McTominay and our centre-back options

[Taylor1996]

Getting back on topic of the defence:

It's interesting just how many teams in Scotland (and in England) play with a 3 or a 5 now. Just study SofaScore or Whoscored and you'll witness the recent change.

4 out of 6 SPL teams today played a variety of a 3.

Where's the "no one plays 3/5 at-the-back" mob now? Where's the scorn that we dare deviate from the holy back four?

Even Scotland play it now, and long may it continue.

If Scotland played it when a certain poster mooted it, the players and manager would be used it to it by now, and we would be ahead of the curve

I wonder who saw this new wave coming, from a couple years back. Mmhh..

Edited September 27, 2020 by Taylor1996

[Malcolm]

19 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

Getting back on topic of the defence:

It's interesting just how many teams in Scotland (and in England) play with a 3 or a 5 now. Just study SofaScore or Whoscored and you'll witness the recent change.

4 out of 6 SPL teams today played a variety of a 3.

Where's the "no one plays 3/5 at-the-back" mob now? Where's the scorn that we dare deviate from the holy back four?

Even Scotland play it now, and long may it continue.

If Scotland played it when a certain poster mooted it, the players and manager would be used it to it by now, and we would be ahead of the curve

I wonder who saw this new wave coming, from a couple years back. Mmhh..

 

🙂….   maybe you should be in charge of the Scotland team lol.....

You can go on about three at the back until you are blue in the face.  Its not the formation that is the challenge for us, its the players and picking the right ones in the right positions.  Even Craig Brown, the master of 5-3-2 (and lets be honest, with Scotland it will be a back 5) switched to a four on occasion - e.g. against Finland in 1994.  Theres a massive difference between playing 5 with three centre halfs and two fullbacks, to three with one centre half and two full backs and with wingers in wing back positions (eg England Euro 96).

4-3-3 has made a comeback in recent years too!

 

 

 

 

[Taylor1996]

8 hours ago, Malcolm said:

 

🙂….   maybe you should be in charge of the Scotland team lol.....

You can go on about three at the back until you are blue in the face.  Its not the formation that is the challenge for us, its the players and picking the right ones in the right positions.  Even Craig Brown, the master of 5-3-2 (and lets be honest, with Scotland it will be a back 5) switched to a four on occasion - e.g. against Finland in 1994.  Theres a massive difference between playing 5 with three centre halfs and two fullbacks, to three with one centre half and two full backs and with wingers in wing back positions (eg England Euro 96).

4-3-3 has made a comeback in recent years too!

 

 

 

 

Actually, Brown played with a four several times. 2 of the three matches at Euro 96 was with a back four. All three matches at France 98 we played with a three.

People here say that our players are more suited with a back four. Where is the evidence?

We've played 4-2-3-1 for God knows how long:

We don't have the center backs to be able play at international level in a two.

We don't have the defensive-minded midfielders to play with a double-pivot.

We don't have the number 10 capable of occupying the space between the striker.

We don't have wingers that can cross or dribble.

We don't have the striker capable of playing a lone-role. (We do now, in Dykes)

A lot of people here should stop talking and start learning. The sarcasm and derision from certain individuals is a deflection, as their footballing knowledge matches their general intellect.

I'm doing people a massive favour, merely by posting.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Taylor1996

[mccaughey85]

19 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

Actually, Brown played with a four several times. 2 of the three matches at Euro 96 was with a back four. All three matches at France 98 we played with a three.

People here say that our players are more suited with a back four. Where is the evidence?

We've played 4-2-3-1 for God knows how long:

We don't have the center backs to be able play at international level in a two.

We don't have the defensive-minded midfielders to play with a double-pivot.

We don't have the number 10 capable of occupying the space between the striker.

We don't have wingers that can cross or dribble.

We don't have the striker capable of playing a lone-role. (We do now, in Dykes)

A lot of people here should stop talking and start learning. The sarcasm and derision from certain individuals is a deflection, as their footballing knowledge matches their general intellect.

I'm doing people a massive favour, merely by posting.

Lol your not a bad guy really, every board needs someone like you. I just hope you stick around this time instead of starting up a new account.

[RabtheBruce]

27 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

A lot of people here should stop talking and start learning. The sarcasm and derision from certain individuals is a deflection, as their footballing knowledge matches their general intellect.

I'm doing people a massive favour, merely by posting.

I think you may need tae lay off the marching powder there, fella.

[Taylor1996]

lol Exactly what I'm talking about.

The phrase "Casting pearls before swine", comes to mind.

It's funny. Reading places like Rawk, Redcafe and other football forums, there's always stimulating conversations brewing. Here? You get sarcastic comments about Ron Burgendy and drugs.

[Malcolm]

1 hour ago, Taylor1996 said:

lol Exactly what I'm talking about.

The phrase "Casting pearls before swine", comes to mind.

It's funny. Reading places like Rawk, Redcafe and other football forums, there's always stimulating conversations brewing. Here? You get sarcastic comments about Ron Burgendy and drugs.

totally up for people expressing their views 👍😀

[Taylor1996]

4 hours ago, Malcolm said:

totally up for people expressing their views 👍😀

About football. This is a football forum, isn't it?

Three replies to my previous replies, zero of them about football.

The most recent replied that I've received have been about Ron Burgendy, drugs, about me not being a bad guy and multiple people pointing out my typos.

This is the forum version of Arkham Asylum.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Taylor1996

[Kirk]

 

16 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

Actually, Brown played with a four several times. 2 of the three matches at Euro 96 was with a back four. All three matches at France 98 we played with a three.

People here say that our players are more suited with a back four. Where is the evidence?

We've played 4-2-3-1 for God knows how long:

We don't have the center backs to be able play at international level in a two.

We don't have the defensive-minded midfielders to play with a double-pivot.

We don't have the number 10 capable of occupying the space between the striker.

We don't have wingers that can cross or dribble.

We don't have the striker capable of playing a lone-role. (We do now, in Dykes)

A lot of people here should stop talking and start learning. The sarcasm and derision from certain individuals is a deflection, as their footballing knowledge matches their general intellect.

I'm doing people a massive favour, merely by posting.

We would be better with a back 4 no doubt, wasting a body playing 3 at the back when we don't even have 2 decent centre halfs. 

Never heard of a double pivot, sounds like an Americanism, maybe basketball?

We have a few who could play as a "10" but we could also play 2 forwards if we werent wasting a spot on a 3rd centre half.

You are doing nobody a favour

 

[Taylor1996]

48 minutes ago, Kirk said:

 

We would be better with a back 4 no doubt, wasting a body playing 3 at the back when we don't even have 2 decent centre halfs. 

Never heard of a double pivot, sounds like an Americanism, maybe basketball?

We have a few who could play as a "10" but we could also play 2 forwards if we werent wasting a spot on a 3rd centre half.

You are doing nobody a favour

 

Ok. Where's the evidence? Where's the evidence of us qualifying for anything with a four?

You've never heard of a double pivot?

I mentioned it first on Saturday morning:

 

Darren Fletcher says "Double Pivot" several times on Sunday night on MOTD2:

Watch this from 14.55

https://www.fullmatchesandshows.com/2020/09/27/bbc-match-of-the-day-2-27th-september-week-3/

He's got all his football coaching badges. He's played at the top level throughout his career. He's not American.

As I said, people should stop talking and start learning.

Maybe we do, but because the double pivot is always awol, he'd have to come back into midfield, this, leaving the striker stranded and with a pool of distance between him and the midfield.

[Third Lanark]

Now that Porteous has been called up maybe he could take McTom's place on the right of a back three, leaving the latter to move into his more natural midfield holding role. Just a thought...

Edited September 29, 2020 by Third Lanark

[Malcolm]

I don't think we will see McTominay playing in the back three again.... suspect it may be a 4 at the back, with Tierney at LCH or RB.

[Taylor1996]

6 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Now that Porteous has been called up maybe he could take McTom's place on the right of a back three, leaving the latter to move into his more natural midfield holding role. Just a thought...

Definitely.

It's actually the perfect storm. A lot of people call Porteous rash, etc, but that's exactly why there is 3 at the back system. It's exactly the reason why Arsenal play that system, to facilitate David Luiz.

[Malcolm]

4 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

Definitely.

It's actually the perfect storm. A lot of people call Porteous rash, etc, but that's exactly why there is 3 at the back system. It's exactly the reason why Arsenal play that system, to facilitate David Luiz.

who would you play as your back three and wing backs?

[Kirk]

1 hour ago, Taylor1996 said:

Ok. Where's the evidence? Where's the evidence of us qualifying for anything with a four?

You've never heard of a double pivot?

I mentioned it first on Saturday morning:

 

Darren Fletcher says "Double Pivot" several times on Sunday night on MOTD2:

Watch this from 14.55

https://www.fullmatchesandshows.com/2020/09/27/bbc-match-of-the-day-2-27th-september-week-3/

He's got all his football coaching badges. He's played at the top level throughout his career. He's not American.

As I said, people should stop talking and start learning.

Maybe we do, but because the double pivot is always awol, he'd have to come back into midfield, this, leaving the striker stranded and with a pool of distance between him and the midfield.

Doesnt matter what we have done before, matters now and we are shite with a back 3 as has been seen so many times.

 

Never heard of it until that, a quick look would suggest instead of using daft basketball terms we will call them defensive midfielders

[Malcolm]

50 minutes ago, Kirk said:

Doesnt matter what we have done before, matters now and we are shite with a back 3 as has been seen so many times.

 

Never heard of it until that, a quick look would suggest instead of using daft basketball terms we will call them defensive midfielders

or how about half backs?  That’s the original British term for these positions.  Scotland played with two half backs in the 60s...  Jim Baxter was often the left half back, often shortened to left half.  In these days we played a WM formation...

 

2        5         3

      4        6

      8        10

7           9        11

 

your midfield was half backs 4,6 and inside forwards 8,10. Kind of similar to the box midfield we used against Israel just there.

as we moved in to the late 60s, one of the half backs moved in to partner the centre half and the inside forwards played either side of the other half back in a midfield 3.  With one of the wingers withdrawn to sometimes become a 4 in midfield.

 

 

 

[Clyde1998]

On 9/14/2020 at 3:20 PM, er yir macaroon said:

Liam Morrison is 17. I reckon he might make our team in about 18 months. What a talent he is. Normally you’d be worried about a centre half being bullied at that age, but not in this case. 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.sundaypost.com/fp/008ei2308sub_6/amp/

I wonder if he'll be called up to the U21s to replace Porteous, now he's been called up to the first team for next month. Having a look at him to see if he's ready for U21 level can't be a bad thing.

[Taylor1996]

4 hours ago, Malcolm said:

who would you play as your back three and wing backs?

Good question. The inclusion of Porteous gives Clarke a few more options. 

Cooper has a couple of good matches for Leeds. McKenna has had a good start with Aberdeen and Forest and Porteous has got promise. Tierney is solid at center back. 

I'd probably go with Cooper, McKenna and Tierney with Taylor as the left wing back. No idea who would play on the right. Maybe Callum Patterson.

I watched the match against the Czechs again. The defence wasn't actually the problem. They didn't do as badly as I thought on first viewing, the issue was that they got no protection from the midfield.

[Taylor1996]

3 hours ago, Kirk said:

Doesnt matter what we have done before, matters now and we are shite with a back 3 as has been seen so many times.

 

Never heard of it until that, a quick look would suggest instead of using daft basketball terms we will call them defensive midfielders

Over the past 20 years how many times have we used 3 and how many times have we used 4? It's incomparable.

In a perfect world I would play with a four. No question.

It's not a new thing, though. A google search found it mentioned in 2013 in an English site. With most football positional names, I think it's derived from an Italian phrase.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.vavel.com/en/football/2013/12/07/308802.amp.html

[er yir macaroon]

It was pretty clear from Clarke’s interview that Porteous is only in for the first game to see him in training because he’s suspended for the u21s. The last couple of times I've seen him he’s been quite poor (ability and decision making), although I get why he is of interest. 

[Kirk]

15 hours ago, Malcolm said:

or how about half backs?  That’s the original British term for these positions.  Scotland played with two half backs in the 60s...  Jim Baxter was often the left half back, often shortened to left half.  In these days we played a WM formation...

 

2        5         3

      4        6

      8        10

7           9        11

 

your midfield was half backs 4,6 and inside forwards 8,10. Kind of similar to the box midfield we used against Israel just there.

as we moved in to the late 60s, one of the half backs moved in to partner the centre half and the inside forwards played either side of the other half back in a midfield 3.  With one of the wingers withdrawn to sometimes become a 4 in midfield.

 

 

 

That's quite interesting, I always asumed back in the day it was a 4-4-2 haha, with a few other variations. Looks strainge seeing a team set like that

12 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

Over the past 20 years how many times have we used 3 and how many times have we used 4? It's incomparable.

In a perfect world I would play with a four. No question.

It's not a new thing, though. A google search found it mentioned in 2013 in an English site. With most football positional names, I think it's derived from an Italian phrase.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.vavel.com/en/football/2013/12/07/308802.amp.html

Doesn't matter how many times we have done it, the recent evidence proves we are shite with a 3.

Aye i saw it mentioned on a few google pages but never heard anyone actually talking about it apart from that clip you sent. Just seems like changing positional names for the sake of it. I'll stick with defensive mid, or the Makelele

[Taylor1996]

4 hours ago, Kirk said:

Doesn't matter how many times we have done it, the recent evidence proves we are shite with a 3.

Aye i saw it mentioned on a few google pages but never heard anyone actually talking about it apart from that clip you sent. Just seems like changing positional names for the sake of it. I'll stick with defensive mid, or the Makelele

If we were so good with the four, our previous three managers would not been forced to try a three. And reading a recent interview with Steve Clarke, the players enjoy it.

Growing up, Dunga, for Brazil, was the one who made it fashionable. But I'm sure there are players who pre-dated him. But yes, Makelele was absolutely amazing in the role. 

The whole defensive debate is nuanced. I rewatched the Czech match. The midfield gave the defence zero protection. No team in the world would be able to win matches if the midfield gave no protection.

Edited September 30, 2020 by Taylor1996

[Taylor1996]

Man United fans discussing McTominay's potential at center back.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/mctominay-at-cb.458086/

People actually talking about football in a footballing forum! Wow! I hope it catches on.

Wish this was a football forum, as opposed to a playground. Oh well. I'm more that up for the task of propping this place up.

 

[ceudmilefailte]

2 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

Man United fans discussing McTominay's potential at center back.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/mctominay-at-cb.458086/

People actually talking about football in a footballing forum! Wow! I hope it catches on.

Wish this was a football forum, as opposed to a playground. Oh well. I'm more that up for the task of propping this place up.

 

Interesting piece with Man U leaking goals it could well happen and would be massive for us. 

Did you really need the bolkocks after the link though. 

[Taylor1996]

8 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Interesting piece with Man U leaking goals it could well happen and would be massive for us. 

Did you really need the bolkocks after the link though. 

There's parallels between Scotland and Manchester United. United don't have good center backs (for the obscene money they have spent) so, I think OGS will probably shore it up by going back to the three.

Yes. A football debate without abuse and toxicity - That's what it looks like.