Is there any point in them calling up Fletcher when he won't be used and the under 21s need to win. Naive decision IMO. What are you guys' views on this?

Personally I wouldn't call him up for the full squad unless I was going to play him. And I would.

Is he really that good? I mean, is he another player at a (I hate using this, but...) provincial club that is made out to look better than he really is, whereby his poor performances are quickly papered over by one or two outstanding displays?

Like Brown and Thompson were hailed as uber-players at Hibs, but have been found wanting at their respective clubs where a poor performance or two is quickly picked up on, will Fletcher be the same, or is he consistently good?

I haven't really seen much of him to form an opinion and would like to know whether he's everything the (Real Madrid yawnfest) hype says he is.

I think he will be on the bench and come on with 20 minutes left. So I'd have left him in the U-21s.

I rate him quite highly and have done since the first time I saw him play. He's very physical, and can mix it up with defenders, but he also possesses a great touch and some good skill.

His performance for the U21s on Thursday night was excellent, and I thought he should have been taken to Macedonia. He's certainly a far better option than Clarkson, who is mediocre at best.

At the end of the day, success in the U21s means very little if the full team don't qualify. We probably only need a draw in the U21s anyway, and hopefully the likes of McCormack and Lennon can still provide some firepower.

Not really. From what I've seen of Lennon has isn't impressed me at all. The under 21s will need him for a bit of height and strenght up top. Who have they got btw?