Striking Options

[Tommy Nooka]

 

54 minutes ago, troopio said:

They play for countries not afraid to Play more than 1 striker for a start that's for sure!! In the case of Kanu he is a strange one though as his Club scoring record is abysmal, clearly just one of those players who loves putting on his countries shirt, wish some of our guys looked like that, half of them look like they are half asleep when playing!

Hal Robson-Kanu is about as Welsh as Morris dancing (I know his old man Rechi)!

He's actually from quite a privileged background, his mother is the daughter of a minister and he played with Prince William and Harry as a youngster. Guy just had a good tournament, nothing to do with love for the country unfortunately.

[oneteaminglasgow]

Because he's had the best career doesn't mean he is the best option now, when was fletchers last prolific season, premiership or not goals breed confidence and form in a striker, if we get one chance against England id rather it fell to one of the guys that are banging them in at whatever level than a guy who's struggling to find the net at a high level

You seem to be entirely missing the point. I'll make it simple.

A striker's job in a system like Scotland's goes much beyond "taking a chance if the ball falls to him." That's a part of it, yes, but equally important is the role in helping to create chances for other players (in particular the 3 directly behind him) and this is where Fletcher is vastly superior to any other Scottish strikers presently, and is also why he's consistently played at a better level than any of them.

The simplistic view of Striker A scores more goals than Striker B so he should start appears to be the only basis for wanting anyone other than Fletcher picked. Jordan Rhodes or Leigh Griffiths might be more likely to take a chance if one happened to come along than Steven Fletcher, but overall we'd be a worse team without Fletcher IMO.

[Tommy Nooka]

48 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

 

You seem to be entirely missing the point. I'll make it simple.

A striker's job in a system like Scotland's goes much beyond "taking a chance if the ball falls to him." That's a part of it, yes, but equally important is the role in helping to create chances for other players (in particular the 3 directly behind him) and this is where Fletcher is vastly superior to any other Scottish strikers presently, and is also why he's consistently played at a better level than any of them.

The simplistic view of Striker A scores more goals than Striker B so he should start appears to be the only basis for wanting anyone other than Fletcher picked. Jordan Rhodes or Leigh Griffiths might be more likely to take a chance if one happened to come along than Steven Fletcher, but overall we'd be a worse team without Fletcher IMO.

 

Steven Fletcher was available for nothing this summer, he's ended up at Sheff Wed.

That says it all imo, he isn't even worth a punt to an EPL team.

I don't see this 'job' Fletcher apparently does for Scotland so he's clearly failing at that as well as scoring goals.

The other 3 are better players, I expect it to be proven this season. There's much more to Griffiths game than just scoring goals for a start, he'll certainly have more assists than Fletcher.

[54_and_counting]

1 hour ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

 

You seem to be entirely missing the point. I'll make it simple.

A striker's job in a system like Scotland's goes much beyond "taking a chance if the ball falls to him." That's a part of it, yes, but equally important is the role in helping to create chances for other players (in particular the 3 directly behind him) and this is where Fletcher is vastly superior to any other Scottish strikers presently, and is also why he's consistently played at a better level than any of them.

The simplistic view of Striker A scores more goals than Striker B so he should start appears to be the only basis for wanting anyone other than Fletcher picked. Jordan Rhodes or Leigh Griffiths might be more likely to take a chance if one happened to come along than Steven Fletcher, but overall we'd be a worse team without Fletcher IMO.

i think you are missing the point that some of us are making as well, fletcher and the system used to accomodate him and the other players isnt working, if it was we wouldnt be approaching 20 years of non tournament football

instead of our main and only striker creating chances for 3 midfielders behind him, how about we try the novel idea of the midfielders creating chances for our striker or strikers, it may actually just work

[RandomGuy.]

Griffiths has looked absolutely miles out his depth every time hes played for Scotland, and so has Rhodes when its being competitive games.

You can't just look at the best players and assume they'll perform, the players need to be able to cope at this level too.

[54_and_counting]

2 hours ago, forameus said:

That'll be the Will Grigg who didn't play any games at the tournament, aye?  The one that has scored a mighty one goal in eight appearances?  And that was in a friendly I believe.  But he has a pure bantz song about him, so it must be true.

And Hal Robson Kanu really fired his country to the Euros with his one goal in qualifying (that came when they were already ahead against Cyprus).  He's a better example, but effectively only gets hyped due to one very, very good goal.  I remember Fletcher scoring a very good goal against Poland too...

Lafferty is the only one that can be used as an example - he scored 7 in qualifying, so pretty instrumental.  What level was he playing at at the time?  Technically the Premier League, with Norwich, although he was on loan to Rizespor and Birmingham City in that time.  Not really sure what point you're trying to make with that.

Taking Lafferty out of the equation, I'm not really sure what's comparable.  You're talking about players who had decent tournaments despite not playing at a high level and being pretty limited.  We had a number of strikers fitting that mould during qualifying, in fact you could argue every striker we had was like that (except Fletcher, who is limited in finishing, but was playing at a higher level).  Only we didn't qualify - whose to say on another alternate timeline we qualified and Martin, Fletcher and Griffiths chipped in with goals that went way beyond what we thought they were capable of?  Unlikely, but I'm sure most of the Belgium side thought it was pretty unlikely that Hal Robson Kanu would send them on such an outrageous dummy, before he did.

 

Wales played only one forward technically.  If you want to count Bale, fair enough, will give you that, but given he's Gareth Bale, it's hardly comparable to anything we can put out.  Northern Ireland did play 2 up...oh no, wait, they didn't.  They played Lafferty up front on his own.

But yeah, they're totally "not afraid" to play more than one striker, despite only playing...one.

the point is that these guys were good enough performers at lower than EPL level to be taken in the squads and given chances, remember this time last season Fletcher wasnt even getting a strip on matchdays for sunderland who were struggling for goals (the goals he supposedly creates) instead sunderland try an actual goalscorer in defoe and their fortunes changed

By next tournament Fletcher will have been in the scotland team for 10 years, in the last 8 years he has managed 8 goals in 28 appearances, 6 of which came in the 2 gibralter games, 2 goals in 26 games is an absolutely brutal return and it shows that

euro 2008, 21 goals in 12 games

WC 2010, 6 goals in 8 games

euro 2012, 8 goals in 9 games

WC 2014, 8 goals in 12 games

euro 2016, 22 goals in 10 games (12 against Gibraltar which kinda skews the figures a bit)

our goals for tally has been on the decline for years now, so clearly the idea that fletcher up front himself works is wrong, he's not scoring goals and obviously we arent scoring many from the chances he creates (if he creates many)

[54_and_counting]

16 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Griffiths has looked absolutely miles out his depth every time hes played for Scotland, and so has Rhodes when its being competitive games.

You can't just look at the best players and assume they'll perform, the players need to be able to cope at this level too.

not one to stick up for him given my leanings lol, he's made 7 appearances for scotland, id guess most if not all were off the bench, id argue that is nowhere near enough time to judge someone

[RandomGuy.]

10 minutes ago, 53_and_counting said:

not one to stick up for him given my leanings lol, he's made 7 appearances for scotland, id guess most if not all were off the bench, id argue that is nowhere near enough time to judge someone

3 starts, 4 subs appearances and 272 minutes.

Compared to Chris Martins 2 starts and 259 minutes, who's been written off by everyone.

[54_and_counting]

41 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

3 starts, 4 subs appearances and 272 minutes.

Compared to Chris Martins 2 starts and 259 minutes, who's been written off by everyone.

neither is enough to form a proper judgement, but 8 goals in 28 appearances including 6 against the mighty gibraltar is enough imo regarding fletcher

[F_T_Y]

Rhodes has not had the time on the pitch for Scotland to be even branded as 'looking out his depth'.

Griffiths i am not sure on, think there could be more to come from him.

Our striking options say we pick 4 strikers per squad as we could get away against most teams in the group.

In no particular order our top four strikers would be Griffiths,Fletcher, Rhodes and McCormack.

Or just wait to see who is scoring and pick players on form, something Strachan seems to struggle with.

[oneteaminglasgow]

Steven Fletcher was available for nothing this summer, he's ended up at Sheff Wed.

That says it all imo, he isn't even worth a punt to an EPL team.

I don't see this 'job' Fletcher apparently does for Scotland so he's clearly failing at that as well as scoring goals.

The other 3 are better players, I expect it to be proven this season. There's much more to Griffiths game than just scoring goals for a start, he'll certainly have more assists than Fletcher.

That's because you're an absolute fuckwit, or purposely not understanding why someone scoring barrel loads in a much worse league doesn't make them better than someone who doesn't score as often but plays at a far higher level.

[Tommy Nooka]

That's because you're an absolute fuckwit, or purposely not understanding why someone scoring barrel loads in a much worse league doesn't make them better than someone who doesn't score as often but plays at a far higher level.

No, the fuckwit would be the person that repeatedly does the same thing and expects different results. Whatever you think Fletcher does for the team isn't working, we simply aren't scoring goals.
It's time we tried something different, we aren't qualifying as it is so we've nothing to lose.

[Arthur I. Tess]

Matt Smith scores for Fulham...

[54_and_counting]

1 hour ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

 

That's because you're an absolute fuckwit, or purposely not understanding why someone scoring barrel loads in a much worse league doesn't make them better than someone who doesn't score as often but plays at a far higher level.

fletcher now plays in the championship, rhodes now plays in the EPL, does that mean rhodes is an automatic first pick given he's at a higher level

[oneteaminglasgow]

No, the fuckwit would be the person that repeatedly does the same thing and expects different results. Whatever you think Fletcher does for the team isn't working, we simply aren't scoring goals.
It's time we tried something different, we aren't qualifying as it is so we've nothing to lose.

Plenty of teams qualified by scoring much fewer goals than we did. Wales, Hungary and Romania only scored 11 on their way to the finals, Albania only got 10. Every single team in the playoffs scored less goals in qualifying that we did.

I'd hazard a guess and say that maybe, rather than scoring goals being the problem it's instead that we concede too many.

[Arthur I. Tess]

49 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

 

 

Plenty of teams qualified by scoring much fewer goals than we did. Wales, Hungary and Romania only scored 11 on their way to the finals, Albania only got 10. Every single team in the playoffs scored less goals in qualifying that we did.

I'd hazard a guess and say that maybe, rather than scoring goals being the problem it's instead that we concede too many.
 

 

yeh, I agree

we conceded too many

wales' performances were based on a rock solid defence

and they aren't exactly endowed with top talent in terms of defenders either

I'd go with Smith and Griffiths up front in a 4-4-2

defend in depth then knock it up the pitch when we win the ball

do a leicester

[AyrExile]

Not sure why Griffiths is even quoted alongside those other names. Yes he's prolific at SPL level but unfortunately that level is more league one standard in England. Until hitting the net recently in the champions league qualifiers he had.never scored a goal at any decent standard. Last season he looked lost in any of the Europa cup games I watched. By all means give him a run out and see what happens but imo there is a long way to go before he's keeping Fletcher out the team. 

[Tommy Nooka]

23 minutes ago, AyrExile said:

Not sure why Griffiths is even quoted alongside those other names. Yes he's prolific at SPL level but unfortunately that level is more league one standard in England. Until hitting the net recently in the champions league qualifiers he had.never scored a goal at any decent standard. Last season he looked lost in any of the Europa cup games I watched. By all means give him a run out and see what happens but imo there is a long way to go before he's keeping Fletcher out the team. 

Griffiths and Fletcher have both played for Wolves and Hibs, I'd argue Fletcher played in a better side at both clubs than Griffiths.

Guess who has the better goal ratio?

I'm not saying he'd be the answer but I'd give him AND Rhodes a run out for a few games, see what they can do together because they've certainly scored goals everywhere else they've played.

[oneteaminglasgow]

Griffiths and Fletcher have both played for Wolves and Hibs, I'd argue Fletcher played in a better side at both clubs than Griffiths.

Guess who has the better goal ratio?

I'm not saying he'd be the answer but I'd give him AND Rhodes a run out for a few games, see what they can do together because they've certainly scored goals everywhere else they've played.

Fletcher played for wolves in the premiership, Griffiths played for them in the league 1. Griffiths obviously played in a far better wolves side than Fletcher in the context of the division they were in.

[Arthur I. Tess]

not sure about the hype regarding Rhodes

let's see if he actually gets a game next season and, if he does, if he actually scores some goals

Griffiths is the sort of player who you can hit the ball to long when defending

you can't really do that with Rhodes

Steven fletcher proved that he could score goals at the top level in struggling sides with limited chances. But, as pointed out, his best days are clearly behind him. He could still do a job for Scotland though

matt smith would give us something different that would really cause issues