.jpg.89025891dd2a1428f93136116dde25ef.jpg)
Monkey Tennis
-
Posts
32,241 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
29
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Monkey Tennis
-
-
6 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:
You think Steve clarke plays up to them when things are going well?
Not as much as some, but he doesn't get pissed off with them in the way he did on Friday.
My comment was more in general terms anyway. People in the media are absolutely entitled to quiz football managers. You appear to think they're not.
0 -
5 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:
It was funny how angry Kenny macintyre got at clarke’s press conference. Media guys get so indignant when managers, players don’t play their wee game and pretend these interviews really mean much.
I don't agree with you at all here.
Now Kenny McIntyre is clearly a monumental bell-end. However, if the other night didn't prompt questions, I've not got a clue what would.
Managers are absolutely delighted to "play their wee game" when it's going well. There is a flip side to that and any dubious indignation is most evident when they don't like being asked about it.
1 -
11 minutes ago, Butters Scotch said:
Not saying it was all his undoing
Jesus.
Everyone's at it.
0 -
1 hour ago, 2426255 said:
Fair douze.
Seriously, are you doing this on purpose?
2 -
6 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:
What are you expecting beyond ‘we let ourselves down and Germany were excellent’?
He isn’t going to dig out individuals, we know that. Everyone knows we were awful, Steve clarke knows that. You know that.
I'm not expecting much more to be honest.
The defensive tetchiness of the press conference was maybe inevitable, but a bit of looking back on where we went wrong wouldn't hurt.
Nobody's demanding that he give loads away, or publicly slaughter anyone. To deliver a performance like that on such an occasion probably does require some humility and reflection though. I thought McGregor got the tone right yesterday.
0 -
3 hours ago, FK1Bairn said:
To have a chance of qualification, we need 6 points imo.
This is senseless.
Precedent tells us that 4 points would be extremely likely to get us through. To say we need 6 even "to have a chance" is quite simply wrong.
1 -
2 hours ago, Richey Edwards said:
Nevermind 6 points.
I'd settle for having an actual shot on target at this point.
That's greedy.
Let's just settle for a shot.
We can leave all that fancy 'on target' caper to the big teams.
0 -
-
2 minutes ago, Fratelli said:
We didn’t adapt the game in any way with the loss of Dykes. We were hopelessly skelping it up to Adams despite it clearly not working and just bypassing the midfield. Giving them the ball back constantly and allowing them to come at us again. That’s a tactical issue
I didn't feel it was getting skelped long at times in the hope of it leading to anything.
I think it was just done due to the lack of options available.
1 -
23 minutes ago, 2426255 said:
Good thread. Honestly the TA forum is an emotional, angsty and frustrated mess... It always a disaster zone when we lose.
I agree that the TA threads are the nuttiest on the site.
I actually find it far worse when we win.
The bragging, the hubris, the getting utterly carried away and vengeful attacking of anyone suggesting caution, is quite something.
2 -
5 minutes ago, Binos said:
We've achieved 4 points, or equivalent, three times
78, 82 that included iran & new zealand
And 96 as pointed out above
The players need 2 performances of their lives to turn this around
And the equivalent of 5 in 1974.
Of course the difference is that finishing 3rd in your group meant certain elimination in all those tournaments.
In several tournaments since, that's not been the case. A single win against Uruguay would have got us through in 1986, because the two defeats which preceded the game were narrow. Famously of course, we couldn't beat a side reduced to ten men in the 2nd minute.
Getting a point in our 2nd game should theoretically be easier this time than it looked in the last Euros and we managed it then. It kept us alive going into the final group game. We know the outcome of that though.
0 -
43 minutes ago, rainbowrising said:
I am looking at qualifying 2nd not the wing and a prayer 3rd stuff
Well that's a bit daft.
4 points would very probably get a team through in 3rd place. It's only failed to once in a tournament run to this format. It's hardly a mythical notion.
2 -
28 minutes ago, GordonS said:
No, I posted tables from the qualification before that tournament, and two from after. Look again.
You're effectively using one result - the defeat to Costa Rica - to argue that a team with a very good record over the course of 6 years wasn't very good. They lost by a goal to Brazil and to us. Those don't take away from the reality of how good that side was.
I have never heard anyone try to argue that wasn't a very strong Sweden side before, so points for novelty.
Well if citing 92 and 94 is relevant, can I ask how they did in 86 and 88?
It would surely be equally relevant.
0 -
1 hour ago, Fratelli said:
There’s been far too much dismissing of our results and performances post qualification imo. We’ve been terrible, and you can’t just turn it off and on.
Yes, we've been poor for a long time and plenty have been saying so. That doesn't stop certain people describing any criticism as 'knee jerk' though.
1 -
5 minutes ago, GordonS said:
The very strong Sweden who had qualified unbeaten ahead of England, who won their group at the Euros two years later knocking out England and France and made the semi finals, who finished third at the World Cup in 94 losing 1-0 to Brazil in the semi and who reached number 2 in the world rankings that year.
It's easily the best team Sweden have had since 1958.
Have you actually posted tables from later tournaments to bolster your case?
The fact is that they had a miserable tournament at the one being discussed, also managing to lose to Costa Rica.
0 -
It feels pretty unlikely now.
Apart from the obvious damage to morale, the difference after last night is that the chance of getting through with 3 points has pretty much been snuffed out.
We'll almost definitely need at least 4 now, which heightens the stakes in the Swiss game.
It goes without saying that we will need to be so much better than last night in both games, in order to get anything from them at all. I'll admit that I'm struggling to see us beating anyone. It's obviously possible though.
1 -
9 minutes ago, 2426255 said:
Sorry that upset you mate. I'm more a numbers than letters kind of guy.
Apology accepted.
This is not the day for such antics.
1 -
57 minutes ago, bridge of allan bairn said:
I'm not even sure how he achieved it, despite weeks and months of preparation we weren't at it from the first minute. In the first minute or two we could all tell it wasn't working.
Yip, literally from the first minute the game was totally one sided.
I've only really seen it that way a couple of times before. I remember my Dad and I turning to each other just a few minutes into the Morocco game in '98 and agreeing that it wasn't going to happen for Scotland that night. I also recall a Queens game from a few season back against Patrick Thistle that would see the losers drop into the relegation play-off. That day, a sliced clearance into the air put us into trouble after 30 seconds and we never emerged from it.
Last night, Germany threatened right away with that one that was given offside that Gunn saved with his head. It completely set the tone, and ensured that we were in panic mode all evening.
We were always pretty likely to lose and there was always a fair chance we'd be soundly beaten by a fair margin. I genuinely had not considered the possibility that we'd play as badly as that though. Just awful from the very outset to the last kick.
2 -
1 minute ago, Ross. said:
Given the resource gap between the sides it’s an excellent example to use to back up the viewpoint that McCoist is fucking clueless about football, particularly tactics and how to set a team up.
Yes, but in your list of minnows who beat them, the Queens of that time was not a good fit. Annan would have served your purposes better.
0 -
45 minutes ago, Ross. said:
One of you consistently talks absolute fucking bollocks and is clearly out of depth when it comes to football, and the other hasn’t, to my knowledge, managed the team with the second biggest budget in the Scottish game to defeats by the likes of Stirling Albion, Queen of the South and Forfar Athletic.
The Queens team that beat his, took 7 points off them that season and finished one place beneath them.
Maybe not the best example for what you're trying to say.
1 -
4 hours ago, Fratelli said:
At first last night I gave him the benefit of the doubt, as it was a last ditch, heat of the moment attempt to prevent a certain goal. After seeing it again it’s fucking brainless. There’s absolutely no need to go in with his left leg like that
Yes, that's exactly the same for me.
At first I saw it as a last ditch lunge, but in reality it was absolutely unnecessary for him to dive in so dangerously.
0 -
12 minutes ago, velo army said:
I was also part of the Living Room TA (the German for that is not Lebensraum)
Bravo!
1 -
13 hours ago, 2426255 said:
The owness is on the Tartan Army to make the best of it anyway
Christ almighty.
We're in 'lone behold' territory here.
7 -
10 hours ago, GordonS said:
My attempt at positivity is remembering Costa Rica. Just like tonight, we were the worst team in the whole wide world after that game. But we came out all guns blazing and beat a very strong Sweden 2-1.
The very strong Sweden that lost all 3 group matches?
1
Steve Clarke
in Tartan Army Ramblings
Posted
A case can be made for this, but that's more a reflection of the competition than anything else.
I think it's easy to exaggerate our achievements under Clarke.
With almost half of the continent qualifying for the Euros now, getting there is nothing special. We've still missed out on World Cups which are harder to reach but came close last time after starting poorly.
As noted, we've struggled in most of our crunch games.
We've done fine under Clarke. I see no particularly urgent need to either stick or twist. Either approach could be justified.