Germany v Scotland

[2426255]

Just wanted to one more thing.

Not only do fans miss half the shit unfolding in front of their face. Managers have at least 4 pairs of eyes feeding them information and some of that is data analytics and who knows in the future maybe AI. The idea that your joe public is going to know what is the best tactical approach or changes to be made is only going to get further away imo.

[Chripper]

1 minute ago, HopeStreetCadette said:

This discussion about tactics being wrong begs the question, how do we set up tactically in our next 2 games to ensure success if it’s not sitting deep and counter attacking?

Great question.

I honestly thought that when we played the Netherlands that was going to be the template going forward.

Yes, we lost 4-0, but it was 1-0 with 72 minutes to go.

We went at them and showed bravery and attacked them.

We matched them with possession, passing, shots and chances.

It's not like they stepped off and let us have possession. They didn't. They pressed us just as much as Germany did. That day we also had Gilmour in central midfield and we played 3-4-2-1.

I have no appetite to rewatch last night's match. But from memory it looked like we played 5-4-1 and our gameplay was to park the bus and play on the counter.

We should've been set-up like we did against the Dutch. Hindsight Is a great thing, but last night was Murphy's Law (whatever could go wrong will go wrong).

I hope in the next two matches we just set up more positively.

[Old Bing]

5 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

Just wanted to one more thing.

Not only do fans miss half the shit unfolding in front of their face. Managers have at least 4 pairs of eyes feeding them information and some of that is data analytics and who knows in the future maybe AI. The idea that your joe public is going to know what is the best tactical approach or changes to be made is only going to get further away imo.

Your also just a fan, and a Joe public.

[2426255]

8 minutes ago, SlayerX said:

Great question.

I honestly thought that when we played the Netherlands that was going to be the template going forward.

Yes, we lost 4-0, but it was 1-0 with 72 minutes to go.

We went at them and showed bravery and attacked them.

We matched them with possession, passing, shots and chances.

It's not like they stepped off and let us have possession. They didn't. They pressed us just as much as Germany did. That day we also had Gilmour in central midfield and we played 3-4-2-1.

I have no appetite to rewatch last night's match. But from memory it looked like we played 5-4-1 and our gameplay was to park the bus and play on the counter.

We should've been set-up like we did against the Dutch. Hindsight Is a great thing, but last night was Murphy's Law (whatever could go wrong will go wrong).

I hope in the next two matches we just set up more positively.

Clarke did hint in the post match that Gilmour will start in one of the games. He was asked by a journalist if it was a tough decision and if it would have made any difference. Clarke answered by saying:

Quote

I thought Germany were excellent. We couldn't get a foothold in the game. I'm not too sure if it would have made any difference (starting Gilmour), but we'll find out.

Steve Clarke

Edited June 15 by 2426255

[2426255]

8 minutes ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

Your also just a fan, and a Joe public.

Yes, I'm not pretending I'm more than that. Steve Clarke isn't just a fan or just joe public which is the point you always seem to miss. I think this recent quote sums up my opinion.

Recent quote from Julian Nagelsmann about armchair tacticians out there. Directed towards armchair fans and media.

------------------------------------

In our country it's become quite common for fans to judge players, which I don't like to do because I'm just watching it as a fan. I would never sit in front of the TV and say that I would have done so-and-so as the manager or question what a player is doing, because you don't know what's really going on there. It's a terrible example, but there are teams that are really bad at throw-ins in their own half so a team might have a tactic to kick the ball against an opposing player to force them to have lots of throw-ins in their own half or put the ball out of play themselves. The fans just see a lot of balls going out of play and wonder why that is.

When you don't know what the managers plan is and what they might have intended, it's extremely hard to judge. That's not to say that you're not disappointed as a fan when Germany don't play well in tournaments. But I'm not a manager who sits in front of the TV, judges another manager, is constantly making notes or claims that he would have reacted a certain way or made certain substitutions because I wasn't there.

Julian Nagelsmann

------------------------------------

https://streamable.com/kipkso

Edited June 15 by 2426255

[54_and_counting]

20 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

Gilmour said that was part of his decision to leave. Murty left him out of a cup squad or something and he decided to go.

Dont kid yourself that it had nothing to do with the fact chelsea paid him fortunes nevermind what they gave his family as well in terms of buying accommodation etc

A 15yo left out of a cup game doesn't think "aye I'll go to chelsea cause they play loads of 15yo's" lol

[54_and_counting]

21 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

That's your view and your sticking to it. That's fine, I'm not here to convince you. Rangers fans have no love for Clarke, tell me were they happy Scotland got pumped - bet you they were delighted.

Dont care if it was clarke or anyone else, he got it wrong, both player choice and tactics

People can moan about the lack of press, energy etc, but when you pick 3 centre halves to mark one man while 5 of they best midfielders in the world stroll about against 4 of your team, there will be no press and the energy quickly evaporates as players feel it's a pointless effort

[2426255]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

Dont care if it was clarke or anyone else, he got it wrong, both player choice and tactics

People can moan about the lack of press, energy etc, but when you pick 3 centre halves to mark one man while 5 of they best midfielders in the world stroll about against 4 of your team, there will be no press and the energy quickly evaporates as players feel it's a pointless effort

right, fair enough. off you go then.

[ekok]

OK my bad for engaging with this sad git. Over and out

[2426255]

4 minutes ago, ekok said:

OK my bad for engaging with this sad git. Over and out

[MarkoRaj]

Numbers, can you remember us playing a flat 4 in midfield.

I remember Clark talking about us having different options within the same formation: box midfield, 3 across the middle with a number 10 and a flat 4 but I can't recall when we actually played it. Feel like it would have been the better option last night

[2426255]

21 minutes ago, MarkoRaj said:

Numbers, can you remember us playing a flat 4 in midfield.

I remember Clark talking about us having different options within the same formation: box midfield, 3 across the middle with a number 10 and a flat 4 but I can't recall when we actually played it. Feel like it would have been the better option last night

We played a flat-4 against Norway. Also at home to Spain, away to France. It's usually when we don't have the ball becoming a 3421 when we have the ball. It was a bit of a go to during qualification and we really used it after struggling at home to Cyprus pressing from a 3421 shape first using it in the 2-nil win against Spain.

I think we used it last night, but it can be hard to tell it apart from 3421. The flat-4 normally plays our two #10's as wide midfielders

https://streamable.com/79s7u1

Quote

He's great (Dykes). He's got a tireless shift up there when I play that 5-4-1 flat. He never stops running, he never stops trying.

Steve Clarke, Norway v Scotland

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65941355

Edited June 15 by 2426255

[RawB93]

7 minutes ago, MarkoRaj said:

can you remember us playing a flat 4 in midfield.

I prefer 'the central belt'

[Coooombe]

1 hour ago, 54_and_counting said:

Dont care if it was clarke or anyone else, he got it wrong, both player choice and tactics

People can moan about the lack of press, energy etc, but when you pick 3 centre halves to mark one man while 5 of they best midfielders in the world stroll about against 4 of your team, there will be no press and the energy quickly evaporates as players feel it's a pointless effort

It was essentially 7 v 4 in midfield as our wing backs were so narrow that their full backs had the full width of the pitch to themselves too. f**k knows what the plan was but the back 5 essentially left us with 4 players out of the game whenever Germany had possession. 

[HopeStreetCadette]

2 hours ago, SlayerX said:

Great question.

I honestly thought that when we played the Netherlands that was going to be the template going forward.

Yes, we lost 4-0, but it was 1-0 with 72 minutes to go.

We went at them and showed bravery and attacked them.

We matched them with possession, passing, shots and chances.

It's not like they stepped off and let us have possession. They didn't. They pressed us just as much as Germany did. That day we also had Gilmour in central midfield and we played 3-4-2-1.

I have no appetite to rewatch last night's match. But from memory it looked like we played 5-4-1 and our gameplay was to park the bus and play on the counter.

We should've been set-up like we did against the Dutch. Hindsight Is a great thing, but last night was Murphy's Law (whatever could go wrong will go wrong).

I hope in the next two matches we just set up more positively.

Crazy how performance and tactics can completely shift the narrative. We got hounded that night in the end but I looked at that performance with much more optimism than last night despite it being the same margin of defeat.

[Chripper]

22 minutes ago, HopeStreetCadette said:

Crazy how performance and tactics can completely shift the narrative. We got hounded that night in the end but I looked at that performance with much more optimism than last night despite it being the same margin of defeat.

It's true.

I didn't understand the criticism after the Dutch defeat. Van der Vaart even said afterwards that Scotland should've won 0-4 and remember Koeman's interview post match? He looked like he saw a ghost.

We had a high press and a high defensive line. So, pretty much the opposite against Germany.

If we play the way we did against the Dutch (same system and same application) against the Swiss and Hungary, we could win both.

Fingers crossed.

[VictorOnopko]

3 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Yes, I've been dealing with mugs like yourself all day in between trying to re-watch bits of last nights game to figure out what went wrong.

Who appointed you to deal with the "mugs" expressing opinions on here? 

2 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Just wanted to one more thing.

Not only do fans miss half the shit unfolding in front of their face. Managers have at least 4 pairs of eyes feeding them information and some of that is data analytics and who knows in the future maybe AI. The idea that your joe public is going to know what is the best tactical approach or changes to be made is only going to get further away imo.

I'm not entirely convinced based on last night's drubbing and national humiliation that the current management team know the best tactical approach or how to respond to unfolding shit. I suppose we'll find out in the next two games.

So far all they've managed is  a clusterbùrach in front of a global audience. 

[DA Baracus]

What was the worst gap for Scotland?

The one(s) we gave Germany last night or the Darién Gap?

[Skyline Drifter]

6 hours ago, Swordfishtrombone said:

Clarke has a cheek to talk about 'negative normans' then send out a team to just invite the opposition to shoot. Thrre was zero ambition in that team. You can take getting pumped if you have a go. If Craig Gordon was playing the score would have been halved.

 

6 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Rubbish. The team was set up the same way as it was against Spain (twice) and Norway. It's just because the result didn't go as you wanted it to.

 

5 hours ago, 2426255 said:

The basic game plan as a concept was fine: To defend deep and counter and not get caught playing football in our own third. That's the only point I'm trying to make here. We did that against Spain and Norway and it was okay.

The execution wasn't good in any respect. The press didn't function, We didn't counter well, We turned the ball over often and in bad areas and the ball didn't stick when we played over the top. On top of that we make a few errors which is normal with a team playing above their level and when we tried to break their press it was clunky.

It was execution and not the general game plan that let us down. If you want to put that on the manager, go right ahead. The game was over before it started. We didn't have time to pick moments to press etc. It was just a bad day at the office for everyone. No-one is happy with what played out.

Yeah this. It's very easy to criticise the coach / tactics when you've been battered but the shape was pretty much what we used throughout qualifying. It beat Spain at home and whilst we rode our luck a bit it kept us in the game in Spain till Hickey's slip too. There are three factors in why it completely didn't work on Friday night.

1. As you say, we played poorly. Lots of players were off it, particularly the midfielders. McGinn's been out of form for weeks. Not convinced McTominay's fully fit. McGregor had maybe his worst game for Scotland, etc. Robertson's not looked fully fit since his injury issues at Liverpool across Xmas, McTominay's been touch and go for games for weeks. McGregor had a serious achilles problem in March, Tierney's been out as often as he's been fit in the last six months. Even the good players we do have aren't properly fit. We've been decimated by injury at the wrong time.
2. We were shorn of at least two vital players and visibly weakened for it. We had our third choice right back playing and he's miles behind Aaron Hickey. That's not his fault, he's the best cover we've got in the circumstances, but Hickey's a massive loss. You get away with it to an extent with Patterson but to have lost both is horrendous luck. And I still find it odd that some people on here are convinced Adams is our best option up front. Almost all of our best results have been achieved with Dykes up top, leading the line physically, pulling the team up the park, giving McGinn / McTominay something to feed off and helping out defensively into the bargain. He has his limitations but he's perfect for the setup Clarke's designed. Adams can't do any of that. He's a better actual goalscorer and maybe a better passer but he doesn't cover as much ground or play as physical a game as Dykes does. Kroos doesn't get as much time to pick out passes like Rodri didn't if Dykes is pressing him too.
3. And fundamentally, Germany were VERY, VERY good. I was guilty of thinking they weren't in magic form when the draw was made, that opening games are often tight cagey affairs, that they might be nervous in front of their home crowd. They were none of these things. Kroos and Gundogan are class acts, we knew this, but in Wurz and particularly Musiala they have generational talents breaking through and we're absolutely miles off that level. These are Champions League level players and, much as we've the best side we've had this century, only Robertson can really claim to be close to that level. McTominay, McGinn, Tierney are Europa League level players, probably so is McGregor and Gilmour. Maybe even Christie. The rest are hovering between bottom have top tier and top half second tier players.

There's a limit to the amount of that which can be pointed at the coaching and tactics or papered over. We're a good team when everyone's fit and on form but we're not a tier one nation and tier one nations playing well will beat us, they'll hammer us when they play well and we're weakened. Our goalkeepers aren't good enough, our 3rd choice right back isn't good enough. In truth probably none of our centre backs are really good enough and our forward options certainly aren't, but we can't buy new ones. This is international football and we've a limited pool to pick from. Is anyone not playing that should be? Gordon might have been better in goal, even at 41, but he didn't hardly get a club game last season. If Souttar was better than what we had playing he'd have been here. The fabled 'Newcastle Four / Five' would all likely improve us but you can't make them commit to Scotland. Indeed Gordon's made it to the England squad now. Livramento probably will eventually. I doubt Barnes or Anderson or Targett will ever play for England (though Targett is predominantly a left back which isn't a problem position anyway. In fact right back isn't a problem position either with Hickey and Patterson added to Johnston coming through shortly. It's just a horrible coincidence we're short of one for this tournament.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

There were only 3 changes from the team that beat Spain to the one that got pumped off Germany.
Ralston, Hendry and Adams.

Creating a fantasy that Dykes has the ability to occupy Rudiger, Tah, and the Kroos and Andrich double pivot seems to be more comforting that admitting Clarke is limited at this level.