Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion

[Jives Miguel]

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Nope, but I am challenging the notion that there's no such thing as "shades of failure".

I'm sorry that you find all this so terribly confusing.

Why bring it up then? Do you think there are shades of "shades of failure"? Is your made up Euros ranking a darker or lighter shade than a 36 game season?

[Monkey Tennis]

11 minutes ago, Jives Miguel said:

Why bring it up then? Do you think there are shades of "shades of failure"? Is your made up Euros ranking a darker or lighter shade than a 36 game season?

It seems to be more of a dimness thing.

[Jives Miguel]

34 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

It seems to be more of a dimness thing.

Glad you can see how ridiculously thick your logic is when its applied to its extremes. 

[Old Bing]

21 minutes ago, Jives Miguel said:

Glad you can see how ridiculously thick your logic is when its applied to its extremes. 

So you think we played well at the euros? What do you think was good about our performances?

Is there any team at the euros you think played badly or were all the teams very good in your opinion?

[Skyline Drifter]

On 17/08/2024 at 12:49, Monkey Tennis said:

Good God SD, where to start with this drivel: style or content?

Let's go with the former.  To see you reduced to using witless P&B staples like "needs fired into the sea" is palpably shocking.  I feel grubby reading it.  It's as if I've just caught Stephen Dobbie shoplifting or something.

If we move onto the sentiment itself, it's almost as bad.  Of course there are shades of failure.  If we finish second on goal difference under Murphy this season, then lose the play-off final on penalties, are you suggesting that it'll represent a similar level of failure to that we've just endured with Bartley?

Of course the nature, as well as the fact, of our elimination plays into people's views regarding Clarke continuing in the role.

Come on Man - Standards.    We've a big game this afternoon and you're needing to pull yourself together.

Seriously I've no idea what you're doing here. This is just nonsense. The League 1 table is a table. It has placings. If we finish 2nd it can reasonably be compared to finishing 7th. These shenanigans about "24th" are just made up stats pretending there was a single big table at the Euros. We were literally 10 seconds from placing 18th in your daft imaginary rankings. Had we done so, would that have been more acceptable? Worse, had we done so deliberately settling for the draw would that have been fine? Of course it wouldn't. He tried to win, the game got stretched, we probably should have had a penalty, we got picked off on a break and finish in this notional "24th". It's mental that it's now being used as evidence of an unacceptable return.

"Standards"? Your standards of analysis have slipped massively here.

Edited August 26 by Skyline Drifter

[Monkey Tennis]

2 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Seriously I've no idea what you're doing here. This is just nonsense. The League 1 table is a table. It has placings. If we finish 2nd it can reasonably be compared to finishing 7th. These shenanigans about "24th" are just made up stats pretending there was a single big table at the Euros. We were literally 10 seconds from placing 18th in your daft imaginary rankings. Had we done so, would that have been more acceptable? Worse, had we done so deliberately settling for the draw would that have been fine? Of course it wouldn't. He tried to win, the game got stretched, we probably should have had a penalty, we got picked off on a break and finish in this notional "24th". It's mental that it's now being used as evidence of an unacceptable return.

"Standards"? You're standards of analysis have slipped massively here.

But I'm not really making anything of the ranked 24th thing.  I acknowledge that it's not the strongest measure.

However, having watched us and the other teams at the tournament, it's a perfectly reasonable conclusion that we were among the very poorest performers, particularly in an attacking sense.

You need to stop prattling on about this 24th place ranking in arguing with me, because it's not especially linked to what I'm saying.

[Skyline Drifter]

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

But I'm not really making anything of the ranked 24th thing.  I acknowledge that it's not the strongest measure.

However, having watched us and the other teams at the tournament, it's a perfectly reasonable conclusion that we were among the very poorest performers, particularly in an attacking sense.

You need to stop prattling on about this 24th place ranking in arguing with me, because it's not especially linked to what I'm saying.

And yet it's what you decided to take issue with, quoting me responding to jimBaxter's daft analysis of it.

If you want to say Clarke's not the man for the job now because of the Euros performances despite the issues he had to deal with that's fine. You're entitled to think that. I don't remotely agree. My post initially was entirely about jimbaxter deciding some arbitrary assessment of 24th actually mattered.

[Old Bing]

3 hours ago, Jives Miguel said:

Glad you can see how ridiculously thick your logic is when its applied to its extremes. 

Exactly as I thought, you scuttle off and stick to the dots.

12 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

And yet it's what you decided to take issue with, quoting me responding to jimBaxter's daft analysis of it.

If you want to say Clarke's not the man for the job now because of the Euros performances despite the issues he had to deal with that's fine. You're entitled to think that. I don't remotely agree. My post initially was entirely about jimbaxter deciding some arbitrary assessment of 24th actually mattered.

Again "the issues he had to deal with", were were the only team at full strength? Don't be ridiculous

So you watched the euros and thought scotland did well? Was there any teams there you thought didn't do well?

Can any clarke supporter answer that? 3 so far have run for cover

Edited August 17 by Old Bing

[Monkey Tennis]

11 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

And yet it's what you decided to take issue with, quoting me responding to jimBaxter's daft analysis of it.

If you want to say Clarke's not the man for the job now because of the Euros performances despite the issues he had to deal with that's fine. You're entitled to think that. I don't remotely agree. My post initially was entirely about jimbaxter deciding some arbitrary assessment of 24th actually mattered.

Yet, the bit you took up with me concerned the idea that there are different degrees to which a side can come up short.  

I think that's not a terribly contentious idea myself, but you disagreed.

[eez-eh]

It’s possible to want Clarke to stay on and to think the “24th” thing is a load of horseshit, yet also admit that we were absolutely stinking at the Euros. Because we were. It’s baffling that anyone who watched our games could think otherwise.

[Old Bing]

19 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

It’s possible to want Clarke to stay on and to think the “24th” thing is a load of horseshit, yet also admit that we were absolutely stinking at the Euros. Because we were. It’s baffling that anyone who watched our games could think otherwise.

I think some people, admittedly very few watched that and thought we played well or ok. I know it's very hard to imagine.

But ok if you want clarke to stay on then can you explain why? Like obviously you don't have to but I'd like to understand what people are basing it on.

What do you think he's going to do differently or how is he going to Improve as a manager?

Cos personally I just don't see it, I think at this point he's a completely busted flush. And for me his lack of any kind of communication shows he's not interested in engaging with any criticism. So if he won't acknowledge it or admit things went wrong, how will he learn from it.

[2426255]

14 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Which is presumably why nobody did.

https://forum.pieandbovril.com/topic/291462-euro-2024-expectations/page/16/#comment-16567070

1 in 4 from 130 people said their expectations ahead of the tournament were to qualify from the group. 

[Monkey Tennis]

16 hours ago, 2426255 said:

https://forum.pieandbovril.com/topic/291462-euro-2024-expectations/page/16/#comment-16567070

1 in 4 from 130 people said their expectations ahead of the tournament were to qualify from the group. 

I'm not seeing the phrase "minimum expectations" in there - you know, the phrase I actually challenged.

1 in 4 is hardly a ringing endorsement of your feeble case anyway.

Edited August 18 by Monkey Tennis

[2426255]

1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I'm not seeing the phrase "minimum expectations" in there - you know, the phrase I actually challenged.

It's in the opening post of the thread linked. Not the same phrase, but words to the same effect with the same intended meaning.

On 25/04/2024 at 15:16, 2426255 said:

So what are you expecting from Scotland at Euro-2024 and does it match what you think our aim should be?

The point I'm making is a number of fans had set the floor = ceiling. That's unrealistic.

Edited August 18 by 2426255

[Old Bing]

Oh my God, just had to run to the toilet there.

I caught a whiff of us at the euros

[Monkey Tennis]

4 hours ago, 2426255 said:

It's in the opening post of the thread linked. Not the same phrase, but words to the same effect with the same intended meaning.

Well that's not true.

As you know, you started the thread yourself and here's all of what you said in the opening post:

"It’s around the midway point from the disappointment of the March camp to the June camp. The excitement will ramp up as the media spotlight turns towards the tournament so probably the best time to do this type of post before the frenzy hits. So what are you expecting from Scotland at Euro-2024 and does it match what you think our aim should be?

I don’t have any expectations for the tournament. I think the aim should be to qualify from our group, but if we fall short it wouldn't necessarily be failure. Steve Clarke suggested for the most part that the aim is just to be competitive and see where it takes us although has also touched on trying to get out of the group. Clarke did an interview with Tom English that was released today which touches on the aims for the tournament amongst other things.

Most of the comments made by Steve Clarke on the subject since we qualified back in October: "

 

As you can see, there are mentions of "expectations" and of " aims".  There's nothing, however, on "minimum expectations" or anything that can be construed as such at all.

Don't be dishonest.  It doesn't help you.

[VictorOnopko]

4 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Well that's not true.

As you know, you started the thread yourself and here's all of what you said in the opening post:

"It’s around the midway point from the disappointment of the March camp to the June camp. The excitement will ramp up as the media spotlight turns towards the tournament so probably the best time to do this type of post before the frenzy hits. So what are you expecting from Scotland at Euro-2024 and does it match what you think our aim should be?

I don’t have any expectations for the tournament. I think the aim should be to qualify from our group, but if we fall short it wouldn't necessarily be failure. Steve Clarke suggested for the most part that the aim is just to be competitive and see where it takes us although has also touched on trying to get out of the group. Clarke did an interview with Tom English that was released today which touches on the aims for the tournament amongst other things.

Most of the comments made by Steve Clarke on the subject since we qualified back in October: "

 

As you can see, there are mentions of "expectations" and of " aims".  There's nothing, however, on "minimum expectations" or anything that can be construed as such at all.

Don't be dishonest.  It doesn't help you.

Great post. The problem, however, is that no matter how many times numbers is skewered and made to look very silly indeed, he will just keep on posting endless variations of the same shite in his never-ending quest to defend Steve Clarke and the humiliatingly awful performances Scotland served up at Euro 24.  It could be "outcomes", or "minimum expectations", or his "analysis which I'm still working on", but the end result will be the same - the "fans" (spit) don't know how lucky they are and everything was, and is, fine.

[Old Bing]

25 minutes ago, VictorOnopko said:

Great post. The problem, however, is that no matter how many times numbers is skewered and made to look very silly indeed, he will just keep on posting endless variations of the same shite in his never-ending quest to defend Steve Clarke and the humiliatingly awful performances Scotland served up at Euro 24.  It could be "outcomes", or "minimum expectations", or his "analysis which I'm still working on", but the end result will be the same - the "fans" (spit) don't know how lucky they are and everything was, and is, fine.

Indeed, it's also noticeable that everyone has ran from my question "did any team at the euros perform badly".

Understandable as they would have to answer and name teams that did poorly. All of which would be better than us.

Unless some folk think it's like a primary 1 sports day and everyone gets a pat on the head and told they did well

[Monkey Tennis]

45 minutes ago, VictorOnopko said:

The problem, however, is that no matter how many times numbers is skewered and made to look very silly indeed, he will just keep on posting endless variations of the same shite 

Yes, that's true.

Offsidegate certainly taught us that.

[2426255]

17 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

As you can see, there are mentions of "expectations" and of " aims".  There's nothing, however, on "minimum expectations" or anything that can be construed as such at all.

Okay, no problem. I'm happy to agree to disagree with your interpretation and move on. 

13 hours ago, VictorOnopko said:

 It could be "outcomes", or "minimum expectations", or his "analysis which I'm still working on".

I'm glad you mentioned that. It takes time to analyse, compare to different games and evidence. I apologise for the delay, but I'll describe the ideas as they relate to the game against Hungary without the evidence or detail:

Andy Robertson

• Scotland's primary method of attack is via the wide areas.  Robertson is crucial to Scotland's wide attacks.  Clarke hasn't historically used Robertson in a left-back role because he is more valuable to us in attacking zones. 

• Robertson rotates into the front-3. 
• Robertson made zero crosses from open play against Hungary. 

Kieran Tierney

• The number of times Tierney dovetails or rotates with Robertson varies with the strength of the opposition.  Against Germany and Switzerland there was minimal rotation between the two players. 
• Playing McKenna allowed us to continue to play Robertson higher while replacing the defensive aspect of Tierney's game.    

Scott McTominay

• Scott McTominay played in the Christie/Armstrong role. A role he hasn't played for Scotland before Euro-2024.

I have evidenced these Scotland sided points from the game and compared with the games across 2024: Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Gibraltar, Finland, Germany and Switzerland.

I haven't looked at the Hungary side of things, how Clarke addressed the issues with the LHS in the second half and I haven't established the why, but those are the concepts.

Edited August 19 by 2426255