Euro 2024 Expectations

[Bing.McCrosby]

5 hours ago, lubo_blaha said:

I would be concerned if the games meant anything. The only one which did was Spain away in which we played well and were unlucky not to take anything from.

England and France friendlies - beaten by two of the best in the world, with a much changed team in the case of France.

Georgia and Norway - we were missing Gunn, Hickey, Tierney and Robertson. Got draws against good sides.

Netherlands - played very well for 70 minutes but fell to bits towards the end. 

Northern Ireland - rotten performance against a minnow who were a lot more up for the game than we were.

I would be seriously concerned if these results took place at the start of a qualifying campaign or in the nations league. Thankfully our record in these campaigns speaks for itself. We’re at our best playing at high intensity and that’s not easy to replicate in friendlies or dead rubbers.

Georgia id disagree are a good side, Norway id say their players missing Haaland and Odegaard were much more of a factor for them. Yet we never won either game. That in itself isn't shocking.

But if you add up the 7 game streak its really not good.

Winning breeds confidence, I think we seen that against N Ireland.

We need to turn it around, but recognising we need to turn it around is part of that.

 

[Pocketman]

9 hours ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

We've not won a game in 7 matches mate, and lost 5 of those games. Yes 4 of those games we would be expected to lose, the other 3 we were favourites. 

If thats not what you would consider a poor run of form and results then we just have very different ideas and expectations.

[2426255]

'Form' is and always has been a load of shite IMO. It has too much traction with fans.  

The Motherwell fans were banging on about Stuart Kettlewell needing to get sacked because he was a on a 15 game 'winless run'. That run lasted from 4-Sep until 30-Dec. He didn't get sacked and they're fine. It was a period where they weren't able to get the results they wanted and that's it, a difficult period but they got through and came out the other side.

It's just a difficult period for fans because we haven't had a win to cheer. Does anyone believe that this is terminal for this team and that we'll not come out the other side? That's the question really. 

[MarkoRaj]

Bedwetters anonymous

[VictorOnopko]

6 hours ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

Georgia id disagree are a good side, Norway id say their players missing Haaland and Odegaard were much more of a factor for them. Yet we never won either game. That in itself isn't shocking.

But if you add up the 7 game streak its really not good.

Winning breeds confidence, I think we seen that against N Ireland.

We need to turn it around, but recognising we need to turn it around is part of that.

 

Georgia are a decent side, who have also qualified for the Euros. They have a world-class winger in Kvaratskhelia and a good amount of quality throughout the team.  Apart from a pumping from Spain their recent record is solid and when we beat them at a soggy Hampden they'd been unbeaten in 10 competitive matches (and one loss in 15!).

No one is saying our 7 game streak is good.

We have two more friendlies and yes, we could do with good performances.  I'm more worried about our injuries than our form though and getting McTominay back is more important than how many goals we beat Gibraltar by.

Edited May 6 by VictorOnopko

[BFTD]

4 hours ago, VictorOnopko said:

Georgia are a decent side, who have also qualified for the Euros. They have a world-class winger in Kvaratskhelia and a good amount of quality throughout the team.  Apart from a pumping from Spain their recent record is solid and when we beat them at a soggy Hampden they'd been unbeaten in 10 competitive matches (and one loss in 15!).

Hoping we avoid them in the quarter-finals TBH.

(well, if England can do this shit...)

[A Diamond For Me]

I don't how much you can really talk about form and momentum when you're looking at half dozen or so games stretched out over half a year.  All the players will have had ups and downs in their form at their clubs in that time, and that will have far more to do with their confidence, surely.

Edited May 7 by A Diamond For Me
Typo

[Bing.McCrosby]

6 hours ago, VictorOnopko said:

Georgia are a decent side, who have also qualified for the Euros. They have a world-class winger in Kvaratskhelia and a good amount of quality throughout the team.  Apart from a pumping from Spain their recent record is solid and when we beat them at a soggy Hampden they'd been unbeaten in 10 competitive matches (and one loss in 15!).

No one is saying our 7 game streak is good.

We have two more friendlies and yes, we could do with good performances.  I'm more worried about our injuries than our form though and getting McTominay back is more important than how many goals we beat Gibraltar by.

Tbh what im hearing (not from yourself) is that our winless run is ok. And excuse after excuse.

The Gibraltar game which was previously surely just a nice day out now becomes important.

[2426255]

13 minutes ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

Tbh what im hearing (not from yourself) is that our winless run is ok. And excuse after excuse.

It is okay. It's not brilliant and it's not a disaster. Relax mate.

[lubo_blaha]

13 hours ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

Georgia id disagree are a good side, Norway id say their players missing Haaland and Odegaard were much more of a factor for them. Yet we never won either game. That in itself isn't shocking.

But if you add up the 7 game streak its really not good.

Winning breeds confidence, I think we seen that against N Ireland.

We need to turn it around, but recognising we need to turn it around is part of that.

 

I think the Norway scoreline shows who missed their respective players more.

Of course it isn’t good but I don’t think we should be wetting the bed about a run of dead rubber games, over half of which were against top ten nations, with several key players missing.

[Butters Scotch]

9 hours ago, 2426255 said:

'Form' is and always has been a load of shite IMO. It has too much traction with fans.  

The Motherwell fans were banging on about Stuart Kettlewell needing to get sacked because he was a on a 15 game 'winless run'. That run lasted from 4-Sep until 30-Dec. He didn't get sacked and they're fine. It was a period where they weren't able to get the results they wanted and that's it, a difficult period but they got through and came out the other side.

It's just a difficult period for fans because we haven't had a win to cheer. Does anyone believe that this is terminal for this team and that we'll not come out the other side? That's the question really. 

Form is no a load of shite at all, it's a big part of the game. Good form (ie winning) breeds confidence which in turn can lead to players doing something great in game to help their team win.

 

[Bing.McCrosby]

1 hour ago, lubo_blaha said:

I think the Norway scoreline shows who missed their respective players more.

what

1 hour ago, Butters Scotch said:

Form is no a load of shite at all,

 

Im not even engaging with this Its nonsensical.

[Monkey Tennis]

1 hour ago, lubo_blaha said:

I think the Norway scoreline shows who missed their respective players more.

Laughably self fulfilling pish.

[lubo_blaha]

1 hour ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

what

Im not even engaging with this Its nonsensical.

 

1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Laughably self fulfilling pish.

Our defence dealt with Haaland well in Oslo. Odegaard had a stinker.

In Glasgow, our makeshift defence was poor against the side they put out. 

Is it really so outrageous to say we missed our four starting players more than they missed their two?

[BFTD]

I think we can at least agree that, regardless of squad absences and angst of Haaland/EPL fans, Norway weren't good enough to qualify. We'd all have been pretty depressed to have finished behind them.

[Monkey Tennis]

38 minutes ago, lubo_blaha said:

 

Is it really so outrageous to say we missed our four starting players more than they missed their two?

Probably not, but given the identity of their two, it's a stretch.

What is outrageous, however, is the circularity of the argument you attempted to construct.

[Bing.McCrosby]

45 minutes ago, lubo_blaha said:

 

Our defence dealt with Haaland well in Oslo. Odegaard had a stinker.

In Glasgow, our makeshift defence was poor against the side they put out. 

Is it really so outrageous to say we missed our four starting players more than they missed their two?

What i was referring to as nonsensical was the opinion that form is irrelevant in sport. Nothing to do with what you said.

Regarding the Norway game, they may have been missing more than 2 players (cant be bothered to check). But either way the result of the game wouldn't prove anything.

But the excuse that we were missing players for me doesn't work. Both teams were missing players for me theirs were of a much higher standard and as such level of importance.

[Bing.McCrosby]

41 minutes ago, BFTD said:

I think we can at least agree that, regardless of squad absences and angst of Haaland/EPL fans, Norway weren't good enough to qualify. We'd all have been pretty depressed to have finished behind them.

I think you should know fine well that there's no chance we can all agree on pretty much anything.

[lubo_blaha]

5 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Probably not, but given the identity of their two, it's a stretch.

What is outrageous, however, is the circularity of the argument you attempted to construct.

I’ll think twice before suggesting that conceding lots of goals meant we missed our defenders and goalkeeper again.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, lubo_blaha said:

I’ll think twice before suggesting that conceding lots of goals meant we missed our defenders and goalkeeper again.

Lucky they didn't have their 2 best attackers then as we would have been guaranteed to concede twice as many. Is that how it works?