Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion

[ahemps]

Qualification should be a realistic target but as a nation of our size it is still a 'slight' achievement. Since it was expanded, the last 3 tournaments:

Sweden didn't make the last Euros.

Serbia have only qualified once.

Greece have never qualified.

Ireland have been once.

Denmark and Netherlands didn't make the 1st expanded tournament.

On the flip side

Austria, Hungary and Poland have been to the last 3

Albania, Romania and Wales have been twice

Georgia and Finland have been once

We should be aiming for every tournament but looking at this I would say getting to around 3/4 is probably what is likely to happen so we should not dismiss qualification too lightly as a given.

[Old Bing]

2 hours ago, Butters Scotch said:

Further irony is that majority of those players were jobbers playing in the English championship or SPL and young guys just starting out their careers. 

Tierney was only 19, McGinn was just starting out at Villa (nowhere near same player he is now), Fraser wasn't selected until 2017, Fletcher was on the decline with his illness, Robertson was at Hull (nowhere near same player as now) and conveniently misses out a number of players like your Anya's and Chris Martin's who got gametime. You could go on and on. 

@Chripper

 

Mcginn was still a Scottish championship player when Strachan first capped him. In hindsight it was a ridiculously good spot by him. 

[Smokerson]

I thought his press conference before the two games last week was bordering on embarrassing the way he didn't come out and give us even the slightest bit of honesty about the Germany and Hungary games. BUT, I have been quietly impressed , relieved and hopeful about the Poland and Portugal performances. He ditched the system which was becoming a 5-2-2-1. We were on the front foot a bit more and pushed one of the top sides all the way. We also blooded some new players so it suggests he can get a tune out of us and get us going in the right direction again. 

This all done without a lot of key players being injured, not yet having clubs and McGregor surprisingly chucking it.

Hopefully we can pick up some points in October/November and then can look forward to the world cup draw.

[Old Bing]

2 hours ago, Smokerson said:

I thought his press conference before the two games last week was bordering on embarrassing the way he didn't come out and give us even the slightest bit of honesty about the Germany and Hungary games. BUT, I have been quietly impressed , relieved and hopeful about the Poland and Portugal performances. He ditched the system which was becoming a 5-2-2-1. We were on the front foot a bit more and pushed one of the top sides all the way. We also blooded some new players so it suggests he can get a tune out of us and get us going in the right direction again. 

This all done without a lot of key players being injured, not yet having clubs and McGregor surprisingly chucking it.

Hopefully we can pick up some points in October/November and then can look forward to the world cup draw.

This is the only sensible pro clarke post I've read. I don't agree with you but I can at least understand and respect where your coming from.

[Boo Khaki]

8 hours ago, ahemps said:

Qualification should be a realistic target but as a nation of our size it is still a 'slight' achievement. Since it was expanded, the last 3 tournaments:

Sweden didn't make the last Euros.

Serbia have only qualified once.

Greece have never qualified.

Ireland have been once.

Denmark and Netherlands didn't make the 1st expanded tournament.

On the flip side

Austria, Hungary and Poland have been to the last 3

Albania, Romania and Wales have been twice

Georgia and Finland have been once

We should be aiming for every tournament but looking at this I would say getting to around 3/4 is probably what is likely to happen so we should not dismiss qualification too lightly as a given.

There's nothing contentious here, and there's nothing I'd try to argue against, but I think I should probably expand a bit on the sentiment in my previous post that qualifying is not an achievement. 

Of course it is, but I merely think the act of qualifying has been overblown a bit as somewhat more of an impressive achievement than it is in reality. I think the Nations you list in the first part of your post could be fairly described as having underachieved in those circumstances, and those in the bottom have possibly having overachieved to a varying degree based on expectation.

To my mind, it's a perfectly reasonable expectation to expect Scotland to qualify for the vast majority of 24 team UEFA tournament finals. The fact none of Clarke's predecessors managed to qualify for any iteration of the competition since 1996 serves to magnify the accomplishment in people's minds, in my opinion, when in reality all that has actually happened is he's returned the national team to the status I feel is reasonable to expect of them. 

I see it as a bit like a Celtic manager being feted as a genius because he won the league 4 or 5 times on the spin and cleaned up most of the cups while the only serious competition, Rangers, were not in any position to oppose. Is it an "achievement"? Well, yes, of course it is, of sorts at least, you can only win the trophies you compete in, but in reality all he's actually achieved is the bare minimum expected, and when did that become the benchmark for being proclaimed "genius"?

I'm not suggesting most people have lost the plot and are proclaiming Clarke a genius or anything close, it seems to me most people are reasonably objective about his tenure, but (again, IMO) he's "achieved" the bare minimum and I don't see any justification for granting him extra leeway, an extra-long leash just because of that fact, especially when he made a pigs ear of two finals and that indicates he's already hit the limit of where Scotland can conceivably go under his management. Other nations of our stature or smaller still outperform us, so I think it's also perfectly reasonable to conclude that a better manager than Clarke could replicate that with Scotland, so the question then becomes one of sourcing that manager and replacing Clarke.

[ahemps]

15 hours ago, Boo Khaki said:

There's nothing contentious here, and there's nothing I'd try to argue against, but I think I should probably expand a bit on the sentiment in my previous post that qualifying is not an achievement. 

Of course it is, but I merely think the act of qualifying has been overblown a bit as somewhat more of an impressive achievement than it is in reality. I think the Nations you list in the first part of your post could be fairly described as having underachieved in those circumstances, and those in the bottom have possibly having overachieved to a varying degree based on expectation.

To my mind, it's a perfectly reasonable expectation to expect Scotland to qualify for the vast majority of 24 team UEFA tournament finals. The fact none of Clarke's predecessors managed to qualify for any iteration of the competition since 1996 serves to magnify the accomplishment in people's minds, in my opinion, when in reality all that has actually happened is he's returned the national team to the status I feel is reasonable to expect of them. 

I see it as a bit like a Celtic manager being feted as a genius because he won the league 4 or 5 times on the spin and cleaned up most of the cups while the only serious competition, Rangers, were not in any position to oppose. Is it an "achievement"? Well, yes, of course it is, of sorts at least, you can only win the trophies you compete in, but in reality all he's actually achieved is the bare minimum expected, and when did that become the benchmark for being proclaimed "genius"?

I'm not suggesting most people have lost the plot and are proclaiming Clarke a genius or anything close, it seems to me most people are reasonably objective about his tenure, but (again, IMO) he's "achieved" the bare minimum and I don't see any justification for granting him extra leeway, an extra-long leash just because of that fact, especially when he made a pigs ear of two finals and that indicates he's already hit the limit of where Scotland can conceivably go under his management. Other nations of our stature or smaller still outperform us, so I think it's also perfectly reasonable to conclude that a better manager than Clarke could replicate that with Scotland, so the question then becomes one of sourcing that manager and replacing Clarke.

I wasn't posting in response to any comments in particular from any particular poster but was just putting out a brief summary of qualification for the new Euro format and was showing how some smaller, equal and bigger nations have fared.

[ArabFC]

On 11/09/2024 at 08:22, Butters Scotch said:

Further irony is that majority of those players were jobbers playing in the English championship or SPL and young guys just starting out their careers. 

Tierney was only 19, McGinn was just starting out at Villa (nowhere near same player he is now), Fraser wasn't selected until 2017, Fletcher was on the decline with his illness, Robertson was at Hull (nowhere near same player as now) and conveniently misses out a number of players like your Anya's and Chris Martin's who got gametime. You could go on and on. 

@Chripper

Andy Robertson was playing brilliantly for Hull in his early 20s, which is why Liverpool signed him.

He may be vastly more successful now, but I wouldn't claim he's playing any better now he's 30.

[Butters Scotch]

43 minutes ago, ArabFC said:

Andy Robertson was playing brilliantly for Hull in his early 20s, which is why Liverpool signed him.

He may be vastly more successful now, but I wouldn't claim he's playing any better now he's 30.

He seemed to be doing well at Hull but was a bit suspect defensively If I remember right but that might be because he was playing in a rubbish team at the time.

He's clearly imrpoved a lot since he's been at Liverpool though, don't think that's in question?

[ArabFC]

1 hour ago, Butters Scotch said:

He seemed to be doing well at Hull but was a bit suspect defensively If I remember right but that might be because he was playing in a rubbish team at the time.

He's clearly imrpoved a lot since he's been at Liverpool though, don't think that's in question?

All on a curve though innit, and he's defo not on the upward curve anymore.

[Old Bing]

2 hours ago, ArabFC said:

All on a curve though innit, and he's defo not on the upward curve anymore.

I'd say he's still better now than he was at Hull tbf.

Edited September 12 by Old Bing

[immcinto]

Interesting article here about how more British players are playing in big Euro leagues in the last few years. 

https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/british-players-moving-abroad-angel-gomes-harry-kane-td6gkhw2x

The trend includes English and Scottish players, but not Welsh or Irish. 

Is this an indication that we are producing more modern footballers that might be capable of understanding instructions from a non-british coach?

[Lex]

On 11/09/2024 at 09:20, ahemps said:

Qualification should be a realistic target but as a nation of our size it is still a 'slight' achievement. Since it was expanded, the last 3 tournaments:

 

It's the absolute bare minimum expectation. if Scotland ever don't qualify for a 24 team Euros in future whoever the manager is should be sacked. The fact that Gordon Strachan wasn't after somehow failing to qualify for Euro 2016 was a horrendous and bizarre error. 

Actual achievements for a nation our size would be making an impact at the tournament when we get there (played 6 lost 4 drew 2 at tournaments under Clarke) or reaching a world cup. Something he failed miserably at last time despite having an extraordinarily easy route - Denmark, Ukraine and Wales stood in our way. These are not outlandish targets, nations of our size and smaller do it every single tournament. 

We are now in the World Cup cycle - this 'nations league' nonsense is not that important, but the results in it certainly aren't a surprise. The question has to be is Clark the man to take us to USA/MEX/CAN in 2026. If he's not, he must be sacked before the campaign begins. Is there anyone who's seen us play in 2024 who thinks we are going to qualify for the World Cup with this manager?

[ArabFC]

The nation 'our size' is a bit of a misnomer as well anyway.

Ireland is a similar size but they have a focus on other sports such as GAA and Rugby that we don't. We're a fitba first second and third country, which is reflected in the numbers of people per capita attending fitba games in this country compared to others.

Greece adores basketball, the nordics love handball and ice hockey etc etc

[BFTD]

6 minutes ago, ArabFC said:

The nation 'our size' is a bit of a misnomer as well anyway.

Ireland is a similar size but they have a focus on other sports such as GAA and Rugby that we don't. We're a fitba first second and third country, which is reflected in the numbers of people per capita attending fitba games in this country compared to others.

Greece adores basketball, the nordics love handball and ice hockey etc etc

About time we gave up on the football and started trying to give the Irish a good kicking at their own sports. A far more manageable target.

Given that Aussie Rules Football always looks like a random Saturday night scrap between teams of jakes whose maws dressed them for protection against alcohol-related injury, I think we could give them a run for their money too.

[immcinto]

1 hour ago, ArabFC said:

The nation 'our size' is a bit of a misnomer as well anyway.

Ireland is a similar size but they have a focus on other sports such as GAA and Rugby that we don't. We're a fitba first second and third country, which is reflected in the numbers of people per capita attending fitba games in this country compared to others.

Greece adores basketball, the nordics love handball and ice hockey etc etc

The culture is part of the problem.  Nordic countries will have a civilized approach to football similar to other sports coaching. No knuckledragger dads threathening to batter ye if they don't like the cut of yer jib etc

[Jives Miguel]

2 hours ago, ArabFC said:

The nation 'our size' is a bit of a misnomer as well anyway.

Ireland is a similar size but they have a focus on other sports such as GAA and Rugby that we don't. We're a fitba first second and third country, which is reflected in the numbers of people per capita attending fitba games in this country compared to others.

Greece adores basketball, the nordics love handball and ice hockey etc etc

Of all the 6 or 7 countries you've mentioned, only 1 of them, that being Denmark, have a better qualification record in the last few years than us. Also only Finland, and maybe Ireland are the only countries where football isn't the most popular sport. Sweden and Greece have 2x the number of people. IS handball more popular in Denmark than Rugby is here? Not sure about that one, sounds suspicious.

I think attendance numbers are completely irrelevant tbh, would be tenuous at best to suggest that directly translates to more childhood participation in football. I imagine Brazil blows most countries out of the water in that particular field, but their attendance per capita figures will be dreadful. Continental Europeans tend to be much more active in sport participation than us in general anyway.

 

Croatia is the one that's always brought up when people say population is irrelevant. Croatia massively overachieve in literally every sport they dip their toes into. There's clearly at the very least societal factors contributing towards that, if not genetic reasons as well. Its not as simple as just saying "sEe PoPuLaTiOn IrElevanT!!"

Edited Friday at 12:52 by Jives Miguel

[BFTD]

Really wasn't expecting to read about the genetic superiority of Croats today.

[Skyline Drifter]

11 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Really wasn't expecting to read about the genetic superiority of Croats today.

Every day is a school day

[Jives Miguel]

18 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Really wasn't expecting to read about the genetic superiority of Croats today.

 

No denying that its certainly grasping at straws.  People from that rough area of the world; Serbia, Croatia, Hungary, Slovenia etc all seem to just be very good at sports in general. We know people from East Africa are good distance runners, people around Eastern Europe into West/Central Asia are good weightlifters, helped by genetic factors, so why not those lot too. Got to be something in the water there.

[Pocketman]

2 hours ago, Jives Miguel said:

Croatia is the one that's always brought up when people say population is irrelevant. Croatia massively overachieve in literally every sport they dip their toes into. There's clearly at the very least societal factors contributing towards that, if not genetic reasons as well.