Who’s on the plane?

[Shannon]

Are 23 men squads set in stone for Euro 2024. I can see squad sizes of 26 being pushed for due to player fatigue etc next year?

[accies1874]

11 hours ago, craigkillie said:

I'm not sure I'd have him down as a total regular, he was out of the squad for at least a couple of camps before working his way back in for that September one.

He was dropped for the September camp after moving to Luton, but he's been called up for every other one when fit. 

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

9 hours ago, Shannon said:

Are 23 men squads set in stone for Euro 2024. I can see squad sizes of 26 being pushed for due to player fatigue etc next year?

Supposedly it was confirmed in mid-October (and was widely reported as such), but recent reporting implies it's not yet confirmed,

It's certainly not impossible that UEFA might reverse their current stance.  The BBC are reporting this week that injuries in the Premier League are up 15% year-on-year.  That may be the result any number of issues (some systemic/result of additional time etc, others very much temporary such a winter World Cup).  

If the major competing nations start pushing for larger squads, then it might happen, otherwise 23 will be the number.

[2426255]

21 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

Supposedly it was confirmed in mid-October (and was widely reported as such), but recent reporting implies it's not yet confirmed,

It's certainly not impossible that UEFA might reverse their current stance.  The BBC are reporting this week that injuries in the Premier League are up 15% year-on-year.  That may be the result any number of issues (some systemic/result of additional time etc, others very much temporary such a winter World Cup).  

If the major competing nations start pushing for larger squads, then it might happen, otherwise 23 will be the number.

I mean, even Steve Clarke was talking about 23-man squads in his post-match v Norway so it would be reasonable to expect they have that on some authority. It doesn't matter anyway/fuss about nothing - 23 players is more than enough. I think we used 19 players across the November window and you are allowed to replace injured players come the tournament. 

Fans just want more chance of seeing their favourites in a Euros squad - Doak, Shankland etc. I don't see a real reason to have it at 26 anymore or not enough reason to see it as a big deal. For me it's just about whether fringe players sit at home or not, who cares?

Edited November 21, 2023 by 2426255

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

27 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

I mean, even Steve Clarke was talking about 23-man squads in his post-match v Norway so it would be reasonable to expect they have that on some authority. It doesn't matter anyway/fuss about nothing - 23 players is more than enough. I think we used 19 players across the November window and you are allowed to replace injured players come the tournament. 

Fans just want more chance of seeing their favourites in a Euros squad - Doak, Shankland etc. I don't see a real reason to have it at 26 anymore or not enough reason to see it as a big deal. For me it's just about whether fringe players sit at home or not, who cares?

The one element I'd suggest 26 allows (which seems self-evident, and aligned with those claims) is the possibility of wildcards, or players included for experience.

It's the same (strong) argument for why 9/11/13 named subs is much better for youth development than 5 is.  13 subs doesn't guarantee that youth players will get a game, but 5 pretty much ensures they never can.

Given the choice, I'd pick 26 every time.  Can't see any downside, beyond higher hotel bills and three players not making the matchday squad for each game.

[ArabFC]

27 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

I mean, even Steve Clarke was talking about 23-man squads in his post-match v Norway so it would be reasonable to expect they have that on some authority. It doesn't matter anyway/fuss about nothing - 23 players is more than enough. I think we used 19 players across the November window and you are allowed to replace injured players come the tournament. 

Fans just want more chance of seeing their favourites in a Euros squad - Doak, Shankland etc. I don't see a real reason to have it at 26 anymore or not enough reason to see it as a big deal. For me it's just about whether fringe players sit at home or not, who cares?

Indeed. Think we used 20 players in Euro 2020, and a few of those players barely reached double digits in playing time.

 

[No_Problemo]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

I mean, even Steve Clarke was talking about 23-man squads in his post-match v Norway so it would be reasonable to expect they have that on some authority. It doesn't matter anyway/fuss about nothing - 23 players is more than enough. I think we used 19 players across the November window and you are allowed to replace injured players come the tournament. 

Fans just want more chance of seeing their favourites in a Euros squad - Doak, Shankland etc. I don't see a real reason to have it at 26 anymore or not enough reason to see it as a big deal. For me it's just about whether fringe players sit at home or not, who cares?

I imagine the fringe players that have contributed to the campaign will care, and similarly I would like the guys who are on the fringes and always turn up to get a place. The likes of Cooper are constantly talked about as being an huge part of the group. Allowing the likes of Doak major tournament experience can only be a good thing too.

In the grand scheme of things it isn’t a big deal, but there is plenty there to care about! 

[accies1874]

1 hour ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

The one element I'd suggest 26 allows (which seems self-evident, and aligned with those claims) is the possibility of wildcards, or players included for experience.

It's the same (strong) argument for why 9/11/13 named subs is much better for youth development than 5 is.  13 subs doesn't guarantee that youth players will get a game, but 5 pretty much ensures they never can.

Given the choice, I'd pick 26 every time.  Can't see any downside, beyond higher hotel bills and three players not making the matchday squad for each game.

All 26 players made the matchday squad at the last World Cup

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

Just now, accies1874 said:

All 26 players made the matchday squad at the last World Cup

Ah.  I'm just recalling Euro 2020.  Fair point

[2426255]

56 minutes ago, No_Problemo said:

I imagine the fringe players that have contributed to the campaign will care, and similarly I would like the guys who are on the fringes and always turn up to get a place. The likes of Cooper are constantly talked about as being an huge part of the group. Allowing the likes of Doak major tournament experience can only be a good thing too.

In the grand scheme of things it isn’t a big deal, but there is plenty there to care about! 

They can all still be part of it I think unofficially, just not involved in the matchday squads. If they aren't going to play anyway which is evidenced throughout Steve Clarke's time as manager where he doesn't use all 23 men, never mind 26 - then I don't see the difference.

I think as a status/reward thing to say that you're (player) part of the squad or to say your player (fan) is part of that squad then maybe - but personally I don't really care about that kind of thing.

I presume there is a reason to change it back to 23, maybe logistical, I'm not sure. If we can understand the reasoning that would be helpful.

Edited November 21, 2023 by 2426255

[accies1874]

41 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

Ah.  I'm just recalling Euro 2020.  Fair point

I'm guessing they changed it for the World Cup because of that very issue. 

[2426255]

Perhaps it will be an advantage for Scotland as we are fine to work with 23 (or lower on occasion) and perhaps it will be more difficult for other teams that haven't been as efficient.

Or it might provide a small advantage to smaller countries with shallower depth of quality with a view to better competition.

I haven't researched any of that though.

Edited November 21, 2023 by 2426255

[Jives Miguel]

Brown has done absolutely zero in his career, at international or at club level, to merit inclusion. His performance on Sunday was a nice microcosm of his career, an invisible non-entity. Clarke's obsession with calling him up every squad is bizarre at this point.

 

He'll go to the Euros along with Taylor, another of his favourites who shouldn't be going. It is what it is, its not like we've got David Villa waiting in the wings waiting on a callup instead

[2426255]

32 minutes ago, Jives Miguel said:

Brown has done absolutely zero in his career, at international or at club level, to merit inclusion. His performance on Sunday was a nice microcosm of his career, an invisible non-entity. Clarke's obsession with calling him up every squad is bizarre at this point.

Is Steve Clarke a good judge of player? Why did Luton sign him? Always played at Stoke. He has something even if we didn't see it against Norway. 

He was good against France so I'd still just have it under wait and see with Brown. We also know the Scotland team isn't focused on creating chances for our strikers.

Edited November 21, 2023 by 2426255

[nate]

Jacob Brown is never an international level player, for us or anyone else. His scoring record is unconvincing…37 in 219 league apps according to wiki, mostly in the lower leagues too, up against carthorse defenders. You wouldn’t mind if he brought something else to the team, but he doesn’t.  A “bit of pace” isn’t enough at international level. He looks out of his depth. He’s about as threatening as a kitten. It’s Shanks for me.
Brown’s inclusion underlines just how threadbare our squad really is. Speaking of which, Tierney’s continued absenteeism is a big concern. Only 2 full 90 minutes for Scotland in competitive matches stretching all the way back to the beginning of the Nations League (about 14 games I calculate). Ankle, calf,groin,knee…he seems plagued with every kind of injury. How much we need  a fit  Tierney and Robbo beavering down that left flank come next summer. Fingers crossed.

 

[Scary Bear]

Have the likes of McBurnie and Burke totally shat the bed with Clarke or do they come into contention if they bang a few goals in between now and the end of the season?

What about the likes of Nisbet or a wildcard like Doak or Hardie? Any chance for any of them?

Up front it’s just Adams and Dykes who are up to the task. The rest really aren’t worth speaking about at the moment, unless they have a strong end to the season. 

[Ewanandmoreagain]

2 hours ago, Scary Bear said:

Have the likes of McBurnie and Burke totally shat the bed with Clarke or do they come into contention if they bang a few goals in between now and the end of the season?

What about the likes of Nisbet or a wildcard like Doak or Hardie? Any chance for any of them?

Up front it’s just Adams and Dykes who are up to the task. The rest really aren’t worth speaking about at the moment, unless they have a strong end to the season. 

McBurnie and Burke it would have to be quite a few goals I think and even then it might not be popular with some fans.

Shankland should be given a chance to start a game.

We might need a wildcard if we are going to play a back four , eg Fraser !!!

 

[No_Problemo]

3 hours ago, Scary Bear said:

Have the likes of McBurnie and Burke totally shat the bed with Clarke or do they come into contention if they bang a few goals in between now and the end of the season?

What about the likes of Nisbet or a wildcard like Doak or Hardie? Any chance for any of them?

Up front it’s just Adams and Dykes who are up to the task. The rest really aren’t worth speaking about at the moment, unless they have a strong end to the season. 

I think Nisbet has a chance, plus add Stewart and Conway. Hardie would be the furthest away out of those IMO. 

I’m also very confident that Doak would have offered far more up front than Brown did on Thursday night. 

[ArabFC]

3 hours ago, nate said:

Jacob Brown is never an international level player, for us or anyone else. His scoring record is unconvincing…37 in 219 league apps according to wiki, mostly in the lower leagues too, up against carthorse defenders. You wouldn’t mind if he brought something else to the team, but he doesn’t.  A “bit of pace” isn’t enough at international level. He looks out of his depth. He’s about as threatening as a kitten. It’s Shanks for me.

 

*cough* Ikechi Anya *cough*

[Gordopolis]

1 hour ago, ArabFC said:

*cough* Ikechi Anya *cough*

Yeah he was a real livewire during a largely desolate period (mainly the first year or two after he came in, before Strachan took us on that run that nearly qualified us when Anya kind of faded). Lovely lad as well.