Formations and a much needed reality check

[aaid]

Just now, The_Dark_Knight said:

You could just as easily do that with this squad of defenders:

Devlin - back three for Hamilton and Aberdeen.
McKenna - back three for Aberdeen.
Mulgrew - back three for Celtic, Aberdeen and Blackburn
Souttar - back three for Hearts and Dundee United
Halkett (sp?) - back three for Livingston and Hearts
Berra  - Back three for Hearts
Hanley - back three for Norwich and Blackburn and Newcastle.
Tierney - back three for Celtic.

The only real difference is that the defenders you listed are far, far, far more accomplished that the current crop. (Aside from Tieney)

 

I'm talking about those defenders because you said that hardly anyone played a back three at the time of the 1998 world cup.    That much should be pretty obvious.

[The_Dark_Knight]

5 minutes ago, aaid said:

I'm talking about those defenders because you said that hardly anyone played a back three at the time of the 1998 world cup.    That much should be pretty obvious.

Not obvious at all, actually.

I produced evidence that only one player (Matt Elliot) played in a 3/5 on a regular basis. You haven't provided me any evidence of the players that you listed playing in 3/5 on a regular basis.

5 teams out of 20 in the opening match of the EPL season, but I think only Middleborough and Leicester played it regularly. Only one of those teams had a Scottish international. 

Edited October 23, 2019 by The_Dark_Knight

[aaid]

2 minutes ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

Not obvious at all, actually.

I produced evidence that only one player (Matt Elliot) played in a 3/5 on a regular basis. You haven't provided me any evidence of the players that you listed playing in 3/5 on a regular basis.

5 teams out of 20 in the opening match of the EPL season, but I think only Middleborough and Leicester played it regularly. Only one of those teams had a Scottish international. 

A guy - @Dalgety Bay TA - who is a long time Celtic supporter says that Celtic played with a back three at the time, gives you the names and you don't believe him?   I'm not a Celtic supporter but I can remember that they played a three.

Hearts played a three of Weir, McPherson and Paul Ritchie at the time.
I've already told you the three at Spurs - Calderwood, Campbell and Vega

[The_Dark_Knight]

8 minutes ago, aaid said:

A guy - @Dalgety Bay TA - who is a long time Celtic supporter says that Celtic played with a back three at the time, gives you the names and you don't believe him?   I'm not a Celtic supporter but I can remember that they played a three.

Hearts played a three of Weir, McPherson and Paul Ritchie at the time.
I've already told you the three at Spurs - Calderwood, Campbell and Vega

What was the actual debate, again?

Sorry. I had to re-post YOUR post in here - because you obviously couldn't be bothered - so I've actually forgot what the debate is even about.

Oh. OK. I said that very few of our players played in a 3/5 in that era. I meant at a top level.

"That much should be pretty obvious"

And as for Calderwood, I'll give you that one.

[bonny78]

T. L. D. R. 

[AndyDD]

17 hours ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

Nah. I get it. It’s a valid point, though. Society, now, have opinions about every single thing and every single body. Twitter and Facebook, etc, have seen to that. These days people with more opinions than brain cells can unleash their opinion upon the world. Football fans are perhaps the worst at it, in terms of their opinions on punditry. You could visit every football forum on Earth and you’ll find a thread dedicated to tearing strips off commentators/pundits. You don’t get that in any other sport. I’ve never heard a snooker fan bitch about Stephen Hendry’s analysis or a Tennis fan moan about John McEnroe, etc. And yet football fans bitch and moan incessantly about Roy Keane and Alan Shearer, etc. It’s like “Who are they to give their opinions?!”. Umm.. They’re Roy Keane and Alan Shearer, two of the best players of their generation… and they’re being paid to give their opinion. It’s like opinions are only accepted in this society when they’re unsolicited.

I might be in the minority here, but I like listening to the analysis. Pretty much one of the reasons why I miss Andy Gray on Sky. Just too bad Gray was suing the Sun at the time (Rupert Murdoch) for tapping his phone, as that’s why he got fired. 

Yeah, they discussed it on Sky Sports and they also mentioned it on NBC at the time (Le Saux and Dixon), so yes, it was definitely 4-4-2. Klopp seems to have a habit of doing that, when a system isn’t working, he changes it (Must be nice having a proactive manager…). He did it against Manchester United by switching to 4-4-2 at half time and he also did it against Sheffield United at half time, switching to a 3-5-2. All credit to Klopp, as both matches he managed to finagle four points from a potential one.

I know a few basic stats: we’ve conceded 113 goals in 91 matches and our win ratio is 44.9%. (These are stats spanning the past 17 years of competitive matches) The goal conceded per game ratio is atrocious and it’s actually worse than I thought, before I did the research. One of the real shames is, like you said, at one point we had the luxury of having prime Gordon, McGregor and Marshall at our disposal, and all of our managers have let all three down by failing to give them adequate protection. Are there any positions on the field were we are strong? I wouldn’t say so. No. People talk about us having two work class left backs in Tierney and Robertson, and yes, they are world class, but the simple fact is that they’ll never be able to replicate their club form with Scotland, purely because they’re playing with better players at Arsenal and Liverpool. Robertson has been taking pelters for the last few months because he’s not replicating what he does with Liverpool when he’s on international duty. Which I find unfair. He’s a left back. No fullback in the history of football has taken a match by the scruff of its neck.

I grew up in the era of Maldini and Roberto Carlos, but I don’t remember them ever dominating a match. Players like Zidane, Keane, Vieira, Scholes, Pirlo, etc, those are the players that dominated midfield, as they played in positions from which it was easier to dictate a match. That’s another reason why I call into question the general footballing knowledge of people here. How on earth can Robertson replicate his form with Liverpool to Scotland? At Liverpool he’s playing with top players, playing that he can trust to be able to pass the ball to him, players that he can trust passing the ball to. With Scotland we can hardly string three passes together. 

No. I’ll categorically state that there is zero percent chance that we’ll qualify for the Euros via the Play-offs. Technically, there is a chance and it’s possible, since the results aren’t in yet, but for anyone to think that we do stand a chance of qualify is quite frankly, living in a fantasy-land, and is a real-life threat to himself/herself and their community. It’s not impossible, but it is improbable. I literally know nothing of the play-offs, the format, who we might play, etc. As it just doesn’t interest me. 

No. It’s a complete refusal to discuss change. I’ve given my reasons for saying that we are ill-equipped to playing with a back four (to nausea), and it’s always been well thought-out and constructive. Plus, I have seventeen years of documented evidence that we are hopeless using a back four. But I’m always faced with the same old tired clichés. I think the most bizarre reply to my instance that we experiment with a three at the back is the comical “We played three at the back and got beat by Israel. So we gave it a chance”. I’ve faced that one multiple times. I’m never sure if the person is serious or not. I’ll fill that one under the heading of “calling into question the footballing knowledge of the general populace of the TAMB”. That’s akin to Manchester United sacking SAF when he spent his first few years not improving anything. It’s funny (Not in a ha ha way), people expect three at the back to work instantly, they have zero patience for it, and yet they’ve give four at the back seventeen fruitless years and they’re willing to give it another seventeen years.

I also got the question “Why doesn’t Robertson play in midfield for Liverpool”. Do people not realize how good the Liverpool midfield is? They won the European Cup! Besides, just a few weeks ago, Jamie Carragher came out and said that Alexander-Arnold will probably end up playing as an attacking midfielder. 

I’d actually say that the Redcafe is probably one of the most civil football forums. The worst that I’ve ever visited is the Everton one, no idea what it was called. Toffee something. On the main, though, I like the way that the system change was discussed on Redcafe. The person who broached the subject certainly wasn’t on the receiving end of the abuse that I suffered when I first suggested a back three on here.  
I get the analogy and it does have its merit, but we’re talking about Willie Miller here. Right now we have Scott McKenna, a player who was in the heart of the Aberdeen defence when they got beat four-nil on aggregate by HNK Rijeka and Stuart Findlay who was in the Kilmarnock defence who got beat 3-2 by Connah’s Quay Nomads.. And he was also red carded. If anything, you’d tell them NOT to play the way you do with your clubs, and yes, that includes the formation. I’m not sure how much more proof Scotland fans need that our defenders simply cannot cope at any decent level. I get the analogy, but we’re talking apples and oranges here. 

Fair enough, and you may be right, I’m pretty sure you are. But what’s the common dominator with all of the formations that you mentioned? Yep. The four at the back. We’ve tried every single variant of a four and we’ve failed each and every time. It’s akin to a Chef making a curry-base with the same ingredients, and the same volume, and expecting it to taste differently. Am I saying that the sole reason for our lack of relative success is solely down to four at the back? Of course not. They’re many reasons, much of which I’ve listed in my “Sack the SFA” thread, so I’m not going to go over old ground. All I’m asking for is that  a Scotland manager play with a three at the back and give it at least one full campaign. Strachan got the point where he experimented with a four, and that was against England, with Tierney as one of the three center backs. I’d say that it worked. If Stuart Armstrong didn’t try to thread a stupid ball to Griffiths instead of launching it into the stands, we would’ve won. McLeish played it once against Israel. Yes, we got beat, but we went down to 10 men and we had a man sent off. Truth is, we would’ve gotten beat in Israel, no matter which system we played.

In fairness, I don’t watch Scottish football, at all, not even highlights, so I’m not sure where he plays for Rangers. I did watch the match when Italy played Finland a few months ago, I think it was in March. Kamara was playing in the middle of a three, in front of a back five. And you’re being unfair to Finland a tad. They may have played with a five in defence against Italy twice, but they were attacked just as much as Italy did in Italy. In two matches against Italy they only lost 2:0 and 1-2. Hardly embarrassing stuff. And they could’ve easily have gotten a point in Finland. Kamara will probably end up playing as anchorman, he’s a little like Patrick Vieira… but not nearly as good, obviously. He’s only 23 years old. Apart from McTominay, I’d take Kamara over any of our midfielders. What I’ve seen in a Finland shirt (I’ve seen him a handful of times) I quite like.  

You say that a formation isn’t a major contributing factor in our varying quality of performances and results. Of course it isn’t. In any clinical experiment you need both a test group as well as an experimental group. Over the past 17 years (In competitive matches) the test group (four at the back) has been used 91 times, whereas, the experimental group (three at the back) has been used 2 times. 91 to 2 is NOT a fair comparison. It’s disproportionate. 

“Potentially taking out of our better footballers to play another person who isn’t very good”. I don’t understand that one. I’d drop Robertson, Tierney, McTominay, Fraser if it meant we’d qualify for something. What you’re saying is that we should play our best players and not our best team. Yeah, well, England did that when they played Gerrard and Lampard in the middle of midfield whilst shunting Scholes out wide. The way that I see it, the vast majority of our players (defenders and otherwise) are slow and error-prone, etc. 

Do you watch Sheffield United? Those midfielders don’t have to spray 30/40 yard ball around the park, they just do quick little 5 yard passes, which reduces the chance of a misplaced pass. It sound like it’s ver simplifying things, but that’s the thing with our current system, it’s too complicated for our limited players. So yes, if players are closer together, they don’t have to do a Pirlo impression.
Eh, only issue is you really rather did say that Finland are lucky. You said 'just so happens that it's Finland's turn. But that's more by luck than by design' 

Well, there are varying degrees of luck. Finland are making their own luck by being hard working, organized, etc. There’s a difference between being lucky (and earning it) and being lucky and not deserving it.

The Smith era is the closest thing that I’ve felt to the Brown era, both in the stadium and in general. You could just tell that the bond of the players were strong enough to get us over the line, and I think it would’ve, if Rangers didn’t come calling. People can say what they want about Walter Smith, but in my view he’s one of the best managers that we’ve produced. 

Errrr… when did I say that simply being in a top 5 league makes you “top quality”? If that was the case then Hanley would be “top quality”, same with Fleck, McLean, McBurnie, etc. Hanley is a nightmare, Fleck is decent, McLean is hopeless and McBurnie is the worst striker that I’ve ever seen playing for Scotland, at Under 21 level and full level. So… No. The Sheffield United center backs are all Championship level, if they do it at EPL level for a season or so then it may change. One snowflake doesn’t make a Christmas. 
Yes, “nothing about that cannot be attached to a back four (organization and team spirit, etc)” but we’ve had how many managers in the past 17 years? 7? (McLeish twice) None of them have managed to mould our team and organize the back line to a level that we’d be close to qualifying. And Clarke’s remit was to make us organized, etc. I think he only now realizes how massive the task is. 

A back-line of “right back”, Souttar, McKenna and Robertson won’t qualify for anything. I think we all agree that that would be the strongest back four? I don’t care if we had Klopp, Guardiola or Mourinho in the dugout, we would still ship goals. Now, Souttar, McKenna and Tierney is something that I could on board with, as Robertson the anchorman shielding them.

Yeah. It was a while back. The language and abuse has subsided a lot, but It was pretty bad back in the day. I don’t mind, though, in my opinion I’m right about this, so I didn’t mind the abuse thrown at me (even if it was off-the-scale).

Agreed. McKenna, Souttar and Tierney are my dream trio at the back. All three are young and they have many years in front of them, hopefully in a back three. 

That’s the thing about Tierney and Robertson, I’d actually trust them in central midfield more than I would any of our midfielders. That’s just how lowly I rate McLean, Fleck, McGregor, etc. (I’m leaving McTominay out of it because I feel that he has potential) That’s the reason I’d play Robertson as the anchorman, that and he has more defensive capabilities that all of our midfielders combined. Another reason is that when a player is playing in the middle he’ll have the potential to have more influence. I watched the Bayern Munich match last night. Alaba is usually at left back for Munich and anchorman for Austria, but last night he played anchorman and he was flawless. I see no reason why Robertson (or/and Tierney) couldn’t play that role.

I get your point, but I’d much rather Devlin, Mulgrew, etc, have an extra defender to have their back, than having to depend on a two. *shudder*

Nah, It's not that people have more opinions or share them more, it's just that they have a wider reach than ever before. It goes beyond their front room or their workplace or their local. 

I don't really watch any other sports much, but I do find many of the Wimbledon and boxing punts annoying. I've never felt that they don't have qualification to offer opinions or analysis, I’m just not really interested in it and find many of them boring at best, irritating at worst. They are overly-reliant on cliches and offer little to no value in my view. Show me more football and less folk talking about football. I get enough of that with my friends and things like this. I'll rely on a cliche in their honour and say to each their own. 

I do think several players for Scotland are at times expected to do more than is fair based on their club form especially when they are playing alongside higher quality players for their clubs or in a more dominant club side (Old firm players). But I also think this is too often an easy out for those players. I let out a sound of frustration during the Russia home game when Robbo got up the side and... hit his cross straight out of play over the top of the goal. 'That's shite Robbo' was more utterance, to which a lad behind me opined 'aye well it's no like he's got Salah or Mane to give it to'. His ability to keep the ball in play and cross it into the box is entirely unaffected by the calibre of player in the area he is trying to get it to. If they make a tit of it, aye, that's because they are Mcburnie or Burke or Phillips or Shankland rather than Salah or Firmino or Mane, but Robbo's cross was shite in that instance and people are right to expect better from a player of his obvious quality and ability. 

No. I’ll categorically state that there is zero percent chance that we’ll qualify for the Euros via the Play-offs. Technically, there is a chance and it’s possible, since the results aren’t in yet, but for anyone to think that we do stand a chance of qualify is quite frankly, living in a fantasy-land, and is a real-life threat to himself/herself and their community. It’s not impossible, but it is improbable. I literally know nothing of the play-offs, the format, who we might play, etc. As it just doesn’t interest me. 

Well, this paragraph is a silly smorgasbord of contradictions and outright daftness. Zero chance followed swiftly by there is a chance and it is possible. It’s when you suggest that Scotland beating Bulgaria and Norway or Serbia, quite possibly both at home, is a fantasy land that folk are liable to think you’re either deeply flawed in your analysis or are baiting for equally foolish remarks attacking you.

Because make no bones about it, that is a foolish remark. It is also self-evidently silly to claim you know ‘nothing’ of the playoffs. You clearly follow Scotland and have watched the games, you know Scotland are in the play-offs and you know that if they win two matches, at least one at Hampden, they are through to the Euros.

As for the laughable suggestion that it doesn’t interest you… weren’t you earlier on wondering if people on here are even football fans, and Scotland fans? And yet, you are now claiming you have no interest in Scotland having a two game path to a tournament?

We shall see. I fully expect to see you posting predictions of us getting pumped in March 😜  

As I say, I've never seen this refusal to discuss the possibility of change. I've seen some folk say they feel they have talked it to death and have nothing new to add, but that's a natural part of any discussion. As for documented evidence, as we both agree on there is no way that a back four is the sole reason we have failed. You have 17 years of documented evidence that we have not found a way to maximise our ability enough to manage to qualify. That's about all you have. It's about all any of us have, when it comes to evidence. That is an intellectually lazy reply to get but, not to repeat myself but this is not an argument i've made or am making, so it's not really relevant. Nor am I saying Robertson can't play in midfield because he doesn't for his club. However, you have no evidence that he will be effective there, and the argument would perhaps be that his strengths at least as far as we have seen have yet to look like they are in the areas you'd want a central defensive midfielder to be strong in. Robertson's strengths, the arguments goes, are most evident when he motors down the side of the park. You can't prove a negative, so you cannot prove he would be bad as a central midfielder, but i'm not sure what it is that marks him out as being suited to that position. Just being a good player in general? There's also a line of thinking amongst coaches that happy players play well. Would Robbo, or other players, play to their best if unhappy in what they are being asked to do? He doesn't seem the type to spit the dummy, for sure, but if he is unsure, over thinking or wishing he were out on the left, we might not see the best of our best player. 

Let me be clear; none of this is necessarily my personal view on it, but I dispute the idea that anyone who does not think playing him there is a good idea is some sort of unthinking knuckledragger. 

Sure, Willie Miller was miles better than any defender we have available to us now, but as you sort of accept, the analogy fits. The concept of sticking to what your players are already well accustomed to is not some tactical naivety by default and is a principle highly successful football coaches have employed in illustrious careers. Besides, Mckenna and Findlay are ALSO the guys who have been at the heart of the defence for sides that have second and third in their league, in those cases punching well above their weight. Focusing on their most calamitous results ever is rather akin to focusing on isreal away, intellectually speaking... 😜 

Besides, Mckenna has played back 3 at Aberdeen a lot. And when they do, Aberdeen invariably fail unless and until they switch again. McInnes has tried it several times and has often lost points or adjusted back to a flat four during the match to rescue the situation. 

I wouldn't want a scotland manager to stick slavishly to any formation, actually. I don't think we should stick to a back 4 just because and be unwilling to switch it up. I think the exact same principle applies to a back three. What I want is a manager who will make a judgement call based on hat he thinks will maximise the performance and results of the players available to him in each game, regardless of what that means for the way they are set out. If we went back 3 for a full campaign and got battered each and every game, I'd not begrudge the manager for going to a four or a five at some point. So whilst I can totally understand your frustration that, outside Strachan and Mcleish, no manager in recent times has seemed willing to experiment with the back line formation, I would suggest demanding that a manager stick to a back 3 is as equally ill advised as demanding they stick to a back four. 

Well, okay, fair enough. To be fair Kamara plays in a Rangers team that dominates the ball most weeks. Understandably, what he is asked to do for Finland could well be very different than what he is asked to do for Rangers, but at least thus far in their European games he has not been deployed as a sitter or holder, either. That might change tonight, when they go to Porto. Given you don't watch Scottish football, your opinion that Kamara is better than the players you've listed and is likely to end up in epl and is a little akin to Patrick Viera is based on... watching him play a few times for Finland? He's a tidy enough player, but he doesn't stand out in a league in which many of those players do, nor has he been as good in european games as many of the celtic midfielders you draw direct comparison to. He'd get in the squad no problem, were he Scottish. The 11? Maybe. 

Yeah of course we would all drop anyone if it meant qualification, but I think the argument against dropping midfielders to play centre halves that some will employ is that the centre halves that you'd be putting in are highly likely to be less good at passing, controlling, keeping and moving the ball than the sacrificed midfielders. The concern would be inviting teams on to us only to face them up with players who are poor and prone to errors, rather than trying to play midfielders who can keep the ball a bit better. I think the vast majority are error prone but we actually have some decent pace, I think. The central defensive options are, I think, even more prone to errors (and slower, outwith McKenna) than our other players. All things are relative. 

I seem glimpses of them on Match of the day and have watched them in full exactly once. They are a hard working unit with some decent players that are highly likely to go back down again this year (I expect many of the teams currently beneath them to improve and finish ahead of them when it'a all said and done) or, at best, next. But I agree with your general point; you can be tricky and ordinate if you keep things simple. 

When it comes to Smith, actually, no, I think we would have fared worse in that group had he stayed on than we ended up doing. I don't see him playing Faddy in Paris, nor asking Hutton to get up the park as much which often took pressure off the defence for a breather. I also doubt he'd have gone after the Ukrainians with as much aggression as Mcleish did and I think that was crucial to winning that game. If we invited them on by sitting deep I think they'd have caught us on the hop. Certainly that group felt bonded together but it was under Strachan that the players seemed most together in the post-Brown era, for my money. The mentality of the squad, particularly in the last campaign, the lack of pull-outs (Smith and Mcleish even suffered more with that) the level of camaraderie was probably at it's highest amongst the players. Smith was a good manager, for sure. 

Not even close to qualifying? We were fairly close to qualifying for Euro 2008. We were a home win away from qualifying for the playoff's under Burley, despite it all. A last minute penalty conceded to Czech Republic is why Levein never took us to the playoffs, we were very close tho the playoffs for 2016 and we were a goal away from the world cup 2018 playoffs, to boot. Granted, getting to the playoffs is not by any stretch the same as actually winning them when you get there, as Vogts showed, but I do think you are acting like we were miles and miles and miles off it, rather than narrowly 3rd (or narrowly 4th the one time 3rd was enough). 

Often being the 3rd seeds, we tend to perform to our seeding. and there is often a small margin between our total and the total of the team directly above us. 

Heh, I know what you mean by that, but Clarke's remit is to get us qualified via the playoffs. Organised, disorganised, it doesn't matter. By hook or by crook. 

'A back-line of “right back”, Souttar, McKenna and Robertson won’t qualify for anything. ' Given that this back line has never, ever played together, I don't know on what basis you make this categorical claim. It could be that Porteous beside Mckenna would be better than Souttar, but as a 3, yeah, the ideal set from our current eligible players would be Souttar-McKenna-Tierney. Not having Souttar available again makes me quite hesitant to go with a 3 in the next two games. It's worth remembering that Clarke has never been able to call up Souttar or Tierney, two of our best defensive options. Must be so frustrating. 

Hah, well good, but to be honest for someone who doesn't mind it, you sure like to bring it up a lot. When I don't mind something, I tend to pay it no mind. 

Ahaha I hope it happens, if nothing else than to see you predict a Scotland win  

That’s the reason I’d play Robertson as the anchorman, that and he has more defensive capabilities that all of our midfielders combined. Another reason is that when a player is playing in the middle he’ll have the potential to have more influence. I watched the Bayern Munich match last night. Alaba is usually at left back for Munich and anchorman for Austria, but last night he played anchorman and he was flawless. I see no reason why Robertson (or/and Tierney) couldn’t play that role.

Hm. Maybe. I'm not convinced he has as many defensive attributes as you think he does. 

Looking at the available players for these two games, if we were to go with a back three, who would you put in it? Bear in mind Souttar is injured and not expected back until the New Year. 

 

 

 

[bonny78]

2 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Nah, It's not that people have more opinions or share them more, it's just that they have a wider reach than ever before. It goes beyond their front room or their workplace or their local. 

I don't really watch any other sports much, but I do find many of the Wimbledon and boxing punts annoying. I've never felt that they don't have qualification to offer opinions or analysis, I’m just not really interested in it and find many of them boring at best, irritating at worst. They are overly-reliant on cliches and offer little to no value in my view. Show me more football and less folk talking about football. I get enough of that with my friends and things like this. I'll rely on a cliche in their honour and say to each their own. 

I do think several players for Scotland are at times expected to do more than is fair based on their club form especially when they are playing alongside higher quality players for their clubs or in a more dominant club side (Old firm players). But I also think this is too often an easy out for those players. I let out a sound of frustration during the Russia home game when Robbo got up the side and... hit his cross straight out of play over the top of the goal. 'That's shite Robbo' was more utterance, to which a lad behind me opined 'aye well it's no like he's got Salah or Mane to give it to'. His ability to keep the ball in play and cross it into the box is entirely unaffected by the calibre of player in the area he is trying to get it to. If they make a tit of it, aye, that's because they are Mcburnie or Burke or Phillips or Shankland rather than Salah or Firmino or Mane, but Robbo's cross was shite in that instance and people are right to expect better from a player of his obvious quality and ability. 

No. I’ll categorically state that there is zero percent chance that we’ll qualify for the Euros via the Play-offs. Technically, there is a chance and it’s possible, since the results aren’t in yet, but for anyone to think that we do stand a chance of qualify is quite frankly, living in a fantasy-land, and is a real-life threat to himself/herself and their community. It’s not impossible, but it is improbable. I literally know nothing of the play-offs, the format, who we might play, etc. As it just doesn’t interest me. 

Well, this paragraph is a silly smorgasbord of contradictions and outright daftness. Zero chance followed swiftly by there is a chance and it is possible. It’s when you suggest that Scotland beating Bulgaria and Norway or Serbia, quite possibly both at home, is a fantasy land that folk are liable to think you’re either deeply flawed in your analysis or are baiting for equally foolish remarks attacking you.

Because make no bones about it, that is a foolish remark. It is also self-evidently silly to claim you know ‘nothing’ of the playoffs. You clearly follow Scotland and have watched the games, you know Scotland are in the play-offs and you know that if they win two matches, at least one at Hampden, they are through to the Euros.

As for the laughable suggestion that it doesn’t interest you… weren’t you earlier on wondering if people on here are even football fans, and Scotland fans? And yet, you are now claiming you have no interest in Scotland having a two game path to a tournament?

We shall see. I fully expect to see you posting predictions of us getting pumped in March 😜  

As I say, I've never seen this refusal to discuss the possibility of change. I've seen some folk say they feel they have talked it to death and have nothing new to add, but that's a natural part of any discussion. As for documented evidence, as we both agree on there is no way that a back four is the sole reason we have failed. You have 17 years of documented evidence that we have not found a way to maximise our ability enough to manage to qualify. That's about all you have. It's about all any of us have, when it comes to evidence. That is an intellectually lazy reply to get but, not to repeat myself but this is not an argument i've made or am making, so it's not really relevant. Nor am I saying Robertson can't play in midfield because he doesn't for his club. However, you have no evidence that he will be effective there, and the argument would perhaps be that his strengths at least as far as we have seen have yet to look like they are in the areas you'd want a central defensive midfielder to be strong in. Robertson's strengths, the arguments goes, are most evident when he motors down the side of the park. You can't prove a negative, so you cannot prove he would be bad as a central midfielder, but i'm not sure what it is that marks him out as being suited to that position. Just being a good player in general? There's also a line of thinking amongst coaches that happy players play well. Would Robbo, or other players, play to their best if unhappy in what they are being asked to do? He doesn't seem the type to spit the dummy, for sure, but if he is unsure, over thinking or wishing he were out on the left, we might not see the best of our best player. 

Let me be clear; none of this is necessarily my personal view on it, but I dispute the idea that anyone who does not think playing him there is a good idea is some sort of unthinking knuckledragger. 

Sure, Willie Miller was miles better than any defender we have available to us now, but as you sort of accept, the analogy fits. The concept of sticking to what your players are already well accustomed to is not some tactical naivety by default and is a principle highly successful football coaches have employed in illustrious careers. Besides, Mckenna and Findlay are ALSO the guys who have been at the heart of the defence for sides that have second and third in their league, in those cases punching well above their weight. Focusing on their most calamitous results ever is rather akin to focusing on isreal away, intellectually speaking... 😜 

Besides, Mckenna has played back 3 at Aberdeen a lot. And when they do, Aberdeen invariably fail unless and until they switch again. McInnes has tried it several times and has often lost points or adjusted back to a flat four during the match to rescue the situation. 

I wouldn't want a scotland manager to stick slavishly to any formation, actually. I don't think we should stick to a back 4 just because and be unwilling to switch it up. I think the exact same principle applies to a back three. What I want is a manager who will make a judgement call based on hat he thinks will maximise the performance and results of the players available to him in each game, regardless of what that means for the way they are set out. If we went back 3 for a full campaign and got battered each and every game, I'd not begrudge the manager for going to a four or a five at some point. So whilst I can totally understand your frustration that, outside Strachan and Mcleish, no manager in recent times has seemed willing to experiment with the back line formation, I would suggest demanding that a manager stick to a back 3 is as equally ill advised as demanding they stick to a back four. 

Well, okay, fair enough. To be fair Kamara plays in a Rangers team that dominates the ball most weeks. Understandably, what he is asked to do for Finland could well be very different than what he is asked to do for Rangers, but at least thus far in their European games he has not been deployed as a sitter or holder, either. That might change tonight, when they go to Porto. Given you don't watch Scottish football, your opinion that Kamara is better than the players you've listed and is likely to end up in epl and is a little akin to Patrick Viera is based on... watching him play a few times for Finland? He's a tidy enough player, but he doesn't stand out in a league in which many of those players do, nor has he been as good in european games as many of the celtic midfielders you draw direct comparison to. He'd get in the squad no problem, were he Scottish. The 11? Maybe. 

Yeah of course we would all drop anyone if it meant qualification, but I think the argument against dropping midfielders to play centre halves that some will employ is that the centre halves that you'd be putting in are highly likely to be less good at passing, controlling, keeping and moving the ball than the sacrificed midfielders. The concern would be inviting teams on to us only to face them up with players who are poor and prone to errors, rather than trying to play midfielders who can keep the ball a bit better. I think the vast majority are error prone but we actually have some decent pace, I think. The central defensive options are, I think, even more prone to errors (and slower, outwith McKenna) than our other players. All things are relative. 

I seem glimpses of them on Match of the day and have watched them in full exactly once. They are a hard working unit with some decent players that are highly likely to go back down again this year (I expect many of the teams currently beneath them to improve and finish ahead of them when it'a all said and done) or, at best, next. But I agree with your general point; you can be tricky and ordinate if you keep things simple. 

When it comes to Smith, actually, no, I think we would have fared worse in that group had he stayed on than we ended up doing. I don't see him playing Faddy in Paris, nor asking Hutton to get up the park as much which often took pressure off the defence for a breather. I also doubt he'd have gone after the Ukrainians with as much aggression as Mcleish did and I think that was crucial to winning that game. If we invited them on by sitting deep I think they'd have caught us on the hop. Certainly that group felt bonded together but it was under Strachan that the players seemed most together in the post-Brown era, for my money. The mentality of the squad, particularly in the last campaign, the lack of pull-outs (Smith and Mcleish even suffered more with that) the level of camaraderie was probably at it's highest amongst the players. Smith was a good manager, for sure. 

Not even close to qualifying? We were fairly close to qualifying for Euro 2008. We were a home win away from qualifying for the playoff's under Burley, despite it all. A last minute penalty conceded to Czech Republic is why Levein never took us to the playoffs, we were very close tho the playoffs for 2016 and we were a goal away from the world cup 2018 playoffs, to boot. Granted, getting to the playoffs is not by any stretch the same as actually winning them when you get there, as Vogts showed, but I do think you are acting like we were miles and miles and miles off it, rather than narrowly 3rd (or narrowly 4th the one time 3rd was enough). 

Often being the 3rd seeds, we tend to perform to our seeding. and there is often a small margin between our total and the total of the team directly above us. 

Heh, I know what you mean by that, but Clarke's remit is to get us qualified via the playoffs. Organised, disorganised, it doesn't matter. By hook or by crook. 

'A back-line of “right back”, Souttar, McKenna and Robertson won’t qualify for anything. ' Given that this back line has never, ever played together, I don't know on what basis you make this categorical claim. It could be that Porteous beside Mckenna would be better than Souttar, but as a 3, yeah, the ideal set from our current eligible players would be Souttar-McKenna-Tierney. Not having Souttar available again makes me quite hesitant to go with a 3 in the next two games. It's worth remembering that Clarke has never been able to call up Souttar or Tierney, two of our best defensive options. Must be so frustrating. 

Hah, well good, but to be honest for someone who doesn't mind it, you sure like to bring it up a lot. When I don't mind something, I tend to pay it no mind. 

Ahaha I hope it happens, if nothing else than to see you predict a Scotland win  

That’s the reason I’d play Robertson as the anchorman, that and he has more defensive capabilities that all of our midfielders combined. Another reason is that when a player is playing in the middle he’ll have the potential to have more influence. I watched the Bayern Munich match last night. Alaba is usually at left back for Munich and anchorman for Austria, but last night he played anchorman and he was flawless. I see no reason why Robertson (or/and Tierney) couldn’t play that role.

Hm. Maybe. I'm not convinced he has as many defensive attributes as you think he does. 

Looking at the available players for these two games, if we were to go with a back three, who would you put in it? Bear in mind Souttar is injured and not expected back until the New Year. 

 

 

 

T. L. D. R. 

[Dalgety Bay TA]

22 hours ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

You could just as easily do that with this squad of defenders:

Devlin - back three for Hamilton and Aberdeen.
McKenna - back three for Aberdeen.
Mulgrew - back three for Celtic, Aberdeen and Blackburn
Souttar - back three for Hearts and Dundee United
Halkett (sp?) - back three for Livingston and Hearts
Berra  - Back three for Hearts
Hanley - back three for Norwich and Blackburn and Newcastle.
Tierney - back three for Celtic.

The only real difference is that the defenders you listed are far, far, far more accomplished that the current crop. (Aside from Tieney)

People are making out that our current center backs have NEVER played in a back three, at any level. Total fallacy.

Tierney hasn't played back 3 for Celtic.

Hanley never played back 3 for Newcastle who only started playing that again the previous season to this one, after he had left. He also hardly played for Newcastle. Norwich don't play back 3.

[AndyDD]

[ThistleWhistle]

Apologies if I've missed it in one of the appendices but who plays right wing back?    Our right back area is our main weak point so going to a wing back is only going to make that weakness glaringly worse for me. 

[ceudmilefailte]

4 hours ago, ThistleWhistle said:

Apologies if I've missed it in one of the appendices but who plays right wing back?    Our right back area is our main weak point so going to a wing back is only going to make that weakness glaringly worse for me. 

I'm not too sure that the original poster has got as far as to naming any players yet, it's more a case of reinforcing his belief that if we had tried 3 at the back we might have qualified for something in the last 20 years. It will be released in a 50,000 word manuscript in time for Christmas

[bonny78]

Am fed up.  Looking forward to the draw on 22nd 

[The_Dark_Knight]

14 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Nah, It's not that people have more opinions or share them more, it's just that they have a wider reach than ever before. It goes beyond their front room or their workplace or their local. 

I don't really watch any other sports much, but I do find many of the Wimbledon and boxing punts annoying. I've never felt that they don't have qualification to offer opinions or analysis, I’m just not really interested in it and find many of them boring at best, irritating at worst. They are overly-reliant on cliches and offer little to no value in my view. Show me more football and less folk talking about football. I get enough of that with my friends and things like this. I'll rely on a cliche in their honour and say to each their own. 

I do think several players for Scotland are at times expected to do more than is fair based on their club form especially when they are playing alongside higher quality players for their clubs or in a more dominant club side (Old firm players). But I also think this is too often an easy out for those players. I let out a sound of frustration during the Russia home game when Robbo got up the side and... hit his cross straight out of play over the top of the goal. 'That's shite Robbo' was more utterance, to which a lad behind me opined 'aye well it's no like he's got Salah or Mane to give it to'. His ability to keep the ball in play and cross it into the box is entirely unaffected by the calibre of player in the area he is trying to get it to. If they make a tit of it, aye, that's because they are Mcburnie or Burke or Phillips or Shankland rather than Salah or Firmino or Mane, but Robbo's cross was shite in that instance and people are right to expect better from a player of his obvious quality and ability. 

No. I’ll categorically state that there is zero percent chance that we’ll qualify for the Euros via the Play-offs. Technically, there is a chance and it’s possible, since the results aren’t in yet, but for anyone to think that we do stand a chance of qualify is quite frankly, living in a fantasy-land, and is a real-life threat to himself/herself and their community. It’s not impossible, but it is improbable. I literally know nothing of the play-offs, the format, who we might play, etc. As it just doesn’t interest me. 

Well, this paragraph is a silly smorgasbord of contradictions and outright daftness. Zero chance followed swiftly by there is a chance and it is possible. It’s when you suggest that Scotland beating Bulgaria and Norway or Serbia, quite possibly both at home, is a fantasy land that folk are liable to think you’re either deeply flawed in your analysis or are baiting for equally foolish remarks attacking you.

Because make no bones about it, that is a foolish remark. It is also self-evidently silly to claim you know ‘nothing’ of the playoffs. You clearly follow Scotland and have watched the games, you know Scotland are in the play-offs and you know that if they win two matches, at least one at Hampden, they are through to the Euros.

As for the laughable suggestion that it doesn’t interest you… weren’t you earlier on wondering if people on here are even football fans, and Scotland fans? And yet, you are now claiming you have no interest in Scotland having a two game path to a tournament?

We shall see. I fully expect to see you posting predictions of us getting pumped in March 😜  

As I say, I've never seen this refusal to discuss the possibility of change. I've seen some folk say they feel they have talked it to death and have nothing new to add, but that's a natural part of any discussion. As for documented evidence, as we both agree on there is no way that a back four is the sole reason we have failed. You have 17 years of documented evidence that we have not found a way to maximise our ability enough to manage to qualify. That's about all you have. It's about all any of us have, when it comes to evidence. That is an intellectually lazy reply to get but, not to repeat myself but this is not an argument i've made or am making, so it's not really relevant. Nor am I saying Robertson can't play in midfield because he doesn't for his club. However, you have no evidence that he will be effective there, and the argument would perhaps be that his strengths at least as far as we have seen have yet to look like they are in the areas you'd want a central defensive midfielder to be strong in. Robertson's strengths, the arguments goes, are most evident when he motors down the side of the park. You can't prove a negative, so you cannot prove he would be bad as a central midfielder, but i'm not sure what it is that marks him out as being suited to that position. Just being a good player in general? There's also a line of thinking amongst coaches that happy players play well. Would Robbo, or other players, play to their best if unhappy in what they are being asked to do? He doesn't seem the type to spit the dummy, for sure, but if he is unsure, over thinking or wishing he were out on the left, we might not see the best of our best player. 

Let me be clear; none of this is necessarily my personal view on it, but I dispute the idea that anyone who does not think playing him there is a good idea is some sort of unthinking knuckledragger. 

Sure, Willie Miller was miles better than any defender we have available to us now, but as you sort of accept, the analogy fits. The concept of sticking to what your players are already well accustomed to is not some tactical naivety by default and is a principle highly successful football coaches have employed in illustrious careers. Besides, Mckenna and Findlay are ALSO the guys who have been at the heart of the defence for sides that have second and third in their league, in those cases punching well above their weight. Focusing on their most calamitous results ever is rather akin to focusing on isreal away, intellectually speaking... 😜 

Besides, Mckenna has played back 3 at Aberdeen a lot. And when they do, Aberdeen invariably fail unless and until they switch again. McInnes has tried it several times and has often lost points or adjusted back to a flat four during the match to rescue the situation. 

I wouldn't want a scotland manager to stick slavishly to any formation, actually. I don't think we should stick to a back 4 just because and be unwilling to switch it up. I think the exact same principle applies to a back three. What I want is a manager who will make a judgement call based on hat he thinks will maximise the performance and results of the players available to him in each game, regardless of what that means for the way they are set out. If we went back 3 for a full campaign and got battered each and every game, I'd not begrudge the manager for going to a four or a five at some point. So whilst I can totally understand your frustration that, outside Strachan and Mcleish, no manager in recent times has seemed willing to experiment with the back line formation, I would suggest demanding that a manager stick to a back 3 is as equally ill advised as demanding they stick to a back four. 

Well, okay, fair enough. To be fair Kamara plays in a Rangers team that dominates the ball most weeks. Understandably, what he is asked to do for Finland could well be very different than what he is asked to do for Rangers, but at least thus far in their European games he has not been deployed as a sitter or holder, either. That might change tonight, when they go to Porto. Given you don't watch Scottish football, your opinion that Kamara is better than the players you've listed and is likely to end up in epl and is a little akin to Patrick Viera is based on... watching him play a few times for Finland? He's a tidy enough player, but he doesn't stand out in a league in which many of those players do, nor has he been as good in european games as many of the celtic midfielders you draw direct comparison to. He'd get in the squad no problem, were he Scottish. The 11? Maybe. 

Yeah of course we would all drop anyone if it meant qualification, but I think the argument against dropping midfielders to play centre halves that some will employ is that the centre halves that you'd be putting in are highly likely to be less good at passing, controlling, keeping and moving the ball than the sacrificed midfielders. The concern would be inviting teams on to us only to face them up with players who are poor and prone to errors, rather than trying to play midfielders who can keep the ball a bit better. I think the vast majority are error prone but we actually have some decent pace, I think. The central defensive options are, I think, even more prone to errors (and slower, outwith McKenna) than our other players. All things are relative. 

I seem glimpses of them on Match of the day and have watched them in full exactly once. They are a hard working unit with some decent players that are highly likely to go back down again this year (I expect many of the teams currently beneath them to improve and finish ahead of them when it'a all said and done) or, at best, next. But I agree with your general point; you can be tricky and ordinate if you keep things simple. 

When it comes to Smith, actually, no, I think we would have fared worse in that group had he stayed on than we ended up doing. I don't see him playing Faddy in Paris, nor asking Hutton to get up the park as much which often took pressure off the defence for a breather. I also doubt he'd have gone after the Ukrainians with as much aggression as Mcleish did and I think that was crucial to winning that game. If we invited them on by sitting deep I think they'd have caught us on the hop. Certainly that group felt bonded together but it was under Strachan that the players seemed most together in the post-Brown era, for my money. The mentality of the squad, particularly in the last campaign, the lack of pull-outs (Smith and Mcleish even suffered more with that) the level of camaraderie was probably at it's highest amongst the players. Smith was a good manager, for sure. 

Not even close to qualifying? We were fairly close to qualifying for Euro 2008. We were a home win away from qualifying for the playoff's under Burley, despite it all. A last minute penalty conceded to Czech Republic is why Levein never took us to the playoffs, we were very close tho the playoffs for 2016 and we were a goal away from the world cup 2018 playoffs, to boot. Granted, getting to the playoffs is not by any stretch the same as actually winning them when you get there, as Vogts showed, but I do think you are acting like we were miles and miles and miles off it, rather than narrowly 3rd (or narrowly 4th the one time 3rd was enough). 

Often being the 3rd seeds, we tend to perform to our seeding. and there is often a small margin between our total and the total of the team directly above us. 

Heh, I know what you mean by that, but Clarke's remit is to get us qualified via the playoffs. Organised, disorganised, it doesn't matter. By hook or by crook. 

'A back-line of “right back”, Souttar, McKenna and Robertson won’t qualify for anything. ' Given that this back line has never, ever played together, I don't know on what basis you make this categorical claim. It could be that Porteous beside Mckenna would be better than Souttar, but as a 3, yeah, the ideal set from our current eligible players would be Souttar-McKenna-Tierney. Not having Souttar available again makes me quite hesitant to go with a 3 in the next two games. It's worth remembering that Clarke has never been able to call up Souttar or Tierney, two of our best defensive options. Must be so frustrating. 

Hah, well good, but to be honest for someone who doesn't mind it, you sure like to bring it up a lot. When I don't mind something, I tend to pay it no mind. 

Ahaha I hope it happens, if nothing else than to see you predict a Scotland win  

That’s the reason I’d play Robertson as the anchorman, that and he has more defensive capabilities that all of our midfielders combined. Another reason is that when a player is playing in the middle he’ll have the potential to have more influence. I watched the Bayern Munich match last night. Alaba is usually at left back for Munich and anchorman for Austria, but last night he played anchorman and he was flawless. I see no reason why Robertson (or/and Tierney) couldn’t play that role.

Hm. Maybe. I'm not convinced he has as many defensive attributes as you think he does. 

Looking at the available players for these two games, if we were to go with a back three, who would you put in it? Bear in mind Souttar is injured and not expected back until the New Year. 

 

 

 

Yep. The internet has given everyone the ability to share their opinion. Forums like this one are different, as fundamentally places like these are relatively harmless and don’t really pressure people and/or condition self-image. But then again, places like this one still has its fair-share of keyboard warriors and online bullies, specially specifically about the newbie who was ran out of town because he was accused of being moi.

Well, in fairness, in a game of football there’s 15 minute of free-time, networks have to fill the time with something. It’s either hearing pundits analyze the first half for 10 mins or so or watch 15 minutes of commercials or dead-air. It’s like going to school or further education and saying “Nah. I don’t need that, I’ll just discuss economics, etc, with friends and family”. It’s fascinating hearing Mourinho and Roy Keane talk about anything, if it’s about football, all the better. I’m actually surprised that the people that make the “Masterclass” videos haven’t approached Mourinho or SAF. Have you ever watched a “Masterclass” lesson? It’s pretty much a College class put to video. Margaret Atwell and Neil Gaiman give lessons on literature, Gordon Ramsey for cooking, Natalie Portman for acting, Ron Howard for directing, etc. Thank god for modern pirates, otherwise I’d have to pay for it. 

Fair point, but I don’t completely agree with it or go along with it. You could say that Robertson can use excuses for playing poorly in Scotland shirt, as opposed to when he’s in a Liverpool shirt, because of the drop in standard when he’s playing for Scotland. He could and he would have a right to do so, I mean, no one outside of a mental institution would argue with it. I don’t think he ever has, though. Jamie Redknapp and Jurgen Klopp have both stated that the reason for his drop in standards for Scotland is due to him being used to playing, and training, with better players, but I don’t think Robertson is the type of lad to throw his Scotland team-mates under the bus like that. I’d say that, generally, there’s a vast amount of credence in the theory that he doesn’t do it for Scotland because he has to suit his game accordingly and manage his style, etc. I mean, if he bombed up the left wing as frequently as he with Liverpool, in a Scotland shirt, we’d be ripped to pieces, as we generally lose the ball within the first transition of possession.

At Liverpool they make 40-50 passes when they get in their stride, allowing Robertson and Alexander-Arnold time and freedom to bomb forward. With Scotland, we only get about 1-5 passes before it breaks down. People talk about “Player X cannot play in his position Y because it’s not his natural position.”, etc, but you could just as easily say that he’s not playing his “natural position” (Or the position that he plays, week in and week out) when he’s playing left back for Scotland. He does more defending, and spends more time in how own half, in one match for Scotland than a quarter of season with Liverpool. 

And it’s not just a case of ability, it’s also a mentally that’s the problem. When he plays for Liverpool he knows, more times than not, a play who he passes to will keep it and redistribute the ball, how can he possibly can that trust with his Scotland team-mates? I’ll leave out McTominay, Fraser and Tierney. The rest, players like Mulgrew, Devlin, McGregor, McBurnie, etc, when he gives these players the ball he must be in two minds: either pass it and move, or pass and wait to see if they lose it. 

That being said, I don’t see what we’d be losing if he played the anchorman role. People have been saying that we’d be losing his attacking threat, yeah, well, I think I covered that. He spends more time defending than he does attacking. Move him inside, into the anchorman role and get him to shield the central defenders, the way that Alaba or Kimmich do for their countries. We are in a situation right now that we don’t have the luxury of playing our most influential players out in wide position.

Yeah. You can say what you want it being a smorgasbord of contradiction and outright daftness, you can also say that it’s a slap-up feast of lunacy and flawed logic. It matters not. The facts are in, and it says that, in our current state, there’s more chance of being photo-bombed by the Loch Ness Monster than us qualifying for Euro 2020. 

No. When I say that I know “nothing” of the upcoming playoffs I literally mean that I know “nothing” of the upcoming payoffs. I’m not sure where the matches will be held, not sure the potential opponents, I’m not even sure when the playoffs will be held, nor am I sure how many actual legs or matches they’ll be. I’m certainly not going to attend them, because I just see them as glorified friendlies. Can’t remember what friendly I went to. What I am sure of, though, I will watching a European Championships next summer that don’t have Scotland in it. I made a bet with a guy a couple of months ago, it was that we wouldn’t score one goal in the games against Russia and Belgium. I lost, only because the Russian keeper apparently still had butter on his hands (It’s my personal feeling that he was spreading some toast before the match). The guy said that it was okay if I backed out on the bet. I didn’t. A bet’s a bet and I’m man enough to put my money where my mouth is. I’m willing to bet someone, that if we reach the 2020 European Championships, I will refrain from posting for a whole year. I’d actually agree to that bet without a moment’s hesitation (Depending on what the backer’s part of the deal was)

My mind is entirely on the next World Cup qualifiers. Period.

Yeah, I was on earlier claiming that. There’s a difference, though, I said that because I genuinely think that some people want to see us lose. Why do I think that? Because the system of choice is 4-2-3-1 for most people. That’s why I think it and I’ve explained why. Also, a guy said that I need to get a “life” because I said that I recently watched our six matches at Euro 96 and France 98. I’m actually still getting my head around that. I’m not sure what it means. Does it mean that watching Scotland playing football is a waste of time? That there’s no point watching matches were you already know the result? (Ironic coming from a person who attends SPL matches. Before a ball is kicked the winner of the SPL is known) People binge watch shows like “24” or “Peaky Blinders” or movies like “The Godfather”, “Lord of the Rings”, etc. I’d rather watch Scotland, from schoolboy level, to to the seniors, than watch any of that crap.  
Why would Robertson be unhappy playing out of position? Yeah. That to me is the problem. These days you have to pamper players, you have to treat them with kid-gloves and mollycoddle them. Danny McGrain played at left back because we had Sandy Jardine at the time. Two great right backs. Do you think Danny McGrain was “unhappy” playing out of position? I serious no not think for one moment that Danny McGrain was “unhappy” playing for Scotland, out of position or not. I don’t think any of the great players were “unhappy” about playing for Scotland. Back then it an honour and a privilage to represent Scotland. Right now we have “unhappy” players like McBurnie. He’s probably unhappy because he’s not got a person to wipe his bottom when he goes number two. If Andy Robertson, or anyone, is “unhappy” playing for Scotland then they should ring Steve Clarke, or the SFA, and declare that they no longer wish to be selected for Scotland duty. Poor diddims. I’m sure they’ll be happier sitting at home, in their mansions, watching their maid do the business, etc.

Also, what did Robertson say about it being “awkward” at left wingback when he played there against Israel? Did you watch the Sheffield United vs Liverpool match? Liverpool switched to 3-5-2 at half time. Robertson spend the entire second half tearing the Sheffield United a few new holes. I didn’t see anything “awkward” about him being wing-back for Liverpool, nor did I hear a peep from him about it. Why, the poor lad should’ve knocked on Jurgen Klopp’s office and made it clear that playing left wing-back made him feel “unhappy” and “awkward”. Or maybe Klopp expects footballers to man up and go to a 90 minute war. Not cry because you aren’t playing where you want to play. 

None of our players play at the highest level. Imagine if you were a restaurant owner and you had to let two Michelin star Chef go, for whatever reason. You couldn’t hire two Chef’s from a greasy spoon and expect the same results. You’d need to hire three to five good Chef’s in order to fill the gap that was left by those two Michelin stars. Back in the day we had McLeish and Miller. If we had central defenders of that calibre I’d play 4 at the back all day long. But we don’t, we have central defenders who are fit for England’s second tier. Expecting a two, from McKenna, Devlin, Mulgrew, etc, is footballing suicide and it’s just inviting the opposition to beat you to a bloody pulp.

The very fact that this thread has only a few people in it would suggest that you’re in the minority in wanting to discuss systems as well having an open mind. I’d say that 95%+ of people here want to persevere with our system or fail trying. Look at Rafa Benitez, he’s one of the best managers in management, as well one of the most knowledgeable. He got promoted to the EPL with Newcastle, because they didn’t/don’t have any top center backs, he switched to a 3/5. They finished 10th last season. They did so well because he zoned on the weaknesses of his team (defence), and he added numbers. It’s not rocket science. It’s basic “strength in numbers” logic. 

In the Manchester United Vs Liverpool match there were eight players in the midfield, Robertson played more successful passes than all but two (Wijnaldum and Fred). I’d actually say that Robertson was made for the anchorman role (when he’s in a team of extremely limited ability). If he were English or French or German then fine, he’d definitely play at left back, but we can’t accommodate it. It’s akin to C.Ronaldo playing upfront for San Marino, he’s be wasted and he wouldn’t get 10 touches in a match… unless he came short.

Of all the teams who got promoted last season (Norwich, Aston Villa and Sheffield United), I can see Norwich being relegated, Villa surviving by the skin of their teeth and Sheffield United finishing in the top 12.  

Well, if you want to be all technically about it and bring actual facts into the narrative… 😛 Be all that, as it may, it sure as hell didn’t feel like we had all those close shaves. I’ve been losing optimism and hope, incrementally, since Craig Brown left. I’m at the point where I simply cannot see us qualifying for a finals. I have to say, though, watching the under 17s the other day gave me reasons to be a little bit optimistic. Yes, we played a poor team (can’t even remember who is was), and they didn’t give much resistance, regardless, the kids shows a good amount of talent. What encouraged me most of all is both their technical ability and their willingness to keep the ball on the deck. It’s a nice ray of light at the end of the tunnel… with our luck it’ll be a train!

In fairness, what Scotland manager has been able to work with Tierney? McTominay has as many caps in one year than Tierney has in three. Not that I’m questioning Tierney’s nationalism or anything… I’d actually call up Porteous as soon as the Under 21s are done with their qualification group. I think he’s a better raw defender than Souttar and McKenna.

Me predict a Scotland win?!? Have you been drinking? 

Of course he has defensive qualities. He’s a left back. You don’t play at the very top level (and win a little trophy like the European Cup) as a full back and not have defensive qualities. 

For the next two games? I think Caulker will be called up. Tierney will probably be available. So I’d go with Caulker, McKenna and Tierney. Do I expect that to be the case? Not really. I predict Steve Clarke, and every single manager we appoint, till the end of days, to play with four at the back… and we’ll never qualify for anything ever again… the end.

[The_Dark_Knight]

11 hours ago, Dalgety Bay TA said:

Tierney hasn't played back 3 for Celtic.

Hanley never played back 3 for Newcastle who only started playing that again the previous season to this one, after he had left. He also hardly played for Newcastle. Norwich don't play back 3.

Well, the Tierney one wouldn't count anyway, as the SPL is... not very good...

Regardless, though, Brendan Rogers did say that he can play as a center back. He also played as a left sided center back when we drew against England, and he did very well. So yeah, he's played at the highest level (international) in a 3. 

Lots of teams rotate formations during matches (did you watch Ajax a couple of nights ago? It was like perpetual motion), so I'd say that most professional players have to play in various positions during a match.

[The_Dark_Knight]

8 hours ago, ThistleWhistle said:

Apologies if I've missed it in one of the appendices but who plays right wing back?    Our right back area is our main weak point so going to a wing back is only going to make that weakness glaringly worse for me. 

Good question.

I'd say Fraser, but I'd be worried about his lack of height. Maybe Phillips or even Burke. 

People give Burke pelters for being lazy and everything, but I watched him against Valencia and he was really putting in a shift to help his right-back.

[Dalgety Bay TA]

7 hours ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

Well, the Tierney one wouldn't count anyway, as the SPL is... not very good...

Regardless, though, Brendan Rogers did say that he can play as a center back. He also played as a left sided center back when we drew against England, and he did very well. So yeah, he's played at the highest level (international) in a 3. 

Lots of teams rotate formations during matches (did you watch Ajax a couple of nights ago? It was like perpetual motion), so I'd say that most professional players have to play in various positions during a match.

I don't doubt Tiemey could play in a back 3 but its the lack of familiarity with the position which would worry me. 

[AndyDD]

8 hours ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

Well, in fairness, in a game of football there’s 15 minute of free-time, networks have to fill the time with something. It’s either hearing pundits analyze the first half for 10 mins or so or watch 15 minutes of commercials or dead-air.

Not if you record it and watch it 15 mins after kickoff, it doesn't   Then you can fast forward to the football, past the vapid halftime adverts and the equally vapid 'analysis' 😜 

It’s like going to school or further education and saying “Nah. I don’t need that, I’ll just discuss economics, etc, with friends and family”. It’s fascinating hearing Mourinho and Roy Keane talk about anything, if it’s about football, all the better. I’m actually surprised that the people that make the “Masterclass” videos haven’t approached Mourinho or SAF. Have you ever watched a “Masterclass” lesson? It’s pretty much a College class put to video. Margaret Atwell and Neil Gaiman give lessons on literature, Gordon Ramsey for cooking, Natalie Portman for acting, Ron Howard for directing, etc. Thank god for modern pirates, otherwise I’d have to pay for it. 

Haha I mean maybe if it were people as interesting, engaging and gifted at public speaking as Margaret Atwood and Neil Gaiman, instead of barely coherent intellectual vacuums or posturing controversy baiters, but very few pundits are as interesting as those two. To be fair even if they had the most engaging former managers possible, I'd still watch it on a 15 min delay and fast forward halftime.

Fair point, but I don’t completely agree with it or go along with it. You could say that Robertson can use excuses for playing poorly in Scotland shirt, as opposed to when he’s in a Liverpool shirt, because of the drop in standard when he’s playing for Scotland. He could and he would have a right to do so, I mean, no one outside of a mental institution would argue with it. I don’t think he ever has, though. Jamie Redknapp and Jurgen Klopp have both stated that the reason for his drop in standards for Scotland is due to him being used to playing, and training, with better players, but I don’t think Robertson is the type of lad to throw his Scotland team-mates under the bus like that. I’d say that, generally, there’s a vast amount of credence in the theory that he doesn’t do it for Scotland because he has to suit his game accordingly and manage his style, etc. I mean, if he bombed up the left wing as frequently as he with Liverpool, in a Scotland shirt, we’d be ripped to pieces, as we generally lose the ball within the first transition of possession.

I think it is definitely the case that Scotland's deficiencies are always going to blunt the effectiveness of our best players especially relative to their clubs (and especially when their club is this Liverpool team or vintage Fletcher's Man U), without a doubt. And yes he has to be more cautious and more aware of his teammates than he might otherwise be, that he has to tailor his game accordingly. That being said, when making a hash of a cross into the box, it is totally fair to criticise Robertson regardless of the disparity in his team mates, especially when it is sliced straight out for a goal kick. 

Yeah. You can say what you want it being a smorgasbord of contradiction and outright daftness, you can also say that it’s a slap-up feast of lunacy and flawed logic. It matters not. The facts are in, and it says that, in our current state, there’s more chance of being photo-bombed by the Loch Ness Monster than us qualifying for Euro 2020. 

Given that we are, factually, 2 wins (against Bulgaria/Romania/Isreal and Serbia/Norway) from those Euros, the facts say nothing of the sort. Unless, that is, you know something about Nessie that I don't... 😜 

No. When I say that I know “nothing” of the upcoming playoffs I literally mean that I know “nothing” of the upcoming payoffs.

I'm sorry, I just don't believe that at all. I mean, you know they exist, as a concept. You know they are off the back of the Nations League. At a minimum, you know those things. 

I’m not sure where the matches will be held, not sure the potential opponents, I’m not even sure when the playoffs will be held, nor am I sure how many actual legs or matches they’ll be. I’m certainly not going to attend them, because I just see them as glorified friendlies. Can’t remember what friendly I went to. What I am sure of, though, I will watching a European Championships next summer that don’t have Scotland in it. I made a bet with a guy a couple of months ago, it was that we wouldn’t score one goal in the games against Russia and Belgium. I lost, only because the Russian keeper apparently still had butter on his hands (It’s my personal feeling that he was spreading some toast before the match). The guy said that it was okay if I backed out on the bet. I didn’t. A bet’s a bet and I’m man enough to put my money where my mouth is. I’m willing to bet someone, that if we reach the 2020 European Championships, I will refrain from posting for a whole year. I’d actually agree to that bet without a moment’s hesitation (Depending on what the backer’s part of the deal was)

We shall see what, if anything, you are saying in the build up to the March semi-final. I expect you might well be more interested come that point.

Sorry, I'm not really interested in any such bet. To be honest, there's nothing in it for me. I've no desire to see you stop posting on this board for a year, it gets me precisely nothing. 

My mind is entirely on the next World Cup qualifiers. Period.

Yeah, I was on earlier claiming that. There’s a difference, though, I said that because I genuinely think that some people want to see us lose. Why do I think that? Because the system of choice is 4-2-3-1 for most people.

The number of people on here who want Scotland to lose must be perishingly small. Statistically, they might as well not exist. 

That’s why I think it and I’ve explained why. Also, a guy said that I need to get a “life” because I said that I recently watched our six matches at Euro 96 and France 98. I’m actually still getting my head around that.

I know, that is clear with how often you bring it up, and it clearly struck a nerve, but you'd really have to ask the chap who said it what he meant. And he might never clarify. One of those things it seems best just to let go of, lest it beset you any further. 

Why would Robertson be unhappy playing out of position? Yeah. That to me is the problem. These days you have to pamper players, you have to treat them with kid-gloves and mollycoddle them.

And in my day, the grass was greener and the sky more blue... 😜 haha nah what I meant was not that Robertson would strop. I don't think he's that sort at all. He seems to take being a Scotland player and a Scotland Captain as a genuinely huge honour. Simply put, even consciously, people perform better when they are happy and comfortable. The happier and the more comfortable, the better they will perform, by and large. The same goes for football. It isn't a case of always taking the hump and consciously deciding 'well I won't bother my arse now'. it's more nuanced and subtle than that and is an unavoidable aspect of human nature.

Danny McGrain played at left back because we had Sandy Jardine at the time. Two great right backs. Do you think Danny McGrain was “unhappy” playing out of position? I serious no not think for one moment that Danny McGrain was “unhappy” playing for Scotland, out of position or not.

I bet if you'd asked him 'hawl Danny, would you prefer to play right back?' he'd have said aye. In the same way Tierney is more than up for playing right back for Scotland, in the way Robbo would i'm sure play right back, left wing (maybe even defensive mid if someone were crazy enough to suggest it to him ... ) or up front if asked, I think they would both tell you they'd be happier at left back. 

I don’t think any of the great players were “unhappy” about playing for Scotland. Back then it an honour and a privilage to represent Scotland. Right now we have “unhappy” players like McBurnie. He’s probably unhappy because he’s not got a person to wipe his bottom when he goes number two. If Andy Robertson, or anyone, is “unhappy” playing for Scotland then they should ring Steve Clarke, or the SFA, and declare that they no longer wish to be selected for Scotland duty. Poor diddims. I’m sure they’ll be happier sitting at home, in their mansions, watching their maid do the business, etc.

There's a difference, which I hope I've now made clear, in being unhappy playing for Scotland and being less happy playing out of your preferred position than you would be if you were playing there. One is not the other. The two do not equate. 

The very fact that this thread has only a few people in it would suggest that you’re in the minority in wanting to discuss systems as well having an open mind. I’d say that 95%+ of people here want to persevere with our system or fail trying. Look at Rafa Benitez, he’s one of the best managers in management, as well one of the most knowledgeable. He got promoted to the EPL with Newcastle, because they didn’t/don’t have any top center backs, he switched to a 3/5. They finished 10th last season. They did so well because he zoned on the weaknesses of his team (defence), and he added numbers. It’s not rocket science. It’s basic “strength in numbers” logic. 

See, you can be open to discussing it and have an open mind AND still come down on the side of staying in a back four. It's not 'either you agree it must be back 3 or back 5 at all costs until we have better centre halves or you are unwilling to discuss it.' You can both discuss it and come down on the other side.

Well, if you want to be all technically about it and bring actual facts into the narrative… 😛 Be all that, as it may, it sure as hell didn’t feel like we had all those close shaves.

Haha sorry, ruins the fun! I agree it often didn't feel liek we were close to it, especially in the Burley and Levein days, although I strongly feel that our performance in that 1-0 defeat to the Dutch at Hampden under Burley was one of the best I have ever seen with my own eyes from Scotland. Miller has to score that sitter! 

In fairness, what Scotland manager has been able to work with Tierney? McTominay has as many caps in one year than Tierney has in three. Not that I’m questioning Tierney’s nationalism or anything… I’d actually call up Porteous as soon as the Under 21s are done with their qualification group. I think he’s a better raw defender than Souttar and McKenna.

Aye only Strachan. Well, Mcleish a couple of times, as well. Isreal away was Tierney's last match for Scotland. Er, well, his most recent match, I should say, rather than his last. Let's hope not. No not at all, and to be fair to him he missed a hell of a lot of football for Celtic in that period as well and has still to play a league game for Arsenal. 3 matches in total and we're nearly into November. So it's not for me a question of commitment or will with him. 

Me predict a Scotland win?!? Have you been drinking? 

Haha you never know! 

For the next two games? I think Caulker will be called up. Tierney will probably be available. So I’d go with Caulker, McKenna and Tierney. Do I expect that to be the case? Not really. I predict Steve Clarke, and every single manager we appoint, till the end of days, to play with four at the back… and we’ll never qualify for anything ever again… the end.

Is Caulker right footed, I take it? I am still not convinced about calling him up, but it did sound like Clarke was keen on getting him involved. There was some doubt about the timescale in getting his papers sorted, so, just for talking's sake, if Caulker can't feature?

 

[The_Dark_Knight]

6 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Not if you record it and watch it 15 mins after kickoff, it doesn't   Then you can fast forward to the football, past the vapid halftime adverts and the equally vapid 'analysis' 😜 

You could do that, but if you don’t feel like giving BT and Sky money, and you rely on streams to watch it, it kinda takes that method away. I suppose you could hoover for 15 minutes or knit… 

6 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Haha I mean maybe if it were people as interesting, engaging and gifted at public speaking as Margaret Atwood and Neil Gaiman, instead of barely coherent intellectual vacuums or posturing controversy baiters, but very few pundits are as interesting as those two. To be fair even if they had the most engaging former managers possible, I'd still watch it on a 15 min delay and fast forward halftime.

Fair enough, we can’t all enjoy the same things and have the same opinions about stuff, and I’m glad, otherwise life would get dull pretty fast. I don’t include 3 at the back in that, though, because as well both know, anyone who dislikes a back 3 is a heathen and should be put to death…

6 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I think it is definitely the case that Scotland's deficiencies are always going to blunt the effectiveness of our best players especially relative to their clubs (and especially when their club is this Liverpool team or vintage Fletcher's Man U), without a doubt. And yes he has to be more cautious and more aware of his teammates than he might otherwise be, that he has to tailor his game accordingly. That being said, when making a hash of a cross into the box, it is totally fair to criticise Robertson regardless of the disparity in his team mates, especially when it is sliced straight out for a goal kick. 

Well, of course it’s fair to criticize  the guy if he crosses to a guy in row Z. You must remember, though, football is played in the head as much as it is on the park. If you’re playing 90 minutes with 9 or 10 players that are beneath you, talent wise, it’s going to be soul-destroying, no matter who you are. That’s one of the reasons I love Darren Fletcher so much, he was far better and far more successful than all of Scotland team mates, combined, multiplied by one thousand. And yet his love for playing for Scotland never diminished. He played for us through illness - when it would’ve been medically advisable to give international duty a miss - he even drove up from Manchester to Glasgow for a meaningless friendly against Malta (I think it was), making several bathroom stops on the way. It’s warriors like that that we need playing for Scotland, through thick or thin. Not spoiled little boys like Oliver McBurnie acting the big noise by acting like he doesn’t want to be called up for Scotland (Even though I think he does) and basically sticking his middle finger up to an honour that so many more talented players like him didn’t have the opportunity to do.

6 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Given that we are, factually, 2 wins (against Bulgaria/Romania/Isreal and Serbia/Norway) from those Euros, the facts say nothing of the sort. Unless, that is, you know something about Nessie that I don't... 😜 

So, it’s two rounds of one legged matches? I’m not sure we’d be able to beat Bulgaria/Romania or Israel. And as for Serbia, forget about it. And if we played Norway then Odengaard would spend the entire 90 minutes picking holes in us, and Haaland would cut us down. Haaland has previous when it comes to playing us, he scored a hat trick against our under 19s a while back. And as for Nessie, the next time you take a selfie, use your peripheral vision…

6 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I'm sorry, I just don't believe that at all. I mean, you know they exist, as a concept. You know they are off the back of the Nations League. At a minimum, you know those things. 

Well, fine, I know that is exists. That’s the beginning and ending of my knowledge of it. Kinda like how I know the Kardashians exist, doesn’t mean that I know anything about them or could pick them out of a line-up.

6 hours ago, AndyDD said:

We shall see what, if anything, you are saying in the build up to the March semi-final. I expect you might well be more interested come that point.

OK. So It’s March? Cool. In  proper qualifiers I have an interest, I’ve attended a couple, would’ve attended more but I’m literally given up giving my money to the SFA. And I’ve been invested, because it’s qualifying the old fashioned way, I suppose. But this way, the playoff route, it means nothing to me. My opinion would be 160 if we were good and we had the capacity to go toe-to-toe with good teams, but we aren’t, and we can’t, so I’m not. Saying that, though, there’s been a few matches in this Euro Qualifying campaign where I’ve laughed when we’ve conceded. It was more of a “Joker” laugh, one filled with madness and very maniacal in nature, as opposed to one born out of happiness and joy. So yes, The_Dark_Knight is being turned into the Joker, who da thunk it?!

So yeah, I’ll watch them (from home) but I won’t be invested in the match/es. I’m just looking forward to the World Cup qualifiers.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Sorry, I'm not really interested in any such bet. To be honest, there's nothing in it for me. I've no desire to see you stop posting on this board for a year, it gets me precisely nothing.

Nice. So you enjoy my posts? You’re not alone, everyone does, they just hide it with a mask of derision and hostility. 😛  I would actually place that bet, though, that’s how confident I am that we won’t qualify.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

The number of people on here who want Scotland to lose must be perishingly small. Statistically, they might as well not exist. 

Well, in an ideal world, no one here would want Scotland to lose, but I’m starting to wonder. Our center backs are sub-standard, and yet people want to play 2 of them. We have, allegedely, good central midfieders, and yet people want to play a system which facilitates zero players in a central midfield position. If those people don’t want Scotland to lose, well, they’re doing a good impression of acting otherwise. As I said previously, either that or they just know much about football. It’s possible.

The system that we play, and the limited talent our players, make it footballing suicide when we play 4-2-3-1 against a good team, or even a decent team. Essentially, the frequency in which we lose possession we’re constantly playing with two fullbacks, two center backs, two second center backs (and bear in mind, these two are pretty much central midfielders), our wingers get pulled back into wide midfield positions and the second striker comes deep into central midfield. So, essentially, the 4-2-3-1 turns into a 6-3-1 for most matches. Re-watch a recent Scotland match, against a decent/good team, and you’ll see it for yourself. I’m not even going to mention the lone striker. The poor bugger has to run like a headless Chicken for 90 minutes, living on aimless balls and little-to-no quality.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I know, that is clear with how often you bring it up, and it clearly struck a nerve, but you'd really have to ask the chap who said it what he meant. And he might never clarify. One of those things it seems best just to let go of, lest it beset you any further. 

It didn’t really strike a nerve, I was just confused by what he meant by it Still am, actually. It’s puzzling. I asked him what he meant (In a way that wasn’t sarcastic at all…), alas, he failed to answer. I don’t think I’ve seen him post since. He must’ve been one of my other aliases. 😛

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

And in my day, the grass was greener and the sky more blue... 😜 haha nah what I meant was not that Robertson would strop. I don't think he's that sort at all. He seems to take being a Scotland player and a Scotland Captain as a genuinely huge honour. Simply put, even consciously, people perform better when they are happy and comfortable. The happier and the more comfortable, the better they will perform, by and large. The same goes for football. It isn't a case of always taking the hump and consciously deciding 'well I won't bother my arse now'. it's more nuanced and subtle than that and is an unavoidable aspect of human nature.

I wish it were as simple as “Happy players = victories”. There is some credence to it, I suppose, I remember when Mourinho was still United boss, everything was doom and gloom, etc, so it came out on the park. OGS is a cherpier sort, and I’m sure it’s a happier place to be around… I hope it’s still happy when Manchester United get relegated. 😛

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I bet if you'd asked him 'hawl Danny, would you prefer to play right back?' he'd have said aye. In the same way Tierney is more than up for playing right back for Scotland, in the way Robbo would i'm sure play right back, left wing (maybe even defensive mid if someone were crazy enough to suggest it to him ... ) or up front if asked, I think they would both tell you they'd be happier at left back. 

I don’t think McGrain would’ve said that, or even thought it, for one moment. Back then it was an honour to play for your country, especially since we had such talent back then. I think Danny McGrain (or any Scotland player back then) would’ve been happy playing anywhere in the Navy blue of Scotland. Why is it crazy if Robertson was asked to play anchorman? I bet no one thought Pep Guardiola was crazy for moving Lahm from right back to anchorman. I don’t think anyone questions the sanity of Alaba playing reguarly at left back for Bayern Munich and then anchorman for Austria, same with Joshua Kimmich with Germany. Plus I remember back in the day, Paul Lambert moved to Germany. At St Mirren and Motherwell he was pretty much an attacking midfielder, Hitzfeld moved him to the anchorman position, a year later he’s a European Cup winner, marking a certain Zidane out of the final whilst finding time to assist a goal.

I’m not even going to mention the bonehead who was insane enough to move Pirlo from a second striker to anchorman… I wonder how that turned out. 😛  Same with Paul Scholes. He started off as a second striker and he moved into central midfield.

It seems to be an exclusive Scottish thing (just in football), where innovation and thinking outside-the-box and deviating from the ordinary is frowned upon. Even in England, you have James Milner, he’s literally played in every single outfield position (and gives at least a 7 out of team), I never once heard anyone in England cry insanity when it was first suggested that he play “out of position”. I think positions are a misunderstood thing in Scottish football. Youth set-ups in France, Germany, Holland, etc, don’t set kids a position. It’s a fluid system that they have. One youth match a player could be playing left back, next he could be playing up front, etc. In Scotland the concept of position is like it’s set in stone, that it’s written on a player’s DNA and that if a player doesn’t play in his “natural position”, the Gods will get mad and the sky will fall in, etc. It’s ludicrous. Just a few days ago Jamie Carragher said that Liverpool’s left back, Trent Alexander-Arnold, will become a second striker in a few years. I didn’t hear the noise of the men in white coats dragging Jamie Carragher off to a padded cell. When you do it here… BOOM!

Also, if Klopp told Robertson be play anywhere on the park, he’d get his head down and not say a word of resistance.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

See, you can be open to discussing it and have an open mind AND still come down on the side of staying in a back four. It's not 'either you agree it must be back 3 or back 5 at all costs until we have better centre halves or you are unwilling to discuss it.' You can both discuss it and come down on the other side.

Yep. I have no real issue discussing the merits of playing a back four. Hell, in an ideal world we’d have central defenders who are able to play in a back four. My contention, in its simplest form, is that we’ve played with a 4 for long enough.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Haha sorry, ruins the fun! I agree it often didn't feel liek we were close to it, especially in the Burley and Levein days, although I strongly feel that our performance in that 1-0 defeat to the Dutch at Hampden under Burley was one of the best I have ever seen with my own eyes from Scotland. Miller has to score that sitter! 

Tell me about it. I was at the Hampden leg and I agree with you, it was a stellar performance.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Aye only Strachan. Well, Mcleish a couple of times, as well. Isreal away was Tierney's last match for Scotland. Er, well, his most recent match, I should say, rather than his last. Let's hope not. No not at all, and to be fair to him he missed a hell of a lot of football for Celtic in that period as well and has still to play a league game for Arsenal. 3 matches in total and we're nearly into November. So it's not for me a question of commitment or will with him. 

I don’t know. The only think I know is that I’m not the only one who has noticed that Tierney’s a serial-pull-outer for Scotland. He was born in the Isle of Man and he even mentioned representing Manx. I’m guessing that’s what they call Isle of Man-ers? The stat that McTominay has played in a year as much as Tierney’s played in three is a startling one.

7 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Is Caulker right footed, I take it? I am still not convinced about calling him up, but it did sound like Clarke was keen on getting him involved. There was some doubt about the timescale in getting his papers sorted, so, just for talking's sake, if Caulker can't feature?

I think Caulker is right footed. No idea about how long it takes for paperwork to get through, though. Matt Kennedy was on the bench for NI when they played their recent friendly against the Czechs, and that was only talked about a while back, so maybe it doesn’t take as long as people think... I think.

[AndyDD]

On 10/25/2019 at 5:09 PM, The_Dark_Knight said:

You could do that, but if you don’t feel like giving BT and Sky money, and you rely on streams to watch it, it kinda takes that method away. I suppose you could hoover for 15 minutes or knit… 

Certainly allows you time to get some dinner sorted out and set up before you start watching, but sure, could get the needles or the hoover out, too, whatever floats your boat... 😜 

Fair enough, we can’t all enjoy the same things and have the same opinions about stuff, and I’m glad, otherwise life would get dull pretty fast. I don’t include 3 at the back in that, though, because as well both know, anyone who dislikes a back 3 is a heathen and should be put to death…

Well of course haha, somethings are beyond dispute  

So, it’s two rounds of one legged matches? I’m not sure we’d be able to beat Bulgaria/Romania or Israel. And as for Serbia, forget about it. And if we played Norway then Odengaard would spend the entire 90 minutes picking holes in us, and Haaland would cut us down. Haaland has previous when it comes to playing us, he scored a hat trick against our under 19s a while back. And as for Nessie, the next time you take a selfie, use your peripheral vision…

Aye, we know we will be at Home for the first one but we won't know until later next month of we will be at home or away should we make it to the final. i'm never sure of anything when it comes to Scotland, but give Bulgaria's recent showings and the fact that McLeish's Scotland managed to do the business at home to Isreal (just about), I see reason to be confident. The final, though, home or away against either Serbia or Norway, would be a very very tricky game. Still, when a team is two games away, possibly both at home, a team with a home record as good as ours, they have a reasonable chance. So I'll kepe my eyes peeled for prehistoric beasties, just to be safe... 

Well, fine, I know that is exists. That’s the beginning and ending of my knowledge of it. Kinda like how I know the Kardashians exist, doesn’t mean that I know anything about them or could pick them out of a line-up.

OK. So It’s March? Cool. In  proper qualifiers I have an interest, I’ve attended a couple, would’ve attended more but I’m literally given up giving my money to the SFA. And I’ve been invested, because it’s qualifying the old fashioned way, I suppose. But this way, the playoff route, it means nothing to me. My opinion would be 160 if we were good and we had the capacity to go toe-to-toe with good teams, but we aren’t, and we can’t, so I’m not. Saying that, though, there’s been a few matches in this Euro Qualifying campaign where I’ve laughed when we’ve conceded. It was more of a “Joker” laugh, one filled with madness and very maniacal in nature, as opposed to one born out of happiness and joy. So yes, The_Dark_Knight is being turned into the Joker, who da thunk it?!

I agree it is a pretty back-door, grubby sort of way to qualify, but fuck me given the failure after failure i'll take it any day of the week. I'm incredibly invested in any method that might get us there. Hope you get yourself back along to the games at some point. You'd fit in well, there are a lot of bizarre shouts from the stands   I go every home and as many away games as I can possibly manage. Cannae wait for Cyprus, getting close now.  

Nice. So you enjoy my posts? You’re not alone, everyone does, they just hide it with a mask of derision and hostility. 😛  I would actually place that bet, though, that’s how confident I am that we won’t qualify.

Aye, well as much as I enjoy anyone's really. More importantly it would benefit me a sum total of zero if you stopped posting for a year, so purely selfishly I tend not to make bets when the prize is something that does not benefit me one iota. 

I wish it were as simple as “Happy players = victories”. There is some credence to it, I suppose, I remember when Mourinho was still United boss, everything was doom and gloom, etc, so it came out on the park. OGS is a cherpier sort, and I’m sure it’s a happier place to be around… I hope it’s still happy when Manchester United get relegated. 😛

Haha well of course I was not saying it equals victories, but I do think it leads to better performances if the players are enjoying themselves. 

I don’t think McGrain would’ve said that, or even thought it, for one moment. Back then it was an honour to play for your country, especially since we had such talent back then. I think Danny McGrain (or any Scotland player back then) would’ve been happy playing anywhere in the Navy blue of Scotland. Why is it crazy if Robertson was asked to play anchorman? I bet no one thought Pep Guardiola was crazy for moving Lahm from right back to anchorman. I don’t think anyone questions the sanity of Alaba playing reguarly at left back for Bayern Munich and then anchorman for Austria, same with Joshua Kimmich with Germany. Plus I remember back in the day, Paul Lambert moved to Germany. At St Mirren and Motherwell he was pretty much an attacking midfielder, Hitzfeld moved him to the anchorman position, a year later he’s a European Cup winner, marking a certain Zidane out of the final whilst finding time to assist a goal.

Yeah, he probably would have. He'd have said he was happy to play anywhere for Scotland, he'd go in goals if asked, but I'm sure his preference would be to play the position he knows best. That does not mean he would strop of huff about going to the other side of the pitch, indeed as far as we know he did no such thing, but to imagine he would not in his heart of hearts have put himself in his preferred position in the team where it entirely up to him is more than a bit far-fetched. I was joking around by calling it 'crazy' to ask Robbo to go anchorman. Just poking fun.

It seems to be an exclusive Scottish thing (just in football), where innovation and thinking outside-the-box and deviating from the ordinary is frowned upon. Even in England, you have James Milner, he’s literally played in every single outfield position (and gives at least a 7 out of team), I never once heard anyone in England cry insanity when it was first suggested that he play “out of position”. I think positions are a misunderstood thing in Scottish football. Youth set-ups in France, Germany, Holland, etc, don’t set kids a position. It’s a fluid system that they have. One youth match a player could be playing left back, next he could be playing up front, etc. In Scotland the concept of position is like it’s set in stone, that it’s written on a player’s DNA and that if a player doesn’t play in his “natural position”, the Gods will get mad and the sky will fall in, etc. It’s ludicrous. Just a few days ago Jamie Carragher said that Liverpool’s left back, Trent Alexander-Arnold, will become a second striker in a few years. I didn’t hear the noise of the men in white coats dragging Jamie Carragher off to a padded cell. When you do it here… BOOM!

I have more or less no knowledge of the Scottish youth system and systems, nevermind the ones in France, Germany, Netherlands or anywhere else, so I really don't know how they coach children at home or abroad. I know there is a hoary old cliche of scottish coaching as being backwards, old-fashioned and obdurate, but I don't know if this is a truism or not. Have you got experience of and/or evidence of the coaching methods in Scottish youth set ups and the equivalent evidence about those other nations? Analytical articles or anything like that?

I don’t know. The only think I know is that I’m not the only one who has noticed that Tierney’s a serial-pull-outer for Scotland. He was born in the Isle of Man and he even mentioned representing Manx. I’m guessing that’s what they call Isle of Man-ers? The stat that McTominay has played in a year as much as Tierney’s played in three is a startling one.

The thing that reassures me is that he has been plagued by injuries and so comprehensively interrupted in his club career that I don't have much reason to doubt the sincerity. He has struggled for the last couple years or so. 

I think Caulker is right footed. No idea about how long it takes for paperwork to get through, though. Matt Kennedy was on the bench for NI when they played their recent friendly against the Czechs, and that was only talked about a while back, so maybe it doesn’t take as long as people think... I think.

I believe I read somewhere that the situation is different when they have played a friendly for another side already but that might be my imagination masquerading as memory.

Sorry, I'm no sure how you do that more sophisticated looking multiple quoting thing. 

[The_Dark_Knight]

3 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Certainly allows you time to get some dinner sorted out and set up before you start watching, but sure, could get the needles or the hoover out, too, whatever floats your boat... 😜 

Wow, check you out in the fast lane! 

3 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Aye, we know we will be at Home for the first one but we won't know until later next month of we will be at home or away should we make it to the final. i'm never sure of anything when it comes to Scotland, but give Bulgaria's recent showings and the fact that McLeish's Scotland managed to do the business at home to Isreal (just about), I see reason to be confident. The final, though, home or away against either Serbia or Norway, would be a very very tricky game. Still, when a team is two games away, possibly both at home, a team with a home record as good as ours, they have a reasonable chance. So I'll kepe my eyes peeled for prehistoric beasties, just to be safe... 

So, it's two one legged affairs? Got it. Bulgaria looked like traffic pylons during their recent event of race relations, but I'd still be wary of them. Players like Jack, Forrest, Christie and McGregor come up against Scottish pylons on a weekly basis, but I'm not sure how they'd fare against Bulgarian pylons. As for Norway and Serbia, I think they'd take five off us.

Another reason for my lack of interest/enthusiasm/optimism towards the playoffs is that a player actually retired before the playoffs. So, either Snodgrass has zero belief that we'll qualify via the playoff route or....

Remember prior to the Euros in 1992 when Michael Laudrup decided not to participate, as he thought Denmark wouldn't go far, and then went ahead and won it? I don't think history will repeat itself.

3 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I agree it is a pretty back-door, grubby sort of way to qualify, but fuck me given the failure after failure i'll take it any day of the week. I'm incredibly invested in any method that might get us there. Hope you get yourself back along to the games at some point. You'd fit in well, there are a lot of bizarre shouts from the stands   I go every home and as many away games as I can possibly manage. Cannae wait for Cyprus, getting close now.  

Gee, thanks.  All my calls are gold and well thought-out. Seriously, I have a lab and everything...

It's a shame, as I've been a regular since I was about 17. Not every home match, but I'd say 50ish%. I'm done with the SFA, though. Yes, I like what they've done with the performance schools, and for that they should be applauded (they'll probably tear them down tomorrow), but the state of the domestic game is entirely their fault. For a start, the leagues should be expanded and their should be some sort of a homegrown rule in place. I mean, there's no point in producing players if the clubs aren't being forced to give them first team matches.

I've lost my enthusiasm for the senior team. I applaud you for flying the flag, though, metaphorically speaking... unless you do actual fly a flag at matches, If that is the case then I applaud you for flying the metaphorical AND the literal flag...

3 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Haha well of course I was not saying it equals victories, but I do think it leads to better performances if the players are enjoying themselves. 

Yeah. That's why players aren't allowed to attend clown college and clubs aren't allowed to employ clowns, as all the enjoying themselves and all the laugher would make it unfair for the competition. 

3 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I was joking around by calling it 'crazy' to ask Robbo to go anchorman. Just poking fun.

I know. Tons of people have said it and been completely serious, though. I genuinely think that some people here really think that if a player plays out of position he'll blow up. I mean, they play on the same park, the same ball, they most certainly cover that position during the match, but for some strange, even mystical reason, people think if a player begins a match in any other position for which he's accustomed, he'll implode....

3 hours ago, AndyDD said:

I have more or less no knowledge of the Scottish youth system and systems, nevermind the ones in France, Germany, Netherlands or anywhere else, so I really don't know how they coach children at home or abroad. I know there is a hoary old cliche of scottish coaching as being backwards, old-fashioned and obdurate, but I don't know if this is a truism or not. Have you got experience of and/or evidence of the coaching methods in Scottish youth set ups and the equivalent evidence about those other nations? Analytical articles or anything like that?

To be honest, I think the cliched thing about coaching in Scotland is accurate. Generally, coaches, from all levels in Scotland (I do think it's changing, though) focus more on cardio than skills. Why else do you think we've been treated to mediocrity for so long? I've been watching the under 17s and under 19s a lot recently, I'd actually say, as a collective, they have better technical skills than the senior Scotland team. And that tells you everything you have to know.

My nephew was in the Hamilton youth teams. Whilst, I don't think they're a good example of not producing their own (they have been decent at it, nothing more than that), they aren't/haven't been the most professional at youth level. As I said, over the years it's been more about running over hills x1000 times than learning to control the ball, pass the ball, making decisions with the ball and without the ball, etc.

I have a couple of books about Dutch coaching methods, no idea were they are, though. Basically, it's all about morphing kids, not into machines, but into players that have high football IQ, players who has the optimum skill-to-ceiling for each individual player and to be more rounded people. The way that we've coached players, with the minimum of effort, and thrown them on the football scrapheap is deplorable. I mean, if Andy Robertson didn't have the inner drive that he does, he'd still be packing shelves, as opposed to being a European Cup winner and looking likely to add an EPL winner's medal to it.

We've looked at the Spaniards and the Dutch, etc, as if they were Extra Terrestrials. They aren't. They're human beings. It's just that those nations have been professional in their coaching of their kids, whereas, our coaching has been nothing but lip-service. I hope we're turning the corner.

4 hours ago, AndyDD said:

The thing that reassures me is that he has been plagued by injuries and so comprehensively interrupted in his club career that I don't have much reason to doubt the sincerity. He has struggled for the last couple years or so. 

I don't know. Generally, I make an attempt to watch Scots at EPL level, but with Tierney, I'm not even going to try. I'm not writing him off, I'm just waiting for him to start showing the same desire playing for Scotland as he did for Celtic, and will for Arsenal.

4 hours ago, AndyDD said:

Sorry, I'm no sure how you do that more sophisticated looking multiple quoting thing. 

Highlight the text you want to reply to, a window will come up that says "quote selection", just click on it.

[The_Dark_Knight]

Another amazing display by Sheffield United and their fluent 3-5-2 system.

Not only are they organised and hard-working but they also play some of the slickest football I've seen in the EPL outside Manchester City. 

Currently 5th in the EPL.

Ended 1:1 today against Tottenham but Sheffield United had a perfectly good goal ruled out.

Market value of Tottenham's starting XI: £554.8m

Market value of Sheffield United's starting XI: £44.3m

Hopefully Steve Clarke is taking note. Probably not, though, as he'll stick to making us "hard to beat" with the 4-2-3-1...

[Dave78]

2 hours ago, The_Dark_Knight said:

Another amazing display by Sheffield United and their fluent 3-5-2 system.

Hah! I watched that game today, and you're right, they were impressive. I thought to myself 'TDK will be impressed...i bet he's watching. I wonder if he'll mention it on the tamb' 

[The_Dark_Knight]

32 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

Hah! I watched that game today, and you're right, they were impressive. I thought to myself 'TDK will be impressed...i bet he's watching. I wonder if he'll mention it on the tamb' 

Yes, on all three counts. 

When Manchester United aren't playing I usually watch Sheffield United (they very rarely play on the same day). Their brand of football, with the innovative overlapping center backs, is fantastic to watch. 

Seriously, it's like night and day. Manchester United are like watching Scotland now and watching Sheffield United is like watching Scotland (96-99).

Just shows what you can do if you have a clear plan, drill it into the players, create overloads in every position of the pitch and have natural and perpetual angles and movement. Sheffield United are showing that you don't need world class players to compete against better teams.

As opposed to Steve Clarke and his static, zombie football.

Edited November 10, 2019 by The_Dark_Knight

[vanderark14]

6 hours ago, Dave78 said:

Hah! I watched that game today, and you're right, they were impressive. I thought to myself 'TDK will be impressed...i bet he's watching. I wonder if he'll mention it on the tamb' 

What about the shite display from Arsenal? 

[The_Dark_Knight]

3 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

What about the shite display from Arsenal? 

And another one who doesnt understand the sheer fundamentals of football and simply doesnt get it 

Leicester City have the second best midfield in the EPL. Far better than Arsenal's. Rogers is a better manager than Emery... Arsenal are actively looking for a replacement.

Forming the same uncoached and confused players into a different formation won't bridge the aforementioned gaps. 

Pretty much why we brought Clarke in, he was supposed to organize the team and coach them so that we're hard to beat.

That's a simple one.

Edited November 10, 2019 by The_Dark_Knight