Scotland v Uruguay: The different philosophies

By Paul Mooney:

“We’re only a small country, our tiny population makes it harder to compete due to rise of the game globally, we have an iconic and influential past, in the beginning we taught the world a lesson on how to play the game, we cannot afford to keep any of our best players in our league anymore due to the wealth of our neighbour, our game has been dominated by two big clubs, we live in the shadow of this once successful nation...”

Of course this quote is referring to Uruguay (as we all assumed) after failing to reach the 2006 World Cup – without a win at the finals in 16 years.  Scotland is a small country, but has almost twice the population of its South American counterpart. Globally, both nations need to deal with the increasing popularity of the game worldwide. Individually, they can reminisce about the success of the past. Uruguay has won two World Cups, two Olympic gold medals and are fifteen time South American Champions. Scotland has won the British Home Championship twenty four times, qualified for five consecutive World Cups and produced clubs who conquered Europe consistently over the past half century.

In the early years of the game, both countries were tactically innovative – opting for a short passing game rather than the physical kick and rush style adopted by others. It is true that Scotland cannot compete with the EPL and its financial clout...and nor should it. Uruguay borders Brazil, which is one of the world’s emerging super powers. In the past, the Brazileiro may have been forced to sell its best players, but the fact clubs like Santos are able to match European clubs wages to keep superstar Neymar proves how much it has grown. Uruguay has successfully imported its stars across the major world leagues – none of its current 21 man squad play at home. Hardly any Scots venture abroad and those few who do very rarely seem to adapt and come back homesick. Culturally, young Scottish players seem unwilling to experience the lifestyle of other European leagues and seem content to stay in the SPL rather than push on and develop elsewhere.

Moreover, until recent events unfolded, Scottish football was all about the Old Firm and its stranglehold of the league. Nacional and Penerol are Montevideo’s giants, claiming 18 of the past 21 league titles in the Uruguayan Primera. Amazingly, between the two clubs they have won 70 league titles in the 80 years of Uruguayan league football – a historical dominance very similar to the Glasgow giants.

Therefore, how can it be that in the past two years Uruguay has punched well above its weight whilst Scotland continues to decline? During this time they have become Copa American Champions, reached the semi finals of the World Cup and were recently as high as 2nd in the FIFA rankings behind Spain.

 

The other still hasn’t qualified for a major championship since 1998 and has seen its club coefficient plummet. To put it in perspective just how far it has fallen – last year seen the biggest drop of any European league and is now fighting with the Hungarian and Georgian top flight to stay in the top 30.

The main difference between the two countries it would seem is within the strategy, or lack of in Scotland’s case. BBC’s South American correspondent Tim Vickery has often spoken about the control and philosophy implemented across the board by the widely respected head coach, Oscar Washington Tabarez. At youth level, the players play the same philosophy and style to the senior national team, which makes integrating to a higher level much easier.  The modern game is obsessed with possession – in theory the more time you have on the ball the better chance you have of scoring. Contrastingly, Uruguay generally has less possession than the opposition in games and that does not seem to bother them too much. The focus instead is on the effectiveness of an attack - being direct and able to think quickly when they do have the ball. A talented front three of Forlan, Cavani and Suarez in recent years has made them a real threat in front of goal.

Under Craig Levein (or any other manager in recent times), there does not seem to be any long term plan or philosophy other than to call up any player who manages to play at the highest level. From the horrendous tactical performance in Prague, to the ‘headless chicken’ lone striker role in a 4-5-1 (see Miller and Mackail-Smith), there seems to be a lack of cohesion and style particularly in attack. It seems to be accepted that the players are not good enough to play an attacking brand of football, yet the U21 team travelled to Holland earlier last season and won 2-1. It wasn’t just the fact they beat a talented Dutch side, Billy Stark set out with two strikers in Rhodes and Wotherspoon, with attacking wide players Forrest and Wylde making Scotland look creative and dangerous going forward in a 4-4-2 shape. Similarly, at the reverse fixture at New St Mirren Park, Scotland kept possession well and played some excellent football - often more impressive than the Dutch.

It seems clear that having an attacking, technically gifted U21 side with a largely defensive, organised senior team contradicts itself. The senior team has very rarely played with two strikers. What that strategy should be across the board is debatable, but the national side has been content for years to play with a lone striker (often Miller) who basically works very hard chasing lost causes.  Recent national team squads have lacked creativity in the final third, goals and attacking play. The centre half pairing has generally been technically limited, hence a possession based style is difficult to achieve.

Without doubt there is a balance to be found, Scotland has some exciting young players like Templeton of Hearts, Mackay-Steven of United, Forrest of Celtic, Allan of West Brom, Fyvie of Wigan and Rhodes of Huddersfield. In Rhodes, it could well be that our attack is built around him, but he would need quality service from crosses and support centrally to link. Perhaps it is too early to say how his career will develop but it is promising. Somehow we need to build our strategy around the next generation of players coming through, providing a much more positive and technically gifted national side that can compete in the modern game.

Uruguay has shown that small countries can be successful. Scottish football has a passionate and enthusiastic audience; the country just needs direction, vision and a cohesive strategy at the top to succeed.