Jump to content

Scotland v Israel


Smokerson

Recommended Posts

Thinking about this again in the afternoon, if you're going with Dykes up front (and it has to be Dykes, Burke doesn't have the discipline to adhere to tactical instructions in a knockout game) then you have to play a game built around his strengths: Direct passes into him, runners moving beyond him, those players need to be good finishers not afraid to hit a shot.

So that means McGinn and Armstrong behind him, right?

Now here's the problem: can we play Tierney at RB in this system? He'll get forward of course, but is he going to give us the width and stretch the pitch to create gaps in the defence? Will he get crosses into the box? Is that something a right footed player like Palmer would do better? I don't think we'll be able to answer that question until we see them play and by then it's too late.

Your three in the middle then are there to screen ball splayed through feet to the Israeli strikers, and therefore hiding the weakness of our team a little. That's McTominay for sure, then probably two of Jack, Fleck and McGregor.

I don't think Gallagher can start given his form for Motherwell, so it's Cooper and McKenna.

Don't envy Clarke, this is a difficult squad to build a team out of.  We should probably calibrate our expectations accordingly.

My team:

scotlandisrael-1fa9ccb2594453aaf33abaf72

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind a back three of Cooper, McKenna and Tierney with Forrest and Robertson as wing-backs - McKenna has played a few games in the middle of a back three for us recently and, although admittedly a pretty small sample size, has been excellent. I think it will be a back four, though, so it should be Tierney, Cooper, McKenna and Robertson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DrewDon said:

I wouldn't mind a back three of Cooper, McKenna and Tierney with Forrest and Robertson as wing-backs - McKenna has played a few games in the middle of a back three for us recently and, although admittedly a pretty small sample size, has been excellent. I think it will be a back four, though, so it should be Tierney, Cooper, McKenna and Robertson. 

A back three with three left-footed centre backs would be fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, G51 said:

Thinking about this again in the afternoon, if you're going with Dykes up front (and it has to be Dykes, Burke doesn't have the discipline to adhere to tactical instructions in a knockout game) then you have to play a game built around his strengths: Direct passes into him, runners moving beyond him, those players need to be good finishers not afraid to hit a shot.

So that means McGinn and Armstrong behind him, right?

Now here's the problem: can we play Tierney at RB in this system? He'll get forward of course, but is he going to give us the width and stretch the pitch to create gaps in the defence? Will he get crosses into the box? Is that something a right footed player like Palmer would do better? I don't think we'll be able to answer that question until we see them play and by then it's too late.

Your three in the middle then are there to screen ball splayed through feet to the Israeli strikers, and therefore hiding the weakness of our team a little. That's McTominay for sure, then probably two of Jack, Fleck and McGregor.

I don't think Gallagher can start given his form for Motherwell, so it's Cooper and McKenna.

Don't envy Clarke, this is a difficult squad to build a team out of.  We should probably calibrate our expectations accordingly.

My team:

scotlandisrael-1fa9ccb2594453aaf33abaf72

This isn't "a knockout game", although I think your logic overall is sound enough and I respect the team you've picked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Marshmallo said:

Armstrong in an advanced midfield role is alright by me, baby!

Well that just won't do. 

 

Armstrong is a player that I horrifically underrated originally when he first moved to Celtic, I always feel Scotland are a far better team for having him on the pitch though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Marshmallo said:

This isn't "a knockout game", although I think your logic overall is sound enough and I respect the team you've picked.

I keep forgetting the scheduling quirk that means the knockout tie is October. Whole thing has fucked with my brain.

I'm still not sure I like Burke in there though unless we're setting up against someone with a really high line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Grant228 said:

Well that just won't do. 

 

Armstrong is a player that I horrifically underrated originally when he first moved to Celtic, I always feel Scotland are a far better team for having him on the pitch though. 

We're far better with him on the pitch. It's madness him not starting whilst ghosts like McGregor get picked constant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DAFC. said:

We're far better with him on the pitch. It's madness him not starting whilst ghosts like McGregor get picked constant. 

McGregor is in the top two players in Scotland and would be a top performers for about 14 of the teams in The Barclays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, G51 said:

A back three with three left-footed centre backs would be fun.

Fair point - it completely slipped my mind that Cooper is left footed. Then again, I think our best available back four are all left footed. People seem to flag it up less with right footed players for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Marshmallo said:

McGregor is in the top two players in Scotland and would be a top performers for about 14 of the teams in The Barclays.

Well, that's just not true at all, is it? 

I genuinely cannot remember a game (for Scotland, btw) where he has played well to impress. A total ghost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think it will be a back 3, Tierney will partner either McKenna or Cooper with Palmer at right back.

Wouldn't be against McTominay as a centre back long term, however I would liked to have seen him more there for United to see how he does.  There is probably the best competition for places for the middle 3 positions in many years, it will be interesting to see who Clarke picks out of McTom, Mcgregor, McGinn, mclean, Christie, fleck, Jack and McLean, great depth that.

Such a shame that we are looking at either Lyndon Dykes or Oli Burke playing a competitive game as number 9.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DrewDon said:

I wouldn't mind a back three of Cooper, McKenna and Tierney with Forrest and Robertson as wing-backs - McKenna has played a few games in the middle of a back three for us recently and, although admittedly a pretty small sample size, has been excellent. I think it will be a back four, though, so it should be Tierney, Cooper, McKenna and Robertson. 

I think a potential issue with a back three would be that, in trying to solve the problem of having two great left backs, we end up playing neither of them at left back. Instead of playing one out of position, we end up playing both out of position. Essentially, you have to wonder if that's worthwhile or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DAFC. said:

Well, that's just not true at all, is it? 

I genuinely cannot remember a game (for Scotland, btw) where he has played well to impress. A total ghost. 

It's him and Edouard as the top two and there isn't really anyone else close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Marshmallo said:

It's him and Edouard as the top two and there isn't really anyone else close.

Happen to agree with this 100% but like a lot of players, he is nowhere near an automatic choice for this game which is mainly down to his performances in a Scotland jersey not quite matching his club form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndyDD said:

If Paterson has called up on an emergency basis, you do wonder if it wouldn't have been more sensible to call up a younger player who might one day actually be a regular in the squad. All Patterson is ever going to be is an emergency makeshift who we only play in extremis, so not sure what value there is in having him there rather than a younger, actual striker.

Callum Paterson is 25 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, craigkillie said:

Callum Paterson is 25 years old.

As I said already, all Paterson is ever going to be for Scotland is an emergency makeshift forward. Since he will feature only in extremis, it'd be better to include a young striker, rather than a midfielder who used to play right back and is now a forward in an emergency. I struggle to see in which capacity Paterson's inclusion offers more value than a taste for an actual, you know, forward. Prospective forwards tend to be young, younger even than 25. 

Paterson is not and never shall be included as a forward option in any other circumstances. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...