Luxembourg game thread

[Guest Scot1]

2 minutes ago, bigfingers said:

I thought we missed energy in the middle like Armstrong’s runs from the previous match. I’m not sure if dykes and Adams together is the way to go. A midfielder playing off one of them would be better. 

I thought Gilmour brought that when he came on. I think against better teams it’ll be 1 up top with attacking midfielders off him. 3-4-2-1. But against lower ranked teams 3-5-2 maybe useful to use.

[AlfieMoon]

A few decisions to be made. 
 

I think he should play someone off the main striker - either Forrest, Christie or Fraser - and let the roam and run into channels. 
 

Dykes vs Adams - I think Lyndon puts himself about more but Adams has more quality and is probably expected first choice. 
 

Gilmour, I think certainly could merit a start but I can’t see Clarke dropping McGregor which would be the swap I would guess. 
 

RB, O’Donnell keeps the jersey for me. Patterson maybe not quite there yet. 
 

Whatever the starting line up, it’s great that we have quality ready on the bench. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by AlfieMoon

[bigfingers]

I quite like Hendry in the RCB role. I think he should start against Czech.
 

Clarke might want to go more solid against England and put Gallacher and  Hanley in with KT. 

[gaz7]

1 hour ago, Blantyre_Braveheart said:

Gutted for Gilmour, he came on was very impressive and could've put himself in the frame to start against the Czechs. Instead he's probably got a concussion that puts him out for a week.

 

Patterson attacking and technique wise is a massive improvement on O'Donnell. 

 

Both of these young lads will become mainstays for us in the coming years and will end up very special players. Adding them to McTominay, McGinn, Tierney and Robertson is a very promising looking foundation of a squad. 

 

Forget the coming years.  The time is NOW.  

[Barney Rubble]

Patterson.

Got done for speed twice defensively.

Had four opportunities to hit the byeline and cut inside every time.

He's one for the future but not for this tournament - barring something unfortunate to other players.

[mccaughey85]

thought we played ok but should really of taken our chances in the second half. theres still alot of tough decisions for clarke to make and tonights game hasnt made them much easier imo. gilmour looked impressive but i doubt clarke will start him against the czechs. these friendly results and performances have been positive overall so thats good for morale.

my team for the czechs would be

                                              marshall

                                   hendry cooper tierney

                   fraser                                           robertson

                           gilmour/mcgregor mctominay

                                          mcginn

                                  christie adams

 

bit of risk playing fraser ar rwb but its against the poorest team we will face and we need to be attacking to get the win. clarke wont start gilmour so i have went mcgregor but would prefer gilmour. i have chosen hendry and cooper for the centre backs as they are comfortable on the ball and this will help with keeping posession and will help the midfield. armstrong,gilmour, dykes and turbull have done well in these games and its a tough decision to leave them out.

[Caledonian Craig]

2 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

thought we played ok but should really of taken our chances in the second half. theres still alot of tough decisions for clarke to make and tonights game hasnt made them much easier imo. gilmour looked impressive but i doubt clarke will start him against the czechs. these friendly results and performances have been positive overall so thats good for morale.

my team for the czechs would be

                                              marshall

                                   hendry cooper tierney

                   fraser                                           robertson

                           gilmour/mcgregor mctominay

                                          mcginn

                                  christie adams

 

bit of risk playing fraser ar rwb but its against the poorest team we will face and we need to be attacking to get the win. clarke wont start gilmour so i have went mcgregor but would prefer gilmour. i have chosen hendry and cooper for the centre backs as they are comfortable on the ball and this will help with keeping posession and will help the midfield. armstrong,gilmour, dykes and turbull have done well in these games and its a tough decision to leave them out.

I agree with much there aside from Fraser and maybe Adams. Czechs threat is their height in the air so O'Donnell would be of more worth at the back than tiny Fraser. I would start with Dykes as his hold up play is far superior to Adams although Adams is more mobile.

[mccaughey85]

2 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I agree with much there aside from Fraser and maybe Adams. Czechs threat is their height in the air so O'Donnell would be of more worth at the back than tiny Fraser. I would start with Dykes as his hold up play is far superior to Adams although Adams is more mobile.

yeh tbh its tough decisions clarke has to make. hopefully he gets it right

[runningtings]

My thoughts after today:

Dykes isn't that great but he is the best target man we have.

Gilmour is a more positive option than McGregor.

[mccaughey85]

maybe griffiths would of been a good option going by tonights missed chances

[Guest Scot1]

1 minute ago, runningtings said:

My thoughts after today:

Dykes isn't that great but he is the best target man we have.

Gilmour is a more positive option than McGregor.

Dykes hit the post, set up Adam’s goal, caused the sending off, had the ball in the net, ruled offside (couldn’t see because of no replay), I thought he did well tonight. On another night he’d maybe got a goal or two, Adams also did ok, could’ve got another 1 or 2 on another night. We don’t have any top class strikers but the ones we have can do they business with a little luck.

[mccaughey85]

1 minute ago, Scot1 said:

Dykes hit the post, set up Adam’s goal, caused the sending off, had the ball in the net, ruled offside (couldn’t see because of no replay), I thought he did well tonight. On another night he’d maybe got a goal or two, Adams also did ok, could’ve got another 1 or 2 on another night. We don’t have any top class strikers but the ones we have can do they business with a little luck.

not sure why but dykes is coming in for some criticism recently. guy was pretty good tonight, not sure what ppls expectations are from an english championship striker. personally i think hes done great and totally exceeded expectations i had of him.

[Guest Scot1]

4 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

not sure why but dykes is coming in for some criticism recently. guy was pretty good tonight, not sure what ppls expectations are from an english championship striker. personally i think hes done great and totally exceeded expectations i had of him.

We don’t have top, top strikers but we do have 3 decent CF’s which is an improvement over recent times.

[aaid]

25 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:Patterson.

Got done for speed twice defensively.

Had four opportunities to hit the byeline and cut inside every time.

He's one for the future but not for this tournament - barring something unfortunate to other players.

One thing that would concern me is that the commentator mentioned that Paterson had only lost 2 of the 22 senior games he’s played in.   Obviously that’s because he plays for a team who went through the season unbeaten, however a big part of the way Rangers is for both full backs to push forwards as much as possible, hence the number of goals Tavernier scored this season.

Our other flank is by far our strongest with Robertson and even Tierney showing he’s not afraid to get forwards from centre back.

That’s all good stuff if you are playing against teams you can dominate, as has been the case for Rangers domestically.  I’d have some concerns that Paterson just might be a bit too inexperienced to know when to push on and when to hold and cover and that could cost us in a competitive game.

That will come with experience but I think this tournament might be a bit too soon for him, a good option of the bench though.

[gaz7]

14 minutes ago, Scot1 said:

Dykes hit the post, set up Adam’s goal, caused the sending off, had the ball in the net, ruled offside (couldn’t see because of no replay), I thought he did well tonight. On another night he’d maybe got a goal or two, Adams also did ok, could’ve got another 1 or 2 on another night. We don’t have any top class strikers but the ones we have can do they business with a little luck.

Good analysis and I am defo in dykes camp with now fraser behind him. Patterson and gilmour also. 

[aaid]

17 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

maybe griffiths would of been a good option going by tonights missed chances

Griffiths lack of fitness would’ve probably meant he wouldn’t be in the position to miss those chances in the first place.

The time to worry about strikers isn’t when they’re missing them but when they’re not getting chances at all.

[DAVIDB46]

21 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

maybe griffiths would of been a good option going by tonights missed chances

Maybe a few years ago but has looked unfit and overweight for a while now 

[gkm_vancouver]

2 minutes ago, gaz7 said:

Good analysis and I am defo in dykes camp with now fraser behind him. Patterson and gilmour also. 

Dykes will likely get the start against the Czechs but think Fraser will do well to dislodge Christie from the starting line up. Can't see Clarke replacing O'Donnell at RB and would be very surprised if he doesn't play McGregor in midfield, despite how well Gilmour did. For our first game he is likely to stick with experience. No doubt though that Gilmour will get some minutes in this tourney. Still raging about that shocking tackle.

[Guest Scot1]

Well at least we have choices now and a bit of strength in depth. You get the impression now that just about everyone who starts now knows there’s someone battling to take their place, that’s good and competition will hopefully lead to good performances from those who do start against the Czechs.

[Tartan blood]

59 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

not sure why but dykes is coming in for some criticism recently. guy was pretty good tonight, not sure what ppls expectations are from an english championship striker. personally i think hes done great and totally exceeded expectations i had of him.

I'd probably give him man of the match, to be honest. (I don't know who got it) Dykes was unlucky not to get a hattrick. 

I don't think there is much between him and Adams, but Dykes did edge it tonight and has contributed more in bigger games. Obviously that isn't Adams fault as he hasn't had the chance yet.

What I learned is that it should be one or the other. Not both. There wasn't enough creativity through the middle. Far too much reliance on our fullbacks and Tierney to create chances. Which they did in abundance. But neither Dykes nor Adams were able to convert. When it just isn't happening, you need to adapt. That is what happened when Gilmour and Fraser came on. Armstrong and Christie no doubt would have done the same. So, at least 1 more creative midfielder would be better than 2 isolated strikers. Especially against a better team.

[Tartan blood]

2 hours ago, Taylor1996 said:

The team that I watch most is Manchester United. If Fred is worth £50m then Gilmour must be worth £100m.

Growing up, my favourite Scotland midfielders were McAllister, Collins, McCall and Lambert. Billy Gilmour seem to be a hybrid of all four (all that's missing is Collins's free kicks)

As you say, he does what McGregor does, but quicker, better and so much so, so he has to start the Euros.

I don't care what age Gilmour is, he's the best midfielder we have. A double-pivot with Gilmour and McTominay would be interesting. With McGinn buzzing between the space between them and the strikers.

Today's performance wasn't the best, but what struck me is even when we play badly, we still have a solid structure. It's a sign of good coaching and it's a sign that the squad is now totally at ease and they understand the currently system.

No exaggeration, I think it's a bigger risk to play McGregor in the Euros than to play Gilmour. 

Tonight there were no defensive issues, for obvious reasons, but I worry about how easily we are cut open through the middle when McGregor is playing the anchorman role.

McTominay seemed to just be doing his own thing tonight. But if he sits deeper alongside Gilmour, I'll feel far more confident. McGinn didn't have his usual freedom tonight because McTominay pilfered it from him haha

[Barney Rubble]

1 hour ago, aaid said:

One thing that would concern me is that the commentator mentioned that Paterson had only lost 2 of the 22 senior games he’s played in.   Obviously that’s because he plays for a team who went through the season unbeaten, however a big part of the way Rangers is for both full backs to push forwards as much as possible, hence the number of goals Tavernier scored this season.

Our other flank is by far our strongest with Robertson and even Tierney showing he’s not afraid to get forwards from centre back.

That’s all good stuff if you are playing against teams you can dominate, as has been the case for Rangers domestically.  I’d have some concerns that Paterson just might be a bit too inexperienced to know when to push on and when to hold and cover and that could cost us in a competitive game.

That will come with experience but I think this tournament might be a bit too soon for him, a good option of the bench though.

All good points.

I get the impression that Clarke sees Patterson as a serious option after this summer, and his current inclusion may be more attuned to get him acquainted with the standards required to be the first option.

Fraser and Forrest are way ahead of him right now as back-ups to O'Donnell.

Yes - you did read that right.

[Texas Pete]

1 hour ago, mccaughey85 said:

maybe griffiths would of been a good option going by tonights missed chances

I have seen Griffiths miss worse than any of the chances missed tonight.

I’d rather we missed a boat load of chances tonight than against the Czechs. Hopefully the misses tonight will mean the strikers sharpen up in training over the next week. 

[ProudScot]

9 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

All good points.

I get the impression that Clarke sees Patterson as a serious option after this summer, and his current inclusion may be more attuned to get him acquainted with the standards required to be the first option.

Fraser and Forrest are way ahead of him right now as back-ups to O'Donnell.

Yes - you did read that right.

Forrest is never in the frame for right wing back 

[Taylor1996]

5 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

No exaggeration, I think it's a bigger risk to play McGregor in the Euros than to play Gilmour. 

Tonight there were no defensive issues, for obvious reasons, but I worry about how easily we are cut open through the middle when McGregor is playing the anchorman role.

McTominay seemed to just be doing his own thing tonight. But if he sits deeper alongside Gilmour, I'll feel far more confident. McGinn didn't have his usual freedom tonight because McTominay pilfered it from him haha

I think so, too. McGregor is ok and he was acceptable when we had no better alternatives, but things have changed.

Me, too. It's a shame that Jack got injured as he's pretty much the only anchorman we have. Next in line is Shinnie, and he's not even a part of the narrative. 

Yeah. For his tender years, Gilmour does seem to have more confidence and defensive awareness than McGregor. I think it comes natural to him.

lol He did.