Ryan Gauld

[ceudmilefailte]

Been wondering if the fact he didn't get a fit for duty note for the previous games was leaked might have something to do with it if he doesn't get selected.

[Taylor1996]

Anyone who has the attitude "I won't lose any sleep if Gauld isn't named in the squad", etc, obviously haven't seen him.

Gauld and Dykes with McGinn just behind would be a dynamic combination.

[scotlad]

Word on the street - well, Twitter - is that he won't make the squad. 

I'd have thought though, given his recent form and the fact Oli Burke won't make it, that he still has a good chance of making it.

[Taylor1996]

6 minutes ago, scotlad said:

Word on the street - well, Twitter - is that he won't make the squad. 

Unbelievable. 

There's literally nothing more Ryan Gauld could've done this season. His numbers, going by his team, are phenomenal. 

[weekevie04]

Absolute madness from Clarke if true. The camp is in Portugal too, and the 26 man squad doesn't need to be finalised until June. Ukraine and Turkey currently have 35 men provisional squads. 

Can't believe that he won't even take a look at him during these next few weeks. 

If someone like Matt Phillips in his place, I'll be hugely disappointed.

[Texas Pete]

7 minutes ago, weekevie04 said:

Absolute madness from Clarke if true. The camp is in Portugal too, and the 26 man squad doesn't need to be finalised until June. Ukraine and Turkey currently have 35 men provisional squads. 

Can't believe that he won't even take a look at him during these next few weeks. 

If someone like Matt Phillips in his place, I'll be hugely disappointed.

If Clarke does pick Gauld it will probably have been quite a recent decision based on the squad increase and injuries so that’s possibly why Gauld hasn’t been contacted (if that is even true).

I doubt Gauld would have made Clarke’s original 23 man squad that he said he had pretty much decided on recently. 

[Taylor1996]

7 minutes ago, weekevie04 said:

Absolute madness from Clarke if true. The camp is in Portugal too, and the 26 man squad doesn't need to be finalised until June. Ukraine and Turkey currently have 35 men provisional squads. 

Can't believe that he won't even take a look at him during these next few weeks. 

If someone like Matt Phillips in his place, I'll be hugely disappointed.

It'll be incredible. 

His competition is McGinn, Fraser, Christie, McGregor. Gauld is better than all of them.

His numbers, in a league that's far superior to the SPL, and for a team who will be relegated, underlines this.

As I said a few days ago, the very fact that Clarke has never watched Gauld in action this season is dereliction of duty.

I mean, WHO is he watching? What is he doing? I've seen Gauld more than a dozen times this season. I'm doing his job.

[Texas Pete]

58 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

Anyone who has the attitude "I won't lose any sleep if Gauld isn't named in the squad", etc, obviously haven't seen him.

Gauld and Dykes with McGinn just behind would be a dynamic combination.

If Gauld is named tomorrow and eventually makes the final 26 man squad I doubt he’ll be in the starting 11 in any of our group games unless he seriously impresses Clarke in training and/or our warm up games (which is possible obviously). Could be a decent impact player though in the last quarter of matches.

It will be interesting to hear Clarke’s reasons for not picking him if he doesn’t name him though. Especially if he names a squad of 30+ tomorrow. 

He definitely deserves a place in the squad. 

[Taylor1996]

12 minutes ago, Texas Pete said:

It will be interesting to hear Clarke’s reasons for not picking him if he doesn’t name him though. Especially if he names a squad of 30+ tomorrow. 

He already gave the reason.

He's admitted that he's not seen Gauld in action this season. Which is incredible. 

 

[Taylor1996]

The Jadon Sancho stat that shows Ryan Gauld is shining in Portugal as Scot makes Euro 2020 dream admission

 

[Texas Pete]

4 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

He already gave the reason.

He's admitted that he's not seen Gauld in action this season. Which is incredible. 

 

Wasn’t that a good few weeks ago?

[Taylor1996]

Just now, Texas Pete said:

Wasn’t that a good few weeks ago?

Yes.

But if he didn't watch him for 2/3 of the season, I doubt very much that he would've watched the last third.

Why he couldn't be bothered to watch him? I have no idea.

[Texas Pete]

14 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

Yes.

But if he didn't watch him for 2/3 of the season, I doubt very much that he would've watched the last third.

Why he couldn't be bothered to watch him? I have no idea.

You’d think he would make the effort after being questioned about him last time. It’s not like he’d have had to fly to Portugal. 

[vanderark14]

6 hours ago, Texas Pete said:

You’d think he would make the effort after being questioned about him last time. It’s not like he’d have had to fly to Portugal. 

Maybe he has, I'm going to reserve any judgement until today at noon and even then I'm not going to wet the bed if one player isn't picked

7 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

Yes.

But if he didn't watch him for 2/3 of the season, I doubt very much that he would've watched the last third.

Why he couldn't be bothered to watch him? I have no idea.

Jumping to the conclusion Clarke can't be bothered is over the top. Clarke will have his reasons for picking or not picking gauld, if its the latter I doubt its because he couldn't be bothered. 

[Caledonian Craig]

7 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

He already gave the reason.

He's admitted that he's not seen Gauld in action this season. Which is incredible. 

 

For once on the selection front I will defend Clarke here. There is a pandemic on and that has definitely impacted on non-essential travel most definitely (I'd say) preventing him to go on soirees like this. No doubt he's viewed videos/live streams of Farense matches though. Sadly, I'd put down his exclusion more to Clarke's way too overly cautious approach to squad selections and unambitious choices sticking with journeymen in favour of a more dynamic option.

Edited May 19, 2021 by Caledonian Craig

[vanderark14]

33 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

For once on the selection front I will defend Clarke here. There is a pandemic on and that has definitely impacted on non-essential travel most definitely (I'd say) preventing him to go on soirees like this. No doubt he's viewed videos/live streams of Farense matches though. Sadly, I'd put down his exclusion more to Clarke's way too overly cautious approach to squad selections and unambitious choices sticking with journeymen in favour of a more dynamic option.

I don't understand this, which journeymen are you referring to?

Reports today say he's picking Gilmour and Turnbull. I don't think we have many journeymen in our squad.

 

[adamntg]

3 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

I don't understand this, which journeymen are you referring to?

Reports today say he's picking Gilmour and Turnbull. I don't think we have many journeymen in our squad.

 

I thought “journeyman” was harsh.  Journeymen play for Hamilton Accies, Morton and Ayr Utd. Anyone that’s anywhere near the current Scotland squad is an elite player by virtually any measure. 

[Caledonian Craig]

1 minute ago, vanderark14 said:

I don't understand this, which journeymen are you referring to?

Reports today say he's picking Gilmour and Turnbull. I don't think we have many journeymen in our squad.

 

I'd include Nathan Patterson (over journeyman Liam Palmer), Billy Gilmour (over journeyman John Fleck), Turnbull and Gauld. There are players in our squad who Clarke who will select not destined for greatness or any notable career achievements. We have a fair few in our squad such as McKenna, O'Donnell, Palmer, Fleck and Taylor for example and some of those will understandably be in the squad but others there are better options available and options that are better for us now and will aid us in the future too. No brainer really. Will we be getting eliminated in the first round because we failed to select Palmer and Fleck? Definitely not.

[Caledonian Craig]

4 minutes ago, adamntg said:

I thought “journeyman” was harsh.  Journeymen play for Hamilton Accies, Morton and Ayr Utd. Anyone that’s anywhere near the current Scotland squad is an elite player by virtually any measure. 

I am talking about international level now not club level. Those that I'd leave out are players that are not going to see us through to the later stages and who are not destined to win any amount of caps or become even first team regulars for Scotland. Do you disagree?

[vanderark14]

1 minute ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I'd include Nathan Patterson (over journeyman Liam Palmer), Billy Gilmour (over journeyman John Fleck), Turnbull and Gauld. There are players in our squad who Clarke who will select not destined for greatness or any notable career achievements. We have a fair few in our squad such as McKenna, O'Donnell, Palmer, Fleck and Taylor for example and some of those will understandably be in the squad but others there are better options available and options that are better for us now and will aid us in the future too. No brainer really. Will we be getting eliminated in the first round because we failed to select Palmer and Fleck? Definitely not.

Reports this morning gilmour and turnbull are included.

Odonnell and palmer are picked through lack of options. Patterson doesn't seem to have his head screwed on but despite that I'd pick him over palmer and odonnell but until now there have been no other RB options because Patterson was nothing more than back up to Tavernier 

Fleck is a back up, nothing more and I doubt he will get picked

You're being very harsh on mckenna but again he was picked because we were struggling for any decent CBs, now we have hendry and Cooper playing at higher levels and Clarke is picking them

So I still don't understand where you're coming from here 

[adamntg]

7 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I am talking about international level now not club level. Those that I'd leave out are players that are not going to see us through to the later stages and who are not destined to win any amount of caps or become even first team regulars for Scotland. Do you disagree?

No, I don’t think I said I did. 

[Caledonian Craig]

Just now, vanderark14 said:

Reports this morning gilmour and turnbull are included.

Odonnell and palmer are picked through lack of options. Patterson doesn't seem to have his head screwed on but despite that I'd pick him over palmer and odonnell but until now there have been no other RB options because Patterson was nothing more than back up to Tavernier 

Fleck is a back up, nothing more and I doubt he will get picked

You're being very harsh on mckenna but again he was picked because we were struggling for any decent CBs, now we have hendry and Cooper playing at higher levels and Clarke is picking them

So I still don't understand where you're coming from here 

O'Donnell will start our matches as he is the best we have in that position. I have no qualms about his inclusion as he is the best available but it does not change how he will be perceived when he retires. I'd have Patterson in as back up. He's already proven he's not out of place even in European football which is a step above domestic football and has pace which is always handy.

Yes Fleck is back-up and as you say he will and should miss out when we have options like Gilmour and Turnbull waiting in the wings.

Don't get me wrong I have no issue with McKenna being in the squad as there aren't better options out there. But again when he retires from football I don't think it will have seen him win much of the way of trophies or playing at the biggest of clubs hence the journeyman tag. 

[Caledonian Craig]

6 minutes ago, adamntg said:

No, I don’t think I said I did. 

And I didn't say you did either.

Today we have the option of Patterson, Turnbull and Gilmour or Palmer and Fleck - which would you take?

[vanderark14]

Just now, Caledonian Craig said:

O'Donnell will start our matches as he is the best we have in that position. I have no qualms about his inclusion as he is the best available but it does not change how he will be perceived when he retires. I'd have Patterson in as back up. He's already proven he's not out of place even in European football which is a step above domestic football and has pace which is always handy.

Yes Fleck is back-up and as you say he will and should miss out when we have options like Gilmour and Turnbull waiting in the wings.

Don't get me wrong I have no issue with McKenna being in the squad as there aren't better options out there. But again when he retires from football I don't think it will have seen him win much of the way of trophies or playing at the biggest of clubs hence the journeyman tag. 

Most of our players aren't going to win much in the way of trophies unless they're at the OF or one of England's top teams. That rules out the majority of the current squad.

The argument was you said clarkes choices were unambitious and he sticks with journeymen. He doesn't, in some instances he didn't or still doesn't have a choice. 

[adamntg]

Just now, Caledonian Craig said:

And I didn't say you did either.

Today we have the option of Patterson, Turnbull and Gilmour or Palmer and Fleck - which would you take?

Ryan Gauld. I wouldn’t take Patterson, he’s only started four games and is maybe a bit immature. Hope Gilmour is in, although I acknowledge he hasn’t started many games either.