What would be a 'good' tournament? - Page 3 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

What would be a 'good' tournament?


exile
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

Only 9 european teams qualified. We needed to be one of the top 9 european teams just to qualify. Now most sensible folk think we won't be in the top 16. We only got into the last 24 by beating Albania and Israel then winning two penalty shootouts.

Give it up eh? For the simple reason far less teams were taking part. You seem to be advocating a 'closed shop' sort of tournament which hinders growth in any sport. Do you advocate going back to the days of snooker when the world championship final was invitational played between only two players? A time when a 50 break in snooker was groundbreaking? In your utopia of football two of the best achieving teams in the last Euros being Iceland and Wales would not even of qualified. Why do you think the European Super League was so crucified? For the reason it was an exclusivity for the rich boys only. The Euros and World Cup would be exactly the same if we had 8 teams in the Euros every time and 16 in the World Cup. Totally ghastly thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

8 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Give it up eh? For the simple reason far less teams were taking part. You seem to be advocating a 'closed shop' sort of tournament which hinders growth in any sport. Do you advocate going back to the days of snooker when the world championship final was invitational played between only two players? A time when a 50 break in snooker was groundbreaking? In your utopia of football two of the best achieving teams in the last Euros being Iceland and Wales would not even of qualified. Why do you think the European Super League was so crucified? For the reason it was an exclusivity for the rich boys only. The Euros and World Cup would be exactly the same if we had 8 teams in the Euros every time and 16 in the World Cup. Totally ghastly thought.

I never said any of that pish. Your just making stuff up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

I never said any of that pish. Your just making stuff up.

So enlighten us to the point you are trying to make? That getting to the last 16 today is not the same as back then? Or that qualifying was more difficult back then so more of an achievement? Or that tournaments were better back then and they are crap now?

Edited by Caledonian Craig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

So enlighten us to the point you are trying to make? That getting to the last 16 today is not the same as back then? Or that qualifying was more difficult back then so more of an achievement? Or that tournaments were better back then and they are crap now?

Forget it Orraloon and apologies from me its not worth falling out over anyway. Spoils the good mood we have today.

I am sat here thinking that last night is our best performance/result against a side ranked so highly at a major tournament since our opening game at Euro 96 when we drew with Netherlands and then before that you'd have to go back to 1978 when we beat Netherlands 3-2 and then prior to that our 0-0 draw in 1974 against Brazil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/18/2021 at 8:38 AM, exile said:

In perspective, tournament results against the top team on our group:

 

78 - Won (but not by enough)

74, 20 - Drew

86, 98 - Lost by one goal (but scored)

90 - Lost by one goal

92, 96 - Lost by 2 goals

82 - Lost by 3 goals

 

So a good result would be not losing.

 

(Updated)

Edited by exile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Forget it Orraloon and apologies from me its not worth falling out over anyway. Spoils the good mood we have today.

I am sat here thinking that last night is our best performance/result against a side ranked so highly at a major tournament since our opening game at Euro 96 when we drew with Netherlands and then before that you'd have to go back to 1978 when we beat Netherlands 3-2 and then prior to that our 0-0 draw in 1974 against Brazil.

:ok:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last game performances in perspective

96 - Won, but went out on goal difference (were in position to qualify for about 15 minutes)

78 - Won, but went out on goal difference (were within one goal of qualifying, for 3 minutes)

82 - Drew, but went out on goal difference (were in position to qualify for about 45 minutes)

74 - Drew, but went out on goal difference 

86 - Drew, but finished bottom of group

90 - Lost, finished third in group

98 - Lost, finished bottom of group

(92 - Already out)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, exile said:

Last game performances in perspective

96 - Won, but went out on goal difference (were in position to qualify for about 15 minutes)

78 - Won, but went out on goal difference (were within one goal of qualifying, for 3 minutes)

82 - Drew, but went out on goal difference (were in position to qualify for about 45 minutes)

74 - Drew, but went out on goal difference 

86 - Drew, but finished bottom of group

90 - Lost, finished third in group

98 - Lost, finished bottom of group

(92 - Already out)

 

Typically 92 was the only emphatic victory, when it didn't matter.

Hopefully it's repeated tonight 🤞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A last check on perspective:

Tournament - Results - Goal Difference - Goals scored

74 - WDD (GD +2) (3 goals)

82 - WDL (GD 0) (8 goals)

78 - WDL (GD -1) (5 goals)

96 - WDL (GD -1) (1 goal)

92 - WLL (GD 0) (3 goals)

90 - WLL (GD -1) (2 goals)

86 - DLL (GD -2) (1 goal)

98 - DLL (GD -4) (2 goals)

20 - DLL (GD -4) (1 goal)

 

😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Malcolm said:

I think it was a fairly decent tournament. We could easily have lost all three games and not scored.

We more or less did but I know what you mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

However decent the performance, it seems to me (maybe surprisingly) that it is objectively one of the worst if not the worst tournament outcomes at least since 74.

'Maybe suprisingly' because it seems hopes were higher, for longer, and still seem higher, maybe because it's a young team and the potential seems greater than after the results of 1998 or 1986. 

Edited by exile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to ranking we are already above our tournament expectations. Above Turkey , N Macedonia and Russia. 
In each game we had a handful of chances, which I take great comfort from. 
Tonight we saw some very good play from Croatia and I thought Modric lasted better than I had hoped. What a player. 
 

we’re out . Enjoyed it. More to come . The future looks bright. And didn’t the crowd in tonight give it a go 🥃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

End of the day we qualified for a tournament which is great and it takes the pressure off future squads and managers. Ppl greeting about us qualifying through the back door should remember that every other country could of done the same but didnt and we had to beat a very decent Serbia team to get to this tournament. 

We also would of got a playoff spot in our qualifying group had the old format of qualifying been around. 

End of the day progress has been made, might not be massive progress but its a step in the right direction. Also our best players will still be around for the next euros. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

End of the day we qualified for a tournament which is great and it takes the pressure off future squads and managers. Ppl greeting about us qualifying through the back door should remember that every other country could of done the same but didnt and we had to beat a very decent Serbia team to get to this tournament. 

We also would of got a playoff spot in our qualifying group had the old format of qualifying been around. 

End of the day progress has been made, might not be massive progress but its a step in the right direction. Also our best players will still be around for the next euros. 

Fully agree.

And I hate that terminology (not yours I know) of through the back door. It was a route to qualification ratified by UEFA. Through the back door makes it sound like we got in through bribing UEFA or through another team getting kicked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, exile said:

However decent the performance, it seems to me (maybe surprisingly) that it is objectively one of the worst if not the worst tournament outcomes at least since 74.

'Maybe suprisingly' because it seems hopes were higher, for longer, and still seem higher, maybe because it's a young team and the potential seems greater than after the results of 1998 or 1986. 

98 more of a ageing “journeyman” side with bits of talent ; john collins etc , again our forwards way below par

think there was more of an expectation for 86 team ; as experienced bunch of pros who were at top of game club wise , but again forwards were pish at that level ; liverpool players rarely seemed to replicate club form

oh and roy aitken ……

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no doubt we have improved in some form - we actually qualified for a tournament! I know its quite naff to say it, but I am happy we got there.

Do we play better football? I am not sure at all. We have been pretty fortunate when it came to Covid in the Nations League - playing a Czech C side and really struggling - but we found a way to win. We don't know how to beat Israel!

I used to say our level is about Hungary but after their tournament, I think they are better than us. If you think about it in the sense of the ''best sixteen teams in this competition'' got through ; you would say they did! Its stating the obvious ; but Poland, Slovakia, Turkey, ourselves have been pretty disappointing on the whole barring the odd moment in a game or half a game.

Its something to build on, but whilst I like Clarke as a person and no doubt the squad do too(there's no where near as many call offs as other coaches have had) I believe he deserves the rest of the campaign , but I think he is far too slow to change tactically. He's no stranger to making some bold decisions and does surprise on occasions ; but in the actual management of the game, he's very slow. At 3-1, it was fairly obvious it was over ; but why didn't he ring 3/4 changes when it was 2-1? The Czech game, we all seen how slow and poor we were yet nothing really changed at HT.

Clarke is suited to very average teams who just need to survive or do better than expected. Trouble with that is unless its Nations Leagues or being penalty kings in playoff games ; we won't qualify with tight losses (scorewise) ; draws and wins against Faroes and Luxembourg.

We have some decent players and TBH, there's an element of them being shackled under Clarke. McTominay playing as a defender, Tierney out of position-ish, the need for Stuart Armstrong to fit in this team (he's too disjointed to start for us, IMO)

Scoring. The stats say it all - our average goal per tournament was 0.3. Joint bottom with Turkey and Slovakia - and we seen how poor they both were all tournament. You could argue Macedonia were far more entertaining to watch and better value for money/stats.

Roaning on a bit, but give Clarke the rest of the campaign (its looking tough as it is with that draw) and we'll need to be more cavalier away in Vienna, and the home game against Denmark. Being a poor (pts wise) second doesn't guarantee a playoff. So we'll need to go for it to have any chance of Qatar. I'm not sure I can see Clarke doing that!

Saying that, who's going to take it? Maybe Callum Davidson in a few years if he progresses ; but someone like Derek McInnes would be the favourite to take over if he quit! Yikes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, weekevie04 said:

There is no doubt we have improved in some form - we actually qualified for a tournament! I know its quite naff to say it, but I am happy we got there.

Do we play better football? I am not sure at all. We have been pretty fortunate when it came to Covid in the Nations League - playing a Czech C side and really struggling - but we found a way to win. We don't know how to beat Israel!

I used to say our level is about Hungary but after their tournament, I think they are better than us. If you think about it in the sense of the ''best sixteen teams in this competition'' got through ; you would say they did! Its stating the obvious ; but Poland, Slovakia, Turkey, ourselves have been pretty disappointing on the whole barring the odd moment in a game or half a game.

Its something to build on, but whilst I like Clarke as a person and no doubt the squad do too(there's no where near as many call offs as other coaches have had) I believe he deserves the rest of the campaign , but I think he is far too slow to change tactically. He's no stranger to making some bold decisions and does surprise on occasions ; but in the actual management of the game, he's very slow. At 3-1, it was fairly obvious it was over ; but why didn't he ring 3/4 changes when it was 2-1? The Czech game, we all seen how slow and poor we were yet nothing really changed at HT.

Clarke is suited to very average teams who just need to survive or do better than expected. Trouble with that is unless its Nations Leagues or being penalty kings in playoff games ; we won't qualify with tight losses (scorewise) ; draws and wins against Faroes and Luxembourg.

We have some decent players and TBH, there's an element of them being shackled under Clarke. McTominay playing as a defender, Tierney out of position-ish, the need for Stuart Armstrong to fit in this team (he's too disjointed to start for us, IMO)

Scoring. The stats say it all - our average goal per tournament was 0.3. Joint bottom with Turkey and Slovakia - and we seen how poor they both were all tournament. You could argue Macedonia were far more entertaining to watch and better value for money/stats.

Roaning on a bit, but give Clarke the rest of the campaign (its looking tough as it is with that draw) and we'll need to be more cavalier away in Vienna, and the home game against Denmark. Being a poor (pts wise) second doesn't guarantee a playoff. So we'll need to go for it to have any chance of Qatar. I'm not sure I can see Clarke doing that!

Saying that, who's going to take it? Maybe Callum Davidson in a few years if he progresses ; but someone like Derek McInnes would be the favourite to take over if he quit! Yikes!

Maybe Souness fancies it now we have decent players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2021 at 11:10 PM, exile said:

However decent the performance, it seems to me (maybe surprisingly) that it is objectively one of the worst if not the worst tournament outcomes at least since 74.

'Maybe suprisingly' because it seems hopes were higher, for longer, and still seem higher, maybe because it's a young team and the potential seems greater than after the results of 1998 or 1986. 

Are you washing 1998 from your memory?

We were in an easier group than this tournament and ended up with the same return - one point. And that came at a time when we were perennial qualifiers. Okay we had the World Champions in that group (this time we had the World Cup runners-up) but Norway were not a team in the same category as England (World Cup semi-finalists and top five ranking) and Morocco certainly not as highly-ranked as the Czech Republic. On top of that we were ranked far higher than we are currently. In fact I would say the group we had in this tournament I struggle to think of a tougher one that we have had at a major tournament aside from 1986.

Did we disgrace ourselves here in such a tough group? Definitely not. Unlike 1998 V Morocco, 1990 V Costa Rica, 1978 V Peru, and 1978 V Iran. 

Stats show we gave it a real good go but sadly we just do not have top quality in the final third which is a killer at this level.

 

Edited by Caledonian Craig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Eh no, not washing 1998 from memory, 1998 does feature in the earlier posts comparing previous tournaments.

I think we are at cross purposes. I never said we disgraced ourselves, I just said our record this time was objectively worst (on basis of results, goal difference and goals scored). Yet it doesn't feel the worst - for the exact reasons you state, plus what I suggested, I think a stronger feeling of hope for a better future.

Edited by exile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, exile said:

Eh no, not washing 1998 from memory, given I've made several posts on this thread comparing with those other years!

I think we are at cross purposes. I never said we disgraced ourselves, I just said our record this time was objectively worst (on basis of results, goal difference and goals scored). Yet it doesn't feel the worst - for the exact reasons you state, plus what I suggested, I think a stronger feeling of hope for a better future.

I suppose it is much to do with the context of the thread question of 'What would be a good tournament?'

Personally, considering the previous 23 years it has been a good tournament just having Scotland qualify. But of course there is always room to want more but at present we are not quite there to offer more especially given the draw we had. Every country in it were ranked above us and two had a very successful World Cup three years ago and are ranked way above us and have been for too long to remember.

If you look back over the past 6 to 12 months of posts on here discussing our matches you'll find there are far more posts denigrating our players such as McBurnie, McGregor, Dykes, Fraser and O'Donnell to name but a few. Other posts slating our performances in the last two Nations League matches and the World Cup qualifiers against Austria and Israel. From that alone it tells us that even our own fans recognised our shortcomings yet we are expected to string wins together and qualify from perhaps one of our toughest groups we have ever faced in a major tournament. I can't work that one out.

Anyway apologies exile if I snapped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, weekevie04 said:

 

Roaning on a bit, but give Clarke the rest of the campaign (its looking tough as it is with that draw) and we'll need to be more cavalier away in Vienna, and the home game against Denmark. Being a poor (pts wise) second doesn't guarantee a playoff. So we'll need to go for it to have any chance of Qatar. I'm not sure I can see Clarke doing that!

 

All ten second place teams get a playoff spot along with two teams who qualify via the Nations League.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

All ten second place teams get a playoff spot along with two teams who qualify via the Nations League.

Be easier winning the section than 2nd place play off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Be easier winning the section than 2nd place play off.

I'm fairly confident our current squad of players don't have the ability to do either. If we even get a playoff spot our manager will have worked a minor miracle, whoever that manager happens to be. ;)

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
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...
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...