WORLD CUP PLAY-OFFS: the Scottish balls-up scenario. It couldn't happen, could it?!

[MarkoDevilovich]

6 hours ago, ArabFC said:

Fucking hell. Time will bear me out on this. McTominay is a liability at the back - that folk ignore it cos he's good 'on the ball' is mental!

Cooper doesn't play the RCB role and you've already forgotten Souttar, who (incidentally) is pretty fecking decent 'on the ball'. 

Good post, for an Arab incredibly good post

[The Moonster]

As we've seen, the preferred starting 11 is rarely ever available, we always need to draft players into the system to play games. The fact we've got at least 6 options at the back (including McTominay) and 6 good options in central midfield (including McTominay) should see us compete with the best in these play-offs. Clarke has bred a system that allows those players to do what they do well. The only position I'm really concerned about now is goalkeeper, could really do with a youngster somewhere kicking on to match the level of Gordon who I'd love to play for years to come but realistically we need someone coming through. Everywhere else I like our options for the foreseeable future. 

Edited November 17, 2021 by The Moonster

[Satoshi]

For me it's a straight choice between McTominay and Hendry for RCB and I'm leaning towards the latter but it's pretty close and definitiely our most competitive position. Their respective club form could certainly change this going forward and it's particular credit to Hendry as a year ago nobody would have had him above McTominay.

Souttar played well but will only be a Gallagher esque squad player going forward.

McTominay will be the second choice for probably all three CM positions but doesn't deserve to displace McGregor, Gilmour or McGinn.

For our central CB Cooper has proven to be an effective Hanley deputy, good to have two vastly experienced PL captains competing for that central berth (and McTominay / McKenna would do okay at it too).

 

[Quentin Taranbino]

Regarding McTominay, would he make my current starting 11, probably not. However a versatile player like him is massively important and he would make my starting if one or the following were to happen;

- If Hendry is out then McTominay gets bod for RCB

- If Hanley is out and Hendry has to move to middle then McTominay gets nod for RCB

- If Gilmour or McGregor is out then McTominay gets the nod in either of those positions 

- If McGinn is out then McTominay gets the nod (depending on who is playing up front). Let him go box to box like he does at Man Utd.

Lots of instances where he could come in to the starting team but if Hendry, Hanley,  Gilmour, McGregor and McGinn are all fit then currently McTominay doesn't get in the team 

[Aufc]

Surely an option for defence would be hanley, Cooper, tierney. Cooper has been excellent lately

[Scary Bear]

Isn’t this the ‘who are we getting in the play-offs’ thread?

[Zazu]

4 hours ago, Aufc said:

Surely an option for defence would be hanley, Cooper, tierney. Cooper has been excellent lately

Cooper is left footed so would have to go into the middle, with Hanley moving to the right. 

A lot of the success of the current system has been down to the RCB being very comfortable on the ball, be it McTominay Hendry or Souttar. 

Hanley has played extremely well for Scotland as the limited ball winner in the middle of the three, but his touch, passing, dribbling and general technique isn't good enough for him to play on the right in our current system imo. 

[Bing.McCrosby]

14 hours ago, BFTD said:

I'm inclined to agree with the thing about not keeping nations apart. If it's just unacceptable to your country's leaders to play certain nations, then nobody's forcing you to enter the tournament. If the idea is that it would be too dangerous to put on an incendiary match, play it at a neutral ground at the other end of the continent. If Ukraine and Russia both qualify and meet in the knockout stages, the match will absolutely be played, which is all you need to know.

The obvious exception to that is Israel and the Asian Football Confederation. Nobody needs that shitshow.

Im sure its been suggested before. But us starting political international beefs with all the top nations is something we should pursue. Let's play the game hard.

[Scotty Tunbridge]

12 hours ago, DavidMcG said:

- If Hanley is out and Hendry has to move to middle then McTominay gets nod for RCB

 

If Hanley is out then Cooper starts in the middle with those 2 still fighting it out for the RCB slot.

[Skyline Drifter]

16 hours ago, BFTD said:

I'm inclined to agree with the thing about not keeping nations apart. If it's just unacceptable to your country's leaders to play certain nations, then nobody's forcing you to enter the tournament. If the idea is that it would be too dangerous to put on an incendiary match, play it at a neutral ground at the other end of the continent. If Ukraine and Russia both qualify and meet in the knockout stages, the match will absolutely be played, which is all you need to know.

The obvious exception to that is Israel and the Asian Football Confederation. Nobody needs that shitshow.

Not trying to be funny but, why?

Either you have a no exceptions rule or you don't. You can't say we can't be allowing all this nonsense and then immediately saying "well except for that one, they just won't behave".

If the principle you want to adopt is one of distant neutral venues if warring nations meet then why can't you also do that for Israel?  As you said yourself, ultimately if Israel reach a finals and get drawn in knockout football against the Saudis then it would be played (unless either country simply refused to play).

Personally I think the football authorities pragmatic approach is probably about right and it's pretty unlikely that warring nations would ultimately meet if they can defer it into the knock out phases of the finals at the earliest.

[craigkillie]

It was definitely a step too far when they prevented Russian and Ukrainian teams from playing each other in the semi of the Europa League though, that was hugely unfair on the teams involved.

[ArabFC]

18 hours ago, Satoshi said:

For me it's a straight choice between McTominay and Hendry for RCB and I'm leaning towards the latter but it's pretty close and definitiely our most competitive position. Their respective club form could certainly change this going forward and it's particular credit to Hendry as a year ago nobody would have had him above McTominay.

Souttar played well but will only be a Gallagher esque squad player going forward.

McTominay will be the second choice for probably all three CM positions but doesn't deserve to displace McGregor, Gilmour or McGinn.

For our central CB Cooper has proven to be an effective Hanley deputy, good to have two vastly experienced PL captains competing for that central berth (and McTominay / McKenna would do okay at it too).

 

Folk don't have haver some shite!

[effeffsee_the2nd]

Isn’t this the ‘who are we getting in the play-offs’ thread?

I’m not particularly fussed who we get tbqh, we have proved we are more than good enough to be there , if we don’t see ourselves as being capable of beating czech away with this current team then we might aswell chuck it and withdraw from fifa
The obvious one to avoid is Italy , failure to beat NI for an automatic place is outrageous for them and I’d fancy them to put that right in the play offs
Everyone else I think we can beat one way or another either like monday night or like isreal or the austria away game
If the game were played next week, I’d fancy us to beat Portugal too

[Ken Deans]

The best players will be picked. The shape against Denmark has to be the answer going in to the playoffs

[BFTD]

6 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Not trying to be funny but, why?

Virtually the entirely of the Middle East would refuse to play them, and would genuinely rather withdraw from the tournament than even acknowledge them as a country. I guess you could say, "f**k the Middle East, then", but I'm not convinced that losing an entire region from the tournament is in anyone's best interests.

It's also a more complicated situation than with, say, apartheid-era South Africa, as Israel could agree to an independent Palestinian state and stop committing war crimes tomorrow, and it would make no difference to the leadership of some of their neighbours.

Thankfully keeping them in UEFA seems to work for all concerned, and makes a lot more sense than the days of shuttling them off to South America or Oceania for qualifiers.

[BFTD]

9 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Im sure its been suggested before. But us starting political international beefs with all the top nations is something we should pursue. Let's play the game hard.

We do have nukes, after all.

Might call our bluff when they realise we don't have the launch codes, though  

[Skyline Drifter]

3 hours ago, BFTD said:

Virtually the entirely of the Middle East would refuse to play them, and would genuinely rather withdraw from the tournament than even acknowledge them as a country. I guess you could say, "f**k the Middle East, then", but I'm not convinced that losing an entire region from the tournament is in anyone's best interests.

It's also a more complicated situation than with, say, apartheid-era South Africa, as Israel could agree to an independent Palestinian state and stop committing war crimes tomorrow, and it would make no difference to the leadership of some of their neighbours.

Thankfully keeping them in UEFA seems to work for all concerned, and makes a lot more sense than the days of shuttling them off to South America or Oceania for qualifiers.

Yes, yes, I get all that. Thanks for explaining middle eastern politics for me though. 

You're completely missing the point though. You dont get to pick and choose your exceptions. You either say there are no exceptions or you accept there are exceptions. Once you accept the latter its just semantics what's allowed and what isnt. I expect half of your average Ukrainians think their case is far more justified. 

You cant bemoan the principle and then in the same breath accept its valid where you think it should be.

Edited November 18, 2021 by Skyline Drifter

[BFTD]

1 minute ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Yes, yes, I get all that. Thanks for explaining middle eastern politics for me though. 

You're completely missing the point though. You dont get to pick and choose your exceptions though. You either say there are no exceptions or you accept there are exceptions. Once you accept the latter its just semantics what's allowed and what isnt. I expect half of your average Ukrainians think their case is far more justified. 

You cant bemoan the principle and then in the same breath accept its valud where you think it should be.

Sorry, I thought you wanted an explanation about why I thought that was an exception.

We're already picking and choosing our exceptions; I never said I didn't think there should be any, just that Russia and Ukraine doesn't meet it for me. YMMV.

[Skyline Drifter]

1 minute ago, BFTD said:

Sorry, I thought you wanted an explanation about why I thought that was an exception.

We're already picking and choosing our exceptions; I never said I didn't think there should be any, just that Russia and Ukraine doesn't meet it for me. YMMV.

No, what you said was, "If it's just unacceptable to your country's leaders to play certain nations, then nobody's forcing you to enter the tournament".

That's equally valid for your Middle Eastern countries. You basically said there should be no exceptions.......... except for this exception. I dont think thats really a valid stance. I accept there have to be exceptions for practical reasons. 

I agree that Israel playing in UEFA is a far more reasonable solution but once we accept the principle of reasonable solution we also have to accept it may apply in other cases. Personally I think the fact Russia are effectively an invading force in Ukraine is a pretty reasonable cause to keep them apart unless FIFA / UEFA grow a pair of balls and ban Russia altogether (& given this is the organisation that granted the finals to Qatar that's clearly not happening). 

Personally I think its truly ridiculous Spain are allowed to dictate they dont play Gibraltar but I guess its unlikely to affect the qualifying process! 

[BFTD]

8 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

No, what you said was, "If it's just unacceptable to your country's leaders to play certain nations, then nobody's forcing you to enter the tournament".

That's equally valid for your Middle Eastern countries. You basically said there should be no exceptions.......... except for this exception. I dont think thats really a valid stance. I accept there have to be exceptions for practical reasons. 

I agree that Israel playing in UEFA is a far more reasonable solution but once we accept the principle of reasonable solution we also have to accept it may apply in other cases. Personally I think the fact Russia are effectively an invading force in Ukraine is a pretty reasonable cause to keep them apart unless FIFA / UEFA grow a pair of balls and ban Russia altogether (& given this is the organisation that granted the finals to Qatar that's clearly not happening). 

Personally I think its truly ridiculous Spain are allowed to dictate they dont play Gibraltar but I guess its unlikely to affect the qualifying process! 

Still don't know where you're getting that. That's one exception I'm happy with, and I'd consider others, with all my power on the FIFA Executive Committee. South Africa up to the Nineties, for example. England on the basis that they've invaded every c**t on the planet. The list goes on.

Edit: considering Russia have (I think) been kept apart from (at least) Ukraine, Georgia, Afghanistan, and possibly others at various times, I'm sorely tempted to give them the bullet regardless of their use of substances to enhance performances. I'll bring it up at the next meeting.

Edited November 19, 2021 by BFTD