Starting 11 v Ukraine - Page 20 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Starting 11 v Ukraine


Malcolm

Recommended Posts

I didnt really give it enough thought prior to the game but playing a war torn country must have been a nightmare game to play in. Even I felt weird watching it. 

I don't think it's a good enough excuse for the lack of effort but I'm beginning to see what souness meant by not envying the players paying against Ukraine last night. He still wrong to want them to win but he has a point about how difficult it would have been. The whole occasion was just bizarre 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 682
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

8 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

Oh I have missed your dramatics 🤣

I'm telling ye, he is not the answer. He played the same style and tactics at The Euros and we scored 1 goal and got 1 point. It was obvious then that his persistence with Dykes and that style of football didn't work at the highest level.

He hasn't learned anything from the euros or even worse, he's not clever or intelligent enough to change his approach given the players at his disposal.

He should have been sacked then and fuck me he should be sacked now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

I didnt really give it enough thought prior to the game but playing a war torn country must have been a nightmare game to play in. Even I felt weird watching it. 

I don't think it's a good enough excuse for the lack of effort but I'm beginning to see what souness meant by not envying the players paying against Ukraine last night. He still wrong to want them to win but he has a point about how difficult it would have been. The whole occasion was just bizarre 


I felt like we didn’t get fired in to them like we should have.  May have been subconscious.  I wanted to pump them as much as any other side last night. 
 

im hoping wales pump them on Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Malcolm said:


I felt like we didn’t get fired in to them like we should have.  May have been subconscious.  I wanted to pump them as much as any other side last night. 
 

im hoping wales pump them on Sunday.

There were two instances at Ukraine corners where the ball was cleared but our players all jogged slowly out and then allowed Ukraine more time on the ball to create another chance. Had that been the Denmark or Israel match, we would have sprinted out to put pressure on the ball.

I gave up watching after 60 minutes because it was obvious the players weren't up for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Malcolm said:


I felt like we didn’t get fired in to them like we should have.  May have been subconscious.  I wanted to pump them as much as any other side last night. 
 

im hoping wales pump them on Sunday.

I don’t.  I really hope they beat Wales, good luck to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, adamntg said:

I don’t.  I really hope they beat Wales, good luck to them. 


I’d like to see Wales do it.  Didn’t like the gamesmanship of Ukraine last night, and I’m fed up of all the happy clappy pish that want Ukraine to do well just cos of their situation.  The two things are not linked in any way in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Malcolm said:


I’d like to see Wales do it.  Didn’t like the gamesmanship of Ukraine last night, and I’m fed up of all the happy clappy pish that want Ukraine to do well just cos of their situation.  The two things are not linked in any way in my mind.

One man’s gamesmanship is another’s game management.  Let’s not pretend we wouldn’t do exactly the same leading 2-0 away in a WC playoff. 
 

As for “happy clappy” - have a heart man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why exactly was the game played now & not when it should have been.

I mean, the situation hasn't changed for Ukraine,  has it ?

If it couldn't be played then , then why could it be played now, is my question..

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, adamntg said:

One man’s gamesmanship is another’s game management.  Let’s not pretend we wouldn’t do exactly the same leading 2-0 away in a WC playoff. 
 

As for “happy clappy” - have a heart man. 


Totally for them winning the war.  Not totally for them winning a football match. As i said, the two are entirely separate.

All thr folks saying they should get a bye, in no way should thry get that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ThistleWhistle said:

Och I'm over it already - Qatar is a plastic world cup and fuck spending thousands to camp in a portacabin in November in the middle of a desert drinking Coke in a country where analisation is illegal anyway. 

I'll be watching the business end of Strictly hosted in Blackpool by then counting down to my Christmas train coming out.

Analisation was not high on my list of reasons but I otherwise agree with you. If you had to chose a WC to miss out on then this is a good one to pick. Unfortunately we are picking every WC to miss out on irrespective of their laws regarding anal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mox said:

This game was the an exact re-run of the Croatia and Czech games. Manager picks the wrong team, plays guys out of position, picks the wrong formation,  insists on defensive approach, we play long balls to a striker obtuse in the modern game, clearly instructs our players to sit back and not to engage and 60 minutes later realises he's got it wrong. We looked good from about 60 mins to about 80 minutes, coincidentally the only time where we actually tried to pass our way through Ukraine and by that time the game was done.

As with both the Czechs and Croatia, we didn't create any good quality opportunities and that's because our manager insists on agricultural football from a bygone age.

I said after The Euros he should have went and if the SFA are happy to waste our most talented and technically gifted players for a generation on some dinosaur, then that's on them.

There is a strong argument that Clarke doesn’t learn from his mistakes. It may be that his 3-5-2 is too vulnerable if the players aren’t on top form. We were absolute mince last night, the players all miles apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Malcolm said:


Totally for them winning the war.  Not totally for them winning a football match. As i said, the two are entirely separate.

All thr folks saying they should get a bye, in no way should thry get that

I couldn't care less who wins between Wales. I have an irrational dislike for Wales and I am not even sure Ukraine should be in this playoff anymore.......................maybe I am just bitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, er yir macaroon said:

There is a strong argument that Clarke doesn’t learn from his mistakes. It may be that his 3-5-2 is too vulnerable if the players aren’t on top form. We were absolute mince last night, the players all miles apart.

That is the one big flaw with sticking with a rigid system - our opponents can predict what we'll do. I think it definitely helped that Ukraine had months to practise circumventing our system. It's not a coincidence that the game was more even when we changed shape.

In general, I'm not against the 352, but I really don't like playing 2 strikers. Especially if McGinn is essentially told to be on their shoulder as well. Midfield is our strongest area (except left back) and we are only playing 3.

It should be one of Adams or Dykes. Not both. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

There were two instances at Ukraine corners where the ball was cleared but our players all jogged slowly out and then allowed Ukraine more time on the ball to create another chance. Had that been the Denmark or Israel match, we would have sprinted out to put pressure on the ball.

I gave up watching after 60 minutes because it was obvious the players weren't up for it.

I think this would have made a huge difference. Later in the game, when we were applying a bit more pressure, there were small signs of concern in the Ukraine team. Had we applied pressure earlier it could have a very different game.
That said,  my greatest fear about them being more prepared than us came to fruition,  and the fact that their country is at war will have given them a ‘no fear’ mindset. Losing a game of football would be inconsequential when compared to what is happening in their country. 
I think we have,  individually,  more skilful players than they do, there was one or two occasions where that was obvious, but we  shat it big time and they absolutely deserved the win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

I think this would have made a huge difference. Later in the game, when we were applying a bit more pressure, there were small signs of concern in the Ukraine team. Had we applied pressure earlier it could have a very different game.
That said,  my greatest fear about them being more prepared than us came to fruition,  and the fact that their country is at war will have given them a ‘no fear’ mindset. Losing a game of football would be inconsequential when compared to what is happening in their country. 
I think we have,  individually,  more skilful players than they do, there was one or two occasions where that was obvious, but we  shat it big time and they absolutely deserved the win. 

I don't care who wins it but Sunday will be interesting to see if Wales are motivated and up for it. 

Last night was the perfect storm, playing a team at war, tactical and line up mistakes from the manager, lack of drive and effort from our players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

That is the one big flaw with sticking with a rigid system - our opponents can predict what we'll do. I think it definitely helped that Ukraine had months to practise circumventing our system. It's not a coincidence that the game was more even when we changed shape.

In general, I'm not against the 352, but I really don't like playing 2 strikers. Especially if McGinn is essentially told to be on their shoulder as well. Midfield is our strongest area (except left back) and we are only playing 3.

It should be one of Adams or Dykes. Not both. 


that’s fine as  long as you are not including Christie in that midfield 4 as he is mince.  We need an enforcer - a Scott brown type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Malcolm said:


that’s fine as  long as you are not including Christie in that midfield 4 as he is mince.  We need an enforcer - a Scott brown type.

Do enforcers exist nowadays? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

I couldn't care less who wins between Wales. I have an irrational dislike for Wales and I am not even sure Ukraine should be in this playoff anymore.......................maybe I am just bitter

Agree. If I was Ukrainian I'd be angry my highly paid fellow countrymen were playing football. They should be assisting the war effort in any way they could. I have every sympathy for the people in Ukraine and the people displaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

That is the one big flaw with sticking with a rigid system - our opponents can predict what we'll do. I think it definitely helped that Ukraine had months to practise circumventing our system. It's not a coincidence that the game was more even when we changed shape.

In general, I'm not against the 352, but I really don't like playing 2 strikers. Especially if McGinn is essentially told to be on their shoulder as well. Midfield is our strongest area (except left back) and we are only playing 3.

It should be one of Adams or Dykes. Not both. 

352 is brilliant when you have Tierney and Patterson on the park. Watching Patterson link with the midfield or Tierney and Robertson tearing down the left was a joy to watch. When you take those two players out we look less threatening. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, vanderark14 said:

352 is brilliant when you have Tierney and Patterson on the park. Watching Patterson link with the midfield or Tierney and Robertson tearing down the left was a joy to watch. When you take those two players out we look less threatening. 

 

I understand the logic in persevering with a consistent system at international level, even without Tierney and Patterson. If Clarke was spending every day with the players, I'd expect more flexibility. He has the right idea.

However, you're right, without Tierney or Patterson, we lose so much forward movement and possession based football. Gilmour and McGregor were hung out to dry last night. If you don't have the support of Tierney and Patterson, then they need another midfielder in there to help out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Malcolm said:


they seem to be a dying breed. Stein would often play two - eg aitken and souness.

I don't think a scott brown is the answer, he wouldve been boked inside 5 minutes in that game. 

 

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...