Tierney and New Dilemmas - Page 2 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Tierney and New Dilemmas


Third Lanark

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, McTeeko said:

Agree with everything Barney has said about Tierney as a RB/RWB. 

 

Never heard of anyone playing an inverted wing-back. Give me some examples please. 
Plenty teams playing inverted wingers sure, but that’s a totally different thing. 

 

Three left footed centre-backs would be uncomfortable due to the fact that left-sided players are generally pish with their right foot. 

You’ve never heard of anyone play a Right-footed player at LWB? Or vice versa? Countless examples, some positive, some not. Wolves as an example of a positive one. Jonny was a very successful LWB prior to his injury. Since he’s been out, and Wolves have played a naturally left-footed player there they’ve really missed him.

I’d say it’s worth a try. Tierney is arguably our best player. Would be more of a gamble if our natural right-footed player got up and down the line and was known to take defenders on on the outside and whip in magic deliveries. Can’t believe one of the arguments above is we’d lose that! I’m not a HUGE fan of inverted wing backs, but I think the argument is definitely a valid one that we should try Tierney there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, duncan II said:

You’ve never heard of anyone play a Right-footed player at LWB? Or vice versa? Countless examples, some positive, some not. Wolves as an example of a positive one. Jonny was a very successful LWB prior to his injury. Since he’s been out, and Wolves have played a naturally left-footed player there they’ve really missed him.

I’d say it’s worth a try. Tierney is arguably our best player. Would be more of a gamble if our natural right-footed player got up and down the line and was known to take defenders on on the outside and whip in magic deliveries. Can’t believe one of the arguments above is we’d lose that! I’m not a HUGE fan of inverted wing backs, but I think the argument is definitely a valid one that we should try Tierney there.

I’ve never heard of inverted wing-backs, no. 
Tierney can’t play right back. He’s said it himself in one of the Sky pre-match interviews last year how he “doesn’t have a right foot”.

We HAVE tried Tierney at right back and he was pish. Never more highlighted than the Slovakia game at home 3/4 years ago where all game he crossed the halfway line and turned inside, and played a nothing ball into midfield to the nearest player. He was pulled off midway through the second half, replaced with Anya and suddenly we found ourselves playing 20 yards further up the pitch with natural width, and Anya going on to assist the winner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, McTeeko said:

I’ve never heard of inverted wing-backs, no. 
Tierney can’t play right back. He’s said it himself in one of the Sky pre-match interviews last year how he “doesn’t have a right foot”.

We HAVE tried Tierney at right back and he was pish. Never more highlighted than the Slovakia game at home 3/4 years ago where all game he crossed the halfway line and turned inside, and played a nothing ball into midfield to the nearest player. He was pulled off midway through the second half, replaced with Anya and suddenly we found ourselves playing 20 yards further up the pitch with natural width, and Anya going on to assist the winner. 

I don’t think he was pish. Not as effective, yeah. If he doesn’t have a right foot, I wonder just what that appendage was that swung from just eastward of his left leg the other night.

Yes, I get the tendency is to cut inside 9 times out of 10. But as I said, we don’t have flying right-footed alternatives that take a man on on the outside anyway. So what are we actually losing in an attacking sense? In the system we play, I think it’s work. I’m not suggesting we play him as an orthodox right back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, McTeeko said:

I’ve never heard of inverted wing-backs, no. 
Tierney can’t play right back. He’s said it himself in one of the Sky pre-match interviews last year how he “doesn’t have a right foot”.

We HAVE tried Tierney at right back and he was pish. Never more highlighted than the Slovakia game at home 3/4 years ago where all game he crossed the halfway line and turned inside, and played a nothing ball into midfield to the nearest player. He was pulled off midway through the second half, replaced with Anya and suddenly we found ourselves playing 20 yards further up the pitch with natural width, and Anya going on to assist the winner. 

And I just don’t believe that you’ve watched football for, what, 20 years or so and never seen a successful wing back play on the “wrong” side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, duncan II said:

And I just don’t believe that you’ve watched football for, what, 20 years or so and never seen a successful wing back play on the “wrong” side. 

Not by design, no. Obviously there has been the odd exception, but the way it was worded above was that ‘inverted wing-backs’ are played by design, one on either side in the same team, at the same time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, McTeeko said:

Not by design, no. Obviously there has been the odd exception, but the way it was worded above was that ‘inverted wing-backs’ are played by design, one on either side in the same team, at the same time. 

Fair dos. I didn't pick up on that. It's not a term I would've used myself. Just been doing so in this thread as others have used it and didn't want to seem ignorant or feel left out. Ever since I was made to play at left back at the end of my amateur career (an attacking right-sided midfielder with NO left peg whatsoever) I've not really been a fan and just refer to it as doing a job on the wrong side. Didn't realise we now called it "inverted". Anyway, I don't feel that strongly about it, just don't think it should be dismissed out of hand as Tierney has an attacking threat and is, arguably, more of a threat than Robertson. I like him at LCB but feel we're missing a trick by not utilising his attacking prowess.

👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A point being over-looked is that Robertson and Tierney  have a license to attack for Liverpool and Arsenal and the encouragement knowing their crosses will invariably be met by truly great strikers worth many millions of pounds. With Scotland that just is not the case sadly. Our recent revival has been built on the firm base of a much more stable defence which means Robertson and Tierney being used far more in a defensive manner than for their clubs. That is the reason they ply far more subdued but having a strike force that is very weak is not going to encourage Robertson or Tierney to ping crosses into the box when (as sure as eggs are eggs) we'll have probably only one player in the box at that time and it will be Dykes or McBurnie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2021 at 11:11 AM, Caledonian Craig said:

A point being over-looked is that Robertson and Tierney  have a license to attack for Liverpool and Arsenal and the encouragement knowing their crosses will invariably be met by truly great strikers worth many millions of pounds. With Scotland that just is not the case sadly. Our recent revival has been built on the firm base of a much more stable defence which means Robertson and Tierney being used far more in a defensive manner than for their clubs. That is the reason they ply far more subdued but having a strike force that is very weak is not going to encourage Robertson or Tierney to ping crosses into the box when (as sure as eggs are eggs) we'll have probably only one player in the box at that time and it will be Dykes or McBurnie.

Does the ball they cross have a name on it like Lacazette or Firmino? Pretty sure if we get midfielders into position the ball won't care who blooters it into the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Third Lanark said:

Does the ball they cross have a name on it like Lacazette or Firmino? Pretty sure if we get midfielders into position the ball won't care who blooters it into the net.

Watch us play. We do not do lightening counter-attacks. We also tend to play deeper than Arsenal or Liverpool and their midfielders do get into the box quicker than ours plus the pace of Tierney/Robbo tends to be far pacier than our midfielders. Our breaks down the flank tend to come after slow build up at the back and into midfielder so ots a totally different ball game as the defence are well set by this time and not on the back foot like defences are agaimst Arsenal and Liverpool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Never realised tierney was from the isle of man and could have played for any of the home nations

It was pointed out quite a lot when he was emerging at Celtic and eventually made his Scotland debut.

Both his forename and surname are from the Manx language.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep the same system.
However we cant leave Tierney out.

I actually think he is possibly a better player than Robertson? 
There is a good case to play Tierney as the attacking full-back and let Robertson sit.
Going forward against Slovakia he was brilliant.  Robertson however seems lost without Mane / Salah to hook up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2021 at 5:22 PM, Haggis_trap said:

Keep the same system.
However we cant leave Tierney out.

I actually think he is possibly a better player than Robertson? 
There is a good case to play Tierney as the attacking full-back and let Robertson sit.
Going forward against Slovakia he was brilliant.  Robertson however seems lost without Mane / Salah to hook up with.

If we play with three centre backs we don’t need a sitting midfielder. If we play with two, one option would be Tierney or Robertson as the holding midfielder. I could see Tierney doing it well but I’m not sure if it’s such a good idea. We may be stuck with the status quo.

Edited by er yir macaroon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, er yir macaroon said:

If we play with three centre backs we don’t need a sitting midfielder. If we play with two, one option would be Tierney or Robertson as the holding midfielder. I could see Tierney doing it well but I’m not sure if it’s such a good idea. We may be stuck with the status quo.

That's our current system at the moment, though. A back three and a double-pivot of Jack and McGregor. Pretty much allowing the wingbacks, attacking midfielder and two strikers to attack:

3-2-1-2

It's an interesting variant on 3-5-2. One, I suspect, Steve Clarke took from Atalanta.

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...