Scotland v Israel

[Donathan]

FWIW I’d go


Marshall

Cooper - McKenna - Tierney

Palmer - McGinn - Fleck - Robertson

Forrest - McBurnie - Armstrong

[eez-eh]

Fraser “opted out” apparently - due to not having enough match fitness. There was me thinking that playing some matches might be the best way to, you know, get match fitness.

Surely that’s the straw that breaks the camel’s back? Not like we don’t have an abundance of midfielders anyway.

[eez-eh]

2 minutes ago, ScottishZizou said:

I think there’s very little between:

mctominay, fleck, mcginn, Armstrong, mcgregor, Christie  

Do you think he is a nailed in starter out of that bunch?

Yes. He’s been excellent so far playing behind the striker.

[accies1874]

Folk dropping Christie for Armstrong is understandable, but you also need to take into account international form as well as club form. Christie's been the best player in pretty much every game he's started for Scotland.

[craigkillie]

Armstrong has always played well for Scotland too. I would have both of them (and McTominay and Jack) ahead of McGregor, but Clarke has picked McGregor in every single game so far.

[Savage Henry]

5 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

Fraser “opted out” apparently - due to not having enough match fitness. There was me thinking that playing some matches might be the best way to, you know, get match fitness.

Surely that’s the straw that breaks the camel’s back? Not like we don’t have an abundance of midfielders anyway.

Fraser’s attitude plainly stinks.  It’s not as if he’s got a record of turning up through thick and thin at the best of times.

[ScottishZizou]

Just now, craigkillie said:

Armstrong has always played well for Scotland too. I would have both of them (and McTominay and Jack) ahead of McGregor, but Clarke has picked McGregor in every single game so far.

I’m in complete agreement with this, I don’t understand why Mcgregor is an automatic starter every game. The issue is we realistically have to play Mctominay or jack for shape and Forrest for pace. Leaving 3 spaces for Armstrong, Christie, Mcginn and Fleck which is a very tough call

[thruthenight]

1 minute ago, Savage Henry said:

Fraser’s attitude plainly stinks.  It’s not as if he’s got a record of turning up through thick and thin at the best of times.

Yeah, his refusing to play for Bournemouth at the end of the season has put a lot of potential suitors off him. I'll be amazed if it turns out he's pulled out of this squad because of a lack of fitness.

[Dunning1874]

I agree that all of Taylor, Palmer & O'Donnell being there does mean Tierney will be at centre back, but don't agree that it makes a back three likely. We have enough trouble shoehorning all the midfielders who should be starting games in as it is without dropping one to accommodate a centre back.

I think that means we're continuing with a back four with Robertson and Taylor as the left back options, Palmer and O'Donnell as the right back options, then we have four options for the two centre back slots in Tierney, McKenna, Cooper and Gallagher. You're not going to change the system and drop someone like Armstrong or Christie to accomodate two of the latter three there. Those options mean Robertson, Tierney and probably Palmer start but bets are off on which one partners Tierney at centre back.

Otherwise it's the squad you'd expect, revolving door of third choice goalkeeper aside. When everyone's fit you'd expect Fraser in for Burke (although his bridges may be burned), and Gilmour in for McLean, possibly Griffiths will be back if he ever gets a consistent run of games again, but there's no one obvious missing out.

Edited August 25, 2020 by Dunning1874

[swing_kinker]

18 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

Based on Clarke's press conference, I'm not sure Ryan Fraser is in his good books.

Definitely got that vibe from him too 

[craigkillie]

We've named three left-backs in quite a few squads since Clarke took over. I've just assumed it's because he likes all three players and it does absolutely no harm to have them all around, rather than the sort of mental stigma of someone like Taylor being dropped and then reselected every few months. I don't think it necessarily points to him playing any particular sort of system. Worth remembering that Palmer has played centre-back a bit in his career too, not that I'm expecting him to line up there for us.

The thing that stands out more to me is that Forrest is the only out-and-out winger there. The likes of Burke, Armstrong and Christie can play wide too, but they're all primarily central players. It will be interesting to see what that means in terms of the shape of the team, but I am pleased that it hopefully means we've seen the last of Matt Phillips.

Edited August 25, 2020 by craigkillie

[ScottishZizou]

If someone were to ask me of the ten most deserving outfield players of Scotland game time given their form/ abilities in no particular order I would go: 

Robertson, tierney, Mcginn, Armstrong, mctominay, fleck, Forrest, Jack, Christie, mcgregor.

how many can we shoe horn into one team before it becomes utterly ludicrous and counter productive? 

Questions-

1- do you shoe horn Tierney into CB? I’d probably go yes. 
2- which midfielders do you have to play? Realistically either Mctominay or Jack to keep shape. Forrest as we become unable to stretch teams without him 

3- can you get off without playing a striker? I think no so someone else has to play 

4- can any of these guys play right back? No so another can’t play 

You end up with a right back, a centre back and a striker who probably aren’t in our best players but have to play, Just the nature of it and three guys who have a good claim getting turfed. Pretty unfortunate and bound to be arguments as I could make a case for all ten of the above to start but 3 can’t. Jack and Mcgregor I wouldn’t then justifying the next is immensely difficult 

[eez-eh]

Sign me up for the “distinctly unimpressed by McGregor in his recent caps” club. In theory he should be a dynamic option in midfield who can do a bit of everything and link defence with attack, but I don’t think it’s ever worked out like that.

11 minutes ago, thruthenight said:

Yeah, his refusing to play for Bournemouth at the end of the season has put a lot of potential suitors off him. I'll be amazed if it turns out he's pulled out of this squad because of a lack of fitness.

It’s in the BBC article that he said he wasn’t fit enough to be included.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53894763

[The Moonster]

7 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

Based on Clarke's press conference, I'm not sure Ryan Fraser is in his good books.

I would just stop calling him up if I was Clarke. He's shown absolutely nothing that suggests he's at all interested in playing for Scotland. I'd rather play a central player like Christie or Armstrong out wide knowing that they'll give us everything they've got than Fraser picking and choosing when he wants to play.

[G51]

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

We've named three left-backs in quite a few squads since Clarke took over. I've just assumed it's because he likes all three players and it does absolutely no harm to have them all around, rather than the sort of mental stigma of someone like Taylor being dropped and then reselected every few months. I don't think it necessarily points to him playing any particular sort of system. Worth remembering that Palmer has played centre-back a bit in his career too, not that I'm expecting him to line up there for us.

The thing that stands out more to me is that Forrest is the only out-and-out winger there. The likes of Burke, Armstrong and Christie can play wide too, but they're all primarily central players. It will be interesting to see what that means in terms of the shape of the team, but I am pleased that it hopefully means we've seen the last of Matt Phillips.

Hopefully it means a 4-3-2-1 formation. McGinn/Christie/Armstrong linking up with McBurnie could work - he needs players making runs ahead of him.

[David W]

43 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I honestly can't fathom why a team struggling to find 2 capable centre backs would opt to play a formation that requires 3 of them, but that appears to be what Clarke is thinking. Having both O'Donnell and Palmer there makes no sense if your plan is to play Tierney at right back, which is what we all thought would happen. I'd have dropped one of those guys, probably O'Donnell but aside from that I think the squad is pretty strong.

Will see what Clarke goes with but I haven't enjoyed any of the games we've played with 3 centre halves before.

As counter-intuitive as it might be, my instinct has always been thaf if you don't have two good centre halves, then you play three at the back. It's easier to defend the box and you can let Robertson attack more than he would having to protect a poor centre half in a two. It often ends up as a four anyway with one wing-back tucking in and the other having to push higher to stop a cross. When you don't have a competent right back, it seems like a no-brainer.

However, I'd also say that three at the back needs a lot more work on the training pitch; I'd only be playing it if it was a long term plan.

I seem to remember Scotland playing a game (no idea which one) where they played three at the back, two wingbacks and an out and out defensive midfielder and they basically ended up with six at the back. The midfield has to be confident enough to push high and bring the defence with it.

[G51]

2 minutes ago, David W said:

As counter-intuitive as it might be, my instinct has always been thaf if you don't have two good centre halves, then you play three at the back. It's easier to defend the box and you can let Robertson attack more than he would having to protect a poor centre half in a two. It often ends up as a four anyway with one wing-back tucking in and the other having to push higher to stop a cross. When you don't have a competent right back, it seems like a no-brainer.

However, I'd also say that three at the back needs a lot more work on the training pitch; I'd only be playing it if it was a long term plan.

I seem to remember Scotland playing a game (no idea which one) where they played three at the back, two wingbacks and an out and out defensive midfielder and they basically ended up with six at the back. The midfield has to be confident enough to push high and bring the defence with it.

I see your point, but I'd argue with the particular profile of CB we have, instead of playing 3 at the back, play 4 and simply play a flat midfield three that stops passes into feet for the opposition strikers. Keep the centre mids rigid and let them shuffle over as the ball is moved about.

That then leaves two of McKenna/Gallagher/Cooper to primarily deal with the aerial threat, which is their strength.

I'd basically play the formation that Rangers played in European games last year that made Niko Katic (who is also great in the air but not great at everything else) look class.

[John Lambies Doos]

No issue with Dykes getting in squad, but what's he actually done?

[Savage Henry]

8 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

No issue with Dykes getting in squad, but what's he actually done?

Be tall and run around a lot.

[The Moonster]

8 minutes ago, David W said:

As counter-intuitive as it might be, my instinct has always been thaf if you don't have two good centre halves, then you play three at the back. It's easier to defend the box and you can let Robertson attack more than he would having to protect a poor centre half in a two. It often ends up as a four anyway with one wing-back tucking in and the other having to push higher to stop a cross. When you don't have a competent right back, it seems like a no-brainer.

However, I'd also say that three at the back needs a lot more work on the training pitch; I'd only be playing it if it was a long term plan.

I seem to remember Scotland playing a game (no idea which one) where they played three at the back, two wingbacks and an out and out defensive midfielder and they basically ended up with six at the back. The midfield has to be confident enough to push high and bring the defence with it.

My problem with 3 at the back is that it has arguably two of our best players in Robertson and Tierney out of their best positions and limits the wide midfielders we can use, which again is quite a strong area for us.