leigh Griffiths

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

58 minutes ago, Jeremiah Cole said:

Is this a joke?

Griffiths is a League One reject.

He’s not been a regular starter for years now.

He’s finished

He was Wolves best player when he was there.  13 in 31 from attacking midfield then snapped up by Celtic as he was doing really well.  

[Rodhull]

59 minutes ago, Jeremiah Cole said:

Are you being serious?

We’ve got a £20 million striker playing regularly and scoring for a top half Premiership side and you’re picking these guys ahead of him?

Do you seriously think that any of these guys would get even near the bench at Sheffield United?

Some people are totally and utterly clueless!

None of what you’ve said is wrong but Mcburnie has been fucking terrible every time he’s played for Scotland. Should he just get picked because of what club he plays for regardless?

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

34 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

None of what you’ve said is wrong but Mcburnie has been fucking terrible every time he’s played for Scotland. Should he just get picked because of what club he plays for regardless?

I hate this he hasn't been good for Scotland pish. 

He's played nine times, four of them starts, spread out over about two years. 

If you're looking for evidence of what sort of player he is you get forty looks a season at him, but some fans insist on only judging based on the nine bits of games over two or three years he's played for Scotland. 

That's virtually irrelevant, especially with young players who aren't the same player now they were  a year ago.

I'm not a big McBurnie fan, but its obvious by a process of elimination he is the best we've got.  

[Rodhull]

8 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

I hate this he hasn't been good for Scotland pish. 

He's played nine times, four of them starts, spread out over about two years. 

If you're looking for evidence of what sort of player he is you get forty looks a season at him, but some fans insist on only judging based on the nine bits of games over two or three years he's played for Scotland. 

That's virtually irrelevant, especially with young players who aren't the same player now they were  a year ago.

I'm not a big McBurnie fan, but its obvious by a process of elimination he is the best we've got.  

Aye imagine judging who should play for Scotland based on how well they play for Scotland. Let's keep picking him even though there's other older or less talented players who regularly play better for the national side and also don't get caught saying they can't be arsed.

[forameus]

1 hour ago, Rodhull said:

Aye imagine judging who should play for Scotland based on how well they play for Scotland. Let's keep picking him even though there's other older or less talented players who regularly play better for the national side and also don't get caught saying they can't be arsed.

And where are these players who "regularly play better for the national side"?  McBurnie is hardly the answer, but he's up there with the best of a bad bunch.  We have a very poor selection of strikers.

[Rodhull]

Just now, forameus said:

And where are these players who "regularly play better for the national side"?  McBurnie is hardly the answer, but he's up there with the best of a bad bunch.  We have a very poor selection of strikers.

Off the top of my head Naismith, Griffiths, Martin and even Burke have all performed better without always even being good for Scotland than Mcburnie has.

Clearly going by club form none of these would be considered better players than Mcburnie but whether it's attitude or being ill suited to the formation/style of play Scotland uses something seems to be stopping him from getting close to replicating his Sheff Utd or Swansea form. Hopefully he comes good but the idea of not using his previous form for the national team as a factor in whether he should be picked or not seems unwise.

 

[forameus]

3 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

Off the top of my head Naismith, Griffiths, Martin and even Burke have all performed better without always even being good for Scotland than Mcburnie has.

Clearly going by club form none of these would be considered better players than Mcburnie but whether it's attitude or being ill suited to the formation/style of play Scotland uses something seems to be stopping him from getting close to replicating his Sheff Utd or Swansea form. Hopefully he comes good but the idea of not using his previous form for the national team as a factor in whether he should be picked or not seems unwise.

 

That's a bit of a stretch.  How far are you going back to get a Naismith that performed like that?  Same with Griffiths, I'd imagine he's unlikely to be able to play to that level at this point (maybe in March).  Martin seems extremely similar to McBurnie in that he was roundly pilloried by fans (and I'm not sure he ever really played any better than McBurnie has).  And Burke?  Come on...

I'd agree on the final point though.  It needs to be a factor.  But we also can't just say "well, he's been shite in the past" and write him off.  He looked utterly miserable in the Russia game, because he was struggling to get any kind of service, and getting bullied in all senses by better defenders.  Potential-wise, he is the best option we've got in my opinion, so we need to be very careful, and ideally try and get a confident McBurnie in, and actually attempt to give him the service he needs.

[Jeremiah Cole]

2 hours ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

He was Wolves best player when he was there.  13 in 31 from attacking midfield then snapped up by Celtic as he was doing really well.  

If he was Wolves 'best player' then they wouldn't have benched him then sold him right in the middle of a promotion campaign!

"attacking midfield"??? He was a striker!

[Jeremiah Cole]

2 hours ago, Rodhull said:

Should he just get picked because of what club he plays for regardless?

He should just get picked because he's currently our best striker!

The club he's at is a marker of the level of his quality!

I'm old enough to remember the days when Kenny Dalglish got pilloried early in his Scotland career because he didn't perform for Scotland as he did for Liverpool.

 

 

 

[Rodhull]

Just now, forameus said:

That's a bit of a stretch.  How far are you going back to get a Naismith that performed like that?  Same with Griffiths, I'd imagine he's unlikely to be able to play to that level at this point (maybe in March).  Martin seems extremely similar to McBurnie in that he was roundly pilloried by fans (and I'm not sure he ever really played any better than McBurnie has).  And Burke?  Come on...

I'd agree on the final point though.  It needs to be a factor.  But we also can't just say "well, he's been shite in the past" and write him off.  He looked utterly miserable in the Russia game, because he was struggling to get any kind of service, and getting bullied in all senses by better defenders.  Potential-wise, he is the best option we've got in my opinion, so we need to be very careful, and ideally try and get a confident McBurnie in, and actually attempt to give him the service he needs.

Naismith started in the last two games for Scotland and was pretty solid in both which is enough to be better than Mcburnie has ever been for the national side. I think Mcburnie has maybe been ok in a couple of games at best for Scotland and poor in the rest. Griffiths, Burke and Martin have at least managed to rise above the low level Mcburnie has performed at.

[Rodhull]

1 minute ago, Jeremiah Cole said:

He should just get picked because he's currently our best striker!

The club he's at is a marker of the level of his quality!

I'm old enough to remember the days when Kenny Dalglish got pilloried early in his Scotland career because he didn't perform for Scotland as he did for Liverpool.

 

 

 

Dalglish had been playing for Scotland for years before he even signed for Liverpool?

[Jeremiah Cole]

37 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

the idea of not using his previous form for the national team as a factor in whether he should be picked or not seems unwise.

 

the idea of not using his current club form as a factor in whether or not he should be picked seems unwise

the idea of not using the current club form of Naismith, Griffiths and Martin as a factor in whether or not they should be picked seems unwise!

[Jeremiah Cole]

1 minute ago, Rodhull said:

Dalglish had been playing for Scotland for years before he even signed for Liverpool?

Yeh, that highlights how long he was pilloried by Scotland fans!

Thanks for making my point for me

[Jeremiah Cole]

4 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

Naismith started in the last two games for Scotland and was pretty solid in both which is enough to be better than Mcburnie has ever been for the national side. I think Mcburnie has maybe been ok in a couple of games at best for Scotland and poor in the rest. Griffiths, Burke and Martin have at least managed to rise above the low level Mcburnie has performed at.

Do you seriously think that Naismith, Griffiths, Martin or Burke would get a place on the bench at Sheffield United, never mind a start?

 

[Rodhull]

Just now, Jeremiah Cole said:

Do you seriously think that Naismith, Griffiths, Martin or Burke would get a place on the bench at Sheffield United, never mind a start?

 

Nope and never said they would. Should we ignore that Mcburnie has been awful for Scotland though and not pick players that have performed better than he has?

[Rodhull]

3 minutes ago, Jeremiah Cole said:

Yeh, that highlights how long he was pilloried by Scotland fans!

Thanks for making my point for me

I think the point was that your memory isn't very good.

[Rabinho]

That's a bit of a stretch.  How far are you going back to get a Naismith that performed like that? 

As far back as our last two internationals.
Naismith was excellent in the last double header, showed more in those two games than McBurnie ever has and that was whilst being about 70% fit. His influence on the rest of the team was crucial as was his link up with McGinn.
He also looked as if he wanted to be there unlike McBurnie.

[forameus]

 

39 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

Naismith started in the last two games for Scotland and was pretty solid in both which is enough to be better than Mcburnie has ever been for the national side. I think Mcburnie has maybe been ok in a couple of games at best for Scotland and poor in the rest. Griffiths, Burke and Martin have at least managed to rise above the low level Mcburnie has performed at.

4 minutes ago, Rabinho said:

As far back as our last two internationals.
Naismith was excellent in the last double header, showed more in those two games than McBurnie ever has and that was whilst being about 70% fit. His influence on the rest of the team was crucial as was his link up with McGinn.
He also looked as if he wanted to be there unlike McBurnie.

I'd completely forgot that he played in those two games, so I take that part back.

[Snobot]

I was at the Cyprus game so could see beyond what was on TV. Naismith set the tone, pressing from the front and getting the team further up the pitch, which has been a consistent problem under Clark. You could hear him quite clearly and his leadership was a big factor in the performance. He may not be as natural a finisher as others but he played well as part of the overall team performance.

McBurnie came on, lacked any urgency and looked like he was blowing out of his arse after 10 minutes. It might just be his style but it was a clear contrast when we needed to push up to avoid sitting in. I would love for him to be a big success but I wasn’t impressed. 
 

We don’t need headless chickens who do nothing but run about, but given our limitations as a team we do need to defend from the front. I suspect Griffiths would give us that if picked, and Naismith certainly does. Maybe McBurnie would suit having someone playing closer to him as I think he has looked isolated as a single striker.

[greenockraver]

2nd goal in 3 days tonight for celtic