Netherlands V Scotland Match Thread

[Yr Alban]

19 hours ago, Diego10 said:

Sitter aside, i thought Shankland made us look a more threatening side.  He isn't going to chase long balls down which placed an emphasis on us passing the ball into the final third and helped us keep possession.  His link up play was  very good.

OK, I may be biased, but it's a bit harsh to call that a sitter. It's not as if he pulled an Iwelumo. It was a good chance, maybe our best in the game, but he still had to beat the keeper. He just got slightly too much on it - six inches lower and it's unsaveable.

If there was a sitter in the game, it was McTominay's free header with the keeper exposed.

[Diamond Scot]

2 hours ago, BryanBlessed said:

If we're not going to use players due to risk of injury, we shouldn't be using any of our first XI. If we're playing top teams we should play our best players.

 

I'd rather Souttar didn't have his nightmare at all. I think it was a silly move to put him on in that position in the first place. 

Thats a weird take. Are you suggesting that teams should play their best players for 90 mins every game. No subs, no rotation, no trying out anything new?

Managers all over the world play their best team for an hour and then make loads of subs in friendly games. It allows them to see how the team is shaping up and then rest key players whilst giving others the chance to show what they can do.

We would all rather that players didnt have bad games but thats not reality is it. Loads of people were suggesting Souttar to get a chance. He got a chance, didnt take it and is likely now back down the pecking order. So bringing him on gave Clarke information that he previously didnt have. 

[Andy of Lochcarron]

16 minutes ago, Yr Alban said:

Was at work last night, so just watched the highlights now.

As a Hearts fan, this was reminiscent of about a hundred games I've seen us play against Celtic and Rangers over the years. It was never a 4-0 game, but we didn't convert any of the chances we created, couldn't get established in the game, lost a sucker punch goal, passed up further chances to equalise, and then at the end got picked off with late goals as we lost focus, to put a polish on the scoreline for the opposition.

It's basically what happens when you play against a better team. No matter how well you play, you'd better convert your chances, or you could be on the wrong end of a hiding. The trouble is that, well, we aren't as good as the top teams. Let's take Shankland's chance. I've seen him score similar goals from there a dozen times, but his conversion rate is maybe 70-80% for a chance like that, and the Dutch have guys who will score from there 98% of the time, and did. Doesn't make him a bad player (and I think he played well, and hope Clarke noted that) but their players are turning out for the likes of AC Milan, and Shanks is at Hearts.

I'm hoping that we learned one lesson - against a top team, you can't lose your focus even for a moment, because they will punish you.

Good post, I am a Hearts fan tae & agree- think I would have jumped out the appalling section they have for away fans in the stadium had Shanks bagged it - one mighty climb up concrete -thought I had climbed Everest & only the same way exit doon. Got to say tho, mere focus from defenders & put away one of the numerous chances we were onto a good positive uplifting result…

[Yr Alban]

3 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Thats a weird take. Are you suggesting that teams should play their best players for 90 mins every game. No subs, no rotation, no trying out anything new?

Managers all over the world play their best team for an hour and then make loads of subs in friendly games. It allows them to see how the team is shaping up and then rest key players whilst giving others the chance to show what they can do.

We would all rather that players didnt have bad games but thats not reality is it. Loads of people were suggesting Souttar to get a chance. He got a chance, didnt take it and is likely now back down the pecking order. So bringing him on gave Clarke information that he previously didnt have. 

I can't disagree with this. It's frustrating as hell to play that well and lose heavily, but we only have a few friendly games to prepare for the tournament, and the manager is going to try new things out.

[BryanBlessed]

4 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Thats a weird take. Are you suggesting that teams should play their best players for 90 mins every game. No subs, no rotation, no trying out anything new?

Managers all over the world play their best team for an hour and then make loads of subs in friendly games. It allows them to see how the team is shaping up and then rest key players whilst giving others the chance to show what they can do.

We would all rather that players didnt have bad games but thats not reality is it. Loads of people were suggesting Souttar to get a chance. He got a chance, didnt take it and is likely now back down the pecking order. So bringing him on gave Clarke information that he previously didnt have. 

I'm not saying they shouldn't experiment but I don't think 70 minutes into a game we potentially could have drawn or won was the right time to do it looking at the overall context.

 

People were calling for Souttar to come in but not at LCB. 

[PapofGlencoe]

If Hanley's fit, he'll be straight in at CB.  Astonished if not.

Porteous and particularly Souttar give me the fear truth be told.

 

Gunn

Patterson Hendry Hanley Tierney   Robertson

Gilmour

Mcginn Christie mctominay

Shankland

[BryanBlessed]

9 hours ago, PapofGlencoe said:

If Hanley's fit, he'll be straight in at CB.  Astonished if not.

Porteous and particularly Souttar give me the fear truth be told.

 

Gunn

Patterson Hendry Hanley Tierney   Robertson

Gilmour

Mcginn Christie mctominay

Shankland

You can see what Clarke was doing putting Souttar on there as if he'd done well, Cooper would be out. I think it was madness personally but maybe he was good in training. 

 

Agree on Hanley but I might not have said that a few days ago. I thought all our CB's had a poor 2nd half. Hendry got easily turned in his own box but Gunn saved him. Souttar seriously messed up for the second and Porteous was at fault for the fourth.

Can we please bar McTominay from his own box at corners?

[The Black Bra]

51 minutes ago, BryanBlessed said:

You can see what Clarke was doing putting Souttar on there as if he'd done well, Cooper would be out. I think it was madness personally but maybe he was good in training. 

 

Agree on Hanley but I might not have said that a few days ago. I thought all our CB's had a poor 2nd half. Hendry got easily turned in his own box but Gunn saved him. Souttar seriously messed up for the second and Porteous was at fault for the fourth.

Can we please bar McTominay from his own box at corners?

Agree about Hanley, I thought his time might have been up but open to trying anyone who might shore things up. Annoying McKenna has had to pull out as it only leaves the Finland and Gibraltar games for him and Hanley to feature.

[Orraloon]

22 hours ago, Scot1 said:

We could try Souttar in there. Or play Souttar at left centre half and try Tierney in there. 
Ferguson is another possibility. 
Personally, I’d try Souttar there first. With Tierney at left centre half in a back 4. See how it looks. 

You are going to drop one of our midfield players in order to play Souttar out of position????? 

[Orraloon]

23 hours ago, Goozay said:

Our strongest back three is Tierney-Hendry-Porteus. Hanley has been out for a while, from a Scotland perspective, so not relevant. 

Agree, that's our starting back three if everybody is available.

[Scot1]

30 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

You are going to drop one of our midfield players in order to play Souttar out of position????? 

No I’d drop Porteous and play a back 4, dropping a centre half for a defensive/holding midfielder. 

[Goozay]

23 minutes ago, Scot1 said:

No I’d drop Porteous and play a back 4, dropping a centre half for a defensive/holding midfielder. 

As I've said previously in this thread, we played 4 at the back against Georgia away and Norway at home and shipped 5 goals! 

I'd also be loathed to play players out-of-position, centre half as defensive midfielder, like you are suggesting.

[Scot1]

10 minutes ago, Goozay said:

As I've said previously in this thread, we played 4 at the back against Georgia away and Norway at home and shipped 5 goals! 

I'd also be loathed to play players out-of-position, centre half as defensive midfielder, like you are suggesting.

We played both games without a defensive midfielder and both games with Greg Taylor at left-back. And if I remember correctly, every goal for Norway came down our left. 
In my opinion, we need 5 in midfield not at the back. 
The midfield 4 of 

McGinn McTominay Gilmour Christie

Looked good, for the most part. I think we need a defensive midfielder sitting behind them. That means going to a back 4.

Edited March 24 by Scot1

[Scot1]

4 of the 5 goals came down our left side in those 2 games. With Robertson playing at left back, Tierney at left centre half and a defensive midfielder screening the back 4, I don’t think we lose all of those 5 goals.

[Goozay]

5 hours ago, Scot1 said:

4 of the 5 goals came down our left side in those 2 games. With Robertson playing at left back, Tierney at left centre half and a defensive midfielder screening the back 4, I don’t think we lose all of those 5 goals.

Who is this defensive midfielder you seem reluctant to name?

[duncan II]

47 minutes ago, Goozay said:

Who is this defensive midfielder you seem reluctant to name?

Souttar apparently! 🤣

😳

[theabsentee]

8 hours ago, Scot1 said:

4 of the 5 goals came down our left side in those 2 games. With Robertson playing at left back, Tierney at left centre half and a defensive midfielder screening the back 4, I don’t think we lose all of those 5 goals.

I know what you're saying & I wouldn't be totally against a back 4 but ONLY if Tierney is injured or has to come off in a game but I'm only really agreeing due to the fact we all know the drop off in quality on the left of the 3 when Tierney isn't there is huge. 
    A back 4 protected by 2 sitting players that are disciplined enough to know their roles, they would be Christie & Gilmour on current form,  not McTominay as his natural instinct is to get forward & we need his threat in the final third.

  We can't rely on Tierney to be fit enough to play 90 minutes in any game nevermind the full Euros so I'm sure it's this major predicament that's giving Clarke sleepless nights far more than who starts upfront .

 

               

[BookhouseBoys]

I don’t think he’s quite there yet, but for me the long term solution is Josh Doig coming into that Tierney slot when KT is unavailable. He seems the most similar in style of the other players that would get put there. As I say, though, I don’t think he’s quite there yet.

[breeks_mctavish]

7 hours ago, duncan II said:

Souttar apparently! 🤣

😳

😂🫣

[PapofGlencoe]

I just think we need a more physical centre half in the centre.  I don't think Hendry or Porto are quite there, while good players.

I'd have McKenna or Hanley in at centre and Tierney obviously at left cb.  Right centre back could be one of a few.

Anyway, will be interesting to see what we end up with.  I trust Clarke to assess the players in training.  I'm not hugely concerned about the rest of the team.  

[BryanBlessed]

3 hours ago, PapofGlencoe said:

I just think we need a more physical centre half in the centre.  I don't think Hendry or Porto are quite there, while good players.

I'd have McKenna or Hanley in at centre and Tierney obviously at left cb.  Right centre back could be one of a few.

Anyway, will be interesting to see what we end up with.  I trust Clarke to assess the players in training.  I'm not hugely concerned about the rest of the team.  

I think Clarke probably realises putting Souttar on the left of a back three was a mistake so I don't think his poor performance will change much and I think he will probably still make the squad.

 

  Jack Hendry is good on the ball but I wouldn't put him down as that great a defender. We need a balance so, like you say, probably put Hanley or McKenna in the middle and then RCB is between Porteous/Hendry/Souttar. Realistically, it's going to be one of the first two and that would be Porteous for me.

Edited March 25 by BryanBlessed

[Third Lanark]

36 minutes ago, BryanBlessed said:

I think Clarke probably realises putting Souttar on the left of a back three was a mistake so I don't think his poor performance will change much and I think he will probably still make the squad.

 

  Jack Hendry is good on the ball but I wouldn't put him down as that great a defender. We need a balance so, like you say, probably put Hanley or McKenna in the middle and then RCB is between Porteous/Hendry/Souttar. Realistically, it's going to be one of the first two and that would be Porteous for me.

Souttar has been playing on the left of a back 2 with his club to accommodate Goldson so it's reasonable to assume he could play on the left of a back 3. If he gets a chance tomorrow and does ok it might mean no room for Cooper in the squad although the latter is much more experienced at international level.

[Caledonian Craig]

1 hour ago, Third Lanark said:

Souttar has been playing on the left of a back 2 with his club to accommodate Goldson so it's reasonable to assume he could play on the left of a back 3. If he gets a chance tomorrow and does ok it might mean no room for Cooper in the squad although the latter is much more experienced at international level.

Cooper is NOT that much more experienced at international level than Souttar. He has about 8 more caps. Souttar has the advantaged too of getting regular first team football at present unlike Cooper.

[BryanBlessed]

4 hours ago, Third Lanark said:

Souttar has been playing on the left of a back 2 with his club to accommodate Goldson so it's reasonable to assume he could play on the left of a back 3. If he gets a chance tomorrow and does ok it might mean no room for Cooper in the squad although the latter is much more experienced at international level.

I know but it isn't that similar to LCB of a back three. At least the experiment happened in a friendly 

[Yr Alban]

Meant to ask this the other night. What was the deal with the Dutch playing Auld Lang Syne when they scored? Was it just to wind us up?