Injuries

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

Not calling up another striker would be negligent.  When he named the 28 we all knew he was taking all 3 strikers.  One of them getting injured before we've even left the country is a game changer and he's not stupid.

I'd be amazed if it isn't Conway

[Chripper]

55 minutes ago, DC92 said:

It's a 26 man squad. Taking a 7th central defender instead of replacing Dykes, ensuring we are one injury away from being massively reliant on one striker, would be mental.

There's no evidence Christie or McTominay or whoever can lead the line better than the reserve striker options, and moving them there would further weaken us in areas already weakened by the loss of Ferguson.

Surely Clarke is just taking the extra time to consider who that replacement is.

He's not replacing Dykes. We have two out-and-out strikers to fill one spot.

Christie and McTominay and McGinn have all played the number 10 role for the past few years.

Even if we did play the aforementioned as strikers, they would be played as a false 9, so it would actually strengthen the midfield.

No. Steve Clarke isn't calling up anyone else. I'd be amazed if he did. He probably would if Shankland or Dykes pulled out. Hopefully that doesn't happen.

[DC92]

8 minutes ago, SlayerX said:

He's not replacing Dykes. We have two out-and-out strikers to fill one spot.

Christie and McTominay and McGinn have all played the number 10 role for the past few years.

Even if we did play the aforementioned as strikers, they would be played as a false 9, so it would actually strengthen the midfield.

No. Steve Clarke isn't calling up anyone else. I'd be amazed if he did. He probably would if Shankland or Dykes pulled out. Hopefully that doesn't happen.

When have McTominay or Christie played as "false 9s"? When has Clarke used a "false 9" in preference to an actual striker? When was the last time he selected a squad with fewer than three strikers in it?

A third striker is much more likely to see action than a seventh CB.

[Chripper]

1 hour ago, DC92 said:

When have McTominay or Christie played as "false 9s"? When has Clarke used a "false 9" in preference to an actual striker? When was the last time he selected a squad with fewer than three strikers in it?

A third striker is much more likely to see action than a seventh CB.

When has Clarke used a false 9? Never. Doesn't mean he won't or can't.

When did he play a three at the back as a club manager? Never. At international level your system is usually always dictated by the players you have.

Our strikers couldn't hit water if they fell out of a boat. The solution? False 9 and flood the midfield.

Dykes, Adams and Shankland scored three goals combined in the qualifiers.

I didnt say that Christie has played as a false 9. I said that he has often played as a 10 for Scotland.

Could he play as a false 9? Definitely. So could Forrest, McGinn and Doak.

McTominay has played as a false 9 for Manchester United three times, including once in the FA Cup final.

The squad are now in Portugal. There's no chance of a striker being called up.

Edited June 3 by SlayerX

[Butters Scotch]

7 hours ago, SlayerX said:

He's not replacing Dykes. We have two out-and-out strikers to fill one spot.

Christie and McTominay and McGinn have all played the number 10 role for the past few years.

Even if we did play the aforementioned as strikers, they would be played as a false 9, so it would actually strengthen the midfield.

No. Steve Clarke isn't calling up anyone else. I'd be amazed if he did. He probably would if Shankland or Dykes pulled out. Hopefully that doesn't happen.

Dykes did pull out, did you mean adams? 

There's a chance the Two strikers could pull out due to injury or illness, Doak is only back from injury and is more of a winger and our midfielders are the strongest part of our team and the ones that got us a lot of the goals from midfield during the qualifiers and you want to now move them into an alien position potentially. You should stick to playing Fifa. 

[Quentin Taranbino]

Calling up a striker and having a central defender drop out (assuming no more injuries) is the safe and sensible option. I doubt anyone sees differently to be honest.

If you drop a defender and call up a third striker, even if he isnt used nobody will bat an eyelid.

If we don't call up a third striker and something happens to Adams or Shankland then he will be crucified and much more of a risk to the on park results and performance 

All this talk of false 9s and using McTominay, McGinn and Christie as strikers need to get in the bin.

Pretty sure he will call up a striker, he will be weighing up which one fits his system best in terms of attacking and defending. Also have a funny feeling he is getting confirmation on Ross Stewarts match sharpness and if reports are good, I think it will be him.

[true fan]

Should have named between 32 to 34 players in provisional squad..

Any new injuries or existing injuries fail to resolve he has ready replacement, who is already part of the squad.

Now he looks very indecisive at a time we should have no wrinkles

[PSJ.84]

Starting to hope we never play a ‘false nine’. 

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

19 minutes ago, true fan said:

Should have named between 32 to 34 players in provisional squad..

Any new injuries or existing injuries fail to resolve he has ready replacement, who is already part of the squad.

Now he looks very indecisive at a time we should have no wrinkles

Clarke has already said he's treating the u21s as the standby list.   He will not have wanted to be working with 30 + players when he's effectively settled his mind on everything bar 3rd choice keeper and which centre half to leave out

[Kevin Finnerty]

15 minutes ago, true fan said:

Should have named between 32 to 34 players in provisional squad..

Any new injuries or existing injuries fail to resolve he has ready replacement, who is already part of the squad.

Now he looks very indecisive at a time we should have no wrinkles

Why does he look "indecisive"? He said at the start of this camp that he planned to use the under-21 squad as a reserve pool in case of further injuries and from his comments yesterday it sounds like he's planning to make the call on either replacing Dykes or keeping the squad as-is within a day or two of coming back home from Gibraltar. Seems straightforward enough to me.

[craigkillie]

7 hours ago, SlayerX said:

When did he play a three at the back as a club manager?

He played a back three a few times when he took over at Killie.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

The whole false-9 thing sounds like EA Sports FC talk.  Also, the idea that McTominay could do it seems like a combination of survivorship bias, and the Peter Principle.

I don't think we have anyone who could do the false-9 approach, unless all anyone really means is either playing without a striker, or asking a striker to play deep.  Both perfectly valid options, but neither actually being what a F9 role is.

[DC92]

7 hours ago, SlayerX said:

When has Clarke used a false 9? Never. Doesn't mean he won't or can't.

When did he play a three at the back as a club manager? Never. At international level your system is usually always dictated by the players you have.

Our strikers couldn't hit water if they fell out of a boat. The solution? False 9 and flood the midfield.

Dykes, Adams and Shankland scored three goals combined in the qualifiers.

I didnt say that Christie has played as a false 9. I said that he has often played as a 10 for Scotland.

Could he play as a false 9? Definitely. So could Forrest, McGinn and Doak.

McTominay has played as a false 9 for Manchester United three times, including once in the FA Cup final.

The squad are now in Portugal. There's no chance of a striker being called up.

Right. He might do something he's never done before. I don't see why you're so confident that he will.

[Quentin Taranbino]

32 minutes ago, Kevin Finnerty said:

 He said at the start of this camp that he planned to use the under-21 squad as a reserve pool in case of further injuries

He did say that at the start of the camp but said yesterday that if he calls up someone to replace Dykes it might not necessarily be from the under 21s - which means he is clearly considering Stewart, Nisbet etc as well as genuine options.

Edited June 3 by Quentin Taranbino

[Butters Scotch]

12 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

The whole false-9 thing sounds like EA Sports FC talk.  Also, the idea that McTominay could do it seems like a combination of survivorship bias, and the Peter Principle.

I don't think we have anyone who could do the false-9 approach, unless all anyone really means is either playing without a striker, or asking a striker to play deep.  Both perfectly valid options, but neither actually being what a F9 role is.

It is all a bit EA FC 24 and agree McTominay isn't quite suited for the role. The false 9 has been in football for over a 100 years and is a deep lying CF (so essentially another midfielder that starts high), someone that can take the ball under pressure, impeccable touch to hold off players, be able to turn quickly to face goalwards, make runs into the box. It's sort of become modern again following Barcelona under Pep, Fabregas playing there for Spain in recent times, Havertz at Leverkusen/Arsenal, Zirkzee at Bologna are some examples. 

I don't think we have the players technical enough to do it well, perhaps Doak could play there but I think he would be a lot more useful with him out wide/inside forward running at players where there is more space to utilise his pace. Maybe even McGinn with his big arse would do a job there but it's a difficult system to use and you need the right players for it hence why I think Clarke wouldn't even bother with this.

[Streets of Raith]

9 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

The whole false-9 thing sounds like EA Sports FC talk.  Also, the idea that McTominay could do it seems like a combination of survivorship bias, and the Peter Principle.

I don't think we have anyone who could do the false-9 approach, unless all anyone really means is either playing without a striker, or asking a striker to play deep.  Both perfectly valid options, but neither actually being what a F9 role is.

Ryan Gauld could do it,  and it would be the perfect culmination of the last decades worth of P&B tartan army ramblings.

[Richey Edwards]

How about Steven Fletcher?

[Billy Jean King]

2 hours ago, true fan said:

Should have named between 32 to 34 players in provisional squad..

Any new injuries or existing injuries fail to resolve he has ready replacement, who is already part of the squad.

Now he looks very indecisive at a time we should have no wrinkles

Surely picking a bigger initial provisional squad makes you look more indecisive, no ????

[Billy Jean King]

Lewis Morgan never gets a mention, banging in goals at MLS level whatever that actually is.

[Chripper]

1 hour ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

The whole false-9 thing sounds like EA Sports FC talk.  Also, the idea that McTominay could do it seems like a combination of survivorship bias, and the Peter Principle.

I don't think we have anyone who could do the false-9 approach, unless all anyone really means is either playing without a striker, or asking a striker to play deep.  Both perfectly valid options, but neither actually being what a F9 role is.

Check Manchester United's previous three matches.

United have played with two up top (both no 9s), Bruno and McTominay.

Three wins plus it completely nullified Manchester City in the FA Cup final.

I don't even know what "EA Sporte FC talk" is". I grew out of consoles with the Mega Drive and Snes.

Pouring scorn on a progressive system is pure Scottish football.

I remember Ian Cathro being mocked and chased out of Scottish football for having a *gasp* laptop on the bench by football neanderthals like Kris Boyd.

Meanwhile, the analytics of the likes of Manchester City is like NASA. (Strangely, Boyd doesn't use the same incredulous language when he's sat in his comfy Soccer Saturday seat).

And Angelo Alessio being driven out of Kilmarnock as his training was "boring". Aye, right, it's good enough for amateurs like Pirlo, Pogba, etc, but not good enough for superstars like Kirk Broadfoot, etc.

There's a reason why Scottish football is in the dark ages. It's partly the fans, the players and the media.

"False 9?!? That's witchcraft!! It's 4-4-2 and long balls or get out of our village!" (With the slight tone of "Deliverance" in the background)

Edited June 3 by SlayerX