Squad face Lithuania & Slovakia next month

[Big Fifer]

Never understood the fascination with "if we're going for goals we need two up top". We play 4-2-3-1 for a reason, because offensively the 3 are our biggest threat. We are far more dangerous playing with an attacking midfield 3 of Snodgrass, Ritchie and Burke than we would be with sticking Fletcher and Griffiths next to each other.

For me:

Marshall

Paterson Hanley Berra Robertson

Fletcher Bannan

Burke Snodgrass Ritchie

Fletcher

 

Russell Martin has been absolutely bowfing everytime I've seen him this year hence Berra being in there. I'd rather McArthur get a spot but given Darren Fletcher has just been given the arm band I doubt he'll be dropped. Otherwise you could argue till you're blue in the face about the striker, it'll be Fletcher or Griffiths. 

 

Edited to add: This will not be an easy game.

[AyrshireOwl]

10 minutes ago, sergie's no1 fan said:

 

With Snodgrass and Burke in the team they will often act like a second striker like they did in Malta.

If Fletcher is dropping deep or out wide with the ball you'll find Snodgrass waiting in the middle more often that not.

Don't think we'll pump them but we should win. Clean sheet would be brilliant too but I'd sacrifice a clean sheet for a 2-1/3-2 win.
 

 

We really do look like we've improved a lot going forward compared to last campaign. When you look at the Ireland game at Home we played Maloney, Naismith and Anya. Ritchie Burke and Snodgrass is a huge upgrade from that, and that will only help Fletcher who will be able to hold the ball and link up with any of them.

Exciting times going forward, just wish we had a decent centre half!

[LinkinFighter]

I think Hutton should play, Paterson didn't look great against Malta.

[Savage Henry]

12 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

Slovenia only drew with them (with Lithuania 2-0 up at one point). Although that was in Lithuania, we really shouldn't be underestimating them.

Slovenia are no good.  Lithuania are no good.*  We have to be taking 9 points at a minimum from those four games.  Scotland should be winning these games.  Scrape a 2-1 with a 97th minute Russell Martin header for all it matters, but Scotland should be beating these teams.

 

* I realise Scotland are no good either, but if they have any pretence of qualifying for a major tournament out of what is a relatively generous group, then this is the reality of things.

[forameus]

Aye, it's only Lithuania.  Clearly we should be playing two strikers, as that will obviously lead to more goals.  Just like Georgia.    

We should be taking full points from them, but going into the game thinking we can just play another striker because we'll pump them is setting ourselves up for a fall.  To be honest, even saying, as above, that Slovenia and Lithuania are "no good" is setting ourselves up.  The players need to go out treating it like any other game.  Not like they did in Georgia, where it was clear they thought they needed to turn up.  Not like they have in games they know are must win.  Just go out, beat what's in front of us, and move on to the next.

[Savage Henry]

1 minute ago, forameus said:

Aye, it's only Lithuania.  Clearly we should be playing two strikers, as that will obviously lead to more goals.  Just like Georgia.    

We should be taking full points from them, but going into the game thinking we can just play another striker because we'll pump them is setting ourselves up for a fall.  To be honest, even saying, as above, that Slovenia and Lithuania are "no good" is setting ourselves up.  The players need to go out treating it like any other game.  Not like they did in Georgia, where it was clear they thought they needed to turn up.  Not like they have in games they know are must win.  Just go out, beat what's in front of us, and move on to the next.

The alternative is to apologise in advance for bad results.  We need to be honest, if Scotland can't beat these teams then they have no right to even hope to qualify for a tournament.  Saying Lithuania and Slovenia are good teams and shouldn't be underestimated is setting ourselves up just as much. They shouldn't be underestimated but Scotland should be beating them.  I don't see a contradiction there.

[forameus]

Just now, Savage Henry said:

The alternative is to apologise in advance for bad results.  We need to be honest, if Scotland can't beat these teams then they have no right to even hope to qualify for a tournament.  Saying Lithuania and Slovenia are good teams and shouldn't be underestimated is setting ourselves up just as much. They shouldn't be underestimated but Scotland should be beating them.  I don't see a contradiction there.

Pretty much agree with the bolded.  We absolutely should be beating them, but it's the attitude of them being diddies that some have - not saying you did - that has led to us falling down so often.  Technically these "diddies" are all catching up, and in some cases have surpassed us.  Quality wise we should still be ahead but Georgia have twice proved against us that if you organise yourselves well enough you can get results above your station.  

But aye, the bolded part pretty much sums it up.  

[accies1874]

Slovenia are no good.  Lithuania are no good.*  We have to be taking 9 points at a minimum from those four games.  Scotland should be winning these games.  Scrape a 2-1 with a 97th minute Russell Martin header for all it matters, but Scotland should be beating these teams.

 

* I realise Scotland are no good either, but if they have any pretence of qualifying for a major tournament out of what is a relatively generous group, then this is the reality of things.

Of course we should be beating them. That isn't always the case, though, and we can't be underestimating them or Slovenia.

[Tulloch Gorum]

2 hours ago, C. Muir said:

Some of the comments on the official Sevco Facebook page on their status about Wallace and McKay call ups are hilarious. 

Last year they were seething about getting no international call ups, this year they are seething about getting international call ups. 

What a strange, sad bunch of peepul.  

[Bishop Briggs]

1 hour ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Why do Fuds continue to pick up on stuff like this, managers will literally never say it's a must win unless the outcome genuinely is the deciding factor on qualifying. And I'm guessing he did aye, he should have said because I watched them in the Euros and against England!!!!!! Shocking IMO

 

Celtic fud defends Strachan shock! 

If we are going to qualify, we must beat diddies like Lithuania at home.

[tintax]

Echo's of what he was saying prior to the Georgia game.  Simple as this IMO failure to win this game and we can forget about Russia

http://stv.tv/sport/football/1368306-gordon-strachan-denies-lithuania-qualifier-is-a-must-win-game/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[forameus]

3 minutes ago, tintax said:

Echo's of what he was saying prior to the Georgia game.  Simple as this IMO failure to win this game and we can forget about Russia

http://stv.tv/sport/football/1368306-gordon-strachan-denies-lithuania-qualifier-is-a-must-win-game/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

In his defence, I don't think you can entirely compare the two games.  With Georgia, we were on a massive high and moving into what was going to be a very difficult set of games.  A win there and we would go in against Germany potentially with a chance of not just qualifying, but topping the group.  In fact, that's probably where the more relaxed attitude came from, because the hype train was well and truly picking up pace by that point.  Of course, it was the wrong decision.  Would we have won had he told them it was a must-win?  No-one knows.  Personally I doubt it, but obviously no proof of that.

With this game, obviously we're a lot earlier in the campaign.  If we do drop points, it's not over, but the difficulty definitely spikes.  We'd then need to get that win from somewhere, probably Slovakia away (which we should be looking at winning anyway) or more either game against England.  That's not beyond the realms of possibility, but obviously more difficult than picking up three points at home against 5th seeds.

Really there needs to be a middle-ground.  I don't agree with the "if we don't win, it's all over" doom-bringers, but I'm not going to say that this is some free hit.  I'd like to believe that in private, the squad knows exactly what this game is, and is being told as such by WGS.  If we lose, articles like that will be brought up and blamed.  If we win, they'll be forgotten.  That's how it goes.

[Contra]

Patterson is a bad defender and will get shown up for that if he starts, Hutton is the better option for now. 

Why we need 3 left backs and have no place for McCormack is utterly baffling as McCormack is our second best striker. 

Marshall

Hutton Berra Martin Tierney 

McArthur Bannan

Burke Snodgrass Ritchie

Griffiths

 

[Gordopolis]

45 minutes ago, forameus said:

Aye, it's only Lithuania.  Clearly we should be playing two strikers, as that will obviously lead to more goals.  Just like Georgia.    

I take it you mean in 2007 (pretty sure we played 1 up in both games last time round)?

[forameus]

5 minutes ago, Gordopolis said:

I take it you mean in 2007 (pretty sure we played 1 up in both games last time round)?

I more meant the general point that we can sacrifice someone in midfield because Lithuania are a "diddy".  Like Georgia were prior to us getting beat.  Twice.

[troopio]

TBH there is not really anything to get angry about with the squad, for once I think he has actually picked the right squad in terms of people who are largely playing for their clubs and are in good form.

Hutton still getting called up actually makes sense, never thought I would say this ha, but I am thinking of it from the POV that he can potentially act as some sort of Mentor to Patterson to help bed him in, maybe I am wrong though? My fear is Hutton is being Kept in reserve to face England though, I think that is probably a given actually.

The weird one for me is why call up 3 Left Backs?? do we need 3? What like is Wallace in CB ha?

For the Lithuania game I would change Martin for Griffiths and keep the rest of the team unchanged, see how it goes from there.

[forameus]

Can any of the left backs play anywhere else?  I know it's unlikely, but is he maybe going to try out one - probably either Tierney or Robertson - at right back so we can play both?  Unlikely, I know.  It would potentially explain calling up all 3 though.  

1 minute ago, troopio said:

TBH there is not really anything to get angry about with the squad, for once I think he has actually picked the right squad in terms of people who are largely playing for their clubs and are in good form.

Hutton still getting called up actually makes sense, never thought I would say this ha, but I am thinking of it from the POV that he can potentially act as some sort of Mentor to Patterson to help bed him in, maybe I am wrong though? My fear is Hutton is being Kept in reserve to face England though, I think that is probably a given actually.

The weird one for me is why call up 3 Left Backs?? do we need 3? What like is Wallace in CB ha?

For the Lithuania game I would change Martin for Griffiths and keep the rest of the team unchanged, see how it goes from there.

I'd change Martin for Fletcher, but unchanged the same way.  Although if it's Griffiths in there, I would be in no way disappointed.  It does mean we'd be playing a completely different way, particularly the players behind whoever starts.

[sergie's no1 fan]

Lithuania will sit in deep though. Will Griffiths be as influential if there is no space to run in behind? He can score goals out of nothing but I think GS will be going with a battering ram up front, probably Fletcher.

[lionel hutz]

Why is Lee Wallace in the squad?

Douglas and Kingsley are miles better

So is Shinnie, but if you're not playing LB for your club then you can't for your country

[oneteaminglasgow]

Why is Lee Wallace in the squad?

Douglas and Kingsley are miles better

So is Shinnie, but if you're not playing LB for your club then you can't for your country

I'd rather have seen Shinnie or even Mulgrew over Wallace. They're not going to start but the other 2 can at least cover other positions should the need arise.

Other than that, nothing to be concerned about really. The inclusion of McKay is strange as he's crap, but he won't play and would only be replaced by someone else who wouldn't play either.