Slovakia v Scotland

[Texas Pete]

20 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

After the last two games I'm not sure Fraser is ahead of Christie. I'm not sure why we have so many strikers in the squad when two of our best options up front are really midfielders.

Agreed but Fraser also played will up front last month. Dykes and Fraser or Dykes and Christie. The one constant is there is no place for McBurnie. He’ll get the odd game with injuries and suspensions but unless something changes dramatically with his form he will never be a first choice option. 

[ceudmilefailte]

15 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

Agreed but Fraser also played will up front last month. Dykes and Fraser or Dykes and Christie. The one constant is there is no place for McBurnie. He’ll get the odd game with injuries and suspensions but unless something changes dramatically with his form he will never be a first choice option. 

I still say he is the first choice replacement for Dykes but probably about the tenth best option to play beside him.

Edited November 16, 2020 by ceudmilefailte

[Caledonian Craig]

47 minutes ago, Bino's said:

It's the same debate when Oli Burke came on the scene

Eventually all realised despite the price tag the performances didn't merit, certainly, starts

And I firmly believe once our other options are tried we will come to the same conclusion but we are where we are.

[ThistleWhistle]

4 hours ago, ceudmilefailte said:

I think it's more a case of Clarke rating the system and like it or not McBurnie and Dykes are the only two players we have that fit into it.

For me this is essentially it - the system looks like a classic 'big one little one' partnership.  Our options for the lump role aren't great:

> Fletcher - doing same role for Stoke and would be absolutely perfect but would send out totally the wrong message if we go cap in hand. 

> Dykes - his to lose but currently not exactly ripping it up at QPR

> McBurnie - got us up the pitch ok yesterday and I can't remember us creating that many chances away from home against semi decent opposition in a long time.  He'll probably be back up. 

> Burke - should be able to play this role with his build and speed but just doesn't seem to have the footballing intelligence for it.  

On the other hand we're comparatively better stocked in the other role whether it be tricky midfield types like Fraser and Christie or, if more attacking, strikers who like facing goal in Shankland, Griffiths and Burke.   

[Texas Pete]

40 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

I still say he is the first choice replacement for Dykes but probably about the tenth best option to play beside him.

I would agree if he would start scoring and holding the ball up effectively.

In fairness to the guy he did win a few headers yesterday and could’ve had a couple of assists if Griffiths had taken his chances but when you compare McBurnie yesterday to Dykes against Serbia you would never guess which one was the £20 million EPL player. 

[Caledonian Craig]

19 minutes ago, ThistleWhistle said:

For me this is essentially it - the system looks like a classic 'big one little one' partnership.  Our options for the lump role aren't great:

> Fletcher - doing same role for Stoke and would be absolutely perfect but would send out totally the wrong message if we go cap in hand. 

> Dykes - his to lose but currently not exactly ripping it up at QPR

> McBurnie - got us up the pitch ok yesterday and I can't remember us creating that many chances away from home against semi decent opposition in a long time.  He'll probably be back up. 

> Burke - should be able to play this role with his build and speed but just doesn't seem to have the footballing intelligence for it.  

On the other hand we're comparatively better stocked in the other role whether it be tricky midfield types like Fraser and Christie or, if more attacking, strikers who like facing goal in Shankland, Griffiths and Burke.   

Spot on.

Clarke has a system that involves exactly as you say - a big striker to hold the ball up or flick on for pacy attacking midfielders to carry the attack in. Dykes is the man for that but when not available that hard facts are McBurnie is seen by Clarke as the next best in that role. It has been an effective system for us in the last few months and I don't see why Clarke would want to change it.