Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion

[Butters Scotch]

9 hours ago, Chripper said:

Nice. Let's play 6 a side.

In the real world: Gunn, McCrorie, Clark, Ralston, McCrorie, Hanley, Porteous, Souttar, Taylor, Barron, McGinn, McLean, Dykes, Adams, Conway.

The gods themselves do tremble.

If people are legit blaming Steve Clarke for Scotland failing to progress past the first stage of the European Championship then they should remember that 5 times European Cup winning Carlo Ancelotti managed a 10th and a 12th EPL finish with Everton.

If people think if we sack Clarke, appoint Thomas Tuchel, and suddenly Scotland can go toe to toe with teams in major tournaments... they're clearly in lala land.

A certain Sir Alex Ferguson was in charge in the 86 World Cup.

The greatest manager in the history of football (with a vastly greater first XI) managed a draw and 2 defeats.

If P&B was around back then, screwballs would be calling him every name under the sun and calling him to be sacked.

Sound familiar?

[2426255]

10 minutes ago, Butters Scotch said:

I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about here when you say he doesn't play Robertson LB.

Would Robertson have less opportunity to provide attacking threat if he was playing as a left-back in a back-4? For Liverpool it's not as important given the quality of their players in every position, but ideally for Scotland perhaps you want Robertson playing in areas close to the zones where we can put his attacking strengths to good use. We never got him into those areas enough against Hungary for whatever reason so that's a different issue, but the idea that you don't really want him in deeper positions is understandable.

It doesn't matter who the opposition are Clarke hasn't demonstrated any preference for playing Robertson as a left-back in a back-4. He'll play Taylor there or Tierney there, but not Robertson. Why is that?

Edited August 22 by 2426255

[Butters Scotch]

2 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

Would Robertson have less opportunity to provide attacking threat if he was playing as a left-back in a back-4? For Liverpool it's not as important given the quality of their players in every position, but ideally for Scotland perhaps you want Robertson playing in areas close to the zones where we can put his attacking strengths to good use. We never got him into those areas enough against Hungary for whatever reason so that's a different issue, but the idea that you don't really want him in deeper positions is understandable.

It doesn't matter who the opposition are Clarke hasn't demonstrated any preference for playing Robertson as a left-back in a back-4. He'll play Taylor there or Tierney there, but not Robertson. Why is that?

is this first comment directly from Clarke or something?

I can't understand why there needs to be any debate over this, for Dundee United he was a rampaging LB in a back four, pretty sure it was the same at Hull and at Liverpool he was playing in a back four for majority of his time including the first game of this season. For Scotland, you often find him in a LB position against the better teams when we play 5 at the back. He has played countless times in a four at the back with Scotland. More recently we play with wing backs where he is positioned between a LB and LWB switching with Tierney. For all intents and purposes, he is an attacking LB that loves to get forward.

 

[Old Bing]

10 hours ago, Chripper said:

Nice. Let's play 6 a side.

In the real world: Gunn, McCrorie, Clark, Ralston, McCrorie, Hanley, Porteous, Souttar, Taylor, Barron, McGinn, McLean, Dykes, Adams, Conway.

The gods themselves do tremble.

If people are legit blaming Steve Clarke for Scotland failing to progress past the first stage of the European Championship then they should remember that 5 times European Cup winning Carlo Ancelotti managed a 10th and a 12th EPL finish with Everton.

If people think if we sack Clarke, appoint Thomas Tuchel, and suddenly Scotland can go toe to toe with teams in major tournaments... they're clearly in lala land.

A certain Sir Alex Ferguson was in charge in the 86 World Cup.

The greatest manager in the history of football (with a vastly greater first XI) managed a draw and 2 defeats.

If P&B was around back then, screwballs would be calling him every name under the sun and calling him to be sacked.

Sound familiar?

Ok can you now go thru the players for Switzerland and Hungary and prove how far ahead of us they are?? I doubt it.

And regarding ferguson in 86, if any of the players in any of the teams were the same it would be a good comparison. As it is it's nonsense.

[immcinto]

8 minutes ago, Old Bing said:

Ok can you now go thru the players for Switzerland and Hungary and prove how far ahead of us they are?? I doubt it.

And regarding ferguson in 86, if any of the players in any of the teams were the same it would be a good comparison. As it is it's nonsense.

Well - I provided a list of 8 players and asked him to pick the SPFL/Champ level players out of the list and he zinged back with a "6 a side" quote, so I don't think detail is is strong point. At least it is going in the right direction. He only had 4 players originally, now he is accepting up to 6. Still waiting for him to tell us which two of the eight don't make the grade.

[2426255]

On 22/08/2024 at 11:15, Butters Scotch said:

For Scotland, you often find him in a LB position against the better teams when we play 5 at the back. He has played countless times in a four at the back with Scotland. More recently we play with wing backs where he is positioned between a LB and LWB switching with Tierney. For all intents and purposes, he is an attacking LB that loves to get forward.

The more Scotland can get Robertson near the attacking zones the more chance we'll score. Playing three centre-backs reduces or removes Robertson's defensive responsibility when Scotland have the ball allowing him to play higher, more frequently. He doesn't have that same freedom in a back-4. 

Quote

When you play as a wing-back you don't actually have to defend as much. At full-back you have to properly defend. You have a lot of one-vs-ones and you have a lot of players running off the back of you [at full-back], so you have to be switched on at all times. Your body position and everything about it defensively is totally different.

Matt Doherty

https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/what-is-the-difference-full-back-wing-back-football/1jielh8pgzqia1a6lv0ziv23ek

[Old Bing]

3 hours ago, 2426255 said:

The more Scotland can get Robertson near the attacking zones the more chance we'll score. Playing three centre-backs reduces or removes Robertson's defensive responsibility when Scotland have the ball allowing him to play higher, more frequently. He doesn't have that same freedom in a back-4. 

https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/what-is-the-difference-full-back-wing-back-football/1jielh8pgzqia1a6lv0ziv23ek

Yes but it doesn't work nearly as well without Tierney at lcb. As has been explained to you several thousand times, and has been proven on the pitch in front of our eyes many many times. 

The fact is simply you can't understand it, because you don't understand football.

[Butters Scotch]

5 hours ago, 2426255 said:

The more Scotland can get Robertson near the attacking zones the more chance we'll score. Playing three centre-backs reduces or removes Robertson's defensive responsibility when Scotland have the ball allowing him to play higher, more frequently. He doesn't have that same freedom in a back-4. 

https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/what-is-the-difference-full-back-wing-back-football/1jielh8pgzqia1a6lv0ziv23ek

Robertson playing in a four at Liverpool, United and Hull didn't hurt his attacking intent. Having a winger infront of him works in his favour to get him into attacking zones so I'm not sure what the argument is here at all.

[Monkey Tennis]

On 22/08/2024 at 01:19, Chripper said:

A certain Sir Alex Ferguson was in charge in the 86 World Cup.

The greatest manager in the history of football (with a vastly greater first XI) managed a draw and 2 defeats.

If P&B was around back then, screwballs would be calling him every name under the sun and calling him to be sacked.

There's not really much need to call for the sacking of a stand-in manager who's scheduled to resume his regular job again after the tournament.

[immcinto]

On 22/08/2024 at 01:19, Chripper said:

A certain Sir Alex Ferguson was in charge in the 86 World Cup.

The greatest manager in the history of football (with a vastly greater first XI) managed a draw and 2 defeats.

If P&B was around back then, screwballs would be calling him every name under the sun and calling him to be sacked.

Sound familiar?

Aye, Euro 2020, Steve Clarke. One draw, two defeats.

Broad consensus on P&B was that Clarke was going in the right direction and lessons would be learnt 

 

Like I say. Detail. Not a strong point.

[2426255]

On 23/08/2024 at 18:24, Butters Scotch said:

Robertson playing in a four at Liverpool, United and Hull didn't hurt his attacking intent. Having a winger infront of him works in his favour to get him into attacking zones so I'm not sure what the argument is here at all.

Happy to take your word on that. I haven't followed his career at his clubs beyond the superficial. Regardless of what has happened at club level It doesn't mean that's the best option for Robertson at Scotland. On it's own merits the idea that you don't want Robertson in defensive positions unless required makes sense for Scotland. As does the idea that a wing-back has less defensive responsibility than a full-back.

There isn't a large number of minutes where Robertson has played as a full-back for Scotland post-Covid: Robertson started for Scotland as a left-back against Gibraltar. Prior to that was 5 years ago against San Marino (2019). He performed the left-back role for periods within games either when were chasing a result (Hungary, Spain, Norway, Israel) or covering a sending off (Germany).

To do a comparison would require looking back at the games in Euro 2020 qualifying. I might look at doing that, but perhaps we will see it in the upcoming Nations League games so I'll wait to see if that happens. The conditions are set up to allow that: I'm guessing Kieran Tierney won't be involved. Steve Clarke also suggested he was looking at the back-4 against Gibraltar with a view to games beyond Euro-2024.

[Butters Scotch]

3 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Happy to take your word on that. I haven't followed his career at his clubs beyond the superficial. Regardless of what has happened at club level It doesn't mean that's the best option for Robertson at Scotland. On it's own merits the idea that you don't want Robertson in defensive positions unless required makes sense for Scotland. As does the idea that a wing-back has less defensive responsibility than a full-back.

There isn't a large number of minutes where Robertson has played as a full-back for Scotland post-Covid: Robertson started for Scotland as a left-back against Gibraltar. Prior to that was 5 years ago against San Marino (2019). He performed the left-back role for periods within games either when were chasing a result (Hungary, Spain, Norway, Israel) or covering a sending off (Germany).

To do a comparison would require looking back at the games in Euro 2020 qualifying. I might look at doing that, but perhaps we will see it in the upcoming Nations League games so I'll wait to see if that happens. The conditions are set up to allow that: I'm guessing Kieran Tierney won't be involved. Steve Clarke also suggested he was looking at the back-4 against Gibraltar with a view to games beyond Euro-2024.

I think you're over complicating the role here, there are examples all over the world where full backs in a back four are just as attacking as in a back five. Instead of a CB covering the space left when vacating the LB position, it is one of the CM's. It could certainly work for Scotland if we use a system that suits that. 

[Old Bing]

5 hours ago, Butters Scotch said:

I think you're over complicating the role here, there are examples all over the world where full backs in a back four are just as attacking as in a back five. Instead of a CB covering the space left when vacating the LB position, it is one of the CM's. It could certainly work for Scotland if we use a system that suits that. 

It also allows him to interchange more with the wide player, and overlap more. It's pretty disrespectful towards Robertson that he thinks he can only get forward in a 5 tbh.

[2426255]

20 hours ago, Butters Scotch said:

I think you're over complicating the role here, there are examples all over the world where full backs in a back four are just as attacking as in a back five. Instead of a CB covering the space left when vacating the LB position, it is one of the CM's. It could certainly work for Scotland if we use a system that suits that. 

It's about where you want Robertson on the pitch. Clearly it's preferable to have him as close to the final third as possible as much as possible because he is our best crosser of the ball. Wing-back facilitates that. Pushing him deeper to fit someone in front of him doesn't improve the attack as he is the best player to have high and wide.

In his Scotland career under Clarke he has provided 10 assists playing as a wing-back. He has recorded 1 goal and zero assists from left-back. That's a superficial statistic, but it's being made to underline the point that getting the best out of Andy Robertson by getting him near the attacking zones is a priority for Scotland.

[PB1994]

I actually think Robertson is more effective going forward playing in a back 4 rather than a back 5.

In a 4 he generally has a winger in front of him which takes away the attention of the defending full back. It allows him to overlap and get more space in behind as wingers are easier to get away from when they are tracking back.

When he is in a 5 the full back and winger can essentially double up on him as he is the only attacking threat down that side.

[Butters Scotch]

4 hours ago, PB1994 said:

I actually think Robertson is more effective going forward playing in a back 4 rather than a back 5.

In a 4 he generally has a winger in front of him which takes away the attention of the defending full back. It allows him to overlap and get more space in behind as wingers are easier to get away from when they are tracking back.

When he is in a 5 the full back and winger can essentially double up on him as he is the only attacking threat down that side.

Yep exactly this, he has been doing it for years at Liverpool with great success, you only have to look at his numbers there. 

Albeit that is a team who are are very good at pressing, better quality of players that can keep possession, wingers who are skillful dribblers etc etc which make it easier for him to get forward. 

[Ken Deans]

On 21/08/2024 at 16:44, Chripper said:

What's to address?

The squad is, barring 4 or 5 players, SPL/English Championship standard.

As it stands, two of our best players (Gilmour and McTominay) are bench warmers for their clubs. Not to mention Tierney, who is made of a breadstick.

Personally, I want a manager who is able to take our waifs and strays and gel them into a team who is capable of successfully qualifying.

Clarke has done that. Therefore, he deserves to be the one to call it a day.

He, or the SFA certainly don't owe anyone an apology and/or explanation.

Will Brendan Rodgers or the Celtic board give the Celtic fans an apology and/or explanation when  they inevitably fail to lay a glove on the three teams in their European Cup first group stage?

No.

Will the Celtic fans be calling for the head of Brendan Rodgers when they inevitably fail to lay a glove on the three teams in their European Cup first group stage?

Only the incredibly spoilt and entitled ones.

it's only the incredibly spoilt and entitled Scotland fans who want Steve Clarke to leave.

Thankfully, that seems to be the minority. The majority lived through the two decades of doom and can appreciate what Steve Clarke has done.

A part of me kinda wants Steve Clarke to leave and then seeing the next guy fail to qualify for his campaign(s).

I'll be there with a "I told you so" and with select pages of this thread all loaded.

Might have to wait till he leaves of his own according, first.

The aforementioned will happen, though. So, I'd say to the Clarke outers. Enjoy qualifying will it lasts.

I certainly am.

PS: It won't last. The next manager will probably be Stewart Baxter (if he isn't a myth) or Billy Stark).

PPS: I'm not sitting in Shiva over Euro 24. It's over.

No ambition sadly. 24th from 24. Struggled every game

[Old Bing]

Finally Clarke speaks.

What I was hoping for was him to admit there was failings. And say he's convinced he's the right man to get it right in future. Bring in new ideas and new players.

Instead when asked why he was staying on his reply is "my contract" and laughs.

An arrogant git with zero respect for the fans who pay his wages.

I've never personally disliked him up until now.

[MarkoP]

Thought Clarkes smug comment about his contract today was an effing disgrace tbh

Everyones fault but his what happened in Germany 

Of course the squad being affected by injury made an impact

But that, 2 months later!

He’s really dropped in my estimation as a person

[MarkoP]

1 hour ago, Old Bing said:

Finally Clarke speaks.

What I was hoping for was him to admit there was failings. And say he's convinced he's the right man to get it right in future. Bring in new ideas and new players.

Instead when asked why he was staying on his reply is "my contract" and laughs.

An arrogant git with zero respect for the fans who pay his wages.

I've never personally disliked him up until now.

Should have read this before posting