McGinn hits back at Norwegians after cancelled training match: Scotland does not want to risk new injuries ahead of the World Cup
John McGinn has defended Scotland manager Steve Clarke after Norway manager Ståle Solbakken publicly criticised Scotland for cancelling a closed-door training match ahead of the 2026 World Cup. According to The Guardian's report from Charlotte, the match was supposed to be played on Monday, 8 June, in North Carolina, but the Scottish side cancelled it after assessing that an additional appearance could bring a greater health risk than benefit in preparing for the tournament. McGinn said that the duty of the Scottish staff is to protect their own national team, especially after Billy Gilmour had already been ruled out of the tournament because of a knee injury sustained in a warm-up match against Curaçao.
The dispute broke out only a few days before the start of the World Cup, which is being played from 11 June to 19 July in the United States of America, Canada and Mexico. Scotland are returning to football's biggest stage for the first time since 1998, and Steve Clarke's preparations had already been marked by the loss of an important midfielder and cautious management of other players' minutes. Norway, on the other hand, are also in the final phase of preparations and experienced the cancelled meeting as a serious disruption to their work plan. That is why the agreed closed-door match, conceived primarily as an opportunity for players who needed additional minutes, grew into a public debate about professionalism, communication and the limits of risk ahead of a major competition.
Norwegian staff angry over late decision
According to The Guardian, Scotland and Norway were based in North Carolina, with Norway's base in Greensboro and Scotland's work in Charlotte, where the training match was supposed to be played without spectators and without any public announcement. Norway manager Ståle Solbakken reacted sharply after learning that the meeting would not take place. In the Norwegian camp, they were especially dissatisfied that, according to their version of events, the decision was not communicated directly through a conversation between the two managers, but through people in charge of team organisation. Solbakken described the Scottish move as unprofessional, and assessments also came from the Norwegian staff that the cancellation several days before the meeting was shameful and poor.
Former Norway international Brede Hangeland, who today has a role with the Norwegian national team, stressed, according to the same report, that work on the organisation had been going on for months and that there was what he called a gentlemen's agreement. Norway had counted on the closed meeting serving as an important part of preparations, especially for footballers who had not received the expected minutes in official warm-up tests. In such a context, the cancellation was not viewed only as a technical change to the schedule, but as a decision that disrupted a precisely planned final week before the tournament. Still, the Scottish side claims that exactly such a decision was the only reasonable one after the health problems that had accumulated during preparations.
The Scottish Football Association, in a statement carried by The Guardian, said that the match was not a publicly announced official fixture, but a closed-door training match agreed at team-manager level. According to the Scottish association, the same communication channel was also used when cancelling the meeting. The association added that Norway had been informed as soon as it was assessed that an additional match would carry a greater risk than preparatory benefit. The statement also expressed surprise that information about a match that was supposed to remain closed had ended up in the Norwegian media.
McGinn: Every national team would protect itself first
At a press conference, McGinn rejected the claim that Clarke had acted unprofessionally. According to The Guardian, the Aston Villa midfielder and one of Scotland's most experienced internationals said that Norway have the right to look after their own interests, but that the same applies to Scotland. His message was that decisions ahead of the World Cup must be made through the prism of the health and availability of the squad, not through the desire to hold an informal training meeting at any cost. McGinn stressed that Gilmour's absence had hit the team hard and that nobody in the Scottish camp wanted to risk another similar blow before the first match at the tournament.
McGinn's comparison with Norwegian stars Erling Haaland and Martin Ødegaard resonated in particular. The Scottish midfielder said that Norway, if they were to lose Haaland or Ødegaard in the final stage of preparations, would probably act in the same way and cancel a meeting that carried unnecessary risk. In doing so, McGinn tried to emphasise that this was not about disrespect towards the opponent, but about the standard logic of major competitions, in which one mistimed tackle, fatigue or poor assessment can change an entire tournament. His answer was also clear support for Clarke, who explained the decision by saying that it had been a one-hour training match, not a fixture that should have priority over the team's health situation.
McGinn's defence of the Scottish staff fits into a broader pattern of caution that marked the final part of Scotland's preparations. According to the Scottish association, Gilmour had to leave the national-team camp because of the knee injury from the match against Curaçao and return to Napoli for rehabilitation. Clarke then said that he was disappointed for Gilmour because he had been an important part of the qualifying cycle and that the timing of the injury was especially cruel. In such circumstances, the Scottish staff evidently judged that it was less damaging to miss a closed-door training meeting than to go into the World Cup with additional problems in the squad.
Gilmour's injury changed the tone of preparations
Billy Gilmour's injury carried weight also because of his role in Scotland's midfield. The Scottish association announced on 30 May that Gilmour had injured his knee in the victory over Curaçao and that he would therefore not play at the 2026 World Cup. The same announcement stated that he would return to his club, Italian side Napoli, to begin rehabilitation. For a team returning to the world stage for the first time after 28 years, such a loss is not just a matter of one position, but also a change in the balance of midfield, the distribution of minutes and the psychological impression ahead of the start of the competition.
Scotland then played their final public warm-up against Bolivia in Harrison, New Jersey, and won 4-0. According to Scottish Football Association data, the match was played on 6 June at Sports Illustrated Stadium, and many players whom Clarke expects to use at the tournament were given minutes in the line-up. In the preview of that match, the association stated that Scotland's first World Cup match against Haiti was scheduled for 13 June at Boston Stadium. The same text highlighted that Che Adams, Lewis Ferguson, Scott McTominay, John McGinn and Kieran Tierney had missed the earlier fixture in Glasgow because they joined the national team several days later than the rest of the group.
It is precisely this structure of preparations that shows why the closed-door match against Norway could have been useful, but also why at a certain point it became disputed. On one hand, staffs at major tournaments seek controlled meetings without media and result-related weight in order to distribute workload, check tactical details and give minutes to players who are not regular starters. On the other hand, behind every additional match lies the risk of injury, especially when teams have already gone through travel, a change of climate and intensive preparatory work. The Scottish staff, according to the available information, concluded that the risk threshold had been crossed after Gilmour's withdrawal and several smaller problems in the squad.
Scotland and Norway enter different but demanding groups
According to official FIFA data, the 2026 World Cup is the first tournament with 48 national teams and a total of 104 matches. The teams are divided into 12 groups of four national teams, with the two best teams from each group and the eight best third-placed teams advancing to the knockout stage. Such a format increases the number of matches, but also places additional importance on squad depth, energy management and avoiding injuries before the start of the competition. That is why the dispute over one closed-door match cannot be seen only as a quarrel between two staffs, but also as a symptom of the great pressure that accompanies final preparations at an expanded tournament.
Scotland, according to FIFA's group allocation and official Scottish association announcements, are placed in Group C with Brazil, Morocco and Haiti. It is a group in which Clarke's team must combine discipline, physical freshness and enough attacking courage in order to maintain realistic chances of progression. Brazil carry the traditional weight of one of the biggest names in world football, Morocco have confirmed their status as a serious national team after recent major tournaments, and Haiti, in such a format, can be a key opponent in the fight for points. In that context, every decision about minutes, training and recovery gains additional weight.
Norway, according to the Norwegian Football Federation and FIFA data, are in Group I with France, Senegal and Iraq. The Norwegian federation stated that the national team play their first match against Iraq on 17 June, then against Senegal on 23 June, and then against France on 26 June. Solbakken, after the draw, according to the Norwegian federation's announcement, pointed out that France are the favourites of the group, but also that Norway want to enter the tournament with quality preparations and optimism. That is why it is no surprise that the cancellation of the planned test caused dissatisfaction in the Norwegian camp, especially because every minute of work ahead of Group I is important to them as well.
In the background is the question of professional communication
Although the public debate quickly came down to the question of who was right, the dispute has two levels. The first is sports-medical: Scotland claim that after injuries and smaller problems they had to protect the players. The second is organisational: Norway believe that the manner of cancellation was insufficiently professional, especially considering the months of planning. In international football, such misunderstandings are often resolved far from the public eye, but this case reached the media and opened the question of how binding informal agreements are when circumstances change immediately before a tournament.
The Scottish association emphasises that contact and agreement went through team managers, not managers. That wording is important because the Scottish side thereby rejects Solbakken's objection that Clarke personally should have called the Norwegian manager. Norway, however, clearly believe that the level of agreement was serious enough to require a different way of communicating the cancellation. The difference in interpreting the same process led to open statements that turned a closed-door match into one of the most noticed stories of the final week of preparations.
For Clarke, the most important thing is that the debate does not divert focus from the pitch. His team ended the public part of preparations against Bolivia with a convincing victory and without a new major problem, but the tournament is only beginning. McGinn's reaction therefore also has the function of closing ranks inside the dressing room. The message that Scotland acted professionally and responsibly is directed outward, but also towards a team that must accept that protecting the squad at this moment is as important as another preparatory test.
Cancelled match as a warning ahead of the tournament
The case of Scotland and Norway shows how sensitive preparations for the World Cup are in the final days before the start. National teams in that period must find a balance between match rhythm and recovery, between tactical cohesion and reducing risk, between respecting agreements and their own responsibility towards players. Norway may rightly be frustrated because they lost a planned part of the programme, but Scotland also have a strong argument when they refer to the fresh experience of Gilmour's injury. In modern international football, especially at a tournament with an expanded format and long-distance travel, such assessments are no longer secondary issues.
In his reaction, McGinn tried to translate the entire dispute into the simplest sporting logic: a national team must first protect what it has. The comparison with Haaland and Ødegaard was direct, but also understandable because it reminds that every team would look differently at risk when its key players were involved. The cancelled match will therefore probably remain an episode that raised tensions, but it will not change the basic task of either Scotland or Norway. Both national teams must now prove that they are capable of leaving the organisational dispute behind them and entering their first World Cup matches fresh enough, focused and complete.
Sources:
- The Guardian – report from Charlotte on the cancelled training match, the reactions of Ståle Solbakken, Brede Hangeland, John McGinn and the position of the Scottish Football Association (link)
- Scottish FA – official announcement on Billy Gilmour's injury and his absence from the 2026 World Cup (link)
- Scottish FA – official preview of the Bolivia - Scotland match with information on preparations, the group and Scotland's first appearance at the tournament (link)
- Scottish FA – official page of the Bolivia - Scotland match played on 6 June 2026 in Harrison, New Jersey (link)
- Norges Fotballforbund – official information on Norway's group, match schedule and Ståle Solbakken's statements after the draw (link)
- Norges Fotballforbund – official announcement of Norway's World Cup squad and the schedule of warm-up and group matches (link)
- FIFA – official schedule and information on the 2026 World Cup, including the competition format, dates and number of matches (link)