Steve Clarke - in/out/general discussion

[DublinMagyar]

Dear Steve, f**k off.

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

The problem with getting rid of SC is that that the alternatives are few and bar between.

I’m still angry by what I witnessed in person last week, but I’m also acutely aware that things can get a whole lot worse.

There is nothing in the SFA’s history, nor the current ‘shortlists’ that give me any belief whatsoever that making a change would improve things.

So, either things need to get worse; or, the options need to get better. 

Until then.

[Bing.McCrosby]

9 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

The problem with getting rid of SC is that that the alternatives are few and bar between.

I’m still angry by what I witnessed in person last week, but I’m also acutely aware that things can get a whole lot worse.

There is nothing in the SFA’s history, nor the current ‘shortlists’ that give me any belief whatsoever that making a change would improve things.

So, either things need to get worse; or, the options need to get better. 

Until then.

We don't know what the options are.

But there's 8 billion people in the world, the argument he's the only decent coach we could get isn't a strong one.

[DA Baracus]

12 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

The problem with getting rid of SC is that that the alternatives are few and bar between.

I’m still angry by what I witnessed in person last week, but I’m also acutely aware that things can get a whole lot worse.

There is nothing in the SFA’s history, nor the current ‘shortlists’ that give me any belief whatsoever that making a change would improve things.

So, either things need to get worse; or, the options need to get better. 

Until then.

Again, invite applications.

[Barry Ferguson's Hat]

McLeish deserves another shot.

[Fletchers Saucy Manbun]

Either:

Our tournament performances were about right given our quality, and he overachieved getting us qualified.

Or qualifying was expected given our quality, and he underachieved at the tournament.

Keep him if the former, bin him if the latter.

[Chripper]

There are many brilliant coaches out there. Many very good ones and many good ones.

However, what are our expectations?

How on earth can you expect this group of players to be attacking, attractive and expansive at major tournaments when our strikers are all SPL/Championship standard?

I love McTominay to death but he isn't creative, neither is McGinn. Both create chaos, but neither have flair.

People might not want to hear it but with the squad at our disposal, we have to be compact and try to be hard to beat.

At points, Strachan and Burley and McLeish attempted to make us more attacking. I don't remember the aforementioned managers getting us to major tournaments.

Steve Clarke is doing as well as any manager could.

If he goes then he goes, but I would happily put a wager on with anyone, that we won't qualify for anything with the same squad, particularly if we go back to using previous tried and failed tactics.

The trouble is that too many fans think you can build a mansion with playdough.

Edited Saturday at 20:14 by Chripper

[Bing.McCrosby]

17 minutes ago, Chripper said:

There are many brilliant coaches out there. Many very good ones and many good ones.

However, what are our expectations?

How on earth can you expect this group of players to be attacking, attractive and expansive at major tournaments when our strikers are all SPL/Championship standard?

I love McTominay to death but he isn't creative, neither is McGinn. Both create chaos, but neither have flair.

People might not want to hear it but with the squad at our disposal, we have to be compact and try to be hard to beat.

At points, Strachan and Burley and McLeish attempted to make us more attacking. I don't remember the aforementioned managers getting us to major tournaments.

Steve Clarke is doing as well as any manager could.

If he goes then he goes, but I would happily put a wager on with anyone, that we won't qualify for anything with the same squad, particularly if we go back to using previous tried and failed tactics.

Shit I forgot Strachan, Mcleish and Burley had the exact same squad as now. And the players have been frozen in time.

Edited Saturday at 20:15 by Bing.McCrosby

[Gordon EF]

Nobody is demanding Brazil 1970. But maybe the players we have are capable of more than exiting a tournament with one point and a handful of shots on goal.

Edited Saturday at 20:22 by Gordon EF

[Chripper]

23 minutes ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

Shit I forgot Strachan, Mcleish and Burley had the exact same squad as now. And the players have been frozen in time.

If you think the first XI has vastly improved then I have news for you.

It hasn't.

But by all means, be sarcastic. That'll help.

There are so many dour, depressed, sad sacks in this place that I genuine think that they want to go back to those awesome days of non-qualification so that they can justify their sourness.

If people want to be sad and miserable then fair enough.

Me? I'm loving qualifying and I'm thoroughly enjoying it.

 

Edited Saturday at 20:38 by Chripper

[Butters Scotch]

25 minutes ago, Chripper said:

There are many brilliant coaches out there. Many very good ones and many good ones.

However, what are our expectations?

How on earth can you expect this group of players to be attacking, attractive and expansive at major tournaments when our strikers are all SPL/Championship standard?

I love McTominay to death but he isn't creative, neither is McGinn. Both create chaos, but neither have flair.

People might not want to hear it but with the squad at our disposal, we have to be compact and try to be hard to beat.

At points, Strachan and Burley and McLeish attempted to make us more attacking. I don't remember the aforementioned managers getting us to major tournaments.

Steve Clarke is doing as well as any manager could.

If he goes then he goes, but I would happily put a wager on with anyone, that we won't qualify for anything with the same squad, particularly if we go back to using previous tried and failed tactics.

The trouble is that too many fans think you can build a mansion with playdough.

Good point, I forgot how much quality and how expansive the likes of Georgia, Slovakia, Slovenia, etc are that got them qualified for the knockouts. 

[HeartsOfficialMoaner]

He'd rather play industrious players than flair players. A team of workers. If he can give us one flair player.  

[No_Problemo]

52 minutes ago, Chripper said:

There are many brilliant coaches out there. Many very good ones and many good ones.

However, what are our expectations?

How on earth can you expect this group of players to be attacking, attractive and expansive at major tournaments when our strikers are all SPL/Championship standard?

I love McTominay to death but he isn't creative, neither is McGinn. Both create chaos, but neither have flair.

People might not want to hear it but with the squad at our disposal, we have to be compact and try to be hard to beat.

At points, Strachan and Burley and McLeish attempted to make us more attacking. I don't remember the aforementioned managers getting us to major tournaments.

Steve Clarke is doing as well as any manager could.

If he goes then he goes, but I would happily put a wager on with anyone, that we won't qualify for anything with the same squad, particularly if we go back to using previous tried and failed tactics.

The trouble is that too many fans think you can build a mansion with playdough.

Che Adams spending one season out of the last several in the championship, to then immediately bounce back to the Premiership doesn’t make him championship standard. 

[Bing.McCrosby]

41 minutes ago, Chripper said:

If you think the first XI has vastly improved then I have news for you.

It hasn't.

But by all means, be sarcastic. That'll help.

There are so many dour, depressed, sad sacks in this place that I genuine think that they want to go back to those awesome days of non-qualification so that they can justify their sourness.

If people want to be sad and miserable then fair enough.

Me? I'm loving qualifying and I'm thoroughly enjoying it.

 

You accuse others of getting personal and abusive, yet that's exactly what you have just done. I've not personally said anything about you.

It's not just about whether the team has improved or not. In my view it has. But that's irrelevant.

The players would have to be the same. The players they are playing against would have to be the same.

What your saying is as relevant as tonight's copa America results.

 

[Chripper]

44 minutes ago, No_Problemo said:

Che Adams spending one season out of the last several in the championship, to then immediately bounce back to the Premiership doesn’t make him championship standard. 

He's spent 4 seasons in the Championship and 4 seasons in the EPL.

So he's spent 50% of his career out of the EPL.

In those 4 EPL seasons he's scored 25 goals in 124 games. That's 1 goal every 5 games.

He's only scored double figures in the league twice. Both in the Championship.

People want us to be progressive? To be attacking?

There are two issues with that: Zero creativity and no one who can score.

England are a prime example. They're lucky. They've always been blessed with a world class striker.

Their match tomorrow is a prime example. Take out Kane's (63 goals) from their projected XI and they've scored 26.

Slovakia's projected XI have scored 59 goals.

 

[Chripper]

2 hours ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

You accuse others of getting personal and abusive, yet that's exactly what you have just done. I've not personally said anything about you.

It's not just about whether the team has improved or not. In my view it has. But that's irrelevant.

The players would have to be the same. The players they are playing against would have to be the same.

What your saying is as relevant as tonight's copa America results.

 

In fairness, I only said you were being sarcastic. That isn't personal.

The "sad sack" talk wasn't specifically about you.

It's a general observation about the toxic atmosphere in this place.

There are some people here who are awfully serious and some people who take themselves very serious.

Some people should take a day off and smile a wee bit. Taking away all the politics, etc, this is a great time to be a Scotland fan.

It genuinely feels to me like some people just like to moan and groan. Which is fine, it's their perogative.

It just feels weird. We qualified for a tournament (fine. It went badly). We have a manager who has proven that he get us to tournaments. We have a squad who are now experienced with two top tier tournaments under their belt.

We also have a few good young players coming through.

These are good times.

I wasn't having a dig at you, mate. If I was, you'd know about it

The Internet has this ability to turn even the most rational and even minded of people into thundering loonies.

Again, not talking about you specifically.

Edited Saturday at 23:43 by Chripper

[Butters Scotch]

8 minutes ago, Chripper said:

He's spent 4 seasons in the Championship and 4 seasons in the EPL.

So he's spent 50% of his career out of the EPL.

In those 4 EPL seasons he's scored 25 goals in 124 games. That's 1 goal every 5 games.

He's only scored double figures in the league twice. Both in the Championship.

People want us to be progressive? To be attacking?

There are two issues with that: Zero creativity and no one who can score.

England are a prime example. They're lucky. They've always been blessed with a world class striker.

Their match tomorrow is a prime example. Take out Kane's (63 goals) from their projected XI and they've scored 26.

Slovakia's projected XI have scored 59 goals.

 

You don't need to have a a striker who is mainly a goalscorer in the team to be attacking, progressive, creative etc. Many teams have players all over the midfield who can score and do all of that whilst the striker is more of a player to play off of. Switzerland being a prime example of that.

Again your so called "analysis" is very flawed.

[Gordopolis]

2 hours ago, Butters Scotch said:

You don't need to have a a striker who is mainly a goalscorer in the team to be attacking, progressive, creative etc. Many teams have players all over the midfield who can score and do all of that whilst the striker is more of a player to play off of. Switzerland being a prime example of that.

Again your so called "analysis" is very flawed.

Germany are a good example of that. Havertz is... A midfielder/false 9/number 10

Fullkrug is their Shankland.

Not sure where I'm going with this (after a few beers) but a lethal penalty box striker isn't necessarily the solution to our problems.

But pishing around with an isolated (and clearly not fully fit) Adams at tournament level *certainly* isn't the answer for us.

[DA Baracus]

Folk talk about style of play etc but we didn't play anything close to our best.

We didn't play like we did in our successful qualification games.

We were timid shitebags who played well, well within ourselves. 

[2426255]

20 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

if Hungary had gone absolute all out attack against us, in some effort to win 4-0, there's a good chance they would have lost.

It still exemplifies the double standard applied to other teams. I agree with your point above personally, but I'm sure the Hungarian fans won't. They'll think their approach was too defensive, too negative for a game they needed to win by a few goals, regardless of the reality or what the manager was aware of.

Similarly for Scotland fans objectivity is not applied when the focus of the discussion is Scotland. According to our fans we were also too defensive and too negative in a must win game.