Declan John Called Into Wales Squad

[Waltersgotstyle 297]

9 minutes ago, pete said:

Personally I don't think that is just in sport. In many walks of life Scotland seems to have got left behind.

Not having that mate. Scotland has some very talented and forward thinking people.

[Gonzo79 13,861]

Just now, Waltersgotstyle said:

Not having that mate. Scotland has some very talented and forward thinking people.

Our elected representatives suggest otherwise.  

 

I think we have some good youths coming through (Rangers and Scotland) but when high wages and being legal drinking age come into play, things don't seem to go well.

[Waltersgotstyle 297]

4 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

Our elected representatives suggest otherwise.  

 

I think we have some good youths coming through (Rangers and Scotland) but when high wages and being legal drinking age come into play, things don't seem to go well.

The problem is that our true talent choose not go into politics, they work for international corporations.

 

Very few aspire to become the next first minister.

Edited March 23, 2018 by Waltersgotstyle

[DMAA 3,606]

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

Clearly I'm not, but it's not his fault or problem; he's a product of his generation. 

 

We need someone/something new. 

I'm not sure. Steve Clarke has been lauded by Kris Boyd for doing things the simple old fashioned way. Kilmarnock are a team who generally have inferior players to their oponents so their tactics reflect that. The same could be said of Scotland for probably more than half of their games.

 

If we've learned anything from the past few years in international football it's that we have no excuse for being so poor; Wales, Northern Ireland and Iceland have put us to shame. I haven't looked at the way those teams play but I don't think any of them are particularly modern in their style? Wales maybe more so but still.

[Rousseau 9,588]

50 minutes ago, DMAA said:

I'm not sure. Steve Clarke has been lauded by Kris Boyd for doing things the simple old fashioned way. Kilmarnock are a team who generally have inferior players to their oponents so their tactics reflect that. The same could be said of Scotland for probably more than half of their games.

 

If we've learned anything from the past few years in international football it's that we have no excuse for being so poor; Wales, Northern Ireland and Iceland have put us to shame. I haven't looked at the way those teams play but I don't think any of them are particularly modern in their style? Wales maybe more so but still.

Did Boyd actually say the "simple old fashioned way"?

 

It will get you so far, like NIR; it should be something we can implement.

 

I think Wales -- although it's a lot to do with Bale for them -- and Iceland are a tad more progressive, though; in terms of what they bring offensively.  That's why they've went that little bit further. Iceland are actually incredibly fluid, changing from 4-4-2, to 4-5-1, to 4-1-3-2, to 4-3-3 (there was even an article I recall had them in a 3-3-2-2 in the build-up phase, which changed quickly). It's always focused, targeted tactics. And, Wales employ 3-4-1-2, which suits their players; at the very least it gives opponents something to think about. NIR's performance had an element of luck, for me (they were still effective, though).

 

To be honest, it's the offensive side of the game we struggle with. We can set up defensively, and have done most of the time. Our offensive game is predictable and one-dimensional. There are no real alternatives in that regard. 

 

We should be doing much better than what we are.

[StuGers 477]

3 hours ago, Rousseau said:

Did Boyd actually say the "simple old fashioned way"?

 

It will get you so far, like NIR; it should be something we can implement.

 

I think Wales -- although it's a lot to do with Bale for them -- and Iceland are a tad more progressive, though; in terms of what they bring offensively.  That's why they've went that little bit further. Iceland are actually incredibly fluid, changing from 4-4-2, to 4-5-1, to 4-1-3-2, to 4-3-3 (there was even an article I recall had them in a 3-3-2-2 in the build-up phase, which changed quickly). It's always focused, targeted tactics. And, Wales employ 3-4-1-2, which suits their players; at the very least it gives opponents something to think about. NIR's performance had an element of luck, for me (they were still effective, though).

 

To be honest, it's the offensive side of the game we struggle with. We can set up defensively, and have done most of the time. Our offensive game is predictable and one-dimensional. There are no real alternatives in that regard. 

 

We should be doing much better than what we are.

I think, strangely, in modern day football it is becoming more apparent that, for the higher tier national teams anyway, having a superstar player is far more effective than having a generally proficient team.

Look at the Dutch - a fantastic all round team but awful performances now that their superstars have waned.

Wales, a generally poor team but pushed by one or two far above average players.

 

I can’t explain NI’s success though!

[DMAA 3,606]

3 hours ago, Rousseau said:

Did Boyd actually say the "simple old fashioned way"?

I was paraphrasing from memory but I've just found the article and he did describe him as "old fashioned" and "old school".

 

10 minutes ago, StuGers said:

NIR's performance had an element of luck, for me (they were still effective, though)

If you're as consistently "lucky" as they've been you have a right to be desribed as something better  He's really achieved the impossible there and if it's not down to players it's down to tactics.

 

3 hours ago, Rousseau said:

We should be doing much better than what we are.

True. I think it's a tough job because you need to be able to put out very different teams with very different tactics depending on who you're playing. You could be playing a France or an England or it could be Belarus or Cyprus. I trust McLeish to make us hard to beat but he definitely has a lot to prove in terms offensive tactics against the teams we should be beating.

 

Incidentally, Iceland's mastermind Lars Lagerback recently became Norway's new manager and lost his first game 2-0 to his rival mastermind..............................Michael O'Neill.

[Waltersgotstyle 297]

So back on topic... is our international left back better than their international left back?

[Gonzo79 13,861]

It's largely irrelevant.  All I care about is beating them.  

[Gaffer 1,665]

16 minutes ago, Waltersgotstyle said:

So back on topic... is our international left back better than their international left back?

I must admit that I don't know.  I say that because unlike their fans, I don't watch our city rivals.  Having said that, I get to see him each time we play them and I have to say I'm not impressed with their left back.  Don't get me wrong, I think he's a really decent player but what's his value?  He seems a decent defender and has some pace, but there has to be something extra to be regarded as something more than average.  DJ is a decent defender (so in that regard they're on a par), however DJ has pace to burn and seems to me to be a dangerous attacking player too.  Maybe their's just hasn't had the chance to prove it against us, but if he can't do it against us, what's the point?  DJ on the other hand was ripping them apart (for 60 minutes, but let's not get back into that again) so he stands out more.  I'd take DJ every day of the week.  Their only player that I have rated in games against us is Armstrong, but I've no idea how he performs in their other games, and you know what, I don't care!!!