Reason for horrible exit: lack of quality or overly-defensive tactics?

[Butters Scotch]

23 minutes ago, Chripper said:

The reason Clarke plays with a 3/5 with Scotland isn't because it's a way to shoehorn Robertson and Tierney into the first XI.

I don't know why people think that.

Let's say Tierney misses the next Nations League matches, which Is highly possible. We'll still play with our current system. Guaranteed.

Pish. 

[Kadouken_]

It’s tactics. When McGregor and Gilmour every week are constantly playing passes forward and breaking the lines then suddenly under Clarke are not even looking forward and going backwards.
 

If they were attempting the passes and failing you could blame it on the quality. When they’re not even looking forwards until the final ten minutes it’s clearly tactical. 

[2426255]

13 minutes ago, Kadouken_ said:

It’s tactics. When McGregor and Gilmour every week are constantly playing passes forward and breaking the lines then suddenly under Clarke are not even looking forward and going backwards.
 

If they were attempting the passes and failing you could blame it on the quality. When they’re not even looking forwards until the final ten minutes it’s clearly tactical. 

What was the issue when Celtic lost to Killie in the league cup at the start of the season if you can remember?

[Kadouken_]

3 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

What was the issue when Celtic lost to Killie in the league cup at the start of the season if you can remember?

 

What?

 

[allyo]

In consecutive qualifying and nations league campaigns under Clarke we've finished above Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Ukraine and Georgia. They are arguably all outperforming us at the Euros. Austria might be about to win a group above France and Netherlands.

No one in these campaigns said we didn't have the players. No one complained too much about the tactics. 

Our problem is when we get there.

[2426255]

55 minutes ago, allyo said:

No one in these campaigns said we didn't have the players. No one complained too much about the tactics. 

These discussions always come up when we're losing. There were the same discussion after Euro-2020: The manager needs bulleted and so on. It's not new.

I don't know about the other teams too much, but we won a watch getting Austria when we did - they were miles better than they showed that campaign under Foda. I think they finished behind Israel. Those are the breaks you need sometimes - a team just imploding. Hungary got that benefit getting Scotland at Euro-2024  

Edited June 25 by 2426255

[Binos]

57 minutes ago, allyo said:

In consecutive qualifying and nations league campaigns under Clarke we've finished above Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Ukraine and Georgia. They are arguably all outperforming us at the Euros. Austria might be about to win a group above France and Netherlands.

No one in these campaigns said we didn't have the players. No one complained too much about the tactics. 

Our problem is when we get there.

We've beaten teams who then beat us in a finals 

These teams up their level for a finals match 

Our players appear incapable of this

[DA Baracus]

1 hour ago, allyo said:

They are arguably all outperforming us at the Euros

There's absolutely zero argument about that. They are all outperforming us.

Scotland are/were literally the worst team at the tournament.

[allyo]

Yeah. Chucked that word in to be generous 

[2426255]

I see England are struggling to break down 'inferior' opposition. Probably should have played a back-4.

[Monkey Tennis]

I could maybe have put this in the Austin MacPhee thread but it became a post apocalyptic wasteland so I'll raise it in here instead.

Our set pieces were diabolical.

Not so much in conception, just in terms simply of delivery.  I find it incredible that professional footballers can fail to put the ball roughly into the right area.  Obviously, viciously whipped in balls are difficult to get right, but when players clearly mishit things in at knee height to hit the first defender, I find it kind of unforgivable.  It's even more criminal in that we know we struggle to create chances in other ways.

This isn't unique to Scotland I know, but it's a huge frustration.  It surely shouldn't be that difficult.

[DA Baracus]

14 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I could maybe have put this in the Austin MacPhee thread but it became a post apocalyptic wasteland so I'll raise it in here instead.

Our set pieces were diabolical.

Not so much in conception, just in terms simply of delivery.  I find it incredible that professional footballers can fail to put the ball roughly into the right area.  Obviously, viciously whipped in balls are difficult to get right, but when players clearly mishit things in at knee height to hit the first defender, I find it kind of unforgivable.  It's even more criminal in that we know we struggle to create chances in other ways.

This isn't unique to Scotland I know, but it's a huge frustration.  It surely shouldn't be that difficult.

I think that's again down to confidence. When players lack it so much of their game goes bad.

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

50 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I could maybe have put this in the Austin MacPhee thread but it became a post apocalyptic wasteland so I'll raise it in here instead.

Our set pieces were diabolical.

Not so much in conception, just in terms simply of delivery.  I find it incredible that professional footballers can fail to put the ball roughly into the right area.  Obviously, viciously whipped in balls are difficult to get right, but when players clearly mishit things in at knee height to hit the first defender, I find it kind of unforgivable.  It's even more criminal in that we know we struggle to create chances in other ways.

This isn't unique to Scotland I know, but it's a huge frustration.  It surely shouldn't be that difficult.

It's particularly galling that most of those shit set pieces were taken by our biggest goal threat.   Watching McTominay trying to whip in a flat ball when he's 6ft 4 and great in air had me seething at the games

[Monkey Tennis]

38 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

I think that's again down to confidence. When players lack it so much of their game goes bad.

Yes probably, but it's maddening.  It's surely not all that demanding a skill.  

I know that delivering great balls in consistently is a prized skill, but hoisting it across can't be that hard.  We'd fancy ourselves to manage it most times.  An equivalent would surely be a professional golfer who's struggling with his game, duffing the bloody thing, and that doesn't generally happen.  

I'll probably get told how little I understand and that it goes wrong because they're trying this zippy flat delivery.  It'll continue to enrage and baffle me though.

Just concentrate on doing it properly for Christ's sake.  You must surely practise it enough.

 

[theoriginalhedge]

When players are asked to play a system which they are uncomfortable with of course they will underperform. 

For a manager to not realise that system isn't working until the 80th minute is absolutely shocking. 

The subs put on did make a difference but by then the influential players like McGinn, Gilmour and Robertson were spent and had to be subbed . Had the subs been made at half time then more creative players like Forrest ,  Conway and possibly McCrorie could have been used instead of the old favourites McLean, Armstrong and Morgan. 

That might have allowed  McGinn, Gilmour and Robertson to play their natural attacking games  and saved them wasting their energy trying to concentrate solely on not giving the ball away. 

Sorry but I 100% blame the coaching staff for not at least trying to give the players the freedom to express themselves which in the end cost us that match. 

[2426255]

22 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Yes probably, but it's maddening.  It's surely not all that demanding a skill.  

I know that delivering great balls in consistently is a prized skill, but hoisting it across can't be that hard.  We'd fancy ourselves to manage it most times.  An equivalent would surely be a professional golfer who's struggling with his game, duffing the bloody thing, and that doesn't generally happen.  

I'll probably get told how little I understand and that it goes wrong because they're trying this zippy flat delivery.  It'll continue to enrage and baffle me though.

Just concentrate on doing it properly for Christ's sake.  You must surely practise it enough.

 

I think it would be interesting to look at the set plays. I don't think it would too difficult to understand what is going on particularly with our corners and throw ins.

I assume there is a method to the madness though. From listening to some podcasts there seems to be quite a big focus on being able to get the ball back from a set play if you don't create a chance. So if you play the ball to the back post then there's a chance you can recover it on the other side, that kind of thing. 

[Old Bing]

8 hours ago, 2426255 said:

I see England are struggling to break down 'inferior' opposition. Probably should have played a back-4.

Good result for Slovenia, using a back 4

[Old Bing]

7 hours ago, theoriginalhedge said:

When players are asked to play a system which they are uncomfortable with of course they will underperform. 

For a manager to not realise that system isn't working until the 80th minute is absolutely shocking. 

The subs put on did make a difference but by then the influential players like McGinn, Gilmour and Robertson were spent and had to be subbed . Had the subs been made at half time then more creative players like Forrest ,  Conway and possibly McCrorie could have been used instead of the old favourites McLean, Armstrong and Morgan. 

That might have allowed  McGinn, Gilmour and Robertson to play their natural attacking games  and saved them wasting their energy trying to concentrate solely on not giving the ball away. 

Sorry but I 100% blame the coaching staff for not at least trying to give the players the freedom to express themselves which in the end cost us that match. 

Yeah it's absolute whitaboutary, I don't see anyone saying the good results (a while ago). We're solely down to the players.

[Highlandmagar]

On 24/06/2024 at 19:55, Sergeant Wilson said:

Should we cut and paste all the arguments from the other threads?

It would make,War and Peace look like the Wee Red Book.

[allyo]

A bit of time to reflect.  I maintain that Scottish mentality and fear played a huge part.

However I also think the injuries, and Clarke's unwillingness to adapt to these, were significant.

Firstly we had no threat whatsoever on the right. Anthony Ralston did not work in a formation requiring a wing back. I don't have a view on his general quality, but constantly turning back, he gave us no attacking width on that side.

That meant that opponents could focus on containing our left side. Which was bad enough, but without Tierney it became even easier to do. We were left with nothing.

With the wings neutralised, the goal threat of McTominay and McGinn was gone. Most of their goals have come from arriving late in the box (McT) or finding space on the edge (McGinn) having been fed from wide. We very rarely create through the middle.

Dykes is also a big part of how we play, mostly because he's a handful for defenders and creates gaps when we're attacking, also because he's good at dealing with long balls and bringing others in. Adams doesn't have the same qualities. 

So yeah, we were unfortunate.  Maybe Ferguson and Doak would have given us better options. I think beyond our first 11 there's a drop off in quality which is why I think Clarke stuck with what he knew.

But Clarke created the system and must have known what made it successful, and therefore what would bring it down. On reflection he should have adapted, particularly after losing Tierney.

Edited June 26 by allyo