Scotland’s followers are in danger of wanting to stop the world before leaping off. In what has curiously grown as a theory relating to the country’s troubled international set-up, some would have us believe the identity of manager is irrelevant because of the pitiful resources he has at his disposal. Shoulders shrug as bad results accumulate.
This does a disservice to what Scotland can call upon. It also offers tacit admission of one of Gordon Strachan’s most glaring failings: not maximising what he has at his disposal. Nations who have achieved far more than Scotland in recent times would gleefully have Ross McCormack, Jordan Rhodes, Charlie Adam, Matt Phillips and Tom Cairney among their group. Scotland have discarded them while simultaneously bemoaning everything they do not have. Just because Scotland do not have a multitude of strengths, there is no reason not to accentuate those they do enjoy.
Nobody can legitimately cite Scotland as a football powerhouse. However, they retain more talent than is represented by the international team. The manager is wholly responsible for that. For all that Scotland have become horribly accustomed to blundering between international letdowns, it remains legitimate to apportion blame.
In the build-up to Friday’s meek surrender at Wembley, Strachan’s sentiment contradicted the very thing Scotland should be doing. That is, adopting a system and perfecting it. Instead, the 59-year-old has fumbled around in the dark for the three games as Scotland’s World Cup aspirations have been trashed.
“We’re not a team that can say, ‘That’s the way we play.’ It’s not like a Barcelona where we’re that good to say, ‘That’s the way we play and we never change,’” said Strachan on Thursday. “Because of where we are and what we do and the players we have, we have to adapt to who we’re playing at different times.
“It would be great to just say, ‘That’s the way we play,’ like Barcelona, and not think about tactics. Man City play that way, brilliant, or Chelsea play that way, three at the back. We’re a bit different from that. We have to understand who we’re playing against. If you’re fighting a heavyweight boxer you can’t just fight the same way as him, if he’s a big puncher you have to do something else.”
Teams need not be at the upper echelons to land upon a suitable style. Arguably, this is more beneficial to struggling sides. In Scotland’s case what is needed is obvious: a style that allows the team to be defensively compact and hard to beat while playing on the counterattack. Pretty? Perhaps not, but effective. Strachan’s inability to employ pragmatism has been seriously costly, just as his approach towards certain players is counterproductive.
Against England, despite a decent enough start, Scotland’s defensive organisation was abysmal and they were horrendously blunt in forward areas. If the insistence is that the manager does not miss chances or tackles, coaches would forever be handed lifetime contracts. Soon this surely will not be Strachan’s concern. The Scottish FA do not intend to make a snap decision on the manager, with a thorough debrief to be undertaken before a board meeting scheduled for early next month, but Strachan may resign even before the dust properly settles on the visit to London. If he does, retirement almost inevitably beckons, with this an inauspicious way to end a managerial career that had several high points.
With four months until Scotland play again and the prospect of four home fixtures in 2017 that currently have little or no commercial appeal, the governing body must utilise a fortunate gap in the calendar.
Michael O’Neill is by far the outstanding candidate to replace Strachan if, and it is a huge if, he can be convinced that Scotland represents a sensible career step from Northern Ireland. Even then, the SFA would be required to flex financial muscle that has been softened by this interminable absence from major tournaments. Put simply, O’Neill may be unaffordable.
With the search for a performance director already ongoing, there is suitable scope to properly alter the direction of travel. Strachan never showed much interest in that broad scene at all until the failed qualifying campaign for Euro 2016 meant a public relations boost would come in useful. The SFA, to their credit, have been heavily supportive of Strachan, to an extent that pushed boundaries of generosity.
At Wembley, Strachan spoke of deep pride in his players. Lee Wallace, who performed reasonably enough in his return to the team at left-back, was hailed as phenomenal. This analysis, for merely the latest time, made no sense. Strachan’s spiky approach to any questions relating to his own position, coupled with his noticeably reflective approach before kick-off, told a story.
The wider picture remains a damaging one. A generation of players does not know what it is like to play international tournaments. This resonates in the game’s grassroots with the lack of inspiration harmful. It would be ludicrous to land such issues at Strachan’s door, but the harsh reality is, after almost four years in office, he has provided no tangible progress.
Strachan’s own mood could negate the SFA’s need to be decisive but if a sacking is required, there should be no regret. Even mediocre teams can benefit from good management.
