November Squad (vs Cyprus & Kazakhstan)

[gonzohiggy]

1 hour ago, velo army said:

McCrorie is awful with the ball at his feet and is clumsy in the tackle. There is a solid reason he was allowed to leave, albeit on loan. He's a huddy.

Awful with the ball at his feet? Utter p***

[The Moonster]

20 hours ago, 54_and_counting said:

To me thats a 451 against the might of khazakstan and Cyprus, far too negative in what are essentially friendlies for clarke to try something bold and different

You've gone on the assumption that playing with only 1 striker is negative - it's not. Quite why we want to move to a 3 at the back when we can't even cobble two of them together at the moment is anyones guess.

15 hours ago, Aufc said:

Scotland getting pumped off two good team in russia and belgium and some fans are shouting to bring the youngsters in.

For the record, these games are not glorified friendlies. Clarke needs to use these games to get a settled team for the play offs.

He can only play settled teams if the fuckers turn up.

[anonanist]

Wouldn't mind seeing Andrew Robertson following the Gareth Bale progression and moving from left back over to right wing, where his attacking skills could add more to the team than his defensive abilities, but it'd be one to try out in an insignificant fixture since he won't have the opportunity to play in that role for Liverpool; used to think the same about Callum Paterson, but on the opposite side of the pitch. 

Kieran Tierney seems to be a better all-rounder for the left-back position - in  straight choice I'd pick him over Robertson for that role. 

And, just to contradict myself, part of the problem with the national team seems to be managers picking the best overall group of players who they then try to shoe-horn into various unsuitable positions, rather than picking the best player for each individual position, based on how they play in that specific position for their respective clubs.

[Aufc]

Wouldn't mind seeing Andrew Robertson following the Gareth Bale progression and moving from left back over to right wing, where his attacking skills could add more to the team than his defensive abilities, but it'd be one to try out in an insignificant fixture since he won't have the opportunity to play in that role for Liverpool; used to think the same about Callum Paterson, but on the opposite side of the pitch. 
Kieran Tierney seems to be a better all-rounder for the left-back position - in  straight choice I'd pick him over Robertson for that role. 
And, just to contradict myself, part of the problem with the national team seems to be managers picking the best overall group of players who they then try to shoe-horn into various unsuitable positions, rather than picking the best player for each individual position, based on how they play in that specific position for their respective clubs.

Wow

[DA Baracus]

Folk need to give the 'play Robertson on the wing' stuff a rest.

He isn't a winger and should never be played as one.

[54_and_counting]

2 hours ago, The Moonster said:

You've gone on the assumption that playing with only 1 striker is negative - it's not. Quite why we want to move to a 3 at the back when we can't even cobble two of them together at the moment is anyones guess.

He can only play settled teams if the fuckers turn up.

But one striker is always negative with Scotland, the problem with playing 451 is that scotland inevitably get sucked into sitting deep and leaving the striker isolated and then its launching long balls to them

Play 2 up top and even then if the midfield cant get close to them, at least there is a pair that can work off each other

[Aufc]

But one striker is always negative with Scotland, the problem with playing 451 is that scotland inevitably get sucked into sitting deep and leaving the striker isolated and then its launching long balls to them
Play 2 up top and even then if the midfield cant get close to them, at least there is a pair that can work off each other

I have already questioned you on this. We struggle to find one decent striker nevermind 2. Why do you want to play our best players in unfavoured positions just to accommodate another striker.

The current formation suits us. 4-1-4-1.

I have every confidence that Clarke will get it right once he gets a settled team (if this happens). So many fans over reacting because we got humped twice by the best team in the world and humped twice by a very decent russia team. If he fails to win the next two games and doesnt get through the play off then maybe he will deserve some criticism.

Michael o’neil had a terrible start as boss of NI. Now look at him.

[DA Baracus]

Scotland must be so easy to play against.

 

Let our defenders have the ball. All they will do is either launch it upfield to our isolated striker, thus ensuring easy turnover of possession, or pass it to the keeper to launch it upfield. Press them and they will panic on the ball and turn it over quicker.

 

We rush things, show little composure on the ball and so end up creating very little when we do manage to have a period of possession. We don’t have players making effective runs and so much of what we do is slow and predictable, often resulting in an aimless launched ball. At international level we are one of the most ineffective teams in terms of making use of space. We are horrible off the ball. Punting a high ball and hoping a striker can win a flick on, usually to absolutely no one, or hoping that he can hold it up for the distant midfield whilst swarmed by two or three defenders is archaic. Some teams must watch this shit and either laugh or frown and wonder what the f**k we’re playing at.

 

We sit back deeper and deeper, allowing teams to come at us, and also ensuring that should we managed to get the ball we won’t be able to break effectively. We rely on punted clearances which just invites pressure right back on to us. We can’t keep hold of the ball and struggle to build anything meaningful.

 

We are lagging so far behind other teams. We’re never going to be total nonsense of the level of San Marino, but we’re definitely fast approaching dropping down from being a middling side to being a poor one. For a long time we were an alright team who could give a game to most teams at home and sometimes pull off a decent away result. Now we’re soft and afraid and have slid down from that level.

[54_and_counting]

5 minutes ago, Aufc said:

 

I have already questioned you on this. We struggle to find one decent striker nevermind 2. Why do you want to play our best players in unfavoured positions just to accommodate another striker.

The current formation suits us. 4-1-4-1.

I have every confidence that Clarke will get it right once he gets a settled team (if this happens). So many fans over reacting because we got humped twice by the best team in the world and humped twice by a very decent russia team. If he fails to win the next two games and doesnt get through the play off then maybe he will deserve some criticism.

Michael o’neil had a terrible start as boss of NI. Now look at him.

 

So the last minute winner at home to Cyprus was a magnificent performance then? 

And i fail to understand how a 4141 suits scotland when performances have been brutal, humped twice by the best team in the world isnt a valid excuse

[54_and_counting]

1 minute ago, DA Baracus said:

Scotland must be so easy to play against.

 

Let our defenders have the ball. All they will do is either launch it upfield to our isolated striker, thus ensuring easy turnover of possession, or pass it to the keeper to launch it upfield. Press them and they will panic on the ball and turn it over quicker.

 

We rush things, show little composure on the ball and so end up creating very little when we do manage to have a period of possession. We don’t have players making effective runs and so much of what we do is slow and predictable, often resulting in an aimless launched ball. At international level we are one of the most ineffective teams in terms of making use of space. We are horrible off the ball. Punting a high ball and hoping a striker can win a flick on, usually to absolutely no one, or hoping that he can hold it up for the distant midfield whilst swarmed by two or three defenders is archaic. Some teams must watch this shit and either laugh or frown and wonder what the f**k we’re playing at.

 

We sit back deeper and deeper, allowing teams to come at us, and also ensuring that should we managed to get the ball we won’t be able to break effectively. We rely on punted clearances which just invites pressure right back on to us. We can’t keep hold of the ball and struggle to build anything meaningful.

 

We are lagging so far behind other teams. We’re never going to be total nonsense of the level of San Marino, but we’re definitely fast approaching dropping down from being a middling side to being a poor one. For a long time we were an alright team who could give a game to most teams at home and sometimes pull off a decent away result. Now we’re soft and afraid and have slid down from that level.

Right on the money, scotland dont have a defence strong enough to allow the midfield to press high and support a lone striker

[DA Baracus]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

Right on the money, scotland dont have a defence strong enough to allow the midfield to press high and support a lone striker

I think that even if we could our best defence it wouldn’t make much difference, as we’d still be asking them to play the same way.

 

They’d still get the ball and still be launching it. Whenever a midfielder drops back to take a pass they simply pass it right back. We struggle to have someone drop back and take the ball then push forward, looking for passes. Other teams have long since sussed this and so press our defence and force them to shell an aimless ball or force them to pass back to the keeper so that he does the same. They also stick close to our midfielders and track them deep so that they can’t take up possession and are forced to play the ball back immediately to the defender who has just passed it to them.

 

Teams know that even just a bit of pressure will see us resort to a long punt. It’s so easy for them.

[Gordopolis]

1 hour ago, anonanist said:

Wouldn't mind seeing Andrew Robertson following the Gareth Bale progression and moving from left back over to right wing, where his attacking skills could add more to the team than his defensive abilities, but it'd be one to try out in an insignificant fixture since he won't have the opportunity to play in that role for Liverpool; used to think the same about Callum Paterson, but on the opposite side of the pitch. 

Kieran Tierney seems to be a better all-rounder for the left-back position - in  straight choice I'd pick him over Robertson for that role. 

And, just to contradict myself, part of the problem with the national team seems to be managers picking the best overall group of players who they then try to shoe-horn into various unsuitable positions, rather than picking the best player for each individual position, based on how they play in that specific position for their respective clubs.

 

[Smokerson]

Marshall

Palmer    ?      McKenna     Robertson

McTominay    Armstrong     McGinn

Christie     Naismith      Fraser

[DAFC.]

14 minutes ago, Smokerson said:

Marshall

Palmer    ?      McKenna     Robertson

McTominay    Armstrong     McGinn

Christie     Naismith      Fraser

Behave.

[Smokerson]

Still don't think there is a better option if he is fit, plenty legs, energy and pace around him so you need that experienced focal point. Worked well with Fletcher towards the end of last year.

[DAFC.]

I can get behind McGregor being dropped, as he's been a total ghost for us this campaign, but unsure if Armstrong should replace him at this point. 

[Scumjob]

I would go 4-3-2-1

Marshall in goal

Talked at length about the the back 4 previously but ideally:

Tierney Caulker McKenna Robertson

If Caulker isn't available then I suspect Cooper comes in but I wouldn't mind Findlay getting a run just please not Hanley or Mulgrew. I worry Clarke will go with the attitude of 'better the bombscare you know' though. Midfield:

McTominay, Arstrong and McGinn play as a flat 3 with McTominay sitting and the full backs providing width.

McBurnie starts up front with Fraser and Christie playing behind with a license to float about a bit.

Paterson and Shankland both on the bench to provide plan B firepower.

[The Moonster]

1 hour ago, 54_and_counting said:

But one striker is always negative with Scotland, the problem with playing 451 is that scotland inevitably get sucked into sitting deep and leaving the striker isolated and then its launching long balls to them

Play 2 up top and even then if the midfield cant get close to them, at least there is a pair that can work off each other

We drop deep and resort to long balls because we aren't very good at football, not because we're not playing with two strikers. We're struggling to field one, single striker that is of International quality right now and we're suggesting throwing someone else up there. Having 2 isolated strikers isn't a solution to having 1 isolated striker. We also have a plethora of central midfielders who are among our best players (regardless of their performances in a Scotland jersey). Dropping someone like McTominay, McGinn or Christie in favour of playing Johnny Russell or Oli McBurnie next to Lawrence Shankland doesn't sound like an improvement to the team to me.

[ForzaFifer]

Id keep the same starting midfield and give Shankland another crack in the next two games, i think they all worked well together.

As for the defence, i'd probably throw Tierney in at RB, no idea about CB's though, McKenna should be back and i wouldnt mind another look at Findlay.

[ilostmyself]

 

2 hours ago, Scumjob said:

Tierney Caulker McKenna Robertson

I think that's the best defence we can put out. I've been against Tierney at RB as I think it takes away his attacking threat but I don't think O'Donnell or Palmer are at the level required. Unless we do 3 at the back and put Tierney as the LCB I think it's RB or the bench for him.

Midfield, I'd like to try Jack instead of McTominay as I'm not sure what the latter offers us aside from being one of the least bad performers in a terrible Man Utd side. If Armstrong doesn't get first team football I'd leave him on the bench but otherwise he'd be in the first XI. Basically we've got 6 players for 3 spots in the centre and I think it's McTominay/Jack +2 others. I'd go

Jack McGregor

Forrest Christie/McGinn Fraser

Up front I'd play anyone that can hold the ball up. Shite that Fletcher doesn't want to play as I thought while not being the best striker in the world, he's the best option we have at helping the 3 behind the striker (our strongest positions) get into the game.

Also thought Hornby looked a handful for the U21s against Lithuania but still looks quite raw. This is his first season of first team football so hopefully he keeps in the first team and keeps scoring.