Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion

[Chripper]

6 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

I know you're just having fun, but you were certain Gilmour would start against Germany. "you don't leave out your best players" You also had a feeling Clarke would do something out the box against Germany. "watch this space" Not having a go, just saying.

I suppose it could be argued what we saw on Friday was out the box, but you get what I mean.

No. I'm completely serious. I think Clarke might pack it up if we leave with zero points.

Yeah. You could make the argument that Gilmour should have started. Would it have made much of a difference? No. Maybe a wee bit, but not by much. We were just set up all wrong.

Yeah. I was wrong on both counts.

I just hope upon hope that Clarke goes back to a more progressive system in the next two matches.

We all knew that our progression wasn't going to be determined by the Germany match, but it still hurt.

[2426255]

Just now, SlayerX said:

No. I'm completely serious. I think Clarke might pack it up if we leave with zero points.

Yeah. You could make the argument that Gilmour should have started. Would it have made much of a difference? No. Maybe a wee bit, but not by much. We were just set up all wrong.

Yeah. I was wrong on both counts.

I just hope upon hope that Clarke goes back to a more progressive system in the next two matches.

We all knew that our progression wasn't going to be determined by the Germany match, but it still hurt.

If you want to get predictions right, listen to Clarke - he tells you a lot, he really does, not explicitly. I am extremely confident Gilmour will start against Switzerland. I'd put money on it. At the end of the day if Clarke wants to leave it's up to him and he should be able to do so on his own terms.

[Chripper]

5 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

If you want to get predictions right, listen to Clarke - he tells you a lot, he really does, not explicitly. I am extremely confident Gilmour will start against Switzerland. I'd put money on it. At the end of the day if Clarke wants to leave it's up to him and he should be able to do so on his own terms.

I hope Gilmour starts.

Without doubt, I'm Steve Clarke's biggest fan. He had the testicular fortitude to change the formation that brought 20+ years of misery.

I don't want to see him leave, even if we leave Germany with zero points. He has given us two tournaments and he deserves to see out his contract... particularly if it means going back to the dark ages of our formation.

[JS_FFC]

I like what Clarke has done for us. You have to concede that he’s had access to a far more talented generation of players than any of his predecessors over the past two or three decades, but even still he’s generally got us beating the teams that we should beat and avoiding silly banana skin results, at least in competitive fixtures. He’s now gotten us through nearly 3 full qualifying groups and 2 nations league campaigns without once dropping a single point to a team ranked significantly lower than us and that’s a real improvement on every other Scotland manager this century. We shouldn’t take that for granted.

 

Having said that, I think we seem to be stuck right in that 17-24 bracket of European sides. The sort of teams you would expect to see qualifying for the Euros but going out in the groups, narrowly missing out on the World Cup, and being competitive in the second tier of the nations league but being relegated back down when we do go up to league A.

 

It might well be that our squad talent levels define that we should be playing at exactly that level.
 

It is unfair to suggest that Clarke has done a poor job but is absolutely fair to suggest he might have taken us as far as he can. It’s a thankless task getting us out of the pot 4 purgatory that we were stuck in for years. He’s done it and we should be very grateful for that. 
 

However, can he take us to the next level of being a top 16 team in UEFA consistently? History suggests that this team slips up in the really big occasions. Euro 2020, the World Cup playoffs, and now well on our way to crashing out of the current Euros as well.

 

I think you only consider moving on from Clarke if there’s another manager there that you back to take us to the next level. I’ll be livid if we move on just to bring in Derek McInnes or Malky Mackay or Scotland Gemmell, but with Davie Moyes being right there available and saying he’d like to do the job one day, I think he could be the man to elevate this team. 

[2426255]

1 hour ago, JS_FFC said:

I like what Clarke has done for us. You have to concede that he’s had access to a far more talented generation of players than any of his predecessors over the past two or three decades, but even still he’s generally got us beating the teams that we should beat and avoiding silly banana skin results, at least in competitive fixtures. He’s now gotten us through nearly 3 full qualifying groups and 2 nations league campaigns without once dropping a single point to a team ranked significantly lower than us and that’s a real improvement on every other Scotland manager this century. We shouldn’t take that for granted.

 

Having said that, I think we seem to be stuck right in that 17-24 bracket of European sides. The sort of teams you would expect to see qualifying for the Euros but going out in the groups, narrowly missing out on the World Cup, and being competitive in the second tier of the nations league but being relegated back down when we do go up to league A.

 

It might well be that our squad talent levels define that we should be playing at exactly that level.
 

It is unfair to suggest that Clarke has done a poor job but is absolutely fair to suggest he might have taken us as far as he can. It’s a thankless task getting us out of the pot 4 purgatory that we were stuck in for years. He’s done it and we should be very grateful for that. 
 

However, can he take us to the next level of being a top 16 team in UEFA consistently? History suggests that this team slips up in the really big occasions. Euro 2020, the World Cup playoffs, and now well on our way to crashing out of the current Euros as well.

 

I think you only consider moving on from Clarke if there’s another manager there that you back to take us to the next level. I’ll be livid if we move on just to bring in Derek McInnes or Malky Mackay or Scotland Gemmell, but with Davie Moyes being right there available and saying he’d like to do the job one day, I think he could be the man to elevate this team. 

Too soon. If we get a result against Switzerland you'll look like a fud. The SFA have zero interest in sacking Clarke as he's been bringing in the pennies, helping improve the game up here and so he would have to resign or take another job which is possible given the intensity of the Scotland job.

Scotland are trying to break through a glass ceiling from pot-2 to pot-1. It might not happen at the first attempt. "The last step is the most difficult"  remember that? I would keep him on until the end of his existing contract and re-evaluate from there. If he starts poorly in World cup qualifying that's when I would be open to the discussion.

Edited June 17 by 2426255

[JS_FFC]

1 minute ago, 2426255 said:

Too soon. If we get a result against Switzerland you'll look like a fud. The SFA have zero interest in sacking Clarke as he's been bringing in the pennies, helping improve the game up here and so he would have to resign or take another job which is possible given the intensity of the Scotland job.

Scotland are trying to break through a glass ceiling from pot-2 to pot-1. It might not happen at the first attempt. "The last step is the most difficult"  remember that? I would keep him on until the end of his existing contract and re-evaluate from there. If he starts poorly in World cup qualifying that then I would be open to the discussion.

I’d be minded to give him the nations league depending on how the rest of this tournament goes. If there’s a complete dressing room implosion he should be gone, if we qualify through the group he stays obviously. There’s a huge area in between them though. The most likely scenario at the moment is that we end on 1/2/3 points and go home.

 

 

The only thing that’s even got the idea of sacking him as an option in my mind is that the stand out candidate to take us to the next level is unemployed and has indicated he’d like the job. If Moyes was still at West Ham I’d be 100% in the camp of giving Clarke the chance to keep us in league A, especially as Poland are no great shakes and Croatia look to be on the verge of going into full on rebuild mode. 

[BB_Bino]

On 15/06/2024 at 17:29, Willie adie said:

A lot of it down to the coaching keepers get now , not to catch the ball

As someone who has coached Goalkeepers across a number of academies in Scotland for 17 years and has attended many SFA Goalkeeper Coaching courses and CPD events over that time, I would say that I am qualified enough to tell you that this is nonsense!

14 hours ago, 1320Lichtie said:

Clarkes been excellent for Scotland and I really like the guy. However things have been pretty fkn shite recently and I realise it’s a combination of playing very good opposition and also being shite so it’s not been completely shite etc etc etc…

I think the whole campaign has been "pretty fkn shite" if i'm being honest. McSauce stepping up in big moments and the win against Spain has simply papered over how bad it's been. Cyprus at Home was an absolute slog and was hugely frustrating until he banged in 2 in the last few minutes (despite leading through McGinn), Norway away was so under par until the last 10 minutes but thankfully we kept ourselves compact and in the game until then and we able to come up with 2 bits of magic, just in time. Georgia was no better, but with the conditions and delays was understandable...we got through it, England, Spain and France.....who cares, they're good teams and we have already qualified......Georgia and Norway, again very poor but we didn't lose and we have qualified so who cares.

Delighted we qualified, of course, and love the main players in the squad along with Clarke, but don't for a minute believe that we are anything other than a small nation with deficiencies that is starting to run out of luck.

[BFTD]

I've nothing against David Moyes, but I'm also not sure why anyone would think he's a big step up from Clarke.

Better than depressing options like Malky and Gemmill, but surely nobody would be particularly excited by his appointment.

[2426255]

33 minutes ago, JS_FFC said:

I’d be minded to give him the nations league depending on how the rest of this tournament goes. If there’s a complete dressing room implosion he should be gone, if we qualify through the group he stays obviously. There’s a huge area in between them though. The most likely scenario at the moment is that we end on 1/2/3 points and go home.

 

 

The only thing that’s even got the idea of sacking him as an option in my mind is that the stand out candidate to take us to the next level is unemployed and has indicated he’d like the job. If Moyes was still at West Ham I’d be 100% in the camp of giving Clarke the chance to keep us in league A, especially as Poland are no great shakes and Croatia look to be on the verge of going into full on rebuild mode. 

Let's be honest. It's not going to matter what the fans want at this stage. If we go out of the tournament disappointingly the whole thing will play out like after Euro-2020. Clarke might not get a new contract in August this time, but he won't be sacked - he'll be under pressure. Fans and the SFA look at it completely differently. That's the reality.

It's an expectations thing with the fanbase. Fans always expect one step beyond where the team currently are and a straight line progression, which obviously never happens and hasn't happened under Clarke. The teams maximum capability is always the minimum expectation for supporters - that's why they're a miserable bunch. We all should know that progress is 2 steps forward, one step backwards.

Edited June 17 by 2426255

[No_Problemo]

8 minutes ago, BB_Bino said:

As someone who has coached Goalkeepers across a number of academies in Scotland for 17 years and has attended many SFA Goalkeeper Coaching courses and CPD events over that time, I would say that I am qualified enough to tell you that this is nonsense!

I think the whole campaign has been "pretty fkn shite" if i'm being honest. McSauce stepping up in big moments and the win against Spain has simply papered over how bad it's been. Cyprus at Home was an absolute slog and was hugely frustrating until he banged in 2 in the last few minutes (despite leading through McGinn), Norway away was so under par until the last 10 minutes but thankfully we kept ourselves compact and in the game until then and we able to come up with 2 bits of magic, just in time. Georgia was no better, but with the conditions and delays was understandable...we got through it, England, Spain and France.....who cares, they're good teams and we have already qualified......Georgia and Norway, again very poor but we didn't lose and we have qualified so who cares.

Delighted we qualified, of course, and love the main players in the squad along with Clarke, but don't for a minute believe that we are anything other than a small nation with deficiencies that is starting to run out of luck.

Have you actually just called our qualifying campaign, where we won our first five games and were one of the first nations to qualify shite?

[Bonksy+HisChristianParade]

30 minutes ago, BFTD said:

I've nothing against David Moyes, but I'm also not sure why anyone would think he's a big step up from Clarke.

Better than depressing options like Malky and Gemmill, but surely nobody would be particularly excited by his appointment.

Probably because he’s managed consistently at a much higher level? Just a guess.

[forameus]

1 hour ago, JS_FFC said:

I like what Clarke has done for us. You have to concede that he’s had access to a far more talented generation of players than any of his predecessors over the past two or three decades, but even still he’s generally got us beating the teams that we should beat and avoiding silly banana skin results, at least in competitive fixtures. He’s now gotten us through nearly 3 full qualifying groups and 2 nations league campaigns without once dropping a single point to a team ranked significantly lower than us and that’s a real improvement on every other Scotland manager this century. We shouldn’t take that for granted.

 

Having said that, I think we seem to be stuck right in that 17-24 bracket of European sides. The sort of teams you would expect to see qualifying for the Euros but going out in the groups, narrowly missing out on the World Cup, and being competitive in the second tier of the nations league but being relegated back down when we do go up to league A.

 

It might well be that our squad talent levels define that we should be playing at exactly that level.
 

It is unfair to suggest that Clarke has done a poor job but is absolutely fair to suggest he might have taken us as far as he can. It’s a thankless task getting us out of the pot 4 purgatory that we were stuck in for years. He’s done it and we should be very grateful for that. 
 

However, can he take us to the next level of being a top 16 team in UEFA consistently? History suggests that this team slips up in the really big occasions. Euro 2020, the World Cup playoffs, and now well on our way to crashing out of the current Euros as well.

 

I think you only consider moving on from Clarke if there’s another manager there that you back to take us to the next level. I’ll be livid if we move on just to bring in Derek McInnes or Malky Mackay or Scotland Gemmell, but with Davie Moyes being right there available and saying he’d like to do the job one day, I think he could be the man to elevate this team. 

For what it's worth, I think you're right about that 17-24 bracket, although I would quibble on the numbers.  I think you've got a top tier of nations who will likely always be top tier nations, even if they have wobbles every now and then.  England failed to get to 2008, Germany have had some horrendous tournaments (by their standards), Italy haven't been to a World Cup in 80 years or whatever it is, France have had shitemares etc etc.  But all of those can pretty easily right the ship and go back to where they're pretty much meant to be.

I'd also say there's probably a bottom tier, where there are nations that are probably never going to rise beyond being qualifying diddies, and their best moments will probably be taking an unexpected point off a bigger nation before being decimated in the return game.  Pretty small group that has gotten smaller in the past couple of decades.

Then you've got...well, everyone else.  A big massive huddle of nations that could achieve anything along a scale of World Cup qualification at the top, and absolute depressing shame at the bottom.  We're in there, along with every other nation that isn't in the top or bottom tiers.

But the bit I really disagree on...is it really possible for us to move out of that tier?  There's obviously levels, but I think expecting us to become this side that emulates the sort of nation that qualifies for every World Cup without too much bother and potentially reaches latter stages of tournaments as a rule is probably just setting up for disappointment.  Now that the World Cup is changing, I would really expect us to get to 2026, so opinions may change once that shakes out, but international football is cyclical, and with the potential purple patch we've been in, we could well be in for a Wales style slide back down the pecking order.

And all that probably sounds incredibly dour and pessimistic.  It probably is.  I've just never seen the point in putting unrealistic expectations on when it's just inviting disappointment.  Hope?  Absolutely. Expectations?  Nah.

[ahemps]

A quick 

19 minutes ago, forameus said:

For what it's worth, I think you're right about that 17-24 bracket, although I would quibble on the numbers.  I think you've got a top tier of nations who will likely always be top tier nations, even if they have wobbles every now and then.  England failed to get to 2008, Germany have had some horrendous tournaments (by their standards), Italy haven't been to a World Cup in 80 years or whatever it is, France have had shitemares etc etc.  But all of those can pretty easily right the ship and go back to where they're pretty much meant to be.

I'd also say there's probably a bottom tier, where there are nations that are probably never going to rise beyond being qualifying diddies, and their best moments will probably be taking an unexpected point off a bigger nation before being decimated in the return game.  Pretty small group that has gotten smaller in the past couple of decades.

Then you've got...well, everyone else.  A big massive huddle of nations that could achieve anything along a scale of World Cup qualification at the top, and absolute depressing shame at the bottom.  We're in there, along with every other nation that isn't in the top or bottom tiers.

But the bit I really disagree on...is it really possible for us to move out of that tier?  There's obviously levels, but I think expecting us to become this side that emulates the sort of nation that qualifies for every World Cup without too much bother and potentially reaches latter stages of tournaments as a rule is probably just setting up for disappointment.  Now that the World Cup is changing, I would really expect us to get to 2026, so opinions may change once that shakes out, but international football is cyclical, and with the potential purple patch we've been in, we could well be in for a Wales style slide back down the pecking order.

And all that probably sounds incredibly dour and pessimistic.  It probably is.  I've just never seen the point in putting unrealistic expectations on when it's just inviting disappointment.  Hope?  Absolutely. Expectations?  Nah.

A quick search and comparison shows Scotland to be the 23rd highest population in Europe. When looking at the table it almost ties up with your comment of who the top ranked nations are. Germany, France, Italy, England are all near the top. There are outliers of course but we are pretty much on par with where we should be. Denmark and Croatia are the countries we would love to be matching but we outperform a few countries with higher or similar populations.

[Maltese falcon]

14 minutes ago, Bonksy+HisChristianParade said:

Probably because he’s managed consistently at a much higher level? Just a guess.

Think Moyes has been a very successful and underrated manager, we would be lucky to have him.
I do wonder if fans are realistic  aout what difference he would make.  Clarke is also very good manager who uses negative/solid tactics to get the best out of what he has available.   
Moyes isn't really noted for playing progressive football. - wonder how long it would be before fans complain about him playing negartive football.

Ultimately there are limited options on how to play with the players there are.  We have some good players but not great, and our players are not the creative, progressive ones that are going to create/score bags of goals. - hence the system of trying to have a solid base and not concede (which clearly isn't working over last 10 games)

A.Robertson  - Very good Left back - but hes is a left back so limited influence.   compare that to a clubmate from smaller (football) nation - Szoboszlai

J,McGinn -  A very solid player - popular with Aston Villa fans but played in a more defensive role to allow more talented/creative players to go forward

K.Tierney - A talented player -(but Leftback again) who is dicarded by his club and another more creative left back from small country was prefered

S,Mctominary - A good solid player  - in a poor Man Utd team - but not deemed good enough my most of club fans who want him out. - he will not play if they                                           manage to buy who they want compare to Fernandes, Mainoo

B.Gilmour - obviously talented player but not needed at Chelsea, and at Brighton he is not seen as important or good as Gross on Encisco, Mitoma etc

C.Mcgregor - Very solid Midfielder but is not going to drag team to more creative winning positions.

 

Then there is a significant drom in talent.

My point being any manager needs to get a formation to use limited talent he has, not sure Moyes would be a major upgrade on that.  Would help though if Clarke realised we have very chances at tournaments and be a little more positive

 

 

 

[No_Problemo]

33 minutes ago, Maltese falcon said:

Think Moyes has been a very successful and underrated manager, we would be lucky to have him.
I do wonder if fans are realistic  aout what difference he would make.  Clarke is also very good manager who uses negative/solid tactics to get the best out of what he has available.   
Moyes isn't really noted for playing progressive football. - wonder how long it would be before fans complain about him playing negartive football.

Ultimately there are limited options on how to play with the players there are.  We have some good players but not great, and our players are not the creative, progressive ones that are going to create/score bags of goals. - hence the system of trying to have a solid base and not concede (which clearly isn't working over last 10 games)

A.Robertson  - Very good Left back - but hes is a left back so limited influence.   compare that to a clubmate from smaller (football) nation - Szoboszlai

J,McGinn -  A very solid player - popular with Aston Villa fans but played in a more defensive role to allow more talented/creative players to go forward

K.Tierney - A talented player -(but Leftback again) who is dicarded by his club and another more creative left back from small country was prefered

S,Mctominary - A good solid player  - in a poor Man Utd team - but not deemed good enough my most of club fans who want him out. - he will not play if they                                           manage to buy who they want compare to Fernandes, Mainoo

B.Gilmour - obviously talented player but not needed at Chelsea, and at Brighton he is not seen as important or good as Gross on Encisco, Mitoma etc

 

C.Mcgregor - Very solid Midfielder but is not going to drag team to more creative winning positions.

 

Then there is a significant drom in talent.

My point being any manager needs to get a formation to use limited talent he has, not sure Moyes would be a major upgrade on that.  Would help though if Clarke realised we have very chances at tournaments and be a little more positive

 

 

 

McGinn generally doesn’t play in a defensive role for Aston Villa.

Edited June 17 by No_Problemo

[Maltese falcon]

13 minutes ago, No_Problemo said:

McGinn generally doesn’t play in a defensive role for Aston Villa.

Yes you are correct,

[Mr Heliums]

1 hour ago, ahemps said:

We are pretty much on par with where we should be. Denmark and Croatia are the countries we would love to be matching but we outperform a few countries with higher or similar populations.

Football is Scotland's predominant national sport, whether participating or spectating. In (eg) Switzerland I get the sense of a broader sporting interest – I think their ice hockey league games get average attendances approaching 10k and loads participate in winter sports, handball etc. Imagine it would be similar in other continental countries.

TL:DR: All other things being equal, we should be outperforming similarly sized countries because we're obsessed with one sport.

Edited June 17 by Mr Heliums

[ArabFC]

2 hours ago, BFTD said:

I've nothing against David Moyes, but I'm also not sure why anyone would think he's a big step up from Clarke.

Better than depressing options like Malky and Gemmill, but surely nobody would be particularly excited by his appointment.

Indeed.

There's a reason why all the West Ham fans hated him, despite them being (relativly) successful.

[ilostmyself]

Think Clarke should get the world cup qualification campaign no matter what. I think after which we'll have to start looking at the next crop of players coming through and building a team around Hickey, Ferguson, Gilmour , Doak etc which is probably a good time to change manager.

 

[JS_FFC]

1 hour ago, forameus said:

For what it's worth, I think you're right about that 17-24 bracket, although I would quibble on the numbers.  I think you've got a top tier of nations who will likely always be top tier nations, even if they have wobbles every now and then.  England failed to get to 2008, Germany have had some horrendous tournaments (by their standards), Italy haven't been to a World Cup in 80 years or whatever it is, France have had shitemares etc etc.  But all of those can pretty easily right the ship and go back to where they're pretty much meant to be.

I'd also say there's probably a bottom tier, where there are nations that are probably never going to rise beyond being qualifying diddies, and their best moments will probably be taking an unexpected point off a bigger nation before being decimated in the return game.  Pretty small group that has gotten smaller in the past couple of decades.

Then you've got...well, everyone else.  A big massive huddle of nations that could achieve anything along a scale of World Cup qualification at the top, and absolute depressing shame at the bottom.  We're in there, along with every other nation that isn't in the top or bottom tiers.

But the bit I really disagree on...is it really possible for us to move out of that tier?  There's obviously levels, but I think expecting us to become this side that emulates the sort of nation that qualifies for every World Cup without too much bother and potentially reaches latter stages of tournaments as a rule is probably just setting up for disappointment.  Now that the World Cup is changing, I would really expect us to get to 2026, so opinions may change once that shakes out, but international football is cyclical, and with the potential purple patch we've been in, we could well be in for a Wales style slide back down the pecking order.

And all that probably sounds incredibly dour and pessimistic.  It probably is.  I've just never seen the point in putting unrealistic expectations on when it's just inviting disappointment.  Hope?  Absolutely. Expectations?  Nah.

So I’d say the top tier of nations that consistently qualify for every tournament and who expect to be making deep runs on a very regular basis are France, Germany, Spain, England, Portugal, Italy and the Netherlands.

 

You can generously add Croatia and Belgium to that list given that they’ve been there or there abouts for 20 and 10 years respectively. There’s a fairly clear top 9 IMO.

 

That still leaves 7 spots at each World Cup/knockout stage of the euros, i.e., the two main measures of who the top 16 are.

 

Our goal should be to be a top 16 UEFA team more often than not.

 

Regular players in that 10-16 range include: Poland, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Ukraine, Denmark, Russia (if and when they get reinstated) and Sweden, although the latter is in a bit of a fallow period at the moment.

 

And then the third tier of teams is the more occasional qualifiers, or teams who make the euros but then get papped out early: Turkey, Austria (trending upwards), Serbia, Hungary, Scotland, Romania, Norway, Wales (trending down), Slovakia, Ireland, Slovenia, Albania and Finland.

 

Those tier 3 teams have a decent shot at making the euros (9/12 of them are now) but would largely be expected to crash out early doors and wouldn’t be expected to qualify for world cups. 
 

 

Then you’ve got two tiers of minnows. The “no mugs” trickier tier of minnows like Georgia and North Macedonia who can take points off anyone and are good contenders to make the euros from league C playoffs, and then you’ve got your garbage minnows that everyone should be using to pad their goal difference like Malta and San Marino.

At the moment we are in the 3rd tier out of 5 but we should be aiming for tier 2 (tier 1 is rightly called out as not being realistic for us). To do that we need to be making it into world cups and qualification for the euros should be the minimum expectation with making the last 16 as the true goal.