 |
| What the fuck is an Empire biscuit? It's like something kids make in Primary School. |
You know the drill by now. I'm going to chat irrelevant shite. Other media outlets are available.
Why Scotland is better than England:
1. You can do 'hutting' in Scotland. This sounds like it might be a questionable sexual practice but it isn't*. It basically means (in theory) you can erect (ha ha ha) a small (wee) hut on any bit of land that whoever owns the land allows you to without dicking about with loads of planning stuff. So in other words, you can nip to (tae) B+Q and buy a holiday home (hame)
*What you (ye) get up to in the privacy of yer own hut is up to you.
2. You can walk anywhere apart from someone's actual garden or mad stuff like nuclear bases. This doesn't seem like much to some, but walking is all that keeps me from jumping in the sea some days.
Why England is better than Scotland.
1. Pubs. It's not true that there are no decent pubs in Scotland, (there's at least 3 that are pretty good) but it's fair to state that many pubs in Scotland smell mostly of bleach, stale fag smoke from 20 years ago and brutal emptiness. That's not a bad thing on some levels, there's a lot to be said for the spartan honesty of such establishments but there is something inescapably bleak about yer archetypal Scottish public house (hoose)
2. Pastry products. Of the ten worst bakery experiences I've ever had, ten of them have been Scottish. I'm still digesting a pie I ate near Ayr thirty years ago and a bridie I once ate in Dalbeattie took ten years of my life, so packed was it with a level of salt that it made the dead sea seem positively saltless.
The cakes are all lurid mad colours, like someone tipped a batch of dayglo highlighter pens in the icing/cream. Seeing them sweat in a baker's window, gathering a sheen on them. Honestly. I feel a bit ill.
The cakes are all lurid mad colours, like someone tipped a batch of dayglo highlighter pens in the icing/cream. Seeing them sweat in a baker's window, gathering a sheen on them. Honestly. I feel a bit ill.
vs
If I'm absolutely honest, I'm not really that arsed about lines on a map that someone drew ages ago for reasons I don't really understand. The main drawback to Scotland for me is that it hasn't got Lancashire in it and Lancashire is wonderful. Scotland's grand and that, but Lancashire > Lanarkshire.
vs
vs
After all that shite, I'm not going to pretend to have done any thinking about the game itself: (the fitba) England have changed their fullbacks but still deny us Grealish. Scotland have put Che Adams up front, got Billy Gilmour in and Tierney is back. I thought Scotland were better than 2-0 losers against a Czech Republic side who in turn looked a lot better than a really tepid Croatia so it might be a decent game. It also might just be a walkover.
Gary Neville is wearing a jacket that seems to have a tracksuit top sewn into it. Or, he's wearing a posh jacket over a trackie top. Either way, it's a bit strange. Mark Pougatch would be quite high on my list of people who would be good to play an evil billionaire super villain whose company hides his dastardly scheme in plain sight. There's something about the coldness of his eyes that juxtaposes with his personable matey TV voice. Roy Keane looks like he might just walk off and go for a pint in what could well be a Matelan coat. At half time, he sounds like he's going to cry at the uselessness of humanity being summed by John Stones not reading the flight of the ball. Graeme Souness and his new teeth are getting giddy in away that makes you fear he might be heading for a bit of a let down. Steve Clarke has fat tie, like he's bought it from a shop on a railway station in the mid 90s and his permanent scowl breaks as he offers a bit of banter. Gareth Southgate goes for a straight bat cos that's what Gareth Southgate does.
---
---
Scotland set the tone with an early chance, but England assert themselves with 3 in quick succession including Stones rattling the inside of the post from the aforementioned header. Sterling is excellent for 15 minutes but disappears. He really is England's Sullay Kaikai. From the point that England miss their last chance in that sequence. Scotland play really well. Adams is tremendous, winning it, holding it up, bustling about. Dykes and he don't look an especially well matched pair on paper but they play well together. They make it work. Pickford makes a stunning stop from O'Donnell. It's exactly what he's best at, plunging low, with an impossibly strong hand. Adam stretches desperately but can't turn the rebound home.
At half time, I feel like Scotland have had a surprising amount of quality possession. I've really enjoyed the half. It's been tense and both sides have had their moments. At one point, I think the Scots put roughly thirty passes together before Adams has a shot. It's clear they're not just here to sit deep and smack it long. England look a bit languid, static. They don't look like they did against Croatia at all outside of that one little sweet spell, where they looked briefly irresistible.
The second half is opened by 5 minutes of England pressure but they never really hit that form again. Scotland again fashion chances, James heading the ball over the top as Dykes hits a shot hard on the turn, the ball getting stuck under Adams' feet at the crucial moment and the same player slashing it over the top after a move in which Scotland win the ball back 3 times when it looked like they'd lost possession.
England don't press at all. Scotland play it out, play it around the back. Grealish comes on, but he stands on the left touchline mostly when it seems obvious that England need someone to drive at the heart of the defence.
Scotland look like they try to win it. Billy Gilmour was really good but when he comes off, it's the bustling attacking threat of Stuart Armstrong who comes on. By contrast, England seem devoid of a plan B, playing the same way and whilst they brought on attacking players, it came at the cost of withdrawing other attacking players rather than shifting things around to try and overload Scotland. The two defensive midfielders remaining firmly in place and yet, Modric isn't playing... Sterling wanders about in the second half but makes little impact. Kane, one beautiful pass from wide aside, offers little and to the incredulity of ITV gets subbed. There's one moment of terror for the Scotland as a mad scramble in the box sees Scott McTominey throwing himself into the melee like a rugby league player, as if the ball was a hand grenade and only his sacrifice could save a crowd of children. The game ends with Grealish running at Scotland, meeting a brick wall and passing it back.
---
The full backs rarely marauded. Foden's quality was obvious, even if his impact was limited and I'm not sure why he comes off as if him and Grealish on the same pitch will cause some kind of calamity to happen. More than anything, it's the sense that the subs change nothing because the system doesn't change because caution comes before the risk. Maybe it's the problem of being England. There's too much to lose where as you watch say, Wales, playing fearless, aggressive football, perhaps, because there isn't.
Scotland were the image of what Steve Clarke made at Kilmarnock. Solid, committed and capable of surprising with bursts of quality play that comes from the players having confidence in both each other and the plan. Clarke is never going to be a sexy football manager, but the post Clarke fate of Killie speaks of his influence. Scotland made the most of their resources, they played to their strengths, the players looked comfortable, they posed a threat, despite not really having a top level striker to call on (to make the point clearly, their sub Nisbett was at Raith Rovers (avg attendance about 1,800) and Dunfermline (avg attendance about 4000) prior to joining Hibs this year) whilst England, with all their Champions League winners and finalists, with all their 'big game quality' at their disposal struggled outside of a few little spells to even look they wanted to be threatening. Simply put, Scotland played above the sum of their parts. The same really can't be said of England who had the chance to pin a side with a back 5 in and instead mostly just played in front of them, looking a bit confused about what to do about it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment