Your first XI vs England

[paddymcp]

Ditch the back five, how many games have we won in 90 minutes with it? I’d imagine the answer is close to zero. 
 

Gordon.

Patterson, Hanley, Tierney, Robertson.

Forrest, McGregor, McTominay, McGinn.

Fraser. 

Adams. 

 Fraser is the one player in our team with blistering pace. Breaks the lines well and would be useful in a backs to the wall game like this IMO. 
 

Heart: 1-1 
Head: 3-0
 

Edited June 15, 2021 by paddymcp

[HalfCutNinja]

Changed my mind a bit

     

                                     Marshall

 

                            Hanley         Cooper

Patterson                                                                 Robertson

                                                  Gilmour

                         McTominay

    McGinn                                                Armstrong

                           Dykes

                                                    Adams

 

We'd score at least twice with that team

[Donathan]

Marshall

SOD-Cooper-Hanley-Tierney-Robertson

McTominay-Gilmour 

McGinn

Fraser-Adams

 

Try and nick a point at Wembley then go all out to beat Croatia at Hampden

[Juanhourjoe]

Gordon

Forrest-Hanley-cooper-Tierney

Fraser-Gilmour-Armstrong

Christie-Adams-Robertson

 

[welldaft]

1 hour ago, Donathan said:

Marshall

SOD-Cooper-Hanley-Tierney-Robertson

McTominay-Gilmour 

McGinn

Fraser-Adams

 

Try and nick a point at Wembley then go all out to beat Croatia at Hampden

I would change Marshall for Gordon and SOD for Patterson. 

SOD is copping a lot of flak for yesterday. So let’s see if Nathan has what it takes to be 1st choice right back. 

Apart from that the rest of the team above would do for me.

I very much doubt we would go 2 out and out attackers. So Adams and Fraser for me. 

[RandomGuy.]

He'll swap in McGregor for Hendry, dropping McTominay back into defence, and Adams will start ahead of Christie probably.

Potentially Turnbull for Armstrong too.

Can't see him changing much else.

[ahemps]

I can't see Clarke making wholesale changes so it will likely be 1-2 changes at most. I think Adams will start and Tierney if fit but that will be about it. Tierney not even being on the bench was not a good sign he will be fit for in a few days time.

Gilmour and Paterson not even coming off the bench indicates to me they will be very unlikely to go into the starting 11 on Friday.

[Donathan]

If Tierney is injured then I’d go 4-2-3-1. The 3-5-2 is specifically designed to shoehorn Tierney and Robertson in together but if we don’t have both then I’d revert to the flat back 4.

 

Marshall

SOD-Hanley-Cooper-Robertson

McTominay-Gilmour

Forrest-McGinn-Fraser

Adams

[Dunning1874]

Gordon

Patterson - Hanley - Tierney - Robertson

McTominay - Gilmour

Forrest - Turnbull - Fraser

Adams

Gilmour will allow McTominay to be more box to box, give us much more composure in possession and an outball from defence.

Forrest's defensive workrate will give cover to Patterson and make how little he's been tested defensively less of an issue. O'Donnell undoubtedly played himself out of a start yesterday with his lack of composure in possession, while going to a back four means the defence and midfield will know who's actually meant to be picking up what runners, so Patterson has to come in. A back four'll be far less prone to being dragged all over the place by the movement of whoever of Kane, Sterling, Foden and Grealish they're up against, where we know they'd cause havoc dragging a back three out of position and leaving space for runners. Tierney is more than good enough to play centre back in a back four.

Could argue for McGinn instead of Turnbull in the more advanced role, particularly as pressing will be so important, but both McGinn and Armstrong were poor while Turnbull has been outperforming Christie all season.

Or, if Clarke insists on sticking with the back three:

Gordon

Hanley - Cooper - Tierney

Forrest - McTominay - Gilmour - Robertson

McGinn

Turnbull

Adams

You could push Turnbull forward to play as a proper second striker alongside Adams or bring Fraser in to play there, either a straight swap with Turnbull or in place of McGinn with Turnbull deeper, but if McGinn plays he needs to be further forward. He's just nowhere near as good playing deeper in a flat three.

On the infrequent occasions the back three has worked for us, it's always been with McGinn advanced ahead of a sitting two. I get that Clarke wants to compensate for the loss of Jack and the protection he gives the defence, but that flat three is the worst of all worlds. There's not a midfielder it doesn't hinder individually, it gives the wing backs fewer options in possession which was fatal for O'Donnell yesterday, it leaves the forwards with less support and our resultant struggle to get a foothold in games just ends up with the defence under more pressure anyway.

I just worry that Clarke looks at yesterday with who missed out, thinks the problem was showing too little loyalty rather than too much and decides that putting McGregor back in along with Tierney being fit is the solution.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Dunning1874

[still_game]

Gordon

Patterson  Hanley  Cooper  Tierney

Gilmour

Forrest/Turnbull  McGinn  Robertson

Nisbet   Adams

Think we need something a bit radical to outfox Southgate and placing Robertson further up with Tierney behind might just be overly radical but its one of them, if were gonna go out at least go out fighting, that and the fact its likely Grealish is gonna play there so we could eliminate his threat. Think Nisbet will be ideal for Adams running with the ball, and is more on it than Dykes is. Having Dykes in there is encouraging us to play hoofball, bit like when Duncan Disorderly played for us.Alternatively

Gordon

Patterson  McTominay  Hanley  Tierney  Robertson

Forrest/Turnbull  Gilmour  McGinn

Nisbet  Adams

Edited June 15, 2021 by still_game

[accies1874]

Marshall
Cooper Hanley Tierney
Forrest Gilmour McTominay Robertson
McGinn
Adams Fraser

Forrest and Robertson with Tierney bombing forward might be a bit too gung-ho, especially considering this will be a different game to the Czech one, but it at would at least give an out-ball down the right (hopefully McTominay fancies playing it this time).

Fraser probably remains the best option to partner Adams, although I didn't think Christie was too bad yesterday. I actually quite like Adams and Dykes linking up but the latter seems destined to never score for us again.

If Tierney's still out then it could well be the same back three as yesterday. McGregor and Adams will come in, probably for the players they replaced. I think Forrest might start instead of O'Donnell too.

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

The desperation to throw in Patterson is understandable, but he's utterly untested at any serious level of football. Is Clarke a gambler ? Of course he isn't, which is why O'Donnell...limited that he is....is a shoe-in to start.

He won't drop Marshall either on the back of one error yesterday. 

Providing that Tierney is fit, Hendry will (thankfully) be booted and that will give us extra mobility from the back.

The McGinn/McTominay/Christie/Armstrong midfield didn't work yesterday, and given that Christie has been in poor form for months now I think his time is up. I'm also struggling to see what Armstrong has ever offered to the national side, so I'd relegate him as well. 

Replace Christie with Gilmour (I know, again it's a gamble but we desperately need some drive in the team) and Armstrong with Adams. 

That gives us much more balance and attacking threat than we had yesterday. 

[Thorongil]

Bringing in Gilmour isn’t a gamble IMO. He is better and plays at higher standard than anyone he would be replacing as he won’t be replacing McTominay or McGinn.

[Thorongil]

I think though we might need to play Tierney and Robertson in a way where they have to man mark Foden and Sterling. These two cannot be left unattended.

And get Gilmour to stick close to Mason Mount. 3 centre backs to deal with Kane.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Thorongil

[Ampersand]

If Tierney's fit:

Gordon

Patterson Cooper Hanley Tierney Robertson

Mctominay Gilmour McGinn

Dykes Adams

 

If not, maybe:

Gordon

Patterson Hanley Cooper Robertson

Mctominay Gilmour

Forrest (can't quite believe I typed that, but he looked marginally less unfit than Fraser) McGinn Christie

Adams

... Although I expect Clarke to stick with 5-3-2 regardless. As others have flagged we absolutely need a player in midfield who's comfortable receiving the ball in a tight space and using it. We were crying out for someone able to do that yesterday, and for a centre back willing to come forward. I don't think Hendry did too badly yesterday, but again as others have flagged if he's not comfortable with the ball at this level then I think we have more effective options. His decision-making is still poor.

More generally, while we have a decent squad by our standards we simply don't have the depth of playing pool to leave clearly more talented players on the sidelines because they're young or inexperienced. That's for nations with a 19-year-old wünderkid trying to dislodge a seasoned top-level pro, rather than 'best we've got' plodder. Hence Patterson and Gilmour going straight in.

TLDR: Fucking hope Tierney's fit. Please play Gilmour.

[greenockraver]

Can we still qualify with 3 points?

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

If McTominay and Tierney can't play cb then he should bin the back three tbh. Need them to drive forward and no one else is particularly good at it. I'd have one of Forrest/Fraser and one of Christie/Armstrong supporting Adams and helping create overloads on the wing. Love McGinn but I might drop him, dunno if he's disciplined enough to be one of the 2 central players in that formation and I don't really see his weird second striker role working against better quality opposition. I'd love to be proved wrong on either of those though. Get Gilmour in as well 

 

[Marshmallo]

13 minutes ago, greenockraver said:

Can we still qualify with 3 points?

Not impossible but our goal difference would make it difficult. 

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

16 minutes ago, Ampersand said:

If Tierney's fit:

Gordon

Patterson Cooper Hanley Tierney Robertson

Mctominay Gilmour McGinn

Dykes Adams

 

If not, maybe:

Gordon

Patterson Hanley Cooper Robertson

Mctominay Gilmour

Forrest (can't quite believe I typed that, but he looked marginally less unfit than Fraser) McGinn Christie

Adams

... Although I expect Clarke to stick with 5-3-2 regardless. As others have flagged we absolutely need a player in midfield who's comfortable receiving the ball in a tight space and using it. We were crying out for someone able to do that yesterday, and for a centre back willing to come forward. I don't think Hendry did too badly yesterday, but again as others have flagged if he's not comfortable with the ball at this level then I think we have more effective options. His decision-making is still poor.

More generally, while we have a decent squad by our standards we simply don't have the depth of playing pool to leave clearly more talented players on the sidelines because they're young or inexperienced. That's for nations with a 19-year-old wünderkid trying to dislodge a seasoned top-level pro, rather than 'best we've got' plodder. Hence Patterson and Gilmour going straight in.

TLDR: Fucking hope Tierney's fit. Please play Gilmour.

I don't disagree with anything here, but I've seen the line "if not comfortable with the ball" in reference to Hendry used a lot.

The player least comfortable with the ball - by some distance - is SOD.  He was miles out his depth yesterday.  He's probably our most limited player, but largely it has been fine up until now.  Yesterday that limitation was compounded with what I can only assume was a huge bag of nerves.

I'd also suggest that much of our midfield looked uncomfortable.  There were few - if any! - driving runs from midfield all game.  Perhaps the Czechs had worked out how to play us.  They certainly were very effective at stifling the way we wanted to play.

If we need to be super defensive, then SOD can start.  If not, then Forrest should play.

I am realistic enough to appreciate that Patterson won't start, certainly against England, but the reality is that we have a 19-year old, and a 20-year old who are likely better than the starting options, and we're not going to try it.

Perhaps, when we valiantly lose to England we can throw a hail Mary against Croatia, but I suspect it will be more of the same.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

33 minutes ago, greenockraver said:

Can we still qualify with 3 points?

I've looked through the last four World Cups and the last four European Championships, and every time three points would be enough to put you in contention.

The problem, however, is goal difference.

We either need two groups where 3rd place scores 1/2 points (happened in Euro 2008 but there are very few examples of it happening elsewhere), or you need the 3rd placed teams to have a poor GD.

The reality is that we're be looking at a (-2) unless we can somehow run up a score on Croatia.