Scott Arfield

[narduch]

Arfield has a new manager.

 

[jonovision]

3 hours ago, gator said:

That was a match that many of us on here referred to when we opined that Arfield may be desperately needed, whatever the reason is for his absence I don't think there can be any denying that he would have shored up an over run midfield yesterday!

He could have been useful in a 3 man midfield. He would not have added much, if anything, to the two-midfielder setup we started with and I would have preferred several of our other bench options over him in that scenario.

[gator]

8 minutes ago, jonovision said:

He could have been useful in a 3 man midfield. He would not have added much, if anything, to the two-midfielder setup we started with and I would have preferred several of our other bench options over him in that scenario.

The 2 man midfield was a non starter for me, it wasn't going to work no matter who we played there!

[jonovision]

8 minutes ago, gator said:

The 2 man midfield was a non starter for me, it wasn't going to work no matter who we played there!

The thing is, the 3 man midfield probably also wouldn't have worked given the difference in quality and the health of our best midfielders. Maybe we lose 2-0 instead of 4-1.

The reality of our position in world football. We've made huge strides but we're not near the quality of the top sides yet.

[Lansdude]

For me we lined up wrong but it helped us get the goal with Croatia napping. We then should have realized the tactical mistake halfway through the 1st half and at least tried to lockdown the lead which would have been a massive task but not the impossible one we gave ourselves but not making a formation change/substitutions.

[VinceA]

3 minutes ago, jonovision said:

The thing is, the 3 man midfield probably also wouldn't have worked given the difference in quality and the health of our best midfielders. Maybe we lose 2-0 instead of 4-1.

The reality of our position in world football. We've made huge strides but we're not near the quality of the top sides yet.

Would have rathered lost 2-0 then.

 

There's an idea growing that Kaye/Piette/Spoony et al. are scrubs and can't play at all this WC. That's just wrong. A 3-man midfield may have kept things respectable. We'll never know because JH decided two unfit midfielders was better and even more so only playing them as a two from the start against the best mid trio in the world.

[dyslexic nam]

7 minutes ago, jonovision said:

The thing is, the 3 man midfield probably also wouldn't have worked given the difference in quality and the health of our best midfielders. Maybe we lose 2-0 instead of 4-1.

The reality of our position in world football. We've made huge strides but we're not near the quality of the top sides yet.

I agree with the last paragraph but not the first.  Croatia is exactly the kind of team we should have used an overloaded midfield to soak up pressure and then hit them on the counter using our speed.  That is precisely the type of game I thought we were going to employ.  In an effort to get another striker up top (which ultimately didn’t help our attack considering the goal came from a Tajon to Davies) we were porous through the middle - and that was clear to anyone analyzing the game.  They passed through us like draft beer.  With additional support in the middle we could have done a better job of breaking up those plays and quickly turning into attack.  

All speculation of course but I don’t think that idea of a 3 man midfield would have been a wash with what we tried.  I think we could have either been better prepared out of the gate or could have made better in-game adjustments (which I still see as one of Herdman’s weaker attributes). 
 

[jonovision]

4 minutes ago, VinceA said:

Would have rathered lost 2-0 then.

 

There's an idea growing that Kaye/Piette/Spoony et al. are scrubs and can't play at all this WC. That's just wrong. A 3-man midfield may have kept things respectable. We'll never know because JH decided two unfit midfielders was better and even more so only playing them as a two from the start against the best mid trio in the world.

Fair enough. We essentially had a two goal loss with a garbage time goal due to a bad-pitch bounce. In my opinion (you probably won't agree) the result, if not the margin, was pretty much a fait accompli no matter what Herdman did, and I'm glad he set out to attack because we got our first ever goal, a moment I'll never forget.

I don't think Piette and Kaye are scrubs, but that seemed to be the majority opinion after the last couple of friendlies. I do think they would have struggled immensely against Croatia, no matter the formation.

Although not unconnected, starting two unfit players was a bigger mistake than the formation, but it shows what kind of trust Herdman clearly has with his other midfielders (clearly only Kone and Osorio are in his good books).

[jonovision]

2 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

 In an effort to get another striker up top (which ultimately didn’t help our attack considering the goal came from a Tajon to Davies)
 

I agree with most of your post but not this: David and Larin both occupying defenders in the box is the key reason Davies was able to run free to the back post and score the header.

[Kent]

3 hours ago, narduch said:

Arfield has a new manager.

 

How is everyone just skipping by this factoid that Rangers are only on their 18th manager! They started in 1899 and are only on their 18th manager. TFC started in 2007 and are on their 12th! I looked up Celtic for more Scottish context, they are only on their 19th and they have existed since 1897.

Insanity!

[jonovision]

2 minutes ago, Kent said:

How is everyone just skipping by this factoid that Rangers are only on their 18th manager! They started in 1899 and are only on their 18th manager. TFC started in 2007 and are on their 12th! I looked up Celtic for more Scottish context, they are only on their 19th and they have existed since 1897.

Insanity!

Probably tough to get fired if you finish 1st or 2nd every year.

[Kent]

5 hours ago, jonovision said:

Probably tough to get fired if you finish 1st or 2nd every year.

Celtic's first manager was their manager for 43 years. That helped keep their number down a lot.

[cornerkick]

5 hours ago, Kent said:

How is everyone just skipping by this factoid that Rangers are only on their 18th manager! They started in 1899 and are only on their 18th manager. TFC started in 2007 and are on their 12th! I looked up Celtic for more Scottish context, they are only on their 19th and they have existed since 1897.

Insanity!

I was curious as to their manager history and looked it up... they only had 2 managers from 1899 to 1954, then the tenures became much shorter. 

[gator]

6 hours ago, Kent said:

How is everyone just skipping by this factoid that Rangers are only on their 18th manager! They started in 1899 and are only on their 18th manager. TFC started in 2007 and are on their 12th! I looked up Celtic for more Scottish context, they are only on their 19th and they have existed since 1897.

Insanity!

I expect this Beale character is not going to last after his brief time at QPR, he flirted with the Wolves job weeks ago and turned it down saying it would be wrong to leave a project he was building, it wouldn't be fair to fans or players then this job comes up and he is gone! QPR took a chance on him giving him his 1st managerial job and he started out quite well but has been found out with only 1 point out of the last 15, possibly distracted by the Rangers job coming open! If he does well at Rangers he will be looking to go to a bigger club soon, if he doesn't he will not survive playing second fiddle to Celtic! 

[DeRo_Is_King]

22 minutes ago, gator said:

I expect this Beale character is not going to last after his brief time at QPR, he flirted with the Wolves job weeks ago and turned it down saying it would be wrong to leave a project he was building, it wouldn't be fair to fans or players then this job comes up and he is gone! QPR took a chance on him giving him his 1st managerial job and he started out quite well but has been found out with only 1 point out of the last 15, possibly distracted by the Rangers job coming open! If he does well at Rangers he will be looking to go to a bigger club soon, if he doesn't he will not survive playing second fiddle to Celtic! 

I agree, but my question is how have so many teams been interested in him in such a short amount of time. 

[SthMelbRed]

44 minutes ago, DeRo_Is_King said:

I agree, but my question is how have so many teams been interested in him in such a short amount of time. 

Michael Beale was very well regarded at Liverpool, where he coached the top academy teams and PL2 sides during his time there. He was poached by Steven Gerrard to be his No 2 at Rangers, and then moved to Villa with him, as well. He's got some juice in British footballing circles, where he's regarded as an excellent coach. Whether that translates to being an effective first-team manager, we'll have to wait and see.

[gator]

1 hour ago, DeRo_Is_King said:

I agree, but my question is how have so many teams been interested in him in such a short amount of time. 

His footballing reputation as an assistant and coach is good as @SthMelbRed mentions and I don't think any of us QPR fans really begrudge a guy for taking a supposed better opportunity especially with 1M pounds in compensation, I wish I had some of the links of him assuring his dedication to QPR just weeks ago, that's what pisses fans off and ultimately might not serve him well but it is a business! It is a small sample size for him at Loftus Rd, he started out well but the team has fallen off so we really don't know if he has been figured out, distracted or just victim of the thin squad he assembled!

 

Edited November 29, 2022 by gator

[jordan]

 

[costarg]

8 minutes ago, jordan said:

 

I will never digest playing a two-man midfield - because we just didn't have the quality - while this man was home sitting on his couch. Whatever the story was, it sucks.  

This coming from a guy that's been saying Brazil will never win with Neymar on the pitch since 2016.  Neymar is toxic and you can see and smell it through a TV screen.  About Arfield, I don't know what he's like in the dressing room, but every interview and every single presence on the pitch showed this guy deserved to be in the 11.  I don't care if he didn't wanna travel to Honduras for his family or the brotherhood bullshit, CANMNT would have been better with him.

[jonovision]

59 minutes ago, costarg said:

I will never digest playing a two-man midfield - because we just didn't have the quality - while this man was home sitting on his couch. Whatever the story was, it sucks.  

This coming from a guy that's been saying Brazil will never win with Neymar on the pitch since 2016.  Neymar is toxic and you can see and smell it through a TV screen.  About Arfield, I don't know what he's like in the dressing room, but every interview and every single presence on the pitch showed this guy deserved to be in the 11.  I don't care if he didn't wanna travel to Honduras for his family or the brotherhood bullshit, CANMNT would have been better with him.

If he wanted to be there, he would have been there.

[Floortom]

1 minute ago, jonovision said:

If he wanted to be there, he would have been there.

Based on Herdman’s own words Arfield made himself available for selection to the World Cup roster. He was on the provisional squad list - Herdman just didn’t select him. I think if there were another 1 or 2 injuries in the midfield Arfield would have been there but Herdman wanted to stick with the whole “brotherhood” theme.

[DeRo_Is_King]

36 minutes ago, Floortom said:

Based on Herdman’s own words Arfield made himself available for selection to the World Cup roster. He was on the provisional squad list - Herdman just didn’t select him. I think if there were another 1 or 2 injuries in the midfield Arfield would have been there but Herdman wanted to stick with the whole “brotherhood” theme.

Also, Arfield did make that "Never say never" comment, furthering your point that he was available.  

[jonovision]

17 minutes ago, DeRo_Is_King said:

Also, Arfield did make that "Never say never" comment, furthering your point that he was available.  

I don't think there's much point taking what either side said in the media at face value.

[Shway]

[TGAA_Star]

Arfield if he says never say never then how do you expect Herdman to react to that? I can't see Arfield getting called back into our national team any time soon. Arfield is already getting up in age (1988) he's what 34 already. Next year Gold Cup if he's lucky he would be what 35 years old. If he even remotely makes the team no way he is in starting 11. He would most likely come off the bench. But all in all Arfield hasn't played for Canada in over 3 years. It seems like he's focused strictly on his club Rangers and for him to break back into the Canada squad he would have to beat out certain other players to even be considered especially at the position of which he plays.