sergie's no1 fan Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 It's the way Belgium developed their current squad as I understand it, i.e. not shoehorning a Belgian Charlie Mulgrew in at LB or CB just because he might do a better job for that particular game, but consistently picking and playing the younger guy so he becomes very comfortable with international football and can deliver for a good 10+ years. Its easy enough to say that. Berti Vogts tried that and got sacked not long after, he still gets hounded on here. Its different for a manager. It is all about getting results or you get hounded by c'nts like us on here . Andrew Robertson will probably be the left back for the next few campaigns. GS will know the likes of Hutton are coming to the end of their International careers and he needs to look ahead at replacements but he also knows his job is to win as many games as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Its easy enough to say that. Berti Vogts tried that and got sacked not long after, he still gets hounded on here. Its different for a manager. It is all about getting results or you get hounded by c'nts like us on here . Andrew Robertson will probably be the left back for the next few campaigns. GS will know the likes of Hutton are coming to the end of their International careers and he needs to look ahead at replacements but he also knows his job is to win as many games as possible. That's not really what Vogts did though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergie's no1 fan Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 That's not really what Vogts did though. Ok maybe stretching it a bit. He did try and introduce young players to the team, he had a big rebuilding job after the Brown years. He threw a lot at the wall, players like Darren Fletcher and James McFadden stuck, most didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Ok maybe stretching it a bit. He did try and introduce young players to the team, he had a big rebuilding job after the Brown years. He threw a lot at the wall, players like Darren Fletcher and James McFadden stuck, most didn't. Yeah, but even at that there was a strange mix for a while. He's credited with bringing through players like McFadden and Fletcher, but there was quite a bit of criticism at the time over his reluctance to use them, especially Faddy, in competitive matches. Faddy had already moved to Everton by the time Vogts gave him a real chance competitively. Fletcher didn't get a start until the Holland game, after breaking into the first team at Man Utd. I don't think it was a bold move at all to bring in a guy getting a decent amount of football at that level. The really odd thing was that he thought Scott Dobie and Kevin Kyle were worth giving more of a chance to early on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 For all Bertie's flaws in his time in charge, and I went to a lot of scotland games at that time and suffered big time, he was the last manager to take us to a play-off. He also left a foundation which few other managers have done- Craig Gordon, Darren Fletcher, James McFadden and a few others all broke through under his leadership. Barry Ferguson also became an established international under Bertie. Those 4 were arguably our most important players of that decade. Our under 21's had a lot of promising players- but the difference was they got a chance. The team that Smith/ Mcleish led to narrowly missing out on qualifying for euro 2008 was described by the Italian coach at the time as 'one of the most promising young sides in Europe just now'!! Sometimes you have to take a step back to move two forward. You could argue the difference is Vogts had no choice as Craig Browns team were mostly well into their thirties and there was nothing coming through. Yes he dished out far too many caps and we had a horrendous run of friendlies at hampden without scoring , there was the Faroes draw etc etc. But, would Walter and Big Alex have had these players at their peak as experienced internationals if Bertie hadn't taken the hit and thrown them in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 These players will never get better if they dont get chances against better teams Had the current squad been storming all over europe, topping the group, then we wouldn't be having this discussion But as it stands we're fourth seeds, and a 50/50 chance of finishing 4th What's to lose giving younger players a game What's to lose?? Well Erm even more, making our position even worse maybe? There's not a single young player that's not played that would've improved us as a team!!!! FFS man. 1 defeat away to Georgia and it's fucking doomsday and 'PICK THE YOUNG GUIZ GOAGGS' from fans. If we had we would've been in an even worse position. We have done well in this group, Georgia away aside. Fucking embarassment Scotland fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Bit of a drama queen there lichtie, calm down! The point is our strategy has been piecemeal for many years. Every manager has tried to cobble together a group of average players as best they can to scrape qualification. We've failed and then the whole process starts again. There is no long term plan in place. The managers are forced into it a bit due to the instant pressure for results and to achieve this holy grail of qualification. The thread is about after this campaign if we fail to qualify .. Then maybe it's time for a fresh approach. Maybe it should be communicated to the media/ public that we're going to bed in a young team and possibly sacrifice qualification for a tournament with a view to being in far better shape for the next one. Of course there would still be complaints, but if it was a clear plan to improve things that was well explained then I think many Scotland fans would back it and give it a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forameus Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Bit of a drama queen there lichtie, calm down! The point is our strategy has been piecemeal for many years. Every manager has tried to cobble together a group of average players as best they can to scrape qualification. We've failed and then the whole process starts again. There is no long term plan in place. The managers are forced into it a bit due to the instant pressure for results and to achieve this holy grail of qualification. The thread is about after this campaign if we fail to qualify .. Then maybe it's time for a fresh approach. Maybe it should be communicated to the media/ public that we're going to bed in a young team and possibly sacrifice qualification for a tournament with a view to being in far better shape for the next one. Of course there would still be complaints, but if it was a clear plan to improve things that was well explained then I think many Scotland fans would back it and give it a chance. Except he's completely right. And in the bolded part, you're wrong. They'd crucify him, as they always do. There is nothing wrong with the approach - I'm confident that if there were younger players good enough, they'd be in the squad and playing. Strachan's "plan", should be to pick the best squad of players that he has at his disposal each window, with a few spots for the highly rated youngsters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergie's no1 fan Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 What's to lose?? Well Erm even more, making our position even worse maybe? There's not a single young player that's not played that would've improved us as a team!!!! FFS man. 1 defeat away to Georgia and it's fucking doomsday and 'PICK THE YOUNG GUIZ GOAGGS' from fans. If we had we would've been in an even worse position. We have done well in this group, Georgia away aside. Fucking embarassment Scotland fans. Except he's completely right. And in the bolded part, you're wrong. They'd crucify him, as they always do. There is nothing wrong with the approach - I'm confident that if there were younger players good enough, they'd be in the squad and playing. Strachan's "plan", should be to pick the best squad of players that he has at his disposal each window, with a few spots for the highly rated youngsters. Exactly. Just imagine for 1 minute that Ryan Jack was picked ahead of Scott Brown and we still lost 1-0 to Georgia. The only Scotland fans that would be remotely happy are the Aberdeen fans. The rest would be going bonkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Except he's completely right. And in the bolded part, you're wrong. They'd crucify him, as they always do. There is nothing wrong with the approach - I'm confident that if there were younger players good enough, they'd be in the squad and playing. Strachan's "plan", should be to pick the best squad of players that he has at his disposal each window, with a few spots for the highly rated youngsters. But the approach wouldn't be clear out everyone now and throw in a team full of kids. It would be rather than pick a team for right now, pick players who will be at their peak in 2-3 years. I agree just because they're young and scottish doesn't mean they will be good enough, but take the top half dozen or so prospects and get them involved in the squad/ give them game time. We've failed to qualify for the past 8 tournaments in a row. Do you think we should just carry on with the same short term approach and hope one of these days it's enough to scrape through with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 But the approach wouldn't be clear out everyone now and throw in a team full of kids. It would be rather than pick a team for right now, pick players who will be at their peak in 2-3 years. I agree just because they're young and scottish doesn't mean they will be good enough, but take the top half dozen or so prospects and get them involved in the squad/ give them game time. I'm 100% sure that a few new players will be given some game time in friendlies after this campaign. It would be astonishing if they didn't. Off the top of my head Strachan has given Robertson, May, Martin and Forsyth their debuts. Why wouldn't that continue in future friendlies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 What's to lose?? Well Erm even more, making our position even worse maybe? There's not a single young player that's not played that would've improved us as a team!!!! FFS man. 1 defeat away to Georgia and it's fucking doomsday and 'PICK THE YOUNG GUIZ GOAGGS' from fans. If we had we would've been in an even worse position. We have done well in this group, Georgia away aside. Fucking embarassment Scotland fans. can our position get any worse, we're fourth seeds as it stands, a lot of the current squad have played a part in us becoming fourth seeds scott brown age 30 alan hutton age 30 shaun maloney age 32 david marshall age 30 russell martin age 29 james morrison age 29 steven naismith age 28 steven fletcher age 28 charlie mulgrew age 29 thats 9 of the starting 11 against Georgia, if we fail to get to the euros then by the time russia 2018 comes round they will all be on the wrong side of 30 when do we start giving youngsters competitive games, and i dont mean 18 or 19year olds, but we have guys out there in their early 20's that at the moment need to start experiencing the national stage before it becomes too late for them the germans sacrificed a couple of tournaments to build what they have just now, and while we could never emulate their current squad, sacrificing a tournament or 2 to build a squad capable of qualifying for the following 6 is surely a lot better than simple patchwork jobs every 2 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 For all Bertie's flaws in his time in charge, and I went to a lot of scotland games at that time and suffered big time, he was the last manager to take us to a play-off. You can't simply boil it down to 'He got to a playoff, others didn't' as a defence for him though, you have to look at what he was up against. To get to the playoff he finished above Lithuania, Iceland and the Faroe Islands, while losing in Lithuania and drawing in the Faroes. Burley also managed to finish above Iceland, Levein also managed to finish above Lithuania. No one would attempt to argue that they were anything other than disastrous failures on the basis of finishing above those teams. While under Vogts we finished second and under Smith/McLeish we finished third, there's no denying that finishing third in the 2008 group was a harder task than finishing second in the 2004 qualifiers. The reason we made the playoffs under Vogts is that we had by a country mile the easiest qualifying group we've ever had. It didn't stop him being a dud manager. He didn't really have a choice but to fling young players in because there was no alternative to them. That comes full circle to the current argument: Vogts didn't pick young players over better older players, he picked young players because they were the best he had. The same goes for every other country bringing young players through. Wales didn't chuck Gareth Bale and Aaron Ramsey caps when they were teenagers just for the sake of giving young players with potential a chance, it was because they were the best players available. Belgium didn't pick the likes of Hazard and Courtois as teenagers and watch them turn into world class international players as a result, it was the other way round: they had young players who already had more ability than the older players they were picking at the time, and those players became established internationals as a result of their performances earning that status. If - as we've seen with Strachan's reluctance to start Robertson - we see a player not being picked just because they're young then very well, castigate the manager's reluctance to pick young players. However, no country just flings youngsters straight into the starting eleven for competitive games when they're not as good as the players they're replacing just because they're young. Eden Hazard has 60 caps at the age of 24 because he was good enough to start for Belgium as a teenager and I'd love to see Scottish players doing the same, but Hazard earned a call-up by establishing himself in the Lille first team and winning Ligue 1 Young player of the year when he was 17, then getting caps as a sub before gradually earning his place in the starting eleven through consistently excellent performances for his club and when given the chance his country. Belgium didn't just hand him competitive starts because he's young, and we shouldn't do that for the likes Callum Paterson or John Souttar when they've done nothing to suggest they're as good as the players starting ahead of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 For all Bertie's flaws in his time in charge, and I went to a lot of scotland games at that time and suffered big time, he was the last manager to take us to a play-off. He also left a foundation which few other managers have done- Craig Gordon, Darren Fletcher, James McFadden and a few others all broke through under his leadership. Barry Ferguson also became an established international under Bertie. Those 4 were arguably our most important players of that decade. Our under 21's had a lot of promising players- but the difference was they got a chance. The team that Smith/ Mcleish led to narrowly missing out on qualifying for euro 2008 was described by the Italian coach at the time as 'one of the most promising young sides in Europe just now'!! Sometimes you have to take a step back to move two forward. You could argue the difference is Vogts had no choice as Craig Browns team were mostly well into their thirties and there was nothing coming through. Yes he dished out far too many caps and we had a horrendous run of friendlies at hampden without scoring , there was the Faroes draw etc etc. But, would Walter and Big Alex have had these players at their peak as experienced internationals if Bertie hadn't taken the hit and thrown them in? I've already called this out as revisionism, yet you still persist with this line. Vogts didn't throw the likes of Faddy, Gordon, and Fletcher in. He was quite cautious about it. By the point he put them in they were already some of the best players we had. It would taken a massive amount of incompetence to not put them in the team when he did. He took us to a playoff by finishing above Lithuania, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands. No Scotland manager has failed to do that. We even managed to draw in the Faroes and lose in Lithuania. Can you really claim that Berti did anything for us that any other manager wouldn't have managed? It was a disaster that plummeted us down the rankings and meant that our best team in many years has to try to qualify from a group with Italy, France, and Ukraine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 can our position get any worse, we're fourth seeds as it stands, a lot of the current squad have played a part in us becoming fourth seeds scott brown age 30 alan hutton age 30 shaun maloney age 32 david marshall age 30 russell martin age 29 james morrison age 29 steven naismith age 28 steven fletcher age 28 charlie mulgrew age 29 thats 9 of the starting 11 against Georgia, if we fail to get to the euros then by the time russia 2018 comes round they will all be on the wrong side of 30 when do we start giving youngsters competitive games, and i dont mean 18 or 19year olds, but we have guys out there in their early 20's that at the moment need to start experiencing the national stage before it becomes too late for them the germans sacrificed a couple of tournaments to build what they have just now, and while we could never emulate their current squad, sacrificing a tournament or 2 to build a squad capable of qualifying for the following 6 is surely a lot better than simple patchwork jobs every 2 years Like I said elsewhere, you'll get 3/4 years out of a lot of the guys currently in the squad and players will come through to take their positions. JUST LIKE WHAT HAS ALWAYS HAPPENED! I'm sorry for the capitals but this shite comes up so fucking much!!! Usually after a bad result. It has done for years!! It's an international game, it's up to players to develop at their clubs, in international football you need your best 11 players!!! You shouldn't be giving young guys games over better players FFS to develop them!!! We only play 3/4 competitive games of football a year! We need our best 11 playing together as much as possible when they're away with Scotland to build up any sort of understanding they are able too!!! IF YOUNG GUYS ARE GOOD ENOUGH (Robertson and Hanley) THEY WILL PLAY! Simple as that Eta and of course it can get worse!!! We could be totally out of it already!! We still have a half decent chance of a play off which we would've been nowhere fucking near if he had been playing the shite you're suggesting. If I spent a fortune travelling to Germany or Poland or Ireland and saw him giving young guys a chance, say Bain over Marshall or Jack over Brown or Patterson over Hutton I'd be fucking livid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Like I said elsewhere, you'll get 3/4 years out of a lot of the guys currently in the squad and players will come through to take their positions. JUST LIKE WHAT HAS ALWAYS HAPPENED! I'm sorry for the capitals but this shite comes up so fucking much!!! Usually after a bad result. It has done for years!! It's an international game, it's up to players to develop at their clubs, in international football you need your best 11 players!!! You shouldn't be giving young guys games over better players FFS to develop them!!! We only play 3/4 competitive games of football a year! We need our best 11 playing together as much as possible when they're away with Scotland to build up any sort of understanding they are able too!!! IF YOUNG GUYS ARE GOOD ENOUGH (Robertson and Hanley) THEY WILL PLAY! Simple as that so you are saying that currently steven fletcher is the best scottish striker in football at this moment in time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 so you are saying that currently steven fletcher is the best scottish striker in football at this moment in time? Yes. Naismith maybe, Griffiths nope. Who's better??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Eden Hazard has 60 caps at the age of 24 because he was good enough to start for Belgium as a teenager and I'd love to see Scottish players doing the same, but Hazard earned a call-up by establishing himself in the Lille first team and winning Ligue 1 Young player of the year when he was 17, then getting caps as a sub before gradually earning his place in the starting eleven through consistently excellent performances for his club and when given the chance his country. Belgium didn't just hand him competitive starts because he's young, and we shouldn't do that for the likes Callum Paterson or John Souttar when they've done nothing to suggest they're as good as the players starting ahead of them. steven fletcher has averaged 1 goal in just over 3 games in his career, jordan rhodes has managed around 1 in 2 yet it would take an army to get fletcher out of the scottish team right now no matter his performances hazard had potential at 17 for the national side, no one knew how good he would be on a consistent basis until he consistently got games, belgium took a chance on his potential and it paid off, instead we'll likely go into the next qualifying campaign with a squad full of over 30's because scotland arent willing to take that chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Yes. Naismith maybe, Griffiths nope. Who's better??? fletcher has averaged 1 in just over 3 games at club level throughout his career, jordan rhodes has managed 1 in 2 at club level rhodes has scored 3 goals in 13 appearances for scotland, fletcher has scored 4 in 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 steven fletcher has averaged 1 goal in just over 3 games in his career, jordan rhodes has managed around 1 in 2 yet it would take an army to get fletcher out of the scottish team right now no matter his performances hazard had potential at 17 for the national side, no one knew how good he would be on a consistent basis until he consistently got games, belgium took a chance on his potential and it paid off, instead we'll likely go into the next qualifying campaign with a squad full of over 30's because scotland arent willing to take that chance Hazard won young player of the year in France the season when he was 17/18. He was already good enough to play for Belgium at that age. Who do you suggest that Scotland call up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.