SlayerX

Because Red Bull own two clubs who are eligible to play in the European Cup, UEFA may deny Leipzig entry. Apparently UEFA will decide next month.

Not yet. If I were to guess, I'd say that they wouldn't be allowed in... unfortunately.

If you liked Seinfeld then you'll definitely love this show, as both shows have sociopathic and narcissistic characters. I would say that it's definitely more daring than Seinfeld, but I would call it evolutionary as culture and comedy has changed. Also, if you like Family Guy, then you should definitely try out this show. It's like a live action version of Family Guy... Mac even resembles Seth McFarlane a wee bit.

OK. "despise" and "hate" are probably going a bit over-the-score. What was the dispute? Wright's wife suggested that Anderson intentionally lost a match against Adrian Lewis. Anderson got irked. That's all that happened. To say that they despise each other is making a mountain out of a molehill. Unless something else happened? Anyway, regardless, neither played well and deservedly got beat.

Agreed. However, I haven't seen the story that Spurs are looking at him. The thing with the EPL is that it's only good because of the foreign players, and the clear majority of them learn their trade in their home nation before heading for the riches of English football. I want Burke to spend at least 3 or 4 years in Germany, and then if he heads to England, then so be it, if he does then he'll be doing so a superior player. Talking of, Sky Sports did a survey recently and it shows that EPL teams are made up of 70% foreign players. I wonder when/if they reach a point where they say that is enough is enough and introduce a limit of the amount of foreign players each team can play. They say that it would be against the European law of freedom of movement, but it wouldn't, as if the rule was introduced then teams could buy as many foreigners as they like, but they can only play a certain amount.

Agreed. I doubt they are interested, as I think at this point they want ready-made players, not a work-in-progress like Burke. But yes, I agree, it would've been easy for him to join an EPL club and collect easy money, but he moved to a nation that he knows will improve him as a player, I wish more Scottish players had that attitude.

On second thoughts, I really don't care. My interest in this tournament is gone. The way that both Anderson and Wright played was embarrassing. I mean, to get beat by a team whose star player is 63 years old... Wow.

Yep. My original point is, Philip Taylor is better than David Chisnall. Even when Taylor is on the cusp of retirement he's better.

Last year Wright was ranked above Thornton, and yet... Not so simple.

I'm no way denying that Chisnall should be In the England team on merit, because he should be, however, the England team without Taylor is there for the taking. Besides, I don't know who chooses the teams, last season the Scotland team comprised of Anderson and Thornton. Did Wright refuse to participate because of the argument with Anderson? Did Anderson pull rank and make sure that Wright wasn't selected?

Potentially, Scotland have an explosive team. If Anderson and Wright are firing and on top form I'd be surprised if they didn't win it. They wouldn't probably have won it last season if Lewis didn't stir the pot and create division between Anderson and Wright. I'm glad they'd patched things up As for England, replacing Taylor with Chisnall is akin to replacing Ronaldo with Forrest.

I'd much rather he stayed in Germany and develop his all-round game, rather than retreat back to the UK with their kick and rush style football.

I was going to end the post with "</Sarcasm>", but I assumed that you'd get it.

Can they? Van Bronkhorst and Arteta done not too badly for them. But yes, you're absolutely correct: Richard Wright, Francis Jeffers, Chamakh, Senderos, Squillaci, etc, were all amazing acquisitions, so much better than their Scottish equivalents...

Hopefully. That would be great (If they actually got game time) but I can't see it happening. None of the major teams in England would take a chance on a Scottish player, hell, most (like Arsenal) don't even bother scouting up here.

Really? How about maim? Injure? Call a derogatory name? We'll see how far he develops.

We aren't in a position to rule out anyone. If the lad has a great season next season, and he either gets promoted or earns a big move, then all the better for us. He's the same age as Armstrong and younger than Cairney.

The middle two I'd go for Darren Fletcher and Scott Brown, failing that, maybe Barry Bannan, or just someone who can keep the ball and keep us ticking over. With the two inside forwards I'd give them free-roles and just tell them to do what they do best, and with Armstrong and Cairney or Bannan in those roles, who knows what could happen. Hell, even Ryan Fraser, as his pace would frighten most teams... probably not England, though. I'm just frustrated that we see the same old tired system over and over, and it never works.

Agreed, systems dictate a formation, but not always, certainly not in the case of Strachan and his weird love affair with 4-2-3-2. Let's be honest, we're sub-standard, so we're going to get pinned back no matter who we play (within reason). Playing with back three gives us an attacking outlet, plus it'll put to bed the whole James Forrest debate. Strange time to experiment? Yes, but we should've been trying something different when it became evident that teams had sussed us out. Yep, I agree, which is why I hope Strachan can go out with a roar instead of a whimper... as this could be his final big match in charge.

Well, that's your opinion. I do think that Tierney has potential to be better.. he is only 19, you know.

Agreed. However, with John Fleck, don't count him out just yet. This season he was named in the PFA League One Team of the Year after helping Sheffield United win promotion to the Championship. If he does well next season then who know.

Good comments, all. Fine, OK, if pushed back it WILL turn into a back five, but that's the point; going forward it'll be a back three. As it is, when we're pushed back we're defending with 6 players, and when we're attacking we're still defending with 6 players. I just want to see something else. Strachan used a formation, it worked for a couple of games, and then he's stuck with it through thick and thin. I honestly think he doesn't know what he's doing. I mean, he said that he thought that Tom Cairney was a right midfielder, that's why he didn't pick the lad, and he's surprised by how good he is in the middle.... Couldn't have Strachan tried him in the middle?! The thing is, the 4-2-3-1 IS a defensive formation, no matter how you deploy it, I mean, unless you tell one of the anchor-men to turn into a box-to-box midfielder once we have the ball, etc. It lacks fluidity and flexibility and we struggle, even against the weaker teams. If we go into the England match with a 4-2-3-1, and attempt to soak up pressure and play on the counter, we are dead. I remember back in the '00 play-offs when we played England (and beat them at Wembley) we played a 3-5-2 and our high octane play meant that Beckham was pretty much a right-back for the entire 90 minutes. Did we have better defenders then? Other than Colin Hendry, I'd say no. I would go with: -------------Gordon ------Berra---Martin---Kingsley Tierney------------------Robertson ---Armstrong---Brown---Cairney ------Griffith---Martin/S.Fletcher Are Kingley, Armstrong and Cairney too inexperienced at this level? Maybe, but all three should've been in the squad a year or so ago. Or: -------------Gordon ------Berra---Martin---Kingsley Tierney------------------Robertson ---------Brown---D.Fletcher ------Armstrong---Cairney -----------Griffith

England would kill for Robertson or Tierney, so why not play them where they'll be more effective? Also, were we that much better during the 90's? As opposed to 6 rigid defensive minded players when we're attacking? It's time to do something different.

Burke's manager said that he was a "blank canvas", that he wasn't tactically astute or intelligent and that their coaches had to really work on it with him. The lad just needs a good pre-season under his belt, not just for fitness but also to acclimatise himself with the coaches, his team-mates and a different type of football. The coaches that he'll be getting in German is light-years ahead of the standard of coaching in the UK.

We've been using a flat back four for how long? Since Craig Brown left? And we've qualified for nothing ever since. I'm not saying that the formation is the only reason why we've not qualified for anything major, but it certainly hasn't helped. Our center backs simply aren't good enough to play in a flat back four, at least not at international level against top players, so it's time to bring back three center back and two wing-backs. If nothing else, the extra center back will naturally fill in a gap. Craig Brown saw this, so why hasn't the previous managers not seen it? Plus, Andrew Robertson and Kieran Tierney are both marauding players, so why play them as defensive players? It seems to me that the majority of Scotland fans have been brainwashed into thinking that we SHOULD play with four at the back. The 4-2-3-1 formation is a defensive one. It's essentially 6 rigid defensive minded players and 4 attacking players. That's fine if the four attacking players are world class, but ours are not. Our striker(s) need as much help as they can get, and they'd get much more ammunition for Robertson and Tierney whipping balls in and pushing forward than they would with those two sitting back. The fact that Strachan plays that formation at home is shameful. It's OK for Strachan to come out and say that the Scotland players play with fear, but what does he expect when he plays a formation that's built to defend. I want to see a 3-5-2 or 3-4-2-1... just something different. England will expect us to play a 4-2-3-1.