24th out of 24

[2426255]

3 hours ago, Lex said:

Think it's also worth pointing out that the only games which we haven't lost in both these competitions is the second match. In both cases the team we were playing in the second match had won their first match and were clearly happy with a point in the game against us, as it got them through.

In the other four games the other team needed a win, and we lost them all of them. 

I understand what you're getting at - when the opponent isn't taking their foot off the gas then Scotland lose. That said, I don't think you can say Germany needed a win in the first game add to that the fact your argument would suggest Germany needed only a point against Hungary and it was already job done for Switzerland against Germany.

While there is maybe an element of truth there, the argument itself is too general and lacks context in my opinion. It's also heavy on outcome bias which is inevitable when making an argument based solely on results. We lost the Hungary game because we chased the game, otherwise it would have finished nil-nil.

[Bully Wee Villa]

I don't think England were "clearly happy" with a point at home to Scotland but don't disagree with the rest.

[VictorOnopko]

3 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

I understand what you're getting at - when the opponent isn't taking their foot off the gas then Scotland lose. That said, I don't think you can say Germany needed a win in the first game add to that the fact your argument would suggest Germany needed only a point against Hungary and it was already job done for Switzerland against Germany.

While there is maybe an element of truth there, the argument itself is too general and lacks context in my opinion. It's also heavy on outcome bias which is inevitable when making an argument based solely on results. We lost the Hungary game because we chased the game, otherwise it would have finished nil-nil.

Except the argument isn't just based on the final score. Hungary had less possession than us but hit the post, and managed 14 shots to our 4, with 5 to our zero on target in a must-win game having played a lone-striker (who is really a false 9 and was obviously tired and out of form) up front. Hungary aren't a great team but they had clearly studied our home friendly against Northern Ireland and realised that the way Clarke sets us up, we're unable to break down a team sitting in. That proved to be the case.  We only chased the game for 20 minutes when we finally saw some fresh players on the park, and it didn't work. It was a truly pathetic effort overall from both the management team and the players.

Germany quite obviously came out with high energy to win their opening game as hosts and start the tournament running.  They didn't need a win but they attacked with creativity and pace, and we folded and looked utterly terrified for pretty much the whole game.  I honestly think that game was the most unpleasant, infuriating footballing experience I have ever had as a fan, and I support Partick Thistle.

The past two finals under Clarke have been a disaster. The situation now is actually quite fascinating because it's very hard to unpick why things went so embarrassingly awry this year - is it just his dogged, negative inflexibility, or are the players tired, jaded, and/or past their peak? Does the former feed into the latter somehow?  Is trying to qualify again an acceptable target (IMO, no, if it means we'd be served this thin footballing gruel for a third time at a finals) or should we bring in new ideas so that when we do qualify again, we know what to do when we get there?

 

[2426255]

1 hour ago, VictorOnopko said:

Hungary aren't a great team but they had clearly studied our home friendly against Northern Ireland and realised that the way Clarke sets us up, we're unable to break down a team sitting in. 

Scotland aren't a great team. If we had set up like Hungary, Clarke would still have got pelters. What exactly were you wanting Clarke to do?

Rossi would have got pelters if Hungary hadn't won. Clarke would've got none if Scotland won. That's how fans work, we know all that.

Edited Friday at 14:34 by 2426255

[VictorOnopko]

35 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

Scotland aren't a great team. If we had set up like Hungary, Clarke would still have got pelters. What exactly were you wanting Clarke to do?

Rossi would have got pelters if Hungary hadn't won. Clarke would've got none if Scotland won. That's how fans work, we know all that.

Pay some attention to which players looked like they were towing caravans against Switzerland. Spring a surprise or two rather than being 100% predictable and pedestrian. Use the squad. Change things up far far earlier when we were having no impact whatsoever. And don't lose the rag and lash out with swivel- eyed racist nonsense against the ref afterwards. Take some responsibility for not producing a shot on target in 100 mins in a vital must win game. And ultimately, step aside. 

[forameus]

2 hours ago, VictorOnopko said:

Except the argument isn't just based on the final score. Hungary had less possession than us but hit the post, and managed 14 shots to our 4, with 5 to our zero on target in a must-win game having played a lone-striker (who is really a false 9 and was obviously tired and out of form) up front. Hungary aren't a great team but they had clearly studied our home friendly against Northern Ireland and realised that the way Clarke sets us up, we're unable to break down a team sitting in. That proved to be the case.  We only chased the game for 20 minutes when we finally saw some fresh players on the park, and it didn't work. It was a truly pathetic effort overall from both the management team and the players.

Germany quite obviously came out with high energy to win their opening game as hosts and start the tournament running.  They didn't need a win but they attacked with creativity and pace, and we folded and looked utterly terrified for pretty much the whole game.  I honestly think that game was the most unpleasant, infuriating footballing experience I have ever had as a fan, and I support Partick Thistle.

The past two finals under Clarke have been a disaster. The situation now is actually quite fascinating because it's very hard to unpick why things went so embarrassingly awry this year - is it just his dogged, negative inflexibility, or are the players tired, jaded, and/or past their peak? Does the former feed into the latter somehow?  Is trying to qualify again an acceptable target (IMO, no, if it means we'd be served this thin footballing gruel for a third time at a finals) or should we bring in new ideas so that when we do qualify again, we know what to do when we get there?

 

Need, want, whatever, they were getting it whether they liked it or not.

Edited Friday at 15:39 by forameus

[eez-eh]

3 hours ago, VictorOnopko said:

Except the argument isn't just based on the final score. Hungary had less possession than us but hit the post, and managed 14 shots to our 4, with 5 to our zero on target in a must-win game having played a lone-striker (who is really a false 9 and was obviously tired and out of form) up front. Hungary aren't a great team but they had clearly studied our home friendly against Northern Ireland and realised that the way Clarke sets us up, we're unable to break down a team sitting in. That proved to be the case.  We only chased the game for 20 minutes when we finally saw some fresh players on the park, and it didn't work. It was a truly pathetic effort overall from both the management team and the players.

Germany quite obviously came out with high energy to win their opening game as hosts and start the tournament running.  They didn't need a win but they attacked with creativity and pace, and we folded and looked utterly terrified for pretty much the whole game.  I honestly think that game was the most unpleasant, infuriating footballing experience I have ever had as a fan, and I support Partick Thistle.

The past two finals under Clarke have been a disaster. The situation now is actually quite fascinating because it's very hard to unpick why things went so embarrassingly awry this year - is it just his dogged, negative inflexibility, or are the players tired, jaded, and/or past their peak? Does the former feed into the latter somehow?  Is trying to qualify again an acceptable target (IMO, no, if it means we'd be served this thin footballing gruel for a third time at a finals) or should we bring in new ideas so that when we do qualify again, we know what to do when we get there?

 

I remember pointing this issue out on here at the time of the Norn Iron game - anyone playing us at the Euros who watched that game could see a relatively easy way to nullify us. So many folk were in denial saying it wasn’t a big issue because no one at the Euros would play like that.

Turns out it’s really bitten us on the arse.

[Bing.McCrosby]

20 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

I remember pointing this issue out on here at the time of the Norn Iron game - anyone playing us at the Euros who watched that game could see a relatively easy way to nullify us. So many folk were in denial saying it wasn’t a big issue because no one at the Euros would play like that.

Turns out it’s really bitten us on the arse.

Turns out quite alot of things people said turned out to be true, bad idea to play all the hard friendlies, in turn bad form affecting the confidence, bad to be so loyal and not pick players on form, bad idea to play back 5 every game especially without Tierney.

 

[Billy Jean King]

Our record in meaningful games away from Hampden is dreadful and has been for years. Our decent home form covers over a multitude of cracks.

[Sergeant Wilson]

31 minutes ago, Bing.McCrosby said:

Turns out quite alot of things people said turned out to be true, bad idea to play all the hard friendlies, in turn bad form affecting the confidence, bad to be so loyal and not pick players on form, bad idea to play back 5 every game especially without Tierney.

 

I'll never understand that run of games being chosen. I get the idea of trying to play against similar sides you might meet, but we seemed to pick the wrong teams to an outrageous degree.

[Jacksgranda]

On 27/06/2024 at 09:12, kennie makevin said:

Who's this 'Yogi' imposter people keep referring to ? John 'Yogi Bear' Hughes played for Celtic in the 60's, on form was an unstoppable winger. He never managed or exposed his penis on national television, to my knowledge. Sadly he is no longer with us. 

He certainly was.

[Arthurlie1981]

47 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I'll never understand that run of games being chosen. I get the idea of trying to play against similar sides you might meet, but we seemed to pick the wrong teams to an outrageous degree.

Totally agree. England was about money and so called prestige for the SFA but the others made little to no sense. Playing 1 of England, Holland and France would have made sense.

 

1 hour ago, eez-eh said:

I remember pointing this issue out on here at the time of the Norn Iron game - anyone playing us at the Euros who watched that game could see a relatively easy way to nullify us. So many folk were in denial saying it wasn’t a big issue because no one at the Euros would play like that.

Turns out it’s really bitten us on the arse.

I thought the whole point of playing Gibraltar was about learning how to break a team down who were determined to keep 10 men behind the ball after failing so badly against Northern Ireland. The fact that Clarke just did the same thing and even did little to change it during the game was a major warning sign. When a few people in the press (and supporters) tried to raise it he came out with his 'negative norman' schtick to deflect away from the failings in the lead up to the tournament.

I totally respect those who feel he still has enough credit in the bank to remain in the job (I personally don't) but I just dont understand the defending of him as if it wasn't his fault from some quarters. The defence of injuries is nonsense, we were without 2 starters as neither Patterson nor Ferguson would have started if everyone had been fit.

Edited Friday at 18:04 by Arthurlie1981

[Bing.McCrosby]

1 hour ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I'll never understand that run of games being chosen. I get the idea of trying to play against similar sides you might meet, but we seemed to pick the wrong teams to an outrageous degree.

It just sucked any momentum and confidence we had, it was so bizarre. And then it was defended to the end as a good thing

17 minutes ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

Totally agree. England was about money and so called prestige for the SFA but the others made little to no sense. Playing 1 of England, Holland and France would have made sense.

 

I thought the whole point of playing Gibraltar was about learning how to break a team down who were determined to keep 10 men behind the ball after failing so badly against Northern Ireland. The fact that Clarke just did the same thing and even did little to change it during the game was a major warning sign. When a few people in the press (and supporters) tried to raise it he came out with his 'negative norman' schtick to deflect away from the failings in the lead up to the tournament.

I totally respect those who feel he still has enough credit in the bank to remain in the job (I personally don't) but I just dont understand the defending of him as if it wasn't his fault from some quarters. The defence of injuries is nonsense, we were without 2 starters as neither Patterson nor Ferguson would have started if everyone had been fit.

Realistically 1 and a half, Dykes is only stating half the time at most. I reckon he would only have played against Germany. Maybe on as a sub the other games. So might have got 15 seconds against Switzerland.

[Gordopolis]

2 hours ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

I thought the whole point of playing Gibraltar was about learning how to break a team down who were determined to keep 10 men behind the ball after failing so badly against Northern Ireland. 

Pretty certain the Gibraltar tie was arranged before the NIron debacle (as opposed to being arranged as a result of that shite performance)

[2426255]

2 hours ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

I thought the whole point of playing Gibraltar was about learning how to break a team down who were determined to keep 10 men behind the ball after failing so badly against Northern Ireland.

I thought Gibraltar was primarily taken for fitness and location. I saw it as our equivalent of a pre season friendly.

I don't think much from that game was taken into the tournament.

[2426255]

6 hours ago, VictorOnopko said:

Pay some attention to which players looked like they were towing caravans against Switzerland. Spring a surprise or two rather than being 100% predictable and pedestrian. Use the squad. Change things up far far earlier when we were having no impact whatsoever. 

Fair enough. I always feel with fans results shade opinion. The only constant when we lose is the manager will take the brunt of the fans anger/venting.

If he did what you said and lost it's: trying to be too clever, doesn't know his best XI, has overthought it, tinkerman etc. We've seen what happens if he goes with his best XI: too loyal, too predictable, too stubborn. The only way to please fans is to win, that's all fans understand, so it's hard to have that much sympathy. 

Edited Friday at 21:34 by 2426255

[Arthurlie1981]

11 hours ago, 2426255 said:

I thought Gibraltar was primarily taken for fitness and location. I saw it as our equivalent of a pre season friendly.

I don't think much from that game was taken into the tournament.

I'm sorry but I don't buy into this preseason nonsense. The players had (at most) between 2-3 weeks (some had a week) off before the camp started and shouldn't need a friendly to get fit after a long season. Most countries play teams in these games that are going to play similarly to your opponents (like sparing in boxing) so that you can make sure your system(s) work. The results dont matter especially if you go into the tournament with the lessons learnt. But we didn't and instead when push came to shove, doubled down for the Hungary  game and then Clarke panicked and threw mud at the wall hoping it would stick.

 

[2426255]

15 minutes ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

I'm sorry but I don't buy into this preseason nonsense. The players had (at most) between 2-3 weeks (some had a week) off before the camp started and shouldn't need a friendly to get fit after a long season. 

Please, don't feel the need to apologise. It might be worth reconsidering that concept given Ross McCrorie finished his season with Bristol City on May-4th and the Gibraltar game was June-3rd. If you think that's the only example, you'll be disappointed. 

[VictorOnopko]

11 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Fair enough. I always feel with fans results shade opinion. The only constant when we lose is the manager will take the brunt of the fans anger/venting.

If he did what you said and lost it's: trying to be too clever, doesn't know his best XI, has overthought it, tinkerman etc. We've seen what happens if he goes with his best XI: too loyal, too predictable, too stubborn. The only way to please fans is to win, that's all fans understand, so it's hard to have that much sympathy. 

Those stupid fans, eh? Simple-minded morons.

1. You asked me what I thought Clarke should have done differently and I answered you with multiple things. You don't address any of these and again (wilfully?) miss the point -  it isn't just about the result, it's the manner of the Hungary failure which was galling, and very, very easy to predict upon seeing the lineup, pre-match (no changes except to replace Tierney; exactly the same predictable, negative tactics).

2. If you hold "fans" in such contempt, and believe that no criticism or discussion is worthwhile because it's all just hindsight and Steve Clarke is always right (or that there's no point in discussing hypotheticals), then why on earth do you spend so much time posting/spamming the Scotland threads on this forum, literally a website for football fans to debate football?

 

[immcinto]

10 hours ago, No_Problemo said:

I mean firstly we still don’t know this, and secondly I don’t know what every bit of evidence is given Adams also had a good season. 

It was obviously easier coming on against Hungary; when players were within fifty yards of Shankland. 

 

Adams is not a target man. He supports a striker. At Southampton that is Adam Armstrong, and when he is eventually fully fit, Ross Stewart. If Clarke knew he was going to be so inflexible in the way he puts out a team he should have replaced Dykes with Ross Stewart