McBurnie's socks

[DukDukGoose]

7 hours ago, G51 said:

i should have been clearer - dykes is the nominal "striker" but he doesn't play further forward than the guy beside him.

from serbia. in this game, mcginn pretty much played as far forward as dykes did:

Is that not a case of Christie and McGinn looking to win the second ball from Dykes flicks on and hold up play?

Dykes is our most potent goal threat in the final third.

[G51]

13 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Is that not a case of Christie and McGinn looking to win the second ball from Dykes flicks on and hold up play?

Dykes is our most potent goal threat in the final third.

Dykes has a lot of ability but he's not really that great a finisher IMO. He is a better finisher than McBurnie, but I still don't really want him taking a lot of shots when I have Fraser or McGinn there.

The point I was trying to prove (and probably should have used the games with Fraser I posted later that illustrate it better) is that when Scotland attack, Dykes is rarely the furthest guy forward. Because our ideal build up from keeper to attack  is Marshall - Gallagher - McTominay/Tierney - Dykes - Fraser/McGinn. Now if we're swinging a cross into the box, you're obviously aiming for Dykes. But by and large we don't want to be doing that because a) Dykes is pretty much the only aerial threat we have up front, so he can just be doubled up on and b) It's not a very efficient way of attacking anyway.

So if Dykes is rarely furthest forward when Scotland attack (and the position maps show as much) and he's not the guy we want taking our shots, it's really, really daft to start judging the guy on how many goals he scores for Scotland. And thankfully, Scotland fans haven't done that!

For some reason though, McBurnie is judged by this. Despite the fact he comes even deeper than Dykes. It's odd.

Just because someone is a striker doesn't mean they're going to be the guy getting you goals. We don't want our striker taking shots, we want the best finisher taking shots. And neither Dykes nor McBurnie are the best finishers in the Scotland team IMO.

[DukDukGoose]

8 hours ago, G51 said:

Dykes has a lot of ability but he's not really that great a finisher IMO. He is a better finisher than McBurnie, but I still don't really want him taking a lot of shots when I have Fraser or McGinn there.

The point I was trying to prove (and probably should have used the games with Fraser I posted later that illustrate it better) is that when Scotland attack, Dykes is rarely the furthest guy forward. Because our ideal build up from keeper to attack  is Marshall - Gallagher - McTominay/Tierney - Dykes - Fraser/McGinn. Now if we're swinging a cross into the box, you're obviously aiming for Dykes. But by and large we don't want to be doing that because a) Dykes is pretty much the only aerial threat we have up front, so he can just be doubled up on and b) It's not a very efficient way of attacking anyway.

So if Dykes is rarely furthest forward when Scotland attack (and the position maps show as much) and he's not the guy we want taking our shots, it's really, really daft to start judging the guy on how many goals he scores for Scotland. And thankfully, Scotland fans haven't done that!

For some reason though, McBurnie is judged by this. Despite the fact he comes even deeper than Dykes. It's odd.

Just because someone is a striker doesn't mean they're going to be the guy getting you goals. We don't want our striker taking shots, we want the best finisher taking shots. And neither Dykes nor McBurnie are the best finishers in the Scotland team IMO.

This is a strange hill to die on. 

One I don't think you'd be dying on if he wasn't an openly massive Rangers fan.

[G51]

7 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

This is a strange hill to die on. 

One I don't think you'd be dying on if he wasn't an openly massive Rangers fan.

I don't care in the slightest about McBurnie the person. Who he supports is of no interest to me. Lawrence Shankland is also a massive Rangers fan but I'm not posting anything about why he should be in the Scotland squad, because he isn't good enough and I don't think he should be.

I don't think "please understand that not all strikers are there to score goals so therefore their contribution should be judged differently" is that strange a hill to die on tbh. Not for someone who's seen a lot of Kenny Miller up front, anyway.

If I wasn't tagged in this thread I would never have seen it and would never have posted anything.

[DukDukGoose]

16 minutes ago, G51 said:

I don't care in the slightest about McBurnie the person. Who he supports is of no interest to me. Lawrence Shankland is also a massive Rangers fan but I'm not posting anything about why he should be in the Scotland squad, because he isn't good enough and I don't think he should be.

I don't think "please understand that not all strikers are there to score goals so therefore their contribution should be judged differently" is that strange a hill to die on tbh. Not for someone who's seen a lot of Kenny Miller up front, anyway.

If I wasn't tagged in this thread I would never have seen it and would never have posted anything.

Shankland doesn't publicly discuss his love for Rangers.

McBurnie has contributed almost nothing in a Scotland jersey. Took a brilliant penalty in a shootout and made some good runs on his last start. That's about it.

[Dunning1874]

18 hours ago, G51 said:

and of those 15 games, mcburnie was actually on the pitch for 731 minutes, which is what, 8 games?

Yes, and reducing those 15 games to the time McBurnie was actually on the pitch, the number of goals scored by the team reduces from 9 to 1. We have scored once with McBurnie on the pitch.

This is why, even if everyone accepts the very flimsy argument that you can't judge him directly on his own goals or assists, it doesn't work as a defence of his performances anyway. Even if you argue he's there for a contribution to our all round play rather than getting directly involved in scoring or supplying final balls, it's at this point an irrefutable fact that McBurnie being on the pitch actively hinders us in attack.

If he's there to help us move up the park and bring midfielders into the game rather than getting into the box himself, that clearly isn't working. Either he's failing to perforn that role effectively, or if he is doing it we're incapable of scoring goals despite it anyway, because no one else can score while he's on either. Just by being there he nullifies our midfield as a creative force.

It's not that you can't rely on McBurnie to provide a goal himself when you need one, it's that when he's on the pitch you know the whole team won't get one. That's why it's time to cut our losses. How much evidence of this do we need before we accept it's not going to happen for him, how many chances is he going to get?

[G51]

1 minute ago, Merkland Red said:

Shankland doesn't publicly discuss his love for Rangers.

McBurnie has contributed almost nothing in a Scotland jersey. Took a brilliant penalty in a shootout and made some good runs on his last start. That's about it.

Okay? I'm making this same argument for Dykes and I've no idea what team he supports. I must stress again that I simply do not care in this context who McBurnie supports.

His contributions in the last international break were fine to good. He's also the only striker we have who can replace Dykes without a complete change in style.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

5 minutes ago, G51 said:

Okay? I'm making this same argument for Dykes and I've no idea what team he supports. I must stress again that I simply do not care in this context who McBurnie supports.

His contributions in the last international break were fine to good. He's also the only striker we have who can replace Dykes without a complete change in style.

Paterson and Nisbett offer similar actually so not a true statement.

[G51]

Just now, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Paterson and Nisbett offer similar actually so not a true statement.

Paterson isn't even close to being at the required level, and the difference between his build up play and Dykes/McBurnie's is measured in light-years.

Nisbet is far better suited to the Fraser role than the Dykes role. He has a lot of good qualities but I wouldn't say dropping deep is one of them.

[DukDukGoose]

14 minutes ago, G51 said:

Okay? I'm making this same argument for Dykes and I've no idea what team he supports. I must stress again that I simply do not care in this context who McBurnie supports.

His contributions in the last international break were fine to good. He's also the only striker we have who can replace Dykes without a complete change in style.

Dykes has actually got himself in to dangerous positions and on a couple of occasions had a guilt edged chance if we made the correct decision with the ball.

He's also scored, runs himself in to the ground pressing the opposition and will have won the majority of the aerial duels.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

4 minutes ago, G51 said:

Paterson isn't even close to being at the required level, and the difference between his build up play and Dykes/McBurnie's is measured in light-years.

Nisbet is far better suited to the Fraser role than the Dykes role. He has a lot of good qualities but I wouldn't say dropping deep is one of them.

Both can be play the same position without the need for a change of style.  Nobody mentioned levels.  Dykes doesn't really drop deep anyway, he just is quite static and play catches up with him then passes him and he picks it up again arriving in the box.

[G51]

16 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Dykes has actually got himself in to dangerous positions and on a couple of occasions had a guilt edged chance if we made the correct decision with the ball.

He's also scored, runs himself in to the ground pressing the opposition and will have won the majority of the aerial duels.

Agree with all of that. The fact that McBurnie has done all of those things too, with the obvious exception of scoring, proves why Clarke sees him as the backup for Dykes.

[G51]

18 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Both can be play the same position without the need for a change of style.  Nobody mentioned levels.  Dykes doesn't really drop deep anyway, he just is quite static and play catches up with him then passes him and he picks it up again arriving in the box.

Neither of them can play that position though. Paterson can't do anything on a pitch without committing a foul and it would be blunting the things about Nisbet that actually make him good.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

1 minute ago, G51 said:

Neither of them can play that position though. Paterson can't do anything on a pitch without committing a foul and it would be blunting the things about Nisbet that actually make him good.

Aye they can

[DukDukGoose]

43 minutes ago, G51 said:

Agree with all of that. The fact that McBurnie has done all of those things too, with the obvious exception of scoring, proves why Clarke sees him as the backup for Dykes.

I'm genuinely hoping it works out for the boy. Cutting our losses is a bit harsh. I think it's more about him adapting than the team adapting though.

[G51]

2 minutes ago, Andrew Driver said:

Is it because Lawrence Shankland scores goals and has performed well for Scotland?  

we'll never forget that famous strike against san marino

[John Lambies Doos]

Can't believe@G51. Is still going with this. [emoji848]

[G51]

Just now, John Lambies Doos said:

Can't believe@G51. Is still going with this.

I can't either, tbh. The domestic football is back now so I feel like this has ran it's course until March.

But be warned, if Oli McBurnie plays a key role in the Euros then I will dunk on every single one of you.

[John Lambies Doos]

I can't either, tbh. The domestic football is back now so I feel like this has ran it's course until March.
But be warned, if Oli McBurnie plays a key role in the Euros then I will dunk on every single one of you.

Fair doos m8 [emoji106]

[Bing.McCrosby]

On 24/11/2020 at 15:35, G51 said:

I can't either, tbh. The domestic football is back now so I feel like this has ran it's course until March.

But be warned, if Oli McBurnie plays a key role in the Euros then I will dunk on every single one of you.

This is really really terrifying. Im terrified.

Although if mcburnie continues his current form its extremely unlikely he will even be in the euros squad.