Jump to content

Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion


2426255

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Hoose Rice said:

Shankland has shown absolutely nothing in a Scotland top either.  Even against Gibraltar.  He got lots of time in the games up to the Euro's to stake his place and show what he could do and showed zero.  So after that we just chuck him in anyway?  If anything Conway should have gotten more of a chance.  He's at least playing at a higher level than Shankland and hasn't had the chance to show what he can do with the full NT.

Agree with most of that. I'm not against Shankland getting minutes, but he hasn't exactly set the heather on fire when given the chance.

Don't know much about Conway other than his cameo vs Finland, but he's got more potential than Shankland simply due to age. It's easy to say we should have given him more minutes in the meaningless games leading up to the tournament, but if Brown, Dykes, Nisbet and Stewart weren't all fucked then Conway would still be a U21 player and lucky to be in the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not entirely sure what the issue is with his criticisms of the ref though. Clarke is correct that we were denied a stonewall penalty. His tactics were wrong though and it’s not a valid excuse, but the criticism itself was accurate imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JS_FFC said:

Not entirely sure what the issue is with his criticisms of the ref though. Clarke is correct that we were denied a stonewall penalty. His tactics were wrong though and it’s not a valid excuse, but the criticism itself was accurate imo. 

You’re kidding right?

Possibly his pig ignorant, borderline xenophobic comments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JS_FFC said:

Not entirely sure what the issue is with his criticisms of the ref though. Clarke is correct that we were denied a stonewall penalty. His tactics were wrong though and it’s not a valid excuse, but the criticism itself was accurate imo. 

Really, what was valid and accurate about his criticism of the ref being Argentinian? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Basile Boli said:

You’re kidding right?

Possibly his pig ignorant, borderline xenophobic comments?

 

Just now, Dons_1988 said:

Really, what was valid and accurate about his criticism of the ref being Argentinian? 

Remember, this is coming from the poster who continues to refer to Czechia as Czechoslovakia. Best ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JS_FFC said:

That said ref denied us a stonewall penalty.

He didn't deny us the penalty *because* he is Argentinian, though. That's the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gaz said:

He didn't deny us the penalty *because* he is Argentinian, though. That's the issue.

Did Clarke say that he did? That would be very poor if so and kinda racist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

Remember, this is coming from the poster who continues to refer to Czechia as Czechoslovakia. Best ignored.

Just seen this and so will no longer be engaging in a bad faith discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cheese said:

Clarke went full UKIP last night. Terrible look.

Can you imagine being the ref and hearing those comments? I hope Clarke pays the inevitable fine from his own pockets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, well again said:

The issue is that it wasn't a penalty and it given var would have disallowed it for offside.

Looked at it again now and arguably Stuart Armstrong pulled their man down as well to be fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard a few calling for Steve Clarke to go. Reminds me of when Strachan left on the basis of not qualifying for a major competition to be replaced by... another manager who previously failed to qualify. And if Clarke were to leave I think we would appoint Moyes. If Clarke failing to play attacking football frustrates you,  Moyes wouldnt be different. I also don't think it would be an improvement. Other managers could even take us backwards. 

I've also seen a fair bit of criticism of team selection and tactics. IMO some are misplaced as after the first game Gunn could only have been replaced by someone not as good. Ralston would have been replaced by someone who was on a par at best. 

As for tactics/ formation. Both teams went for it and changed for ten minutes last night and we got opened up. It could have gone either way. For two of the three games at this tournament Scotland competed well and it could have went either way. I wouldn't have made that many changes to those chosen by Clarke. Defensive football/or 5-4-1 seems to be criticised but it worked well in qualifying and will allow us to keep qualifying in future with this level of player. We've qualified for 2 euros after waiting 20 odd years of not qualifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...