Scotland squad face March 2021

[Rob1885]

Announce Shaun Rooney

[GordonS]

20 hours ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

Body analysis aside, I'm struggling to see any upside to having Robertson as a CH.  His strengths are almost all going forward.  

Tierney is really only at CH as a way to shoehorn him into the team somewhere, he's not particularly good at it either.  He has at least played there before at club level though.

Bite the bullet and pick one or the other if you ask me.  Rotate them if you like.

A big part of international football is finding the best system to suit your players, because you have to work with the players you've got. It's one of the things I really like about international football tbh. I wouldn't say Tierney is being "shoehorned" in though, the guy plays in that position for one of the world's biggest clubs. He's been a stand-out performer for them in a relatively bad season. Of our players who play centre back, he is clearly our best.

17 hours ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Not sure tbh, but I'd imagine if picked the SFA would charter a small plane to bring him in.

Heavy Emiliano Sala vibes there.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, GordonS said:

A big part of international football is finding the best system to suit your players, because you have to work with the players you've got. It's one of the things I really like about international football tbh. I wouldn't say Tierney is being "shoehorned" in though, the guy plays in that position for one of the world's biggest clubs. He's been a stand-out performer for them in a relatively bad season. Of our players who play centre back, he is clearly our best.

Heavy Emiliano Sala vibes there.

Hes not played there for arsenal for quite a while. He's been playing left back of a back 4.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

3 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Hes not played there for arsenal for quite a while. He's been playing left back of a back 4.

He played there for much of a last season, and has played there this year.  He's perfectly adept at CB or LB or LWB.

He arguably our best option in all of those positions right now, but it's also true that Tierney + Robertson is a stronger aggregate than any other CB + Tierney, and leaving Robertson out.

If we moved to a back four, then there might need to be a decision, but I'd also imagine Tierney would still be our best RB option.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

He played there for much of a last season, and has played there this year.  He's perfectly adept at CB or LB or LWB.

He arguably our best option in all of those positions right now, but it's also true that Tierney + Robertson is a stronger aggregate than any other CB + Tierney, and leaving Robertson out.

If we moved to a back four, then there might need to be a decision, but I'd also imagine Tierney would still be our best RB option.

Im not saying he's not. 

The original poster seemed to think he was playing there regularly for arsenal. I was just pointing out that it wasn't the case.

For the record, id love to see us go back to a back 4 and have Tierney at right back again.

Edited March 18, 2021 by BingMcCrosby

[craigkillie]

It's absolutely astonishing to me that we try out a new system, play absolutely abysmally with it at first but persist with it until it looks like we've really clicked and the players understand their roles, and then suddenly folk want us to change it.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, craigkillie said:

It's absolutely astonishing to me that we try out a new system, play absolutely abysmally with it at first but persist with it until it looks like we've really clicked and the players understand their roles, and then suddenly folk want us to change it.

Clarke has said himself he will look to play different formations depending on the opposition.

So you can try and contact him to register your astonishment if he does. Im sure he will probably care less than me.

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

28 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

It's absolutely astonishing to me that we try out a new system, play absolutely abysmally with it at first but persist with it until it looks like we've really clicked and the players understand their roles, and then suddenly folk want us to change it.

Alternately, we're not so good with it that it shouldn't be amended when necessary.  It's been good for some teams, much less so against Israel who play the same formation.  Andy Robertson has really toiled against them,and McTominay's lack of defensive experience has cost us a couple of goals.

We're not a team that can afford to have one system and impose our game on others

[HalfCutNinja]

Against the likes of the Faroes we should obviously be changing the system and altering the personnel slightly.

Its a completely different type of game where they will sit and we need to open them up. 

[Gordopolis]

Yep, the 3 at the back system is an absolute cracker for frustrating strong opposition, and I quite like it. It'd be pretty silly not to find another string to our bow, however.

[craigkillie]

56 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Clarke has said himself he will look to play different formations depending on the opposition.

So you can try and contact him to register your astonishment if he does. Im sure he will probably care less than me.

 

31 minutes ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

Alternately, we're not so good with it that it shouldn't be amended when necessary.  It's been good for some teams, much less so against Israel who play the same formation.  Andy Robertson has really toiled against them,and McTominay's lack of defensive experience has cost us a couple of goals.

We're not a team that can afford to have one system and impose our game on others

Clarke is going to say something like that because it makes sense to keep people guessing. I think we've stumbled on something that works and I don't expect us to start games very often with a different system, particularly not at the Euros. There isn't really time to experiment, so for me the only time I can see us changing up to a back four is within a game rather than to start a game.

[HalfCutNinja]

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

Clarke is going to say something like that because it makes sense to keep people guessing. I think we've stumbled on something that works and I don't expect us to start games very often with a different system, particularly not at the Euros. There isn't really time to experiment, so for me the only time I can see us changing up to a back four is within a game rather than to start a game.

Not for the Euros, but the likes of the Faroes and maybe Israel I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

41 minutes ago, Gordopolis said:

Yep, the 3 at the back system is an absolute cracker for frustrating strong opposition, and I quite like it. It'd be pretty silly not to find another string to our bow, however.

This is exactly it. We’ve found 3atb to be effective against very similar opposition - middling-to-above average European nations. We’ve struggled most against Israel, and imagine that has something to do with their setup nullifying ours, whilst having two exceptional strikers for their otherwise pretty mediocre standing.

We seldom have a plan B, and we need one should we be chasing games. We also need another option when we need to dominate a game. 

That said, we didn’t give Serbia an inch, and if they struggle to play through our press then Israel and The Faroes should find it harder.

I’d want to have another option to keep teams guessing, as well as seeing McTominay in midfield, and potentially Tierney at RB in a 4. Good options to have.

Edited March 18, 2021 by HuttonDressedAsLahm

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, craigkillie said:

 

Clarke is going to say something like that because it makes sense to keep people guessing. I think we've stumbled on something that works and I don't expect us to start games very often with a different system, particularly not at the Euros. There isn't really time to experiment, so for me the only time I can see us changing up to a back four is within a game rather than to start a game.

Just to clarify, if we change formation mid game. Your perfectly happy. But if we start with a different formation. You would be absolutely astonished.

Be easier just to admit you made an arse of it eh.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Just to clarify, if we change formation mid game. Your perfectly happy. But if we start with a different formation. You would be absolutely astonished.

Yes, this is a completely normal position to take. I think the current formation is the right way to play, but also that we may occasionally have to change things later on in a game to adapt to the match situation (eg being down to/or against 10 men, needing a goal etc).

[YassinMoutaouakil]

It's a shame Leigh Griffith's career has been plagued by his off the pitch struggles as well as general arseholery. For my money probably the most talented forward we've produced in the 15 odd years I've been watching Scotland and I reckon if he screwed the nut he could easily have been a very good English Premiership forward. Instead he's out the Scotland squad entirely at the age of 30 and it's pretty hard to argue against.

[ewan14]

3 hours ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

Alternately, we're not so good with it that it shouldn't be amended when necessary.  It's been good for some teams, much less so against Israel who play the same formation.  Andy Robertson has really toiled against them,and McTominay's lack of defensive experience has cost us a couple of goals.

We're not a team that can afford to have one system and impose our game on others

I said Robertson had toiled against them

Sportsound pundits said Tierney was more effective at left wing back , but SSC would never drop Robertson

( cannot see it happening esp. with Cooper injured )

 

[ewan14]

17 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

It's a shame Leigh Griffith's career has been plagued by his off the pitch struggles as well as general arseholery. For my money probably the most talented forward we've produced in the 15 odd years I've been watching Scotland and I reckon if he screwed the nut he could easily have been a very good English Premiership forward. Instead he's out the Scotland squad entirely at the age of 30 and it's pretty hard to argue against.

But we have CHE now !

( fingers crossed )

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, craigkillie said:

Yes, this is a completely normal position to take. I think the current formation is the right way to play, but also that we may occasionally have to change things later on in a game to adapt to the match situation (eg being down to/or against 10 men, needing a goal etc).

I dont think it is.

I expect you will be absolutely astonished in the near future.

[Robin.Hood]

McTominay needs to start in midfield. Been some season for him