MacDonald Jardine Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 2 minutes ago, Willie adie said: A lot of it down to the coaching keepers get now , not to catch the ball A lot of it is down to Gunn being shite, or at least low in confidence. What Clarke can do about it is not select him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 12 minutes ago, gannonball said: I wouldn't have been adverse to giving him a chance but he's even said the British style of football doesn't suit him. He is no where good enough for the manager to be adjusting tactics for him to shoehorn him in imo. Yes we wouldn't want any adjustments in tactics just now when we're absolutely flying. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedLichtie86 Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 10 minutes ago, gannonball said: I wouldn't have been adverse to giving him a chance but he's even said the British style of football doesn't suit him. He is no where good enough for the manager to be adjusting tactics for him to shoehorn him in imo. There lies one of the problems of Clarke. He has one formation with one set of tactics. So when any sort of changes are needed he has limited options. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted June 15 Author Share Posted June 15 (edited) Offside is offside. 1 hour ago, 54_and_counting said: He changed the 3 at the back to 3 at the back, it was the back 3 that was the issue, the midfield were swamped because 3 at the back were literally marking 1 striker I'm not sure where you're getting this from to be completely honest mate. Tierney and Porteous always step into midfield to support the midfield and last night was not any different in that regard. You might want to watch the game back if you haven't. I can make you a video if you prefer from the first 10 minutes of the game. To your point about man marking. Wirtz and Musiala were making it difficult to man mark. Same with Kroos, he was playing from left centre back. Specific man marking has gone out of fashion because you are always reacting to the opponent giving them an advantage. Right or wrong that's why you don't see it much. Edited June 15 by 2426255 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordopolis Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 1 hour ago, Bing.McCrosby said: Gilmour, Gauld The other poster was talking about omissions from the squad tho, and gilmour is in the squad. Gauld - I think we are too well stocked in his position unfortunately for him. I definitely wouldn't describe his omission as "baffling". Beyond the Gauld debate, is there anyone really deserving of being there ahead of anyone else? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gannonball Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Bing.McCrosby said: Yes we wouldn't want any adjustments in tactics just now when we're absolutely flying. No one is saying that, changing tactics for a guy who isnt as good as the other attacking midfielders in the team makes little sense however. 11 minutes ago, RedLichtie86 said: There lies one of the problems of Clarke. He has one formation with one set of tactics. So when any sort of changes are needed he has limited options. TBF he changed tactics a good few times initially but would agree he should have mixed it up a little more for NI for instance. Edited June 15 by gannonball 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chripper Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 37 minutes ago, Jambomo said: Gilmour is in the squad. Do people honestly not remember how shit Gauld was when he was at Hibs in the SPL? He’s not left out fucking Messi. Gauld was injured whilst on loan at Hibs. Harry Kane was on loan to Leyton Orient and Leicester and done nothing. Gilmour's loan to Norwich wasn't exactly a success. Whilst Gauld was playing in Lia Portugal 1 he was involved in 16 goals in 33 games for a relegated team. He was also on the shortlist for Liga Portugal 1 team of the year. Again, with a relegated team. On talent, Gauld should be in the conversation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlandmagar Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 3 hours ago, Fratelli said: There’s been far too much dismissing of our results and performances post qualification imo. We’ve been terrible, and you can’t just turn it off and on. One or two dodgy performances in amongst a sea of positive ones? Maybe - but there’s been a trend here. The constant ‘ach qualified for two tournaments and folk are moaning???’ After those results reeked of just being happy to be there. Absolutely this. Too many on here saying" it's only a friendly", " doesnt matter". Last night's performance and result was abysmal, but it has been coming. The manager's tactics, Well? What were they? His choice of team? Porteous, Ralston shouln't be anywhere near the team. McCrorie and Cooper would have been my choices. And Gilmour for Christue. Clarke is on borrowed time now. Last night proved is probably out of his depth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 23 minutes ago, Gordopolis said: The other poster was talking about omissions from the squad tho, and gilmour is in the squad. Gauld - I think we are too well stocked in his position unfortunately for him. I definitely wouldn't describe his omission as "baffling". Beyond the Gauld debate, is there anyone really deserving of being there ahead of anyone else? Tbh I don't know for sure, and I don't think anyone does. We need to see him in a squad and see how he does. What we can say for sure is he has done all he can to be selected. And performed better in his league than someone who has been selected. So it's a mistake in my book, not at least having him in the squad for the friendlies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 23 minutes ago, gannonball said: No one is saying that Your answering for someone else, yet claiming to know how they feel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 24 minutes ago, SlayerX said: Gauld was injured whilst on loan at Hibs. Harry Kane was on loan to Leyton Orient and Leicester and done nothing. Gilmour's loan to Norwich wasn't exactly a success. Whilst Gauld was playing in Lia Portugal 1 he was involved in 16 goals in 33 games for a relegated team. He was also on the shortlist for Liga Portugal 1 team of the year. Again, with a relegated team. On talent, Gauld should be in the conversation. I don’t have much objection to Gauld being in the conversation but the reaction to him being left out is just complete fucking nonsense. The Canadian league is poor, worse than the Scottish leagues, and that matters. He already said he didn’t think his style suited Scottish football. people treating it like he is somehow the massive missing piece of the jigsaw and would turn everything around is completely ridiculous. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted June 15 Author Share Posted June 15 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Jambomo said: I don’t have much objection to Gauld being in the conversation but the reaction to him being left out is just complete fucking nonsense. The Canadian league is poor, worse than the Scottish leagues, and that matters. He already said he didn’t think his style suited Scottish football. people treating it like he is somehow the massive missing piece of the jigsaw and would turn everything around is completely ridiculous. MLS* but the point still stands for me. Players that don't get picked are always seen as the solution by fans when results go against their team. It's a tired point of view that still has traction for some reason. People saying we should have dropped Gunn before the game in favour of Gordon, Clark or Kelly kind illustrates that point. It's only a hindsight thing. Edited June 15 by 2426255 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedLichtie86 Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 1 minute ago, 2426255 said: MLS* but the point still stands for me. Players that don't get picked are always seen as the solution by fans when results go against their team. It's a tired point of view that still has traction for some reason. Think its more down to the fact he has never been invited to a training camp. Even when he was in the Portuguese Team of the Year he was deemed not good enough by Clarke. That is a better league than the SPFL.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted June 15 Author Share Posted June 15 (edited) 5 minutes ago, RedLichtie86 said: Think its more down to the fact he has never been invited to a training camp. Even when he was in the Portuguese Team of the Year he was deemed not good enough by Clarke. That is a better league than the SPFL.. He must just hate Gauld then, think he's a bad egg or want the Scotland team to fail. Also he must be be lazy, stubborn and too loyal. That's the only possible answer I suppose. It coudn't be anything to do with it being the strongest part of our team. A part of the team even Lewis Ferguson can't break into. Nah, can't be that. Edited June 15 by 2426255 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Jambomo said: I don’t have much objection to Gauld being in the conversation but the reaction to him being left out is just complete fucking nonsense. The Canadian league is poor, worse than the Scottish leagues, and that matters. He already said he didn’t think his style suited Scottish football. people treating it like he is somehow the massive missing piece of the jigsaw and would turn everything around is completely ridiculous. 2 things mate, they don't play in the Canadian league. See numbers doesn't realise that either And can you quote anyone saying anything remotely like "missing peice of the jigsaw" or "would turn everything around" Edited June 15 by Bing.McCrosby 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 (edited) 8 minutes ago, 2426255 said: He must just hate Gauld then, think he's a bad egg or want the Scotland team to fail. Also he must be be lazy, stubborn and too loyal. That's the only possible answer I suppose. It coudn't be anything to do with it being the strongest part of our team. A part of the team even Lewis Ferguson can't break into. Gauld can play quite a few positions, so that argument doesn't really stack up either. Edited June 15 by Bing.McCrosby 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2426255 Posted June 15 Author Share Posted June 15 Just now, Bing.McCrosby said: Gauld can play quite a fee positions, so that argument doesn't really stack up either. Unless he can play centre forward, goalkeeper, centre-back or full-back then he isn't getting into the team. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chripper Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Jambomo said: I don’t have much objection to Gauld being in the conversation but the reaction to him being left out is just complete fucking nonsense. The Canadian league is poor, worse than the Scottish leagues, and that matters. He already said he didn’t think his style suited Scottish football. people treating it like he is somehow the massive missing piece of the jigsaw and would turn everything around is completely ridiculous. I don't think there's really much of a fuss made about Gauld not being selected. If there is, I haven't seen it. It's not the Canadian league. It's the MLS. It's America. But yes, it is better than the SPL. Would Gauld's inclusion have made a difference? No. The difference between Gauld, Christie, Morgan, etc, is incremental. I don't like the innuendo that some people (not you) that Gauld is a bad seed, etc. He pretty much grew up alongside Robertson, Souttar, Armstrong, etc. They're all good guys. Every manager has their own opinion. Look at Southgate, he refuses to call up Tomori from AC Milan, for only reason only he knows. Edited June 15 by SlayerX 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 Just now, 2426255 said: Unless he can play centre forward, goalkeeper, centre-back or full-back then he isn't getting into the team. Well not currently, no matter what he does. I'd expect if we replaced the manager he would be instantly included. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Bing Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 Just now, SlayerX said: I don't think there's really much of a fuss made about Gauld not being selected. If there is, I haven't seen it. It's not the Canadian league. It's the MLS. It's America. But yes, it is better than the SPL. Would Gauld's inclusion have made a difference? No. The difference between Gauld, Christie, Morgan, etc, is incremental. I don't like the innuendo that some people (not you) that Gauld is a bad seed, etc. Every manager has their own opinion. Look at Southgate, he refuses to call up Tomori from AC Milan, for only reason only he knows. It's what the Clarke obsessives do, exaggerate any negative point. It's a worn out defence. 1 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.