Time to go Steve Clarke

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, BFTD said:

Yeah, I'm really struggling with this concept. We played poorly against Ukraine, but that happens. The only nations who can do that in qualification games and be pretty sure of getting away with it are much better than us.

I've been thinking this for quite a while now, but some Scots are right up there with England fans in terms of delusion. We've better players than we've had for a long time, but nobody's going to be thinking it's a shame that we didn't qualify for this World Cup. There's no European qualifier that we're clearly better than. We've no goalscorers. It's touch and go at the back. We could switch manager after every poor performance and it still wouldn't change those things.

We've had six permanent managers since the '98 World Cup and, perhaps aside from during Berti Vogts time, the call has always been "we're so much better than this". We're clearly not. Despite the hopelessness of the SFA, there's a reason why the top coaches aren't applying for this job.

Im sure if we look back in the history of football theres probably 1 or 2 instances of teams improving when they changed manager also.

[Binos]

His level of tactical unawareness in a game of that magnitude the other night,  should already be a sacking offence 

Especially as it wasn't the first time 

It won't be though,  who the hell else would even take the job

What other Scottish coaches for instance are even out there anymore 

[BFTD]

Just now, BingMcCrosby said:

Im sure if we look back in the history of football theres probably 1 or 2 instances of teams improving when they changed manager also.

Yes, like under Steve Clarke. I'm no particular fan of his - his main positive is that he seems to have a bit of luck about him - but we're undoubtedly better than when he took over.

I get the impression that it just comes down to the fact that we didn't qualify and some folk think we still should regardless. Just like England can't comprehend that they haven't been good enough to win a World Cup over the past fifty-odd years.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, BFTD said:

Yes, like under Steve Clarke. I'm no particular fan of his - his main positive is that he seems to have a bit of luck about him - but we're undoubtedly better than when he took over.

I get the impression that it just comes down to the fact that we didn't qualify and some folk think we still should regardless. Just like England can't comprehend that they haven't been good enough to win a World Cup over the past fifty-odd years.

You get that impression despite when you asked the question "how well people think this squad should be performing"

I answered

2 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Simply competing alot better in the ukraine game. Not even necessarily winning it. Just performing better than that.

Not playing such poor negative long ball football and frankly embarrassing ourselves.

 

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, Binos said:

His level of tactical unawareness in a game of that magnitude the other night,  should already be a sacking offence 

Especially as it wasn't the first time 

It won't be though,  who the hell else would even take the job

What other Scottish coaches for instance are even out there anymore 

The last thing we need is another Scottish coach.

This is a very well paid job with not much work required in comparison with a club team. We also have good players and good young players. Lack of decent applications would not be a problem i wouldn't imagine.

[BFTD]

Just now, BingMcCrosby said:

You get that impression despite when you asked the question "how well people think this squad should be performing"

I answered

Aye, and I'm still a bit stunned that, for you, the difference between a successful campaign for this team and one that requires the manager to be sacked comes down to "we should have played a bit better in this one game".

Would it have made a difference if we'd done enough to beat Ukraine, then played poorly and went out against Wales?

1 minute ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Lack of decent applications would not be a problem i wouldn't imagine.

I'd imagine that we'd get similar applications to that of the ones we've had previously.

[Bishop Briggs]

13 minutes ago, Binos said:

His level of tactical unawareness in a game of that magnitude the other night,  should already be a sacking offence 

Especially as it wasn't the first time 

It won't be though,  who the hell else would even take the job

What other Scottish coaches for instance are even out there anymore 

Moyes for a start but he will not be interested until he's fed up with club management. 

Alternatively, a British or foreign coach who (unlike Clarke) has been successful at the top level.

Belgium have progressed and done well under Roberto Martinez.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

45 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

 

Qualifying for a World Cup is clearly a much tougher challenge which can never be taken as a given.

 

A tough challenge to beat Ukraine and Wales?
 

 

[Binos]

16 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

The last thing we need is another Scottish coach.

This is a very well paid job with not much work required in comparison with a club team. We also have good players and good young players. Lack of decent applications would not be a problem i wouldn't imagine.

We had the chance a few years back to go for lagerback 

Inexplicably passed on him which allowed him to take Iceland to finals

Classic sfa

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, BFTD said:

Aye, and I'm still a bit stunned that, for you, the difference between a successful campaign for this team and one that requires the manager to be sacked comes down to "we should have played a bit better in this one game".

Would it have made a difference if we'd done enough to beat Ukraine, then played poorly and went out against Wales?

I'd imagine that we'd get similar applications to that of the ones we've had previously.

Thats twice you have misquoted and misinterpreted what I said.

I said vastly better and went into specifics about what should have been better. Not a bit better or a wee bit better.

Again that one game was a world Cup playoff, do you understand?

Its not abnormal in football for managers and players to be judged on their performances in games and tournaments.

Im guessing that like me you weren't involved in sifting thru the applications for the job in recent times. So we don't know what  these similar applications to recent years might look like.

[Binos]

8 minutes ago, Bishop Briggs said:

Moyes for a start but he will not be interested until he's fed up with club management. 

Alternatively, a British or foreign coach who (unlike Clarke) has been successful at the top level.

Belgium have progressed and done well under Roberto Martinez.

 

I know you were just using as example 

But Martinez is appalling and given the talent available he should have won something

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, Binos said:

We had the chance a few years back to go for lagerback 

Inexplicably passed on him which allowed him to take Iceland to finals

Classic sfa

This is indeed would be the next problem. You would be handing the choice to the same clowns who took Alex Mcleish out of retirement.

And made numerous bad choices. They would probably try touting scott Gemmill again.

[SpoonTon]

42 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

Obviously individual games and managerial decisions can alter this, but broadly what should performing to par for Scotland be seen as, and therefore when is a manager failing?

In an era of a 24 team Euros, failing to qualify will obviously always be unacceptable. The manner in which a manager fails to qualify is relevant here, but failing to even make the playoffs for the Euros should clearly be an instant sacking, and failing to get through the playoffs should often be as well. It was an absolute scandal that Strachan was actually given a new contract after finishing fourth when he should have been told in no uncertain terms to f**k off for that humiliation.

Qualifying for a World Cup is clearly a much tougher challenge which can never be taken as a given. Failing to make the playoffs at all would have to lead to serious questions being asked, and if we were to have repeated problems in easily winnable playoffs that'd be an issue - you take the circumstances of the failure into account every time - but I think it would be reactionary nonsense to say any failure to qualify for a World Cup needs a manager to be sacked.

By finishing second in a group to make these playoffs, Clarke has already achieved something no Scotland manager had for 18 years, and even that was a stupidly easy group in comparison. If we make second again in the upcoming Euros campaign, and don't forget that we just absolutely cantered to it by 7 points, that's automatic qualification there.

The actual group does make a massive difference, though. This was the weakest group we've been lucky enough to been drawn in since that time you mention when we somehow got Lithuania, Faroes, and Iceland as our only competition for a playoff spot. This was our chance largely because the draw gave us that chance. Drawing England and Slovakia or Germany and Poland or Italy and France or Russia, Croatia, and Belgium or Belgium and Russia or Spain and Czech Republic is more difficult than a very good Denmark side and an Austria side who were in disarray. 

Which is not to say that I think Clarke did a bad job of the qualifying campaign - the campaign came good and we got the job done. But we're kidding ourselves if we think that we weren't lucky to draw Austria instead of the likes of Ukraine, Switzerland or Poland. If we want to do the same again and finish in second, then we'll need to either get lucky again or seriously improve. 

[Binos]

31 minutes ago, BFTD said:

 the difference between a successful campaign for this team and one that requires the manager to be sacked comes down to "we should have played a bit better in this one game".

It was the manner of the defeat 

If it had been usual hard luck story but it looked like a manager out of his depth 

[craigkillie]

The actual group does make a massive difference, though. This was the weakest group we've been lucky enough to been drawn in since that time you mention when we somehow got Lithuania, Faroes, and Iceland as our only competition for a playoff spot. This was our chance largely because the draw gave us that chance. Drawing England and Slovakia or Germany and Poland or Italy and France or Russia, Croatia, and Belgium or Belgium and Russia or Spain and Czech Republic is more difficult than a very good Denmark side and an Austria side who were in disarray. 
Which is not to say that I think Clarke did a bad job of the qualifying campaign - the campaign came good and we got the job done. But we're kidding ourselves if we think that we weren't lucky to draw Austria instead of the likes of Ukraine, Switzerland or Poland. If we want to do the same again and finish in second, then we'll need to either get lucky again or seriously improve. 

We only lost 1 game in the entire group, and took 16 points out of 18 against the bottom 3 seeds, despite Israel being amongst the strongest of the 4th seeds. Even if we'd had someone like Poland or Ukraine instead of Austria, we'd likely only have had to take 1 or 3 points off them to finish 2nd anyway.

It was a qualifying performance well beyond what we have achieved in two decades. The only reason we weren't in with a shout of actually winning the group was because Denmark wiped the floor with everyone else.

[RandomGuy.]

1 hour ago, BFTD said:

Yes, like under Steve Clarke. I'm no particular fan of his - his main positive is that he seems to have a bit of luck about him - but we're undoubtedly better than when he took over.

I get the impression that it just comes down to the fact that we didn't qualify and some folk think we still should regardless. Just like England can't comprehend that they haven't been good enough to win a World Cup over the past fifty-odd years.

This comes down to a few children being unable to accept that, every so often, a football team won't play well.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, RandomGuy. said:

This comes down to a few children being unable to accept that, every so often, a football team won't play well.

Ironically the most childish post for many pages.

If your annoyed that people have a different opinion on football on a football forum. Take a wee break.

[RandomGuy.]

12 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Ironically the most childish post for many pages.

If your annoyed that people have a different opinion on football on a football forum. Take a wee break.

I'll continue calling people who throw a hissy fit and demand resignations after a poor result children, thanks.

[Moomintroll]

Ah shite, maybe 2468 Motorway was right all along.

[Gordopolis]

This comes down to a few children being unable to accept that, every so often, a football team won't play well.

You can surely understand the frustration though: of all the games to fail to turn up for (manager & players).