Israel Vs Scotland 28th March

[Boaby Fisher]

I watched quite a lot of the qualifying matches over the last few days, and what I saw, especially of the home nations, reinforced a theory I've had since more and more overseas players started coming into the EPL and to a lesser extent the SPL. I watched England's game against Albania (who I would probably categorize as a similar level to Israel, maybe slightly below), and although they totally dominated possession, only scored two, with one being a gift. The one 'good' goal they scored was a typical British league goal - whip in a cross and have a big lad get in front of his marker. If they had done more of that, rather than trying to weave pretty patterns through mass defensive ranks they would probably have got 4 or 5.

I see a similar problem with Scotland, especially against weaker sides. One, we give them way too much respect, and two, we let them dictate our style of play. I'm not advocating hoofball, but there's definitely room for some direct play and whipping in crosses to a big brutal Joe Jordan type. That probably won't work against the better sides, but that's where you play a press and counter. Too many players who usually train with technically excellent overseas players think they have to play like Barcelona or Ajax because it's an international game, and that's just not our strength (nor is it England's for sure). I don't recall the magical Tartan Army results being the product of 50 pass total football moves, but a lot of determination, physicality and a piece of individual magic - let's give these diddy teams the fright of their lives and go for the throat.

[ewan14]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

It's a mentality thing with Scotland and Scottish coaches and players. For years we continually pump out shitebag, negative managers that pollute our game up and down the leagues, who speak of "keeping it tight away and sneaking a goal". In turn they churn out shitebag players who litter our game.

The fear of losing is just so overriding, yet there is fear to change that mindset too, despite it not working for anyone and decades of evidence that back it up.

Good point , but opens another can of worms

Should the size of  leagues be increased to prevent full time (?) teams being relegated , and suffering the financial consequences ?

and ideally encourage less defensive football ?

I do not know the answer

I did hear on the radio that Luxembourg are putting resources in to producing more , better footballers

Edited March 29, 2021 by ewan14

[ewan14]

14 minutes ago, Boaby Fisher said:

I watched quite a lot of the qualifying matches over the last few days, and what I saw, especially of the home nations, reinforced a theory I've had since more and more overseas players started coming into the EPL and to a lesser extent the SPL. I watched England's game against Albania (who I would probably categorize as a similar level to Israel, maybe slightly below), and although they totally dominated possession, only scored two, with one being a gift. The one 'good' goal they scored was a typical British league goal - whip in a cross and have a big lad get in front of his marker. If they had done more of that, rather than trying to weave pretty patterns through mass defensive ranks they would probably have got 4 or 5.

I see a similar problem with Scotland, especially against weaker sides. One, we give them way too much respect, and two, we let them dictate our style of play. I'm not advocating hoofball, but there's definitely room for some direct play and whipping in crosses to a big brutal Joe Jordan type. That probably won't work against the better sides, but that's where you play a press and counter. Too many players who usually train with technically excellent overseas players think they have to play like Barcelona or Ajax because it's an international game, and that's just not our strength (nor is it England's for sure). I don't recall the magical Tartan Army results being the product of 50 pass total football moves, but a lot of determination, physicality and a piece of individual magic - let's give these diddy teams the fright of their lives and go for the throat.

I think Israel are far better than Albania

[Savage Henry]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

It's a mentality thing with Scotland and Scottish coaches and players. For years we continually pump out shitebag, negative managers that pollute our game up and down the leagues, who speak of "keeping it tight away and sneaking a goal". In turn they churn out shitebag players who litter our game.

The fear of losing is just so overriding, yet there is fear to change that mindset too, despite it not working for anyone and decades of evidence that back it up.

But Hamish Husband et al will also tell you it has to be a Scot in charge.  The kind of fans who go mental the moment a defender dare play the ball out of his own box seem to hold a lot of power.  

[Boaby Fisher]

2 minutes ago, ewan14 said:

I think Israel are far better than Albania

I wouldn't say they were far better, but I think the point still stands - both didddies.

[ewan14]

Scotland beat Italy in 1965 due to a passing move from our goalie to their net without one of them touching the ball !

[ewan14]

Just now, Boaby Fisher said:

I wouldn't say they were far better, but I think the point still stands - both didddies.

No

[ewan14]

Anyway , are our defenders and defensive midfielders incapable of communicating with each other ?

e.g. Hanley and O' Donnell

[Savage Henry]

Just now, ewan14 said:

Anyway , are our defenders and defensive midfielders incapable of communicating in sentences  ?

e.g. Hanley

I think we all know the answer is no. 

[ewan14]

6 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

I think we all know the answer is no. 

He can score a goal though !

[HalfCutNinja]

25 minutes ago, ewan14 said:

Scotland beat Italy in 1965 due to a passing move from our goalie to their net without one of them touching the ball !

Scotland actually invented passing football. No joke.

But we have been left miles behind technically now. All of the UK and Ireland have.

Personally I think its the climate, as well as the culture. 

[Thumper]

1 hour ago, Savage Henry said:

It also puts paid to the cliche that Scotland play better against good teams. 

No, it does the opposite. This self-reinforcing myth, which goes back at least as far as 1978, is why we continue to disregard dropped points against the lower seeds. If you go into a group, as Scotland usually do, thinking that picking up 2 or 4 points against the top seeds and drawing with everyone else is fine, then you never qualify. And yet that's the national consensus.

[wastecoatwilly]

3 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Tremendous post.

It really does identify the issue and, as you say, indicate why last night's result is so costly.

I think the post from @Diamonds are Forever has relevance but there's no Germany,Italy or England in this group even thou Denmark could run away with it Scotland are going to finish 3rd at least with second up for grabs.
I've not got a problem with what Clarke said we've qualified for a major tournament that alone should give him goodwill. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by wastecoatwilly

[Monkey Tennis]

27 minutes ago, Thumper said:

No, it does the opposite. This self-reinforcing myth, which goes back at least as far as 1978, is why we continue to disregard dropped points against the lower seeds. If you go into a group, as Scotland usually do, thinking that picking up 2 or 4 points against the top seeds and drawing with everyone else is fine, then you never qualify. And yet that's the national consensus.

The problem with this theory is that we don't generally take 2 or 4 points off the top seeds either.  

[Monkey Tennis]

27 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

I think the post from @Diamonds are Forever has relevance but there's no Germany,Italy or England in this group even thou Denmark could run away with it Scotland are going to finish 3rd at least with second up for grabs.
I've not got a problem with what Clarke said we've qualified for a major tournament that alone should give him goodwill. 

We qualified via a back door that we allowed to shut on us in the breeze this time.

The identity of the top seed has little bearing on the point about dropping points against the weaker sides.

[wastecoatwilly]

17 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

We qualified via a back door that we allowed to shut on us in the breeze this time.

The identity of the top seed has little bearing on the point about dropping points against the weaker sides.

Where not in a position to win the group so the back door is always been our option.
 

[Thumper]

44 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

The problem with this theory is that we don't generally take 2 or 4 points off the top seeds either.  

But we optimise for it. There is this utterly counterfactual narrative that says it doesn't matter if you shitfest out a 0-0 in Minsk so long as you can beat the top seed in Hampden three days later.

I'd like to see someone run the stats on this. We'd almost certainly be better going into every group planning to get 0 points against the top seed and winning against everyone from tier 3 down and instead we virtually always assume 2-4 points are on the board against the top and don't give a shit about dropping 6 elsewhere.

[Monkey Tennis]

8 hours ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Where not in a position to win the group so the back door is always been our option.
 

The Nations' League back door has not always been an option.   It's only just appeared in the last few years.

[Monkey Tennis]

7 hours ago, Thumper said:

But we optimise for it. There is this utterly counterfactual narrative that says it doesn't matter if you shitfest out a 0-0 in Minsk so long as you can beat the top seed in Hampden three days later.

I'd like to see someone run the stats on this. We'd almost certainly be better going into every group planning to get 0 points against the top seed and winning against everyone from tier 3 down and instead we virtually always assume 2-4 points are on the board against the top and don't give a shit about dropping 6 elsewhere.

I think we've been absolutely guilty of "planning to get 0 points against the top seed", with our 'free hit' nonsense.  The fact is that it's actually rare for the top seed to qualify with a 100% record, yet we're happy to assume they do, then turn round horrified, to claim ill fortune if other sides pick up results against them.

The fact is that neither approach is sound.  In terms of real, tangible damage though, our failures against the smaller sides are more costly, because they're avoidable and tend to be avoided by our qualification rivals.

[craigkillie]

This "back door" pish can get straight in the bin. If the Nations League hadn't existed then there would have still been play-offs for the Euros, and we finished 3rd in our group anyway.