Jump to content

Next Scotland Manager Mk II


jagfox

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Peppino Impastato said:

Clarke or wait till summer go for Moyes if west ham don't renew his contract.  Or prandelli.

 

I'm starting to think it will be Clarke though and mildly excited about that, he just seems the perfect fit great coach positive guy smart knowledgeable his teams try to play football but are pragmatic young for a manager and hungry. 

I think he could be a brilliant appointment that the SFA kind of stumbled upon by accident.  Look at the impact he has made at killie, fantastic.  Would have no problem with him finishing the season with them either.

Of the Scottish candidates Clarke would be by far the best and most positive appointment.

Clarke or Prandelli would be my choices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, kanyewestbank said:

I refuse to believe he is even being considered,the SFA are not that out of touch with modern sensibilities ........... then again !!

 

Thing is, they obviously don't care enough to prevent his appointment to his current role, so I don't see why they wouldn't appoint him as the manager

 

I hope I'm wrong but I think he's worth a punt at 8/1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/02/2018 at 19:23, JamieThomas said:

Is there a precedent of a country simply packing it's national team up into a box, stuffing it in the attic and thinking "It's been a blast, lads"?

To be fair, didn't Belgium do exactly this for over a decade? They put more or less everything on the back burner in terms of immediate qualification and invested heavily in youth development in their country. Think they got to one or two tournaments in that time but they were certainly no great shakes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the worst aspects is the complete lack of imagination in the names mentioned. It seems like there is a list of 3 or 4 who are always mentioned when this job comes up. I have no doubt this seam of unoriginality runs right through the sad, gray members of the SFA, as their record of governance proves.

That they even considered Walter Smith, let alone pretty much offered him it, was absurd and such a shit move. Michael O'Neil was a rare move away from their usual list of candidates, but they messed that up with a crap offer. Perhaps they never wanted him and he would be too radical. The SFA might consider that the Vogts appointment burnt them, but it was a move at the time that most welcomed (me included) and I don't think they can be criticised for trying something different. However they seem to be afraid to ever try appointing a foreign manager again, simply due to one that never paid off. If only they'd take that approach with Scottish managers and never appoint one again.

In short, the SFA are dull, incompetent shite who utterly lack the imagination to appoint a good manager for the nation team, never mind run the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it all stems from being absolutely terrified of taking a risk.  Now that's a fair enough worry to have, and we have been burnt in the past, but when the options we have using that strategy are so painfully uninspiring, sometimes you just need to do something, anything, even if that does mean we take a risk.  I'm not going to say we have nothing to lose, because we absolutely do, but unless they go completely mental in terms of risk, it's hard to see any good, affordable option taking us right down.  Particularly when the "safe" option has the same chance of doing just that.

We're not ever going to be told, but it would be nice to know what the plan is.  If they came out and said that after being burned before, they're going away and taking the time to make the right approach so they're not rejected, that's poor, but fair enough.  Right now it just seems like they're sitting with their thumbs up their collective arses doing f**k all.  That is going to massively backfire when they eventually hire some absolute jobber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, forameus said:

I think it all stems from being absolutely terrified of taking a risk.  Now that's a fair enough worry to have, and we have been burnt in the past, but when the options we have using that strategy are so painfully uninspiring, sometimes you just need to do something, anything, even if that does mean we take a risk.  I'm not going to say we have nothing to lose, because we absolutely do, but unless they go completely mental in terms of risk, it's hard to see any good, affordable option taking us right down.  Particularly when the "safe" option has the same chance of doing just that.

We're not ever going to be told, but it would be nice to know what the plan is.  If they came out and said that after being burned before, they're going away and taking the time to make the right approach so they're not rejected, that's poor, but fair enough.  Right now it just seems like they're sitting with their thumbs up their collective arses doing f**k all.  That is going to massively backfire when they eventually hire some absolute jobber.

There isn't a plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Peppino Impastato said:

There isn't a plan.

I know there isn't.  There never is with the SFA.  But even the illusion of a plan would distract some from the reality, beyond the lip service they pay in SSC emails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Peppino Impastato said:

Celtic are the establishment, nobody conspires against you you are not oppressed.  You own Doncaster and owned Regan and are stitching up Scottish football.

I only mentioned Jim Farry, who did conspire against us and was sacked. We dont own anyone, every club has the same number of votes. I dont believe the current organisation are particulalry biased against anyone they are just massively incompetent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gannonball said:

I only mentioned Jim Farry, who did conspire against us and was sacked. We dont own anyone, every club has the same number of votes. I dont believe the current organisation are particulalry biased against anyone they are just massively incompetent.

They're biased against whoever Celtic tell them to be.  Noticed lawwell threatening the SFA yesterday, telling them implicitly appoint someone who will bow down to us or else. You're establishment bullies, and I first noticed your pish when you were acting all persecuted about a referee correctly giving a penalty in a game Celtic won at tannadice the week before an old firm game to create an atmosphere of intimidation that lead to a referee retiring and the rest going on strike.  Disgusting, vile institution and establishment bullies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said:

They're biased against whoever Celtic tell them to be.  Noticed lawwell threatening the SFA yesterday, telling them implicitly appoint someone who will bow down to us or else. You're establishment bullies, and I first noticed your pish when you were acting all persecuted about a referee correctly giving a penalty in a game Celtic won at tannadice the week before an old firm game to create an atmosphere of intimidation that lead to a referee retiring and the rest going on strike.  Disgusting, vile institution and establishment bullies.

You dont happen to be a flat earth theorist as well do You?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gannonball said:

You dont happen to be a flat earth theorist as well do You?

Can't argue the facts eh.  Why, in 2012 when prize money was reorganized after rangers died, did second lose twice as much money as first in the spl?  Why were Celtic allowed to postpone league games to play in money spinning friendlies?  And why were lawwells mates appointed head of the SFA and SPL.

Celtic are the establishment in Scotland and bullies and lawwell is a snake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Peppino Impastato said:

Can't argue the facts eh.  Why, in 2012 when prize money was reorganized after rangers died, did second lose twice as much money as first in the spl?  Why were Celtic allowed to postpone league games to play in money spinning friendlies?  And why were lawwells mates appointed head of the SFA and SPL.

Celtic are the establishment in Scotland and bullies and lawwell is a snake.

I thought all prize money was cut because of the TV deal being cancelled? It all went to a club vote anyway did it not?

Celtic were allowed to postpone games as we already had commitments/contracts in place. I believe next season because there were no commitments this will no longer be allowed. Who are his pals exactly? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...