Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion

[immcinto]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

That is arrogant, entitled and emotional. You are sore because we didn't win a game against a team around our level. Taking the view we 'should' be beating teams on par with us is arrogant. It's worse than England fans as they don't think they 'should' be beating France or Spain. Scotland aren't a better team than Hungary or the Czech Republic.

We should be able to at least give them a game  though? In at least one of these games? Maybe even for a half? Or even a sustained 15 minute period? Or is that just an absurdly unrealistic expectation?

[2426255]

1 hour ago, immcinto said:

We should be able to at least give them a game  though? In at least one of these games? Maybe even for a half? Or even a sustained 15 minute period? Or is that just an absurdly unrealistic expectation?

No, it's not an absurdly unrealistic expectation.

If you look both games over you'll see we gave them both a game. Neither were Scotland's best performance. We could have played better, but the Hungary and the Czech games were both competitive. We played well in aspects of both games and poorly in others. The outcome determines the narrative. We lost, so it was all disgraceful, shameful and so on. I don't share that point of view.

The Germany game was not competitive if you're looking for the contrast. 

Edited July 21 by 2426255

[immcinto]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

The Germany game was not competitive if you're looking for the contrast. 

Careful now! Your getting a bit down on the team there. 

[2426255]

11 minutes ago, immcinto said:

Careful now! Your getting a bit down on the team there. 

Despite what everyone seems to think I am being objective. In other words: It's not me, it's you lot . That aside I think it's clear that my overall observations are at least reasonable and understandable points and in my opinion are true.

We played more a far more defensive game against the Swiss, but that game gets hardly any of the negative attention - why is that? Probably because there was less riding on it and the outcome was okay. The performance in that game was okay and competitive, but not brilliant and not terrible.

The majority of fan content across the board is outcome-led and emotional, you can see the seethe steaming off people in the wake of a game that hasn't gone our way. It's always been that way.

[Butters Scotch]

1 minute ago, 2426255 said:

Despite what everyone seems to think I am being objective. In other words: It's not me, it's you lot . That aside I think it's clear that my overall observations are at least reasonable and understandable points and in my opinion are true.

We played more a far more defensive game against the Swiss, but that game gets hardly any of the negative attention - why is that? Probably because there was less riding on it and the outcome was okay. The performance in that game was okay and competitive, but not brilliant and not terrible.

The majority of fan content across the board is outcome-led and emotional, you can see the seethe steaming off people in the wake of a game that hasn't gone our way. It's always been that way.

[Old Bing]

2 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Despite what everyone seems to think I am being objective. In other words: It's not me, it's you lot . That aside I think it's clear that my overall observations are at least reasonable and understandable points and in my opinion are true.

We played more a far more defensive game against the Swiss, but that game gets hardly any of the negative attention - why is that? Probably because there was less riding on it and the outcome was okay. The performance in that game was okay and competitive, but not brilliant and not terrible.

The majority of fan content across the board is outcome-led and emotional, you can see the seethe steaming off people in the wake of a game that hasn't gone our way. It's always been that way.

I'm afraid it's the option you haven't considered. You just don't have a clue what your watching or talking about.

[Dan Electro]

@2426255 It is widely accepted that the world's first ever independent/indie EP was Spiral Scratch by the Buzzcocks. Here's a tune from it.....

Having set an internal policy of not red dotting, I have to honestly state that I've never read such relentless gibbering pish in my entire life.

Senior players celebrating a goal kick like they had actually won the tournament. 

Two goals; one an own goal, and, one, a deflection.

Not making subs at half time, in a 'must win' game. 

However, it appears to be us that don't 'get it:'

Good grief.....

 

[2426255]

1 hour ago, Dan Electro said:

@2426255 It is widely accepted that the world's first ever independent/indie EP was Spiral Scratch by the Buzzcocks. Here's a tune from it.....

 

Having set an internal policy of not red dotting, I have to honestly state that I've never read such relentless gibbering pish in my entire life.

Senior players celebrating a goal kick like they had actually won the tournament. 

Two goals; one an own goal, and, one, a deflection.

Not making subs at half time, in a 'must win' game. 

However, it appears to be us that don't 'get it:'

Good grief.....

 

The outcome shapes the narrative.

Think of all the weird and wonderful grievances you'd have had if we hadn't beaten Moldova, Faroe Islands, Israel, Norway or Republic of Ireland.

Have we ever lost a 'must win' game and fans haven't been raging? With fans its very black & white. Everyone gets that.

Edited July 21 by 2426255

[Butters Scotch]

6 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

The outcome shapes the narrative.

Think of all the weird and wonderful grievances you'd have had if we hadn't beaten Moldova, Faroe Islands, Israel, Norway or Republic of Ireland.

Have we ever lost a 'must win' game and fans haven't been raging? With fans its very black & white. Everyone gets that.

[Gordon EF]

The outcome is a massive part of what determines the narrative. Of course it is. Would it not be absolutely mental if it wasn't?

We've heard countless times from you that Clarke's remit was to qualify for the Euros. And because he did, this is a success. What do you think that is if not the outcome determining the narrative?

But of course it's not the whole picture. England got to a final whilst being fairly heavily criticised for their performances. So clearly outcome isn't everything determining the narrative there.

There were plenty of concerns raised during qualification that the performance in Oslo was poor, despite the result. So clearly it wasn't outcome 100% determining the narrative.

You have people being critical Clarke now who were much more supportive of him after exiting the previous Euros with one point and being beaten by Ukraine in the WC play off. So obviously it's not just some knee-jerk reaction to a disappointing result.

All the chat about how you're the one objective or intelligent enough to understand all of this is absurd and only goes to show what a deep Dunning-Kruger hole you've dug for yourself.

[Butters Scotch]

6 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

The outcome is a massive part of what determines the narrative. Of course it is. Would it not be absolutely mental if it wasn't?

We've heard countless times from you that Clarke's remit was to qualify for the Euros. And because he did, this is a success. What do you think that is if not the outcome determining the narrative?

But of course it's not the whole picture. England got to a final whilst being fairly heavily criticised for their performances. So clearly outcome isn't everything determining the narrative there.

There were plenty of concerns raised during qualification that the performance in Oslo was poor, despite the result. So clearly it wasn't outcome 100% determining the narrative.

You have people being critical Clarke now who were much more supportive of him after exiting the previous Euros with one point and being beaten by Ukraine in the WC play off. So obviously it's not just some knee-jerk reaction to a disappointing result.

All the chat about how you're the one objective or intelligent enough to understand all of this is absurd and only goes to show what a deep Dunning-Kruger hole you've dug for yourself.

If I had a quid everytime I hear Numbers banging on about the outcome shaping the narrative I would be a millionaire. It's just the same conversation repeatedly so best to not even engage in a "debate" with him.

The fact remains we have failed as a team at tournament football and we have been performly poorly for the past year now and a massive part of this is down to Clarke. He has not integrated enough new players into the first 11, sticking with formations that we all know don't work (3 CB's exc KT), hasn't found a system where we are playing on the front foot creating attacking opportunities and the list goes on.

Rob Page at Wales did fairly well with them, got them to knockouts at tournament football but the Welsh FA weren't scared to punt him as they knew he took them as far as he could. It's a similar situation to where Clarke is so why are we persisting, we need a fresh perspective, someone with different coaching ideas to take this team forward.

[Monkey Tennis]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

The outcome shapes the narrative.

Why do you keep on saying this as if it's a startling insight that escapes the rest of us?

It isn't, and it doesn't.  We all recognise the truth of it.

 

The fact is, however, that in reflecting on Scotland's latest tournament performance, the outcome was entirely in sync with how we played.  It means that the criticism in evidence is not knee jerk or particularly disproportionate.  

It probably is true that if the outcome had been different, the response from many would have been too.  However, we'd have needed to fluke a better outcome, such was the nature of our performance. That can of course happen (Oslo last year) but it is unlikely, and it's not really therefore worth giving the possibility of it, the huge prominence that you seem determined to.

[Old Bing]

6 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Why do you keep on saying this as if it's a startling insight that escapes the rest of us?

It isn't, and it doesn't.  We all recognise the truth of it.

 

The fact is, however, that in reflecting on Scotland's latest tournament performance, the outcome was entirely in sync with how we played.  It means that the criticism in evidence is not knee jerk or particularly disproportionate.  

It probably is true that if the outcome had been different, the response from many would have been too.  However, we'd have needed to fluke a better outcome, such was the nature of our performance. That can of course happen (Oslo last year) but it is unlikely, and it's not really therefore worth giving the possibility of it, the huge prominence that you seem determined to.

I agree with all that, but for me I'd rather numbers keeps posting.

He's doing a better job of convincing people that steve needs to go than everyone else combined.

[immcinto]

Can anyone remember how long to took Clarke to talk to the media after we were knocked out of Euro 2020 (not including post-match press conf)? 

[2426255]

6 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

The fact is, however, that in reflecting on Scotland's latest tournament performance, the outcome was entirely in sync with how we played. However, we'd have needed to fluke a better outcome, such was the nature of our performance. 

I don't agree with you here. The performance against Hungary was passable. It was a coin flip game that we lost. I don't think it would have required a fluke for us to win. 

7 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

The outcome is a massive part of what determines the narrative. Of course it is. Would it not be absolutely mental if it wasn't?

It would be preferable if the narrative was based on performance, intention and understanding rather than purely outcome, but I get that's the world we live in (division of labor). Fans can't be expected to understand the finer details of football and so can only really judge on outcomes. I don't like that, but prefer it to people playing manager or Captain hindsight.

[ekok]

29 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

I don't agree with you here. The performance against Hungary was passable. It was a coin flip game that we lost. I don't think it would have required a fluke for us to win. 

It would be preferable if the narrative was based on performance, intention and understanding rather than purely outcome, but I get that's the world we live in (division of labor). Fans can't be expected to understand the finer details of football and so can only really judge on outcomes. I don't like that, but prefer it to people playing manager or Captain hindsight.

Sorry you haven't got an Fn clue,  surprised people engage with you. Probably intelligent,  definitely not the guru you put yourself up to be. Are you SC ?

[Gordon EF]

36 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

 

It would be preferable if the narrative was based on performance, intention and understanding rather than purely outcome, but I get that's the world we live in (division of labor). Fans can't be expected to understand the finer details of football and so can only really judge on outcomes. I don't like that, but prefer it to people playing manager or Captain hindsight.

But it's not based purely on outcome, which is what I just explained to you.

[ekok]

7 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

But it's not based purely on outcome, which is what I just explained to you.

No you don't get to play that card. In sport , and most things in life , input defines outcome.  In 60 plus years of watching our National Team never ever been so embarrassed,  disappointed and gutted. If you don't understand that explanation, then you must be SC

[Gordon EF]

8 minutes ago, ekok said:

No you don't get to play that card. In sport , and most things in life , input defines outcome.  In 60 plus years of watching our National Team never ever been so embarrassed,  disappointed and gutted. If you don't understand that explanation, then you must be SC

What on Earth are you talking about?

[ekok]

Seriously you don't understand what I am talking about.  The Hungary game in Stugart was the absolute pathetic low point for our National Team in history.  If you don’t get that, just check out.