Old Bing Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 2 hours ago, ArabFC said: Cracking up slightly at the premise that you're educating folk that not every player on a team joins an attack. I honestly think he's a kid 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewanandmoreagain Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 18 hours ago, Bing.McCrosby said: One person (numbers) still saying it was a good idea and 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewanandmoreagain Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 Steve Clarke took the away friendly in Turkey to help prepare for the away game in Spain 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted July 10 Author Share Posted July 10 4 hours ago, ArabFC said: Cracking up slightly at the premise that you're educating folk that not every player on a team joins an attack. That's superb. If everyone understands the concept that we always keep a minimum of 3 players in 'rest defence' then we can move past the idea that playing a 'back-3', 'three clunky centre backs' or replacing Tierney with McKenna is the reason we didn't beat Hungary. 4 hours ago, A Diamond For Me said: As I recall the reaction to the Norway game - and certainly my own thought at the time - was delight at the excellent result, acknowledgement of how little we'd created until the very end, and satisfaction that we'd kept their main threat, arguably the best striker in the world, pretty quiet. I mind my dad saying at the time that if you didn't already know Haaland's reputation you'd not be able to infer it from that game, and surely some of the credit for that has to go to the Scottish defence. Compare this to the post Hungary reaction: No-one is giving the Hungarians credit for their defensive display against Scotland. An acknowledgement of creating very little until the end is not what has been seen after the Hungary game, fierce criticism is closer to the mark. If Scotland had lost to Norway would your reaction have been different? So what do we attribute to that difference in reaction? The outcome. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewanandmoreagain Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 (edited) 38 minutes ago, 2426255 said: That's superb. If everyone understands the concept that we always keep a minimum of 3 players in 'rest defence' then we can move past the idea that playing a 'back-3', 'three clunky centre backs' or replacing Tierney with McKenna is the reason we didn't beat Hungary. Compare this to the post Hungary reaction: No-one is giving the Hungarians credit for their defensive display against Scotland. mainly because it was parking the bus The very best teams do not need to park the bus to give good defensive displays Edited July 10 by Ewanandmoreagain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewanandmoreagain Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 41 minutes ago, 2426255 said: That's superb. If everyone understands the concept that we always keep a minimum of 3 players in 'rest defence' then we can move past the idea that playing a 'back-3', 'three clunky centre backs' or replacing Tierney with McKenna is the reason we didn't beat Hungary. Compare this to the post Hungary reaction: No-one is giving the Hungarians credit for their defensive display against Scotland. An acknowledgement of creating very little until the end is not what has been seen after the Hungary game, fierce criticism is closer to the mark. If Scotland had lost to Norway would your reaction have been different? So what do we attribute to that difference in reaction? The outcome. Going back to the victory in Oslo when SC and Andy Robertson were having their wee conversation after the equaliser IMHO SC was telling Andy to go for the win and how ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 2 hours ago, Ewanandmoreagain said: mainly because it was parking the bus The very best teams do not need to park the bus to give good defensive displays That's it ewan I think we've all kind of got to the point where 99.9% of us agree that playing the back 3 without Tierney was a bad idea. Numbers is trying to change that argument into a back 3 can never work. Which nobody has said. Any formation can work depending on the players and how it's played. We played the back 3 in the most defensive way it's probably been deployed in the history of football. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSJ.84 Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 34 minutes ago, Bing.McCrosby said: We played the back 3 in the most defensive way it's probably been deployed in the history of football. Haven’t watched St. Johnstone in the last three seasons then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 42 minutes ago, PSJ.84 said: Haven’t watched St. Johnstone in the last three seasons then. tbh no, I'll give you that. OK international football 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butters Scotch Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 5 hours ago, 2426255 said: That's superb. If everyone understands the concept that we always keep a minimum of 3 players in 'rest defence' then we can move past the idea that playing a 'back-3', 'three clunky centre backs' or replacing Tierney with McKenna is the reason we didn't beat Hungary. Compare this to the post Hungary reaction: No-one is giving the Hungarians credit for their defensive display against Scotland. An acknowledgement of creating very little until the end is not what has been seen after the Hungary game, fierce criticism is closer to the mark. If Scotland had lost to Norway would your reaction have been different? So what do we attribute to that difference in reaction? The outcome. Jesus you are still going on with this rest defence stuff, please give that a rest as it's interesting absolutely nobody, plus your theory has glaring holes in it which you've chosen to ignore over and over. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velo army Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 Let's get this thread to 100 pages. Quality content. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 11 hours ago, Butters Scotch said: Jesus you are still going on with this rest defence stuff, please give that a rest as it's interesting absolutely nobody, plus your theory has glaring holes in it which you've chosen to ignore over and over. It's fair to point out that Scotland always have a minimum of three players taking up 'rest-defensive' positions when we're attacking. Gibraltar is a good example due to them being a 'weaker' opponent. In this case Ross McCrorie joins the attack while Robertson, Porteous and Hanley stay deeper to provide 'rest-defensive' cover. #GIBSCO - RD2.mp4 I haven't heard anyone say that it's because of our rest-defence that we only scored two goals against Gibraltar. That's the argument being made with Hungary and I can't understand why. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 35 minutes ago, 2426255 said: haven't heard anyone say that it's because of our rest-defence that we only scored two goals against Gibraltar. That's the argument being made with Hungary and I can't understand why. Can you quote one person saying that then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butters Scotch Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 58 minutes ago, 2426255 said: It's fair to point out that Scotland always have a minimum of three players taking up 'rest-defensive' positions when we're attacking. Gibraltar is a good example due to them being a 'weaker' opponent. In this case Ross McCrorie joins the attack while Robertson, Porteous and Hanley stay deeper to provide 'rest-defensive' cover. #GIBSCO - RD2.mp4 6.79 MB · 0 downloads I haven't heard anyone say that it's because of our rest-defence that we only scored two goals against Gibraltar. That's the argument being made with Hungary and I can't understand why. Keeping three players back when in attack isn't exactly some kind of new phenomenon, I think most people are aware we keep bodies back to defend the counter attack. Growing up playing football, if one fullback went up field then you'd keep the other on the opposite side back generally for example, it's very common so let's not pretend this is something new and different. There is next to no argument against keeping a 'rest defence', it's the type of player you are adding to the game to replace Tierney which doesn't add any kind of value to our attacking build up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 1 hour ago, Butters Scotch said: Keeping three players back when in attack isn't exactly some kind of new phenomenon, I think most people are aware we keep bodies back to defend the counter attack. Growing up playing football, if one fullback went up field then you'd keep the other on the opposite side back generally for example, it's very common so let's not pretend this is something new and different. There is next to no argument against keeping a 'rest defence', it's the type of player you are adding to the game to replace Tierney which doesn't add any kind of value to our attacking build up. I don't think he understands that football players are individually different 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArabFC Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 Clearly read a blog about 'rest defence' and now thinks he's some tactical savant. He'll be telling us we need to understand all the players on one team wear the same colour kit next and posting videos to prove it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 2 hours ago, ArabFC said: Clearly read a blog about 'rest defence' and now thinks he's some tactical savant. He'll be telling us we need to understand all the players on one team wear the same colour kit next and posting videos to prove it. Yeah ill need to see the clip for that one 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleedingums Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 6 hours ago, ArabFC said: Clearly read a blog about 'rest defence' and now thinks he's some tactical savant. He'll be telling us we need to understand all the players on one team wear the same colour kit next and posting videos to prove it. Considering that they're a massive Tory, you'd think that they'd have a hard time defending rest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 13 hours ago, Butters Scotch said: it's the type of player you are adding to the game to replace Tierney which doesn't add any kind of value to our attacking build up. On 09/07/2024 at 00:42, Butters Scotch said: Why don't we just keep McGregor back when in attack or even have a more defensively minded midfielder like McClean in the team over a traditional CB It's a trade-off. Not something we worry about with Tierney as we get both, but we saw it with Scott McTominay: You gain on one hand, but you lose on the other. McLean or McGregor are similar. #ISRSCO.mp4 It's a quality issue. Scotland don't have the quality in depth and therefore have to make a choice or trade-off. On 01/06/2022 at 23:42, ArabFC said: I’ve been red-dotted more for this opinion than anything else ever on PnB and I’ve often said Mark McNulty has some skills. But can we all please finally agree that Scott McTominay is not a fucking centre back? Play him in midfield or don’t play him at all. Until Clarke gets past shit like this and pairing Dykes with a flick-on partner, we’ll never progress. https://forum.pieandbovril.com/topic/283065-the-mctominay-conundrum/ -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 It's nearly 30 years since Scotland last qualified for a major tournament. Steve Clarke is not the man to bring that wait to an end. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.