The Official Is Matt Ritchie Good Enough Thread.

[Tartan blood]

Fair enough. I am not sure whether he will really be a feature either in the future but at least he made a contribution. I have sat through other players debuts in the past that have been far worse. I think last night's lethargy was across the team so to single out a debutant for criticism is unfair (not you ParisInAKilt).

We're not singling him out for criticism. We are singling him out because it was his first game and the only 1 in the starting 11 that had to prove himself.

Maloney wasn't great but he has bought himself a pass based on previous performances, as did most of the first 11. Ritchie hasn't.

But yes, he was decent. But nothing more. Not a patch on the debuts of Bannan or Anya, for example.

Strachan, so far, has called up 61 players. So it's not like we are struggling for options, especially in the midfield. He'll probably get in other squads, but so far he hasn't done anything to suggest he should be ahead of many others. But we'll see.

[Caledonian Craig]

We're not singling him out for criticism. We are singling him out because it was his first game and the only 1 in the starting 11 that had to prove himself.

Maloney wasn't great but he has bought himself a pass based on previous performances, as did most of the first 11. Ritchie hasn't.

But yes, he was decent. But nothing more. Not a patch on the debuts of Bannan or Anya, for example.

Strachan, so far, has called up 61 players. So it's not like we are struggling for options, especially in the midfield. He'll probably get in other squads, but so far he hasn't done anything to suggest he should be ahead of many others. But we'll see.

I am not going to argue with any of that mate. Good post. It is evident though if you read some posts here that people are singling him out merely because they don't want him involved. Pretty sad really.

[andyD]

It was me that mentioned Adam. Firstly, I was in NO WAY suggesting he should be called up. In fact, I wouldn't even pick him for a B team.

My point was that he is capable of putting a decent delivery into the box, as are many others. Bannan, for example, has got a cracking delivery. So if that is all that Ritchie brings to the table, then he isn't worth including.

But I'm certainly not writing anyone off after 1 performance. However, I do think there are too many better options that should be in front of him

I'd call it a bad example, Adam's deliveries were horrific for years.

If you think all Ritchie contributed was good set pieces, then I don't think you're being at all fair. There was seemed to be a team order to maintain possession, we played safe at every opportunity and kept hold of the ball instead of risking taking people on or trying a risky pass. Ritchie followed that, often laying the ball back to midfield or the woeful Whittaker. To say he doesn't offer anything because he was doing exactly the same as everyone else on the pitch was doing seems a bit odd.

It was also the guys debut and he quite clearly grew into it. Playing safe early on, struggling to find any link up with Whittaker who was unwilling to run, and who's passing was terrible. If your fullback always rolls it to your feet as a winger you have a hard time doing anything. The weight of the pass means you have to come to it to make sure your marker doesn't get in ahead of you, and it was pretty compact over on that right side, often 2-3 guys around him, so trying to drop a should and beat his man was risky/unwise pretty much every time. When he did come infield a little and pick it up, Whittaker almost every time refused to make a run and offer down the outside. So again.. Ritchie's passing options are limited. He can try and turn and risk giving it away (and then get lambasted on here for that), or play it back and let the team probe for another opening. He took the safe option as you'd expect a guy on his debut to do. Late on he linked up better with Naismith and got a couple of shots away, they were off target, but it's nice to see that he's willing to have a go from there and his scoring record and highlights from his club suggest he has the ability to find the net like that. So for him to be starting to do the same things he does for his club is good, it shows he's got a bit more confident on the international stage and has got over those early doors nerves a bit.

So for me, he retained possession well, was let down by his right back, put in some dangerous balls, had a few long shots which he has in his locker and got the assist for the goal that won the game. As debut's go that's a fine.

That people are complaining that something he did really well might be all he offers is a compliment imo. Imagine if he'd put a foot wrong in the game!!

"but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans done for us?"

[wanderer]

Just watched the highlights and seen his shot at goal in the 2nd half..... there is a touch of Faddy-esque about it, which makes me think there could be something with this guy.

Think he could become a fixture in the squad, but still feel there is probably 2 or 3 players ahead of him for a starting place.

[Parklife]

wanderer, on 26 Mar 2015 - 3:25 PM, said:

Just watched the highlights and seen his shot at goal in the 2nd half..... there is a touch of Faddy-esque about it,

The one that he sclaffed and trundled through to the 'keeper?

[TheReid]

Ritchie was Ok, but zero pace. I'm not sure how Forsyth defends, but going forward he offered nothing.

Who were you watching? Zero pace?

[Tartan blood]

I'd call it a bad example, Adam's deliveries were horrific for years.

If you think all Ritchie contributed was good set pieces, then I don't think you're being at all fair. There was seemed to be a team order to maintain possession, we played safe at every opportunity and kept hold of the ball instead of risking taking people on or trying a risky pass. Ritchie followed that, often laying the ball back to midfield or the woeful Whittaker. To say he doesn't offer anything because he was doing exactly the same as everyone else on the pitch was doing seems a bit odd.

It was also the guys debut and he quite clearly grew into it. Playing safe early on, struggling to find any link up with Whittaker who was unwilling to run, and who's passing was terrible. If your fullback always rolls it to your feet as a winger you have a hard time doing anything. The weight of the pass means you have to come to it to make sure your marker doesn't get in ahead of you, and it was pretty compact over on that right side, often 2-3 guys around him, so trying to drop a should and beat his man was risky/unwise pretty much every time. When he did come infield a little and pick it up, Whittaker almost every time refused to make a run and offer down the outside. So again.. Ritchie's passing options are limited. He can try and turn and risk giving it away (and then get lambasted on here for that), or play it back and let the team probe for another opening. He took the safe option as you'd expect a guy on his debut to do. Late on he linked up better with Naismith and got a couple of shots away, they were off target, but it's nice to see that he's willing to have a go from there and his scoring record and highlights from his club suggest he has the ability to find the net like that. So for him to be starting to do the same things he does for his club is good, it shows he's got a bit more confident on the international stage and has got over those early doors nerves a bit.

So for me, he retained possession well, was let down by his right back, put in some dangerous balls, had a few long shots which he has in his locker and got the assist for the goal that won the game. As debut's go that's a fine.

That people are complaining that something he did really well might be all he offers is a compliment imo. Imagine if he'd put a foot wrong in the game!!

"but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans done for us?"

Okay, Adam was a bad example. Bannan is a better one.

You've pretty much summed up exactly what I felt about Ritchie's performance. Decent all round display and has a good delivery. I've seen worse debuts, but seen better as well. As you say, no one stood out, so it's not really fair to expect him to.

Based on last night's evidence alone, (which isn't enough to go by) he isn't better than what we have.

Chris Martin was given a few more appearances after a decent/average debut. Most don't want him in n the team now. I hope Ritchie doesn't go the same way but it's difficult to say this early on.

I'd say it's GMS's turn to get a chance out wide now, though

[andyD]

So if on your debut, you assist the winning goal and don't put a foot wrong, but don't set the world alight, then you should be dropped, forgotten and replaced? Seriously?

[Tartan blood]

So if on your debut, you assist the winning goal and don't put a foot wrong, but don't set the world alight, then you should be dropped, forgotten and replaced? Seriously?

Um, that's not what I said at all...

I said he had a decent debut and isn't enough to go on to make a decision.

I said it's GMS's turn based on his current form. Are we not allowed to try more than 1 new player per position in the same campaign? Both should be in the next squad. We can let Strachan decide.

[andyD]

I just can't understand why you'd drop a player who improved as the game went on during his debut and made a match winning contribution.

You risk pushing reset on the confidence that player gained during that match, and you dismiss the direct contribution to getting 3 points that he made. That's not good man management. No one has the right wing shirt right now, and to me Ritchie should keep it on Sunday.

Somehow now we're saying "assisted the winning goal? is that all? let's try someone else."

[ParisInAKilt]

I just can't understand why you'd drop a player who improved as the game went on during his debut and made a match winning contribution.

You risk pushing reset on the confidence that player gained during that match, and you dismiss the direct contribution to getting 3 points that he made. That's not good man management. No one has the right wing shirt right now, and to me Ritchie should keep it on Sunday.

Somehow now we're saying "assisted the winning goal? is that all? let's try someone else."

Isn't that where Maloney has been playing?

[Tartan blood]

I just can't understand why you'd drop a player who improved as the game went on during his debut and made a match winning contribution.

You risk pushing reset on the confidence that player gained during that match, and you dismiss the direct contribution to getting 3 points that he made. That's not good man management. No one has the right wing shirt right now, and to me Ritchie should keep it on Sunday.

Somehow now we're saying "assisted the winning goal? is that all? let's try someone else."

Wait, do you see Ritchie as first team player? Therr was really only 4 players on the park that you would consider guaranteed picks (S.Fletcher, Martin, Anya and Maloney).

In any serious game Ritchie would be no where near my line up. NI was to try out new players and give fringe ones a chance. Ritchie will be under no illusions that he is now part of the starting 11.

In our next friendly, yes, I'd start GMS, to experiment a bit more. But against Ireland, Poland etc then it is Maloney (or a fit Snodgrass) that plays right mid

[Paulo2576]

I don't want him called up because he isn't Scottish. But to remove that from the argument I don't see what he did at all. 4 good corners, he also had a few few dreadful ones and free kicks were also poor, couple of poor shots. He's a winger. Anya got past his man countless times, pretty sure Ritchie didn't manage that once.

Obviously the guy must have talent to be a regular in the team he plays for, but as much as we are accused of painting it as a poor performance because of who he is, I would say the people who want non scots in the team are more than exaggerating his impact in the match. I've called it gash, previously, and that was wrong. The reality was that it was a forgettable debut with nothing of note that anyone else in our squad couldn't have done. So whilst I don't think it was terrible, I seen nothing that would court the word impressed that has been used in some articles. GMS any day!!

[munro7]

It seems apparent here that people are using one match for their own agenda. Those that never wanted him called up are doing their utmost to paint this as bad a performance as possible and crank up pressure for him not to be called up again. It is funny because players like Mackay-Steven that people wanted in would have been lauded for putting in a display exactly like his. The praise would have gushed that it was a wonderful cross to set up the goal, bright spot of the match etc etc etc. Sure Ritchie was not brilliant but he was no worse than other players who have been first team regulars for us so where is all the calls for them to never get another chance? That is all.

That works both ways though. The same happened when Bridcutt made his debut, those who are desperate to fill the team with these guys hype up ordinary performances to try and support their agendas too. Ritchie offered absolutely nothing that the likes of Bannan, Mackay Steven or Armstrong couldn't give us.

[Caledonian Craig]

That works both ways though. The same happened when Bridcutt made his debut, those who are desperate to fill the team with these guys hype up ordinary performances to try and support their agendas too. Ritchie offered absolutely nothing that the likes of Bannan, Mackay Steven or Armstrong couldn't give us.

I do not see anyone bigging him up though do you? Lots of people trashing him though. He had an assist on his debut - hardly worth trashing him especially when you consider how poorly the rest of the team played.

[1320lichtie]

Ritchie did ok, expect to see him in most squads from now on

[1320lichtie]

Trying to support agendas?

Ritchie has just as much right to play for Scotland as anyone on this board, that's a fact

I thought singing the national anthem would get the cavemen off his back but oh well

[Caledonian Craig]

I thought singing the national anthem would get the cavemen off his back but oh well

[er yir macaroon]

Who were you watching? Zero pace?

I was watching the game.

[PASTA Mick]

No, he's not.

Snodgrass, Forrest, Phillips and Burke are all better options. Maybe Mackie too.

[Tartan blood]

What we learned from these 2 games is that he has a great set piece. But his all round game didn't offer up anything that we don't already have. Bannan, for example, has an incredible delivery and really lit the game up when he came on. So it's not like we don't have capable players in the squad to take corners.

I think our 3 subs yesterday should feel a bit hard done by that he started ahead of them. Starting him in a friendly is fair enough, that's the purpose of them. But it should have been 1 of our loyal players starting ahead of him in the qualifier.

Snodgrass, GMS and Bannan, should be ahead of him in the pecking order

Edited March 30, 2015 by Tartan blood

[ProudScot]

He did okay, good squad player.

Would sooner see GMS, Armstrong and Phillips in the squad ahead of him though in future.

[Cove_Sheep]

Is this the Phillips to which you refer Non-Proud?

[ProudScot]

Is this the Phillips to which you refer Non-Proud?

Yeah that's him. Glad he switched to us the same way Stuart McCall and Jordan Rhodes did

[ParisInAKilt]

Yeah that's him. Glad he switched to us the same way Stuart McCall and Jordan Rhodes did

Rhodes never played for England at any level