work in web design.

Are you calling Scotland fans thick? 

Yes, it may have been the default, but the fact that most people chose 4-4-2 would suggest that it's the most popular choice. And yes, I'm sure fans knew that they could alter the formation.

So, you also have a PhD in web design? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The_Dark_Knight said:

Are you calling Scotland fans thick? 

Yes, it may have been the default, but the fact that most people chose 4-4-2 would suggest that it's the most popular choice. And yes, I'm sure fans knew that they could alter the formation.

So, you also have a PhD in web design? ;)

Hahaha no, I'm calling the general internet user thick. The fact that it was default made that formation the most popular choice because most people will not have realised they could have changed it.

I do not have a PhD in web design, hence how I'm still alive, but I do work in that area too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mrniaboc said:

Hahaha no, I'm calling the general internet user thick. The fact that it was default made that formation the most popular choice because most people will not have realised they could have changed it.

I do not have a PhD in web design, hence how I'm still alive, but I do work in that area too.

Ah. Then I'm with you on that one, i would even stretch it to the general person. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ElChris04
On 9/5/2019 at 6:42 PM, The_Dark_Knight said:

There's not a chance in hell that Steve Clarke will play a 3 at the back. Doesn't mean that he shouldn't. He certainly should try something, anything, as opposed to sticking with the same formula that our players simply are not suited to play.

We have time on our hands to alter the system. I don't see us qualifying for a major tournament any time soon, so I say that we have tons of time to revert to a new system. All of our matches for the foreseeable future are dead rubbers, in my opinion. There's no better time than the present. 

Yes, Kimmich and Alaba have had years of playing in those positions, but there was a time when the roles were foreign to them. I don't see it as a risk, at all. 

We aren't loaded with talent in the anchorman role. Maybe Jack is, but I don't rate him. McTominay is best when he's playing a box-to-box role. And as for McGregor and McGinn, well, I'm not convinced.

Thanks for the video, I'll give it a look when I have time. :)

In essence, I just want a manager to think outside the box and to divert from the hipster formation of 4-2-3-1. I just don't think we have the players who are capable of playing in a four at the back at this level. I mean, how many players have we god playing in European competition? It speaks volumes. Our players aren't as good as their foreign equivalent.

I appreciate the articulate and thoughtful input. It's nice having a debate with a person who doesn't throw tantrums and insults every second word. :)

No problem, I see a lot of people bring there ideas which can be deemed “crazy” without any explanation. You suggested something that did seem way off but you backed up a lot of it with some good discussion which is rare on the forum these days. A think after the Russia, you could very well have a point. Robertson still thinks he’s playing for Liverpool when he’s at LB and O’Donnell is never international quality in a million years but he’s only got in due to the 4 at the back formation we play.

Honestly at this point, 3 ATB or 5 ATB with Wing back’s isn’t even the most crazy idea atm. Maybe when we have Tierney back 4 at the back is the best option but currently right now giving a role to players like SOD who are way off the ball. It’s actually worth considering.

 And no problem with the video, it’s a good insight on how the 3 ATB is worked to a tea by Cruyff, wouldn’t mind Clarke watching and trying it out now. You had some very valid points and maybe at this point with the group over for us this maybe worth experimenting, especially if we’re facilitating players for a certain formation who clearly aren’t good enough like O’Donnell. I’ve never been a 3 ATB fan but at this point is it really the most crazy Idea? Probably not. Sometimes trying something new is the best port of call.

 

 

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...