Czech game - Page 6 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Czech game


kumnio

Recommended Posts

Just now, thelonehutch said:

A lot of panty wetting on this thread, so defeatist. Cmon we've got a bit of luck for once. We face a much weakened team, so let's go in with confidence and get the three points.

We'll murder them! Cmon Scotland 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

It has been quite negative on here, a confidence boosting win against a weakened Czech team then a win against Israel will soon cheer the troops up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

They will be pretty confident of doing better than a 3 0 defeat

 

Absolutely. If we win 0-1 then that will be better for Slovakia and Israel in terms of goal difference. If we draw or lose then those teams probably won’t care that the Czechs fielded a weakened team against us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taylor1996 said:

We'll go back to 4-2-3-1. We'll then beat a weakened Czech Republic team 0-1, by aid of a penalty of an OG.

People will then say that that's our best system and that we have a strong midfield.

No we won't.   There is no point experimenting in this game either though, as it would be difficult to gauge .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Grim Jim said:

No we won't.   There is no point experimenting in this game either though, as it would be difficult to gauge .

So, just stick to a failing formula?

Last week, before the Israel match, people were saying that we have a strong midfield. They'll say the same after the next match, irrespective of the result. And there's people wanting to switch back to. 4-2-3-1 even now.

I'm not sure if it's stubbornness or stupidity. It's like a person trying to open a tin with a spoon. They try and fail. Try and fail. Instead of switching to the tin opener, they stick with the spoon.

It makes no sense.

Edited by Taylor1996
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

So, just stick to a failing formula?

Last week, before the Israel match, people were saying that we have a strong midfield. They'll say the same after the next match, irrespective of the result. And there's people wanting to switch back to. 4-2-3-1 even now.

I'm not sure if it's stubbornness or stupidity. It's like a person trying to open a tin with a spoon. They try and fail. Try and fail. Instead of switching to the tin opener, they stick with the spoon.

It makes no sense.

The formation didn't look very good on Friday. Players didn't look very comfortable with it. Not that I am suggesting 451 would of been alot better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Chripper try’s to make out everyone else is fixated on 4 at the back when most fans don’t care what formation we play as long as we win. 

Wrong.

If that's the case then why do 90% of people here want to go back to four?

In an ideal world, we'd play four at the back, as we have two brilliant center backs. We'd have a strong midfield, creative attacking players and strikers of supreme talent.

It's not an ideal world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldnt dump the 352 just yet, but I wouldnt have McTominay as part of a three man defence.  Tierney or Robertson on the left, Cooper and Galagher.  3-1-4-2, with Tierney holding and my two wingers must track back when we are under pressure- not a role for Forrest and quite possibly no-one we have available so maybe Tierney plays left sided central with Robertson on the left, this is not easy to be arm chair manager - we need more right footed defenders who are better than what we have - we don't so we might have to say for now- we work to score more than the opposition knowing we will leak goals but we don't have an attack to play that way either.  What formation plays as many of better players in their natural positions - probably the 4-2-3-1.  Just a late night rant, even with Gilmour - we are still weak in defence and have poor creativity in attack. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Texas Pete said:

I think he meant it wasn’t as good as a B squad.......

Gotcha. So, it must be a C or a D team?

If we don't win there's going to a storm.

16 minutes ago, romanticscot said:

I wouldnt dump the 352 just yet, but I wouldnt have McTominay as part of a three man defence.  Tierney or Robertson on the left, Cooper and Galagher.  3-1-4-2, with Tierney holding and my two wingers must track back when we are under pressure- not a role for Forrest and quite possibly no-one we have available so maybe Tierney plays left sided central with Robertson on the left, this is not easy to be arm chair manager - we need more right footed defenders who are better than what we have - we don't so we might have to say for now- we work to score more than the opposition knowing we will leak goals but we don't have an attack to play that way either.  What formation plays as many of better players in their natural positions - probably the 4-2-3-1.  Just a late night rant, even with Gilmour - we are still weak in defence and have poor creativity in attack. 

The Manchester United fans we're pretty much unanimous when they saw that McTominay was in defence. "Madness" pretty much summed it up.

He's not a defender. He's not even an anchornan. He's a prototypical box-to-box midfield. He's not a great passer, he's improving. And unlike McGregor and Jack, he can pass forward. He's great at carrying the ball forward and dribbling. He's deceptively fast.

I agree about the coin-flip between Tierney and Robertson about center back/anchorman roles.

I hope Steve Clarke sticks to his guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GK  Marshall

 

RB: Draw it out a raffle

CB: McKenna

CB: Cooper

LB Tierney

 

CM McGinn

CM: McTominay

CM: Fleck (he was a standout for Sheff Utd against quality sides whereas MacGregor looks good taking the ball off the back 4 in acres of space against pishy teams)

 

LW: Robertson

CF: Dykes

RW Someone who can cover for the fact RB is pish by running back and forth loads (Jack?)

 

Our left side could be enviably strong and imagine having them two swapping about overlapping, underlapping, etc would give a number of teams plenty problems – it could also counter against teams switching easily to get at our pishy right hand side.  Right hand side just admit it is a problem and close it off as much as possible with two players with biggest engines.  Against weaker sides play Fraser if he can be arsed turn up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think at least two from McGinn, McGregor and McGinn will be dropped tonight in favor of moving McTomaniey back into midfield (with Palmer taking up right back duties again) and letting Armstrong get into the team.

Also would not be shocked if Burke sneak into the team and plays almost as a second striker beside Dykes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Not much to gain for Clarke tonight. 

Win narrowly and everyone says it was a extremely weak Czech side(which it undoubtedly is). 

Lose or draw and and he will be hounded for it. 

Anything other than a comprehensive win by 2 or 3 goals will be acceptable to alot of fans and media. 

I think its just the whole uncertainty of what to expect tonight from the Czech's more than Scotland (we have been here so many times in the past..... 17 year old Georgian goalkeepers making their debut for starters).

I think Friday night should be viewed that we were trying to give nothing away to Israel ahead of the much bigger and important game next month.

While this will be a shadow of the Czech's normal side, I think we should treat it that its going to be a game of similar fashion to what we would expect from the likes of Lithuania, Belarus or Macedonia.

I think Clarke will probably take the soft approach, and we will probably take us a while to get into the game.

Early goal and that will settle the nerves, but longer game goes I think the media will have their headlines all set to go to print at full time.....

End of the day, if we come out of these two games with 4 points, that is probably 1 point more than what most people expected us to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, wanderer said:

I think its just the whole uncertainty of what to expect tonight from the Czech's more than Scotland (we have been here so many times in the past..... 17 year old Georgian goalkeepers making their debut for starters).

I think Friday night should be viewed that we were trying to give nothing away to Israel ahead of the much bigger and important game next month.

While this will be a shadow of the Czech's normal side, I think we should treat it that its going to be a game of similar fashion to what we would expect from the likes of Lithuania, Belarus or Macedonia.

I think Clarke will probably take the soft approach, and we will probably take us a while to get into the game.

Early goal and that will settle the nerves, but longer game goes I think the media will have their headlines all set to go to print at full time.....

End of the day, if we come out of these two games with 4 points, that is probably 1 point more than what most people expected us to have.

Its a chance for us to get 3pts and a confidence boosting win. So it's not all bad. We can then go into the play off game with a win under our belt albeit against poor opposition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...