Zappa 0 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Wylde could certainly do a job for Scotland, but there's a lot of competition for places. I'm sure he'll get a chance at some point when he's too old to play for the U21 team. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 966 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Eh ? What has Whittaker's standing in the national set up to do with Wylde's ? They play different positions for a start - how they have played should be virtually irrelevant unless they played in the same position, which they dont. So if we only had one RB you would prefer to take Wylde over that other RB ? A squad is about balance as well. Shouldnt call up's be all about current form???? Whittaker has possibly been our worst player this season but makes the squad. Id have called up Broadfoot well ahead of Whittaker to balance out the RB position. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Shouldnt call up's be all about current form???? Whittaker has possibly been our worst player this season but makes the squad. Id have called up Broadfoot well ahead of Whittaker to balance out the RB position. Yes, but you cant simply load up your squad with "form" players. What if the best 20 players were all strikers, would you decide to take them all and play with no defenders ? Mentioning Whittaker at the same time as Wylde made no sense to me Gribz, because they play different positions in a different area of the field. Now, if you had suggested Broadfoot instead of Whittaker I could have seen sense in it, but Wylde ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 966 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Mentioning Whittaker at the same time as Wylde made no sense to me Gribz, ? Well Im glad your not in charge. My point was players who are in form should be in the squad regardless of position. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 966 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Yes, but you cant simply load up your squad with "form" players. What if the best 20 players were all strikers, would you decide to take them all and play with no defenders ? ? The more I read this its like you posted this for the sake of a debate. Of course your not going to take 20 strikers.....lets get back to basics - Greg Wylde is on form so should be in the squad. Whittaker is there by default. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Got to say I agree with Craig's point of view. We may have no in form keepers but that doesn't mean it's valid to compare MacGregor in the Squad against Wylde. You have to pick a few keepers in the squad even if they are all out of form. Same goes for right backs. Whittaker may not deserved to be picked but you have to compare another right back if you want to compare who deserves to be picked ahead of him - he may be the most in form right back available. To compare with Wylde you need to look at other wingers. Craig is just trying to steer away from a facile debate. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 The more I read this its like you posted this for the sake of a debate. Of course your not going to take 20 strikers.....lets get back to basics - Greg Wylde is on form so should be in the squad. Whittaker is there by default. That is my point. Of course you wont take 20 strikers. But the point you are trying to make is that you would happily go without an RB, or have Wylde as the back up to RB. If you just tried to see the point being made you would see the sense in it. Wylde may be on form whilst Whittaker isnt. That is no justification to have Wylde in the squad rather than Whittaker, unless they play the same position, or are comfortable playing in the same position. If Whittaker was on form and Wylde isnt I would still never take Whittaker as a LM before Wylde as it isnt his natural position. Likewise you cant simply take Wylde and not Whittaker because Wylde is on form and Whittaker isnt. They play in different positions for heavens sakes. If Hutton gets injured you would prefer to bring Wylde on at RB than Whittaker ? We all know you dont rate Whittaker, as is your prerogative. But in order to evaluate whether he should be in the squad or not you should at the very least compare him to other RB's, and certainly NOT Gregg Wylde. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 966 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 LOL what trash Craig. Me comparing Whittaker to Wylde as a human has zero to so with anything. Im just wondering how do you get into a squad. For me it should be if your playing well then you can be in the squad. Jeez where did you get lost??? Lets get this comparing out the window. Wylde is playing well so derseves a shout IMO. Ok lets start again. Id say Wylde deserves to be in the squad. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 LOL what trash Craig. Me comparing Whittaker to Wylde as a human has zero to so with anything. Im just wondering how do you get into a squad. For me it should be if your playing well then you can be in the squad. Jeez where did you get lost??? Lets get this comparing out the window. Wylde is playing well so derseves a shout IMO. Ok lets start again. Id say Wylde deserves to be in the squad. I will refer you to post #9 where you state "Whittaker is there and Wylde isnt...who has been the better performer this season??? " - looks suspiciously like a comparison to me Gribz A squad should be made up of players with a number of attributes, one of which is form. But we dont exactly have a ton of options at RB, do we ? Plus, Whittaker has that "versatile" persona about him which allows a national team coach to have one player effectively cover more than one position. Selecting a squad just isnt quite as easy as having just the form players, you need to consider what tactics you will use (Levein could have went to the Czech Republic with ZERO strikers given the tactics he chose to deploy.... but then, when needing a goal he would have preferred a striker to be on the bench, right ?), what formation and then try to ensure that you have coverage for all positions where possible. Whittaker allows you to do that because he can cover a few positions. But... to be charitable... as you say, lets start again. I would think that Wylde deserves to be in the squad too - he would at least be a change of pace should we have to be more attacking. But would he be in my squad at the expense of Whittaker ? Only if we had a better RB option on the bench than Whittaker..... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Wylde will get his call up for the WC qualifiers. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.