Time to go Steve Clarke

[Granny Danger]

Clark’s biggest problem is one he shares with every other football manager, he’s pigheaded.  It was obvious after 20 minutes that the shape wasn’t working but he refused to acknowledge that.  If he had we might have had a chance.

Our next manager will be just as pigheaded.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

5 at the back and fire long diagonals to the big man to try and get a knock down to the wee man.

 

Bobby Williamson stuff. 

[sergie's no1 fan]

27 minutes ago, Ivo den Bieman said:

Ukraine were simply much better than us. Many people really underestimated them- I am not sure why. Sometimes you just have to accept that you've lost to a much better team, who I expect to gub Wales too & qualify.

Yes it was a disappointing display from Scotland but Clarke's tenure has been overwhelmingly positive and calls for his departure are pretty ridiculous, at this stage.

 

Ukraine were good but how good did we make them look? Player for player are they that better than us that they should have thumped us by 5? The gulf in quality between the two teams shouldn't be as big as it was last night. 

Too many of our players had off nights, our big players too. 

26 minutes ago, qos_75 said:

As shit as we were last night, there is no way he should be going anywhere.

Having said that, It is all well and good getting to the play-offs,  but he needs to work on their mentality in the big games.

Blowing a winning position in the last Nations League and last night’s calamity need to be addressed. 

 

23 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Aye I don’t think he should go, however he needs to stop making a c**t of it in big games. That’s Czech Republic and Croatia at the Euros and last night in the space of a year. 3 huge games and we’ve been laughable in all 3.

Agreed.

We did have our moments at the Euros and last night but at that level you can't just perform for 15-20 minutes in games. 

Hopefully the players and manager will be learning from it.

Edited June 2, 2022 by sergie's no1 fan

[Gordopolis]

Clark’s biggest problem is one he shares with every other football manager, he’s pigheaded.  It was obvious after 20 minutes that the shape wasn’t working but he refused to acknowledge that.  If he had we might have had a chance.
Our next manager will be just as pigheaded.

It's a double edged sword though - his stubbornness can be and has been an asset. It was what saw him push through the change to 3 at the back and stick with it through the first handful of games under that system, when it looked very iffy, and people were howling that he'd lost the plot and calling for change.

[RossBFaeDundee]

Jesus wept.

[2426255]

1 hour ago, BingMcCrosby said:

I obviously knew the feelings on this board would be pro Clarke. I watched the game in a large group offshore, probably 50 guys and the feeling overall that the manager got it wrong an should walk.

So im not sure this board represents the wider feeling accurately.

I watched the game with a group of around 50,000 guys and the feeling overall was it's just a bad result but he has done well overall so I think this board may represent the wider feeling accurately. 

[Old Bing]

Just now, TheScarf said:

Aye I don’t think he should go, however he needs to stop making a c**t of it in big games. That’s Czech Republic and Croatia at the Euros and last night in the space of a year. 3 huge games and we’ve been laughable in all 3.

And thats the concern, our players are better than we have had for a while. If we keep on underperforming in these big games we might well look back at this period as a period of missed chances.

The next generations may well be worse.

[accies1874]

58 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Aye I don’t think he should go, however he needs to stop making a c**t of it in big games. That’s Czech Republic and Croatia at the Euros and last night in the space of a year. 3 huge games and we’ve been laughable in all 3.

England, Austria and Israel (just about) were big games that we've done well in though, so it's not a regular pattern. Going beyond the past 12 months, Serbia and Slovakia were another two that we mostly played very well in. Before last night there was plenty of chat that we actually have turned up in big games recently. 

[Diamonds are Forever]

1 hour ago, Gordopolis said:

1 hour ago, Granny Danger said:

Clark’s biggest problem is one he shares with every other football manager, he’s pigheaded.  It was obvious after 20 minutes that the shape wasn’t working but he refused to acknowledge that.  If he had we might have had a chance.
Our next manager will be just as pigheaded.

It's a double edged sword though - his stubbornness can be and has been an asset. It was what saw him push through the change to 3 at the back and stick with it through the first handful of games under that system, when it looked very iffy, and people were howling that he'd lost the plot and calling for change.

 

It was McLeish who brought in the 3 at the back with Tierney as left centre back, not Clarke. In every game that Tierney played under McLeish he played as a left centre back in a back 3. Clarke himself has tried to promote this idea that it was him who thought up this idea, despite it being nonsense.

I don't disagree with your overall point and you need a certain level of stubbornness and self-belief in a job like that when every man and his dog his opinions. I think he is at the point now though where he really needs to assess the 3-5-2 system and it's effectiveness when Tierney isn't playing. It's a tough one because it does work pretty well when Tierney is fit, so it could mean flip flopping between systems depending on Tierney's fitness, which has it's issues too. But he can't watch last night and continue to play that way without Tierney, he is going to have to change something. Tierney's injury record is terrible and he seems to be the kind of player who will continue to have issues his whole career, so we can't have a system that is reliant on him playing.

Part of the reason McLeish and then Clarke wanted to play 3 at the back is that we had so few centre backs at the time - to the point where players like Mulgrew and Devlin were playing, and why Clarke moved McTominay back there. Our options there are much better now (although still not amazing) and I think it's time to be brave enough to go with 2 centre backs. 

Edited June 2, 2022 by Diamonds are Forever

[itzdrk]

1 hour ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Not sure if you realise, but that one game was a world Cup play off.

I never went round and asked absolutely everyone why they had came to their opinion.

But that only holds any real value if we've been in no great form, simply our form has been good and unless it now takes a dip it's an outlier.  

We played the Netherlands a year ago today in a warm up for the Euros and our results over the past 12 months are-

Played: 15

Won: 7

Draw: 4

Lost: 4

I can't see that as anything other than fine for anyone outside the top nations.  

[lubo_blaha]

I obviously knew the feelings on this board would be pro Clarke. I watched the game in a large group offshore, probably 50 guys and the feeling overall that the manager got it wrong an should walk.
So im not sure this board represents the wider feeling accurately.

The thousands of fans on P&B don’t represent the “wider feeling” but a few lads in an oil rig TV room do [emoji23]

[BFTD]

Scotland managers really are all ninety minutes away from being hounded, aren't they?

[Gordopolis]

Scotland managers really are all ninety minutes away from being hounded, aren't they?

Same as most of the players (Hanley, McTominay, Adams etc)

[Old Bing]

Just now, lubo_blaha said:

The thousands of fans on P&B don’t represent the “wider feeling” but a few lads in an oil rig TV room do

Theres not thousands that post on these threads are there, there's a hard core of maybe 30 and on match days alot more. Go and have a look thru the match thread and decide if Clarke has an overwhelming backing or not.

[Old Bing]

Just now, itzdrk said:

But that only holds any real value if we've been in no great form, simply our form has been good and unless it now takes a dip it's an outlier.  

We played the Netherlands a year ago today in a warm up for the Euros and our results over the past 12 months are-

Played: 15

Won: 7

Draw: 4

Lost: 4

I can't see that as anything other than fine for anyone outside the top nations.  

Im glad your happy mate. I think we could be doing better.

[Gordopolis]

Last night was horrid. I'm frustrated by our apparent shit-the-bediness in crunch matches like last night and Croatia and Czech Republic in the Euros.

But outside those games we are - as the stats a few posts back show - achieving good results often.

As such I think it would be a hell of a risk to ditch Clarke and potentially f**k up that hard-won foundation. Added to this, we've not had stability and squad harmony like this for nearly 15 years.
The smart way forward is to stick with SC and give him another chance to take things to the next level.

[Jambomo]

The whole reason we were even in the position to f**k last night game up was because we didn’t f**k up against the likes of Austria, Israel and Denmark and won the games we needed to. Getting to the playoffs is progress over past seasons.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

It was McLeish who brought in the 3 at the back with Tierney as left centre back, not Clarke. In every game that Tierney played under McLeish he played as a left centre back in a back 3. Clarke himself has tried to promote this idea that it was him who thought up this idea, despite it being nonsense.

I don't disagree with your overall point and you need a certain level of stubbornness and self-belief in a job like that when every man and his dog his opinions. I think he is at the point now though where he really needs to assess the 3-5-2 system and it's effectiveness when Tierney isn't playing. It's a tough one because it does work pretty well when Tierney is fit, so it could mean flip flopping between systems depending on Tierney's fitness, which has it's issues too. But he can't watch last night and continue to play that way without Tierney, he is going to have to change something. Tierney's injury record is terrible and he seems to be the kind of player who will continue to have issues his whole career, so we can't have a system that is reliant on him playing.

Part of the reason McLeish and then Clarke wanted to play 3 at the back is that we had so few centre backs at the time - to the point where players like Mulgrew and Devlin were playing, and why Clarke moved McTominay back there. Our options there are much better now (although still not amazing) and I think it's time to be brave enough to go with 2 centre backs. 

Tierney only played three times under McLeish and we lost two of them (one heavily), after which he reverted back to a back four, which is also how Clarke started. I don't think Clarke is claiming that he invented a back three or that he was the only manager to play Tierney there, but rather that it was his eventual solution to getting both in the team.

I still think the back three is the way to go even if we don't have Tierney available, it has got the best out of a lot of our other players too. It has to be a 3-4-3 rather than a 3-5-2 though, the latter has barely ever worked. The important thing is to find a player who can actually play a bit rather than sticking a lump like Cooper there purely because he's left-footed. If we have the likes of Souttar and Hendry on the other side, we can surely pluck out someone a bit better in possession, even McKenna maybe. You mentioned Mulgrew in your post above, and I genuinely reckon he would still have done a better job in that role than Cooper did last night - Cooper has been fine in the middle of the three but is unable to pass or dribble which makes him a waste of a jersey on the left.

[Diamonds are Forever]

Just now, craigkillie said:

Tierney only played three times under McLeish and we lost two of them (one heavily), after which he reverted back to a back four, which is also how Clarke started. I don't think Clarke is claiming that he invented a back three or that he was the only manager to play Tierney there, but rather that it was his eventual solution to getting both in the team.

I still think the back three is the way to go even if we don't have Tierney available, it has got the best out of a lot of our other players too. It has to be a 3-4-3 rather than a 3-5-2 though, the latter has barely ever worked. The important thing is to find a player who can actually play a bit rather than sticking a lump like Cooper there purely because he's left-footed. If we have the likes of Souttar and Hendry on the other side, we can surely pluck out someone a bit better in possession, even McKenna maybe. You mentioned Mulgrew in your post above, and I genuinely reckon he would still have done a better job in that role than Cooper did last night - Cooper has been fine in the middle of the three but is unable to pass or dribble which makes him a waste of a jersey on the left.

 

Yip, but played in a back 3, which shows it was also McLeish's idea to play him there but he just didn't have the option very often.

Clarke did claim in an interview that he 'had the idea that Tierney could play centre back' and that he (Tierney) 'needed convincing'. Despite the fact he'd already been playing there whenever he was available. I'm not arguing that he didn't do well to properly embed that system with Tierney in it, he did.

I agree about the possibility of a different option on the left of the 3 being better than Cooper, but I'm not convinced we have another player who could offer anywhere near as much as Tierney does to make it effective.

[Old Bing]

11 minutes ago, Gordopolis said:

Last night was horrid. I'm frustrated by our apparent shit-the-bediness in crunch matches like last night and Croatia and Czech Republic in the Euros.

But outside those games we are - as the stats a few posts back show - achieving good results often.

As such I think it would be a hell of a risk to ditch Clarke and potentially f**k up that hard-won foundation. Added to this, we've not had stability and squad harmony like this for nearly 15 years.
The smart way forward is to stick with SC and give him another chance to take things to the next level.

Squad harmony has been brought up a few times, we don't know if there's squad harmony.

Its very rare if a footballer is asked they wouldn't say that there is squad harmony and everything is great. Im not saying the squad isn't all getting along. Just we don't really know.