Patterson, Fraser and McLean out - Page 5 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Patterson, Fraser and McLean out


Squirrelhumper
 Share

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, aaid said:

I think last night showed O’Donnell’s limitations at this level. I wouldn’t say he played badly, he had a good game and as I said earlier his commitment is exemplary.

However, all the Austrian play came down their left hand side, it’s clear they’d picked him out as the weak link. TBF, as we’re so strong on the left most teams would target out right regardless of who we were playing there.  However, the number of crosses into the box from that side showed he was failing to do one of the key aspects of the role, which is to stop them coming in in the first place.   TBF to him, I don’t think he had a lot of support in the same way that Robertson, Tierney and to a degree McGregor all cover for each other on the other flank.

In this system though, defending is only half the job and a big part of the role of wing back is the ability to get forwards and provide attacking width.  He did this but his delivery into the box was atrocious.  

A limited player who always gives his all.

Patterson has the potential to make the position his own for the next decade as Alan Hutton - the last decent right back we had - did.  He needs to play regularly for Rangers though to develop that  

 

Do you not think that might have something to do with who Austria had playing down that side? It the same as Robbo getting pummelled every time he has to face Eli Dasa. I would say that O'Donnell handled Alaba just as well as Robbo has ever managed to handle Eli Dasa, so far anyway. I just hope Robbo has learnt how to play against him for the next game.

I would start with Patterson but O'Donnell should always be in the squad as he has shown he is capable of playing at this level. He is no world beater but he's a decent consistent performer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

37 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

Do you not think that might have something to do with who Austria had playing down that side?

Absolutely this. Austria have one of the best left sided players in the world, if course everything was going to go up that side.

SOD and Hendry had great games to nullify that threat.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

Absolutely this. Austria have one of the best left sided players in the world, if course everything was going to go up that side.

SOD and Hendry had great games to nullify that threat.

 

Austria, Denmark, Croatia and the Czech Repbulic have all targeted our right.  The only decent team that didn’t do that in recent games was England which was probably as they are as strong on the right and weak on the left as we’re strong on the left and weak on the right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Scot1 said:

He’s a box-box midfielder who’s played every role but his natural role. I think alongside Gilmour in midfield we’d start to see the best from McTominay.

Who do you drop to accommodate him? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fairbairn said:

On current form, McGregor.  There's the also the issue of what to do with Jack when he's back and fit.

Jack would be on my bench. Although I do think we need to start playing a back 4, drop a centre halve, at home or against “lesser teams”, a midfield 4 with the right blend of players would allow us to dominate possession more and still offer ample protection for the defence / centre backs. Play the 3/5 system against better teams and tricky away ties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fairbairn said:

On current form, McGregor.  There's the also the issue of what to do with Jack when he's back and fit.

I think Jack may well find his options limited from now on through no fault of his own.  The emergence of Gilmour probably means he’s lost his place.  They’re different sorts of players but it comes down to numbers.  Gilmour’s the sort of player you look to build a team around, in a midfield three that probably means you need a couple of other midfielders who’ll get forwards more.  McGinn is clearly one, at the moment I’d argue that McGregor is probably the one that’s best suited to take the other spot out of the available options. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aaid said:

I think Jack may well find his options limited from now on through no fault of his own.  The emergence of Gilmour probably means he’s lost his place.  They’re different sorts of players but it comes down to numbers.  Gilmour’s the sort of player you look to build a team around, in a midfield three that probably means you need a couple of other midfielders who’ll get forwards more.  McGinn is clearly one, at the moment I’d argue that McGregor is probably the one that’s best suited to take the other spot out of the available options. 

I’d say McTominay is every bit as good a footballer than McGregor, if not better. And his athleticism and physicality will add another dimension to the midfield 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, aaid said:

I think Jack may well find his options limited from now on through no fault of his own.  The emergence of Gilmour probably means he’s lost his place.  They’re different sorts of players but it comes down to numbers.  Gilmour’s the sort of player you look to build a team around, in a midfield three that probably means you need a couple of other midfielders who’ll get forwards more.  McGinn is clearly one, at the moment I’d argue that McGregor is probably the one that’s best suited to take the other spot out of the available options. 

I would agree with that. That's starting three midfielders for me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

We always have somebody out injured or Coveded. For me, McT is now our utility man who covers various positions. That's if he's not injured himself. I wouldn't be adverse to trying him out upfront if everybody else is available.

No, we need McTominay in the middle of the park alongside Gilmour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, duncan II said:

We really don’t. He’s a good option but why break up Gilmour and McGregor? That’s mental. They complement each other really well.

Because McTominay is a better player playing at a much higher level. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would normally say leave out McGregor but I thought he was our best player last night and he does seem to work well with Gilmour. McTominay would step into midfield fairly frequently, as would Tierney, if in the back three (although I’m still not crazy about that formation). McTominay could also play right wing back, no problem at all. Jack needs to get games but if he gets back to top form he would certainly be competing for a place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, duncan II said:

He's a different player. McGregor works well with Gilmour and was, arguably, our best player last night and against Serbia.

I'm not disputing any if that but if the choice is mctominay mcgregor I'd go mctominay every day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

Because McTominay is a better player playing at a much higher level. 

 

McTominay has been average at best for us this year. In fairness so has McGregor but he was very good last night and appears to be forming a good partnership with Gilmour. I’m not sure Clarke should mess with that for the Israel game just because McTominay plays for Manchester United. Particularly if McTominay is only just back from injury. 

I suspect Clarke will play McTominay in a back 3 anyway if he is fit for Israel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Scot1 said:

I’d say McTominay is every bit as good a footballer than McGregor, if not better. And his athleticism and physicality will add another dimension to the midfield 

McGregor's passing last night was exemplary. I didn't used to fancy him but now he and Gilmour are the heartbeat of the team. Jack (if he comes back) will replace Ferguson as he is a far superior player. McTom can, as Texas P. says, slot in the back three but otherwise he may miss out. That in itself tells you how far we have come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, duncan II said:

Ok and that’s fine… Glad you’re not manager though. 🙃

Great response. You've cut through my opinion with that doozy 

3 hours ago, Texas Pete said:

McTominay has been average at best for us this year. In fairness so has McGregor but he was very good last night and appears to be forming a good partnership with Gilmour. I’m not sure Clarke should mess with that for the Israel game just because McTominay plays for Manchester United. Particularly if McTominay is only just back from injury. 

I suspect Clarke will play McTominay in a back 3 anyway if he is fit for Israel. 

It's been one or two games where mcrgegor and gilmour have looked good together. I don't just thinkctominqy plays because of who he plays for, I think he's also a better player. 

I suspect you are right, mctlminay will go into a back 3 to give us someone who can pass the ball from the back.

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...
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...