Scotland v Curaçao

[alfaetrin]

27 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Hanley is probably the worst with the ball at feet out if all our CBs.

The only way Hanley gets game time is if we are backs to the wall, throwing bodies at the ball type of situation in my mind.

Hanley receives more criticism on this board than any other player apart from Ralston. While I sometimes agree with some of the barbs aimed at Hanley, I think that the pile-on is sometimes a bit harsh. Stevie Clarke has had faith in him for years, and I honestly don't think he has let us down any more than anyone else. He is very solid when Scotland are under sustained pressure, and he is good at staying under the opposition radar during matches. He can come up the park effectively for set pieces. I still remember his header that crashed off the post during the Switzerland game at the Euros when the score was 1-1. If that one had gone in, it could have been a very different tournament for Scotland.

He is a starter in America for me, although I would be okay, of course, with him being substituted later in the game when necessary for freshness or tactical change reasons.

[ceudmilefailte]

22 minutes ago, alfaetrin said:

No-one has mentioned the goalkeeping position yet, so I'll raise it. There's little question of putting Angus Gunn between the sticks, but if (god forbid) we need to use another keeper, who should it be?

I thought that Craig Gordon was a bit unfortunate yesterday to have almost nothing to do apart from pick the ball out of the net. Would a sharper (younger?) keeper have been able to push Chong's shot round the post?

When Kelly came on he was quickly called into action, and he certainly rose to the occasion, making a couple of decent saves, although nothing world class was needed.

I would have Kelly down as second choice keeper, and maybe even give him some minutes against Haiti later in the game if we are comfortably ahead. (sorry to tempt fate)

I still haven't forgotten Gordon's rather unconvincing performance when he came on for Gunn for the last 20 minutes against Finland before the Euros, conceding two late goals that I thought a decent keeper should have dealt with. And, of course, as well as his age, he has had his well-documented injury problems since then.

Gunn should get most of the Bolivia game and, again, Kelly for some minutes in the second half. Then Gunn for the Big Occasion.

Thoughts?

Personally I think Gordon is in the squad for the same reasons Dykes ,Hanley and Ralston are. 

[Diamond Scot]

4 minutes ago, alfaetrin said:

Hanley receives more criticism on this board than any other player apart from Ralston. While I sometimes agree with some of the barbs aimed at Hanley, I think that the pile-on is sometimes a bit harsh. Stevie Clarke has had faith in him for years, and I honestly don't think he has let us down any more than anyone else. He is very solid when Scotland are under sustained pressure, and he is good at staying under the opposition radar during matches. He can come up the park effectively for set pieces. I still remember his header that crashed off the post during the Switzerland game at the Euros when the score was 1-1. If that one had gone in, it could have been a very different tournament for Scotland.

He is a starter in America for me, although I would be okay, of course, with him being substituted later in the game when necessary for freshness or tactical change reasons.

Ive previously been a fan of Hanley aswell but theres nothing in what I said that isnt true. He isnt good woth the ball at feet. He has other strengths but for the Haiti game we need players that can move the ball quickly.

[DesiScotsman]

2nd half I thought Shankland & Dykes looked so much better as a partnership than Shankland & Hirst did in the 1st half. Both looked as if they had been playing with each other at club level all season. The link up play was really good. Wouldn’t mind that as the front two against Haiti if Clarke does go with two forwards.

[ceudmilefailte]

18 minutes ago, DesiScotsman said:

2nd half I thought Shankland & Dykes looked so much better as a partnership than Shankland & Hirst did in the 1st half. Both looked as if they had been playing with each other at club level all season. The link up play was really good. Wouldn’t mind that as the front two against Haiti if Clarke does go with two forwards.

Agree with that , problem is it was against a very poor team. 
 It’s another of the big decision's Clarke will hopefully get right Agree with Shankland starting against Haiti but I wouldn’t have Dykes on the pitch. 
Against the other two I’d have whoever can run fastest over 50 metres and still control the ball at the end of it. 

[Caledonian Craig]

20 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Agree with that , problem is it was against a very poor team. 
 It’s another of the big decision's Clarke will hopefully get right Agree with Shankland starting against Haiti but I wouldn’t have Dykes on the pitch. 
Against the other two I’d have whoever can run fastest over 50 metres and still control the ball at the end of it. 

Haiti are on a par with Curacao so feel we should be starting with Dykes and Shankland.

[NE TA in the weeg]

33 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Against the other two I’d have whoever can run fastest over 50 metres...

That's Burke.

Quote

...and still control the ball at the end of it.

Ah, aye, that's not Burke.

Edited June 1 by NE TA in the weeg

[ceudmilefailte]

49 minutes ago, NE TA in the weeg said:

That's Burke.

Ah, aye, that's not Burke.

Sounds like a Kevin Bridges joke about Braveheart and Trainspotting 

[Lion Rampant]

55 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Haiti are on a par with Curacao so feel we should be starting with Dykes and Shankland.

I did notice that Haiti lost 5-1 to Curacao in qualifying, read into that what you will.

One thing is for sure, Haiti will likely be just as comfortable on the ball as Curacao looked in spells on Saturday. We'll need to be a lot better pressing them than we were on Saturday.

Really interested to see how they fare against New Zealand tomorrow night.

[ceudmilefailte]

1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Haiti are on a par with Curacao so feel we should be starting with Dykes and Shankland.

Probably not much better, but it won’t be  against ten men at Hampden. 
We will have a few that we didn’t have on Saturday back mind you 

 

[Orraloon]

3 hours ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Against the other two I’d have whoever can run fastest over 50 metres and still control the ball at the end of it. 

4-6-0 then?

[ceudmilefailte]

2 hours ago, Orraloon said:

4-6-0 then?

That could change quickly into 4-5-1-0 in attacking phases. 

Edited June 1 by ceudmilefailte

[scotlad]

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

That could change quickly into 4-5-1-0 in attacking phases. 

😂

[immcinto]

On 5/31/2026 at 10:27 PM, Diamond Scot said:

Ive previously been a fan of Hanley aswell but theres nothing in what I said that isnt true. He isnt good woth the ball at feet. He has other strengths but for the Haiti game we need players that can move the ball quickly.

It is Hanley's age related decline that is the problem. He used to be Championship standard, but now he is not even at mid SPFL level and he is not getting any younger. 

[Diamond Scot]

19 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Haiti are on a par with Curacao so feel we should be starting with Dykes and Shankland.

Playing 2 up top doesnt neccesarily make a team more attacking.

We struggle to control the midfield or create chances with a front 2 and also leave our defence very exposed.

We were at our most attacking as a team when we played 541 with Tierney however with Doak as an asset then 451 with Doak, McTominay and McGinn behind Shankland we can control the game, create chances and be solid.

Personally id have Christie and Ferguson starting in the deeper roles with Christie license to roam forward. 

[The Black Bra]

1 minute ago, Diamond Scot said:

Playing 2 up top doesnt neccesarily make a team more attacking.

We struggle to control the midfield or create chances with a front 2 and also leave our defence very exposed.

We were at our most attacking as a team when we played 541 with Tierney however with Doak as an asset then 451 with Doak, McTominay and McGinn behind Shankland we can control the game, create chances and be solid.

Personally id have Christie and Ferguson starting in the deeper roles with Christie license to roam forward. 

Agree, I’d like to see Christie & Ferguson as the two sitting midfielders. Gutted for Gilmour, but hopefully this means Christie will play in his club position.

[Tartan blood]

20 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Playing 2 up top doesnt neccesarily make a team more attacking.

We struggle to control the midfield or create chances with a front 2 and also leave our defence very exposed.

We were at our most attacking as a team when we played 541 with Tierney however with Doak as an asset then 451 with Doak, McTominay and McGinn behind Shankland we can control the game, create chances and be solid.

Personally id have Christie and Ferguson starting in the deeper roles with Christie license to roam forward. 

The 2 big games I recall us starting 2 strikers were against England and Denmark. Zero goals. We played well as a team, but had very little attacking threat, ironically, despite playing more strikers. 

Saying that, Shankland wasn't 1 of the strikers in either of those games...

I think we are more suited to having an extra midfielder than 2 strikers. If we can fit in BGD, McTominay and McGinn, and have a sharp spearhead in Shankland, then there is no reason to play a 2nd striker that doesn't score (many) goals.

[vanderark14]

33 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Playing 2 up top doesnt neccesarily make a team more attacking.

We struggle to control the midfield or create chances with a front 2 and also leave our defence very exposed.

We were at our most attacking as a team when we played 541 with Tierney however with Doak as an asset then 451 with Doak, McTominay and McGinn behind Shankland we can control the game, create chances and be solid.

Personally id have Christie and Ferguson starting in the deeper roles with Christie license to roam forward. 

Fair points, however one of the two strikers can come slightly deeper to help create chances. Dykes did this well for Shankland on Saturday. Its not something I would like to see us do against Morocco or Brazil but I would be comfortable with it against Haiti