If the 90 minutes in Paris promises to supply Alex McLeish with the odd problem, the Scotland coach has one conundrum to settle before he faces up to a crucial test for his team.
McLeish indicated on Saturday that he has already decided on the system he will employ against France, wryly suggesting it would be based on "eight at the back". It will almost certainly be a 4-5-1 system with a back four protected by a holding midfielder. One Scottish forward will be left up front to engage the French defence. Kenny Miller, before his injury, would have been a certainty for this role, given his pace and his willingness to chase causes labelled "hopelessly lost".
McLeish now has to make another choice. In the aftermath of a satisfying 3-1 win over Lithuania, the coach made it clear he still had some thinking to do about who would be nominated to fill a berth that makes demands on technique, stamina and discipline.
There are several contenders. The favourite would seem to be Garry O'Connor as McLeish was impressed by the Birmingham City forward's pressing play on Saturday. Craig Beattie has the prerequisite pace and an almost coltish desire to run. Lee McCulloch, who will almost certainly be employed in a five-man midfield, offers another option. He may not have the pace but he is adept at holding the ball up, thus providing besieged midfielders with the option of an out ball. James McFadden and Shaun Maloney, for all their heroics on Saturday, are considered too lightweight for such a demanding position. McFadden may start, but only as a wide player in midfield.
However, in all this post-match analysis and almost febrile speculation, Kris Boyd's name was as absent as humility in an X Factor contestant. It is taken as a given Boyd will play only the most limited of roles in Paris. McLeish may surprise everyone, but Boyd is considered surplus to requirements when his national or club side seek to avoid defeat rather than to chase victory.
This is seen as a denigration of the player, but it is time the young man's extraordinary talent for scoring goals is appreciated. Boyd is an old-fashioned centre forward who faces modern criticisms. He is castigated for his "lack of movement" and his inability "to track back". Fans of my era will not remember similar accusations aimed at, say, Joe McBride or Joe Harper. They were in the team to score goals. They did so. End of story.
Boyd already has a startling international record of seven goals in 11 games. This gives him a ratio of 0.64 goals a game. It compares (see panel) favourably with some of the greats of modern times.
This is not to suggest that Boyd is a Pele, a Law or even an Owen in the making. It is simply to state the fact he is a young man who scores goals for a team that historically has found it difficult to do so against decent opposition.
Boyd's goal ratio is enhanced by the realisation he is not playing for a top-class side. Most would surely accept that it is easier to score for, say, France that it is for Scotland given the amount of chances that are likely to come the Frenchman's way.
The Rangers striker's performance on Saturday drew faint praise yet his contribution was crucial. He scored the first goal by using his head to think quickly and flick the ball deftly home. He was inches from Maloney's cross that finally found Stephen McManus at the back post to restore the lead. He shielded the ball to create the room for McFadden to score with sumptuous technique and precision.
Boyd seems wearied rather than damaged by the criticism over parts of his game. "I've been fortunate enough to take the chances my team-mates have created for me. Hopefully, I can go on and get more. I want to get as many as I can," he said after Saturday's match.
He added: "It's happened before criticism. It'll happen again. I just get on with it.
As long as I keep doing what I'm doing it shuts another few people up."
Boyd may only have a cameo role in Paris. He will, though, have the lead part when Scotland have to win. Amid all the criticism, it may be time to recognise that certainty with a degree of gratitude.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article