Scott McTominay

[Bing.McCrosby]

2 hours ago, skippy2015 said:

Not really heard many commentators mention it but mctominay would prob have had an england cap this year and in my opinion is better than rice and winks. I wasn’t a mcleish fan but the best thing he done was getting mctominay to pledge his future to Scotland.

He's an excellent player who's just getting better all the time. One of the first names on the team sheet.

It's amazing how people could have been and still are critical of him.

Were a strange nation we really are.

[LinkinFighter]

He seems to be turning into a real player. There is definitely more to his game than breaking up play and being a water carrier.

[Guest DAVIDB69]

He's an excellent player who's just getting better all the time. One of the first names on the team sheet.
It's amazing how people could have been and still are critical of him.
Were a strange nation we really are.

He has developed into an excellent player for man united , however this form has still not transferred to a scotland shirt

[RobbieD]

6 hours ago, DAVIDB69 said:

 

 

He has developed into an excellent player for man united , however this form has still not transferred to a scotland shirt

 

 

He’s been fine for Scotland. What do you expect from him exactly 

[Bing.McCrosby]

40 minutes ago, RobbieD said:

He’s been fine for Scotland. What do you expect from him exactly 

He expects him to score a couple of screamers per game, otherwise he's been crap.

[jake.]

He's only played 3 games for Scotland since becoming a guaranteed starter for Man United too - so it's a bit weird to expect to see his current form on show for Scotland when he hasn't really had the chance. 

Besides, it's not like McTominay has been any worse than any other midfielder in the games that he has played. 

[Frankie S]

On 07/12/2019 at 23:24, BingMcCrosby said:

He's an excellent player who's just getting better all the time. One of the first names on the team sheet.

It's amazing how people could have been and still are critical of him.

Were a strange nation we really are.

For a substantial minority of Scotland fans, any player born in England, who has the temerity to choose to play for Scotland, will never be any good.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Frankie S

[craigkillie]

On 07/12/2019 at 23:24, BingMcCrosby said:

He's an excellent player who's just getting better all the time. One of the first names on the team sheet.
It's amazing how people could have been and still are critical of him.
Were a strange nation we really are.

 

I've just scanned all the way back through this thread to posts from the start of the season and can't see a single person being "critical of him" beyond a guy who is clearly joking.

There's just as many, if not more, Scotland fans who have the opposite problem of constantly judging players based solely on their club performances without any thought to how that translates to the national team. Someone being good for their club doesn't mean they'll be good for Scotland, so you can't be "first name on the teamsheet" purely on the basis of club form. The trio of Jack, McGregor and McGinn, while still not brilliant, have probably been the best trio we've put out since Brown retired, so I wouldn't say McTominay is guaranteed to immediately come back in.

Having said that, I do really like McTominay - he adds a bit of physicality to our midfield and there's a zip to his passes which you don't get from other players. Our results with him in the team haven't been great though, so it's a case of working out which side of the chicken and egg scenario he's on.

Edited December 9, 2019 by craigkillie

[forameus]

16 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I've just scanned all the way back through this thread to posts from the start of the season and can't see a single person being "critical of him" beyond a guy who is clearly joking.

There's just as many, if not more, Scotland fans who have the opposite problem of constantly judging players based solely on their club performances without any thought to how that translates to the national team. Someone being good for their club doesn't mean they'll be good for Scotland, so you can't be "first name on the teamsheet" purely on the basis of club form. The trio of Jack, McGregor and McGinn, while still not brilliant, have probably been the best trio we've put out since Brown retired, so I wouldn't see McTominay is guaranteed to immediately come back in.

Having said that, I do really like McTominay - he adds a bit of physicality to our midfield and there's a zip to his passes which you don't get from other players. Our results with him in the team haven't been great though, so it's a case of working out which side of the chicken and egg scenario he's on.

Spot on.  The biggest job for a Scotland manager - and the one that pretty much every single one of them has consistently failed at - is getting as many of our players playing to the standard they're capable of for club sides.  If Clarke could crack that, and get Robertson in the sort of system that lets him play to his strengths, that lets McTominay shine, and finally lets Forrest/Fraser regularly do what they're capable of, then we'll be golden.

As it is though, that's likely impossible.  You're moulding 11 players together who play in likely 11 different systems.  We're not going to see the Robertson that plays for Liverpool, or the McTominay who is getting better and better.  Unless Clarke can achieve what I said above, then he needs to put out the best team rather than the 11 best players.  If that means our standalone best players get benched to play a more cohesive unit, then do it.

[Bing.McCrosby]

3 hours ago, craigkillie said:

 

I've just scanned all the way back through this thread to posts from the start of the season and can't see a single person being "critical of him" beyond a guy who is clearly joking.

There's just as many, if not more, Scotland fans who have the opposite problem of constantly judging players based solely on their club performances without any thought to how that translates to the national team. Someone being good for their club doesn't mean they'll be good for Scotland, so you can't be "first name on the teamsheet" purely on the basis of club form. The trio of Jack, McGregor and McGinn, while still not brilliant, have probably been the best trio we've put out since Brown retired, so I wouldn't say McTominay is guaranteed to immediately come back in.

Having said that, I do really like McTominay - he adds a bit of physicality to our midfield and there's a zip to his passes which you don't get from other players. Our results with him in the team haven't been great though, so it's a case of working out which side of the chicken and egg scenario he's on.

So after all that your saying he would be one of the first names on the teamsheet?

Also your scanning skills maybe on the way out. Or just over ruled by your need to disagree with people. There's plenty of criticism of him on this thread and others. On this page even.

3 hours ago, forameus said:

Spot on. 

Yawn, honestly your posts are so dull.

Eventually you say you think he should play too. Exact same as Craig said, shocker.

[Bing.McCrosby]

4 hours ago, craigkillie said:

 

I've just scanned all the way back through this thread to posts from the start of the season and can't see a single person being "critical of him" beyond a guy who is clearly joking.

There's just as many, if not more, Scotland fans who have the opposite problem of constantly judging players based solely on their club performances without any thought to how that translates to the national team. Someone being good for their club doesn't mean they'll be good for Scotland, so you can't be "first name on the teamsheet" purely on the basis of club form. The trio of Jack, McGregor and McGinn, while still not brilliant, have probably been the best trio we've put out since Brown retired, so I wouldn't say McTominay is guaranteed to immediately come back in.

Having said that, I do really like McTominay - he adds a bit of physicality to our midfield and there's a zip to his passes which you don't get from other players. Our results with him in the team haven't been great though, so it's a case of working out which side of the chicken and egg scenario he's on.

Or are you saying you wouldnt play him, I really don't know. I keep nodding off halfway thru your post.

[forameus]

9 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

So after all that your saying he would be one of the first names on the teamsheet?

Also your scanning skills maybe on the way out. Or just over ruled by your need to disagree with people. There's plenty of criticism of him on this thread and others. On this page even.

Yawn, honestly your posts are so dull.

Eventually you say you think he should play too. Exact same as Craig said, shocker.

You seem to have got a real hard-on for how dull you find everything.  I guess you have to find something to bring joy into your life.  Well, you know what they say.  If you're starting to wonder why most people you come across are arseholes, maybe it's just you.

And I'm not sure I actually did say either way on whether I would play him.  In fact, I specifically said that Clarke should be playing the best team rather than the best 11 players.  If McTominay's in the former, fine.  If he isn't, fine.  

Edited December 9, 2019 by forameus

[Bing.McCrosby]

8 minutes ago, forameus said:

You seem to have got a real hard-on for how dull you find everything.  I guess you have to find something to bring joy into your life.  Well, you know what they say.  If you're starting to wonder why most people you come across are arseholes, maybe it's just you.

And I'm not sure I actually did say either way on whether I would play him.  In fact, I specifically said that Clarke should be playing the best team rather than the best 11 players.  If McTominay's in the former, fine.  If he isn't, fine.  

See if you can find a quote of me saying anyone other than you or Craigs posts are dull.

So are you saying you would or wouldnt play him? Or are you saying nothing as usual 

[forameus]

1 minute ago, BingMcCrosby said:

See if you can find a quote of me saying anyone other than you or Craigs posts are dull.

So are you saying you would or wouldnt play him? Or are you saying nothing as usual 

If you can't read and understand the original post, or the follow-up, then I'm not going to post it a third time.  I'd probably need to descend it to stick-man drawings or something at that rate, and I'm shite at drawing.

[Bing.McCrosby]

8 minutes ago, forameus said:

If you can't read and understand the original post, or the follow-up, then I'm not going to post it a third time.  I'd probably need to descend it to stick-man drawings or something at that rate, and I'm shite at drawing.

Your scared to say you think he should play, because you would be agreeing with me. And it would render all your above posts pointless.

Apart from the one that was about hard-ons and arseholes, Freud would have had a field day with that one.

[forameus]

2 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Your scared to say you think he should play, because you would be agreeing with me. And it would render all your above posts pointless.

Apart from the one that was about hard-ons and arseholes, Freud would have had a field day with that one.

Jesus fucking Christ...

Quote

Unless Clarke can achieve what I said above, then he needs to put out the best team rather than the 11 best players.  If that means our standalone best players get benched to play a more cohesive unit, then do it.

What part of that are you struggling to understand?  I tried not to use any big words as well, so surely it isn't that hard?  I'm not saying McTominay absolutely shouldn't play, and I'm not saying he absolutely should.  Certain parts of our support like to take club form and think that it'll be easily translated to the national team, when clearly that is rarely the case.  Step forward Andy Robertson.  If McTominay can play like he is now and really improve us, then absolutely he should be playing.  If the players around him aren't of a good enough standard, and his form suffers - as we've seen with a lot of players before - then it's going to be up to Clarke to decide whether there are better combinations out there.

[craigkillie]

36 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

So after all that your saying he would be one of the first names on the teamsheet?

Also your scanning skills maybe on the way out. Or just over ruled by your need to disagree with people. There's plenty of criticism of him on this thread and others. On this page even.

Yawn, honestly your posts are so dull.

Eventually you say you think he should play too. Exact same as Craig said, shocker.

34 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Or are you saying you wouldnt play him, I really don't know. I keep nodding off halfway thru your post.

It's not my job to educate you.

 

 

[Bing.McCrosby]

8 minutes ago, forameus said:

Jesus fucking Christ...

What part of that are you struggling to understand?  I tried not to use any big words as well, so surely it isn't that hard?  I'm not saying McTominay absolutely shouldn't play, and I'm not saying he absolutely should.

So you don't have an opinion, great

I know you say your clever, you continually allud to how clever you are. 

But the rest of your post is just so pointless.

People shouldnt play just because of club form, and players should fit a system. This may surprise you but your saying something that has been said thousands of times by thousands of people.

Were talking specificly about Mctominay on this thread. But you don't have an opinion on whether he should play. Just that should you have an opinion it would be the correct one. 

Absolute pointless drivel

[skippy2015]

What part of that are you struggling to understand?  I tried not to use any big words as well, so surely it isn't that hard?  I'm not saying McTominay absolutely shouldn't play, and I'm not saying he absolutely should.  Certain parts of our support like to take club form and think that it'll be easily translated to the national team, when clearly that is rarely the case.  Step forward Andy Robertson.  If McTominay can play like he is now and really improve us, then absolutely he should be playing.  If the players around him aren't of a good enough standard, and his form suffers - as we've seen with a lot of players before - then it's going to be up to Clarke to decide whether there are better combinations out there.
Andy Robertson has been excellent for scotland over his 34 caps. The last campaign I agree his form dipped but this was 6 games of the 34 caps - also he was man of the match against Cyrus - two of the 6 were against San Marino where he did well. Seems lots of fans on here very quick to base all his scotland performances in 3 games in the last campaign without looking at his performance over the 34 caps.

[skippy2015]

What part of that are you struggling to understand?  I tried not to use any big words as well, so surely it isn't that hard?  I'm not saying McTominay absolutely shouldn't play, and I'm not saying he absolutely should.  Certain parts of our support like to take club form and think that it'll be easily translated to the national team, when clearly that is rarely the case.  Step forward Andy Robertson.  If McTominay can play like he is now and really improve us, then absolutely he should be playing.  If the players around him aren't of a good enough standard, and his form suffers - as we've seen with a lot of players before - then it's going to be up to Clarke to decide whether there are better combinations out there.

Andy Robertson has been excellent for scotland over his 34 caps. The last campaign I agree his form dipped but that was 6 games of the 34 caps -also he was man of the match against cyprus- 2 of the 6 were against San Marino where he done well. Seems like a lot of fans on here quick to base all his performances on 3 games in the last campaign without looking at his performances over 34 caps.