What would be acceptable?

[ceudmilefailte]

I'm still in shock that Clarke has been given a new contract.

What would be the minimum points total over the three games to justify this?

Anything less than four to me would mean that the SFA have jumped the gun.

[Orraloon]

5 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

I'm still in shock that Clarke has been given a new contract.

What would be the minimum points total over the three games to justify this?

Anything less than four to me would mean that the SFA have jumped the gun.

Maybe he was threatening to walk? Who knows? Does seem very strange timing though.

[Tartan blood]

40 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

I'm still in shock that Clarke has been given a new contract.

What would be the minimum points total over the three games to justify this?

Anything less than four to me would mean that the SFA have jumped the gun.

I can see where you are coming from, but this isn't like when Levein was in charge and Strachan was available and an obvious improvement. If there was a high quality manager waiting in the wings, I'd consider trying someone new, but I honestly can't think of anyone that could improve us.

Plus, losing the manager would dismantle the camaraderie we've built the past couple years. Clarke has his flaws, but if he can learn from them, he is deserving of the new contract, even if we ended up with only 3 points. One or none points would be sackable though.

[Toepoke]

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Anything less than four to me would mean that the SFA have jumped the gun.

While disappointing, losing two away games against better teams would hardly be a sacking offence. 

 

[ceudmilefailte]

12 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

While disappointing, losing two away games against better teams would hardly be a sacking offence. 

 

I'm not suggesting that he should be sacked more that he shouldn't have been given the extended contract based on achievements so far. 

If he at the very least got a point in Austria then perhaps a new contract could be offered but not before these games. 

[Caledonian Craig]

Acceptable is the wrong term and can be construed in many ways.

What is acceptable to one is not acceptable to another and we need to be realistic. Denmark are better than us - no doubt. We saw that in the Euros. Austria are perhaps on a par or just slightly better than us. I cannot see how, therefore, fans can be presuming or assuming we should be beating teams better than us. It is possible we could beat them with a bit of luck but not a sackable offence if we don't.

For me a lot is to do with the performances we put in.

Edited August 25, 2021 by Caledonian Craig

[Caledonian Craig]

10 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

I'm not suggesting that he should be sacked more that he shouldn't have been given the extended contract based on achievements so far. 

If he at the very least got a point in Austria then perhaps a new contract could be offered but not before these games. 

Might of been a case that other clubs were sniffing around after him.

[ceudmilefailte]

29 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Acceptable is the wrong term and can be construed in many ways.

What is acceptable to one is not acceptable to another and we need to be realistic. Denmark are better than us - no doubt. We saw that in the Euros. Austria are perhaps on a par or just slightly better than us. I cannot see how, therefore, fans can be presuming or assuming we should be beating teams better than us. It is possible we could beat them with a bit of luck but not a sackable offence if we don't.

For me a lot is to do with the performances we put in.

The topic title is designed to ask what individuals think would be acceptable and by the looks of things three points is OK.

Denmark are 2/5 to beat us which looks a massive price and I doubt it will be around for long but if you add that with the Austria odds we are odds on to pick up at least a point. We have every right to expect our manager to manage at least one point.

I never once suggested sacking him, the point is what would be acceptable in terms of results to justify the extension of his contract.

Out of curiosity does any one know how much it would have cost him to breach his previous contract.

[AlfieMoon]

3 points (Moldova) is the acceptable baseline. 
 

4 points (Austria) should be the minimum aim.
 

Anything better than that represents success. We’re expected to lose in Denmark. 
 

I’m happy enough that he’s got a new deal. He’s made mistakes and has things to improve on but he got us to a finals (albeit narrowly and some credit to McLeish and also recognising poor opposition). 
 

Positives are that the players are turning up and wanting to play for him. If we can start punching a wee bit above our weight we’ll be doing okay if you we can find a style that gets the best out of our players. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by AlfieMoon

[COLT NY]

Maybe the SFA is wise to the fact that if we beat Denmark and Austria it will cost a hell of a lot more to tie him down to a new contract, and if they lose they don't have many better options than a guy who at least got us to a real competition?

[ProudScot]

12 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Might of been a case that other clubs were sniffing around after him.

I think that’s pretty unlikely 

[glasgow jock]

I honestly think we underachieved at the Euros (also turned out we where in a much tougher group than perhaps thought), I think we have a decent squad, who quite clearly get on like a club side and buy into the managers plans.

We can be too cautious at times i'd say, but i'm not too concerned overall, we have the makings of a cracking starting 11 .

[Squirrelhumper]

13 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

3 points (Moldova) is the acceptable baseline. 
 

4 points (Austria) should be the minimum aim.
 

Anything better than that represents success. We’re expected to lose in Denmark. 
 

I’m happy enough that he’s got a new deal. He’s made mistakes and has things to improve on but he got us to a finals (albeit narrowly and some credit to McLeish and also recognising poor opposition). 
 

Positives are that the players are turning up and wanting to play for him. If we can start punching a wee bit above our weight we’ll be doing okay if you we can find a style that gets the best out of our players. 

Spot on. 

[wanderer]

Expecting 3, hoping for 4, and anything over 5 points would be excellent IMHO.

I still feel we are slowly going in the right direction, and the Euros came a few months to early for a number of the squad, such as Dykes only really found his form with QPR from March onward, and think we will see some return from him now he has a full season and a pre-season at QPR under his belt.... all the Celtic players were massively out of form (especially Christie).... and Adams was probably a call up or two for a squad to late to really get into the team.

[Squirrelhumper]

31 minutes ago, glasgow jock said:

I honestly think we underachieved at the Euros (also turned out we where in a much tougher group than perhaps thought), I think we have a decent squad, who quite clearly get on like a club side and buy into the managers plans.

We can be too cautious at times i'd say, but i'm not too concerned overall, we have the makings of a cracking starting 11 .

I'm not sure i buy into the too cautious stuff, certainly not compared to previous scottish mangers of late.

He makes us hard to beat but we also create plenty chances in games. Biggest issues is lack of genuine talent up top. Against Czechs we had enough chances to have them dead and buried before they scored their 2nd.   

[Tartan blood]

13 minutes ago, wanderer said:

Expecting 3, hoping for 4, and anything over 5 points would be excellent IMHO.

I still feel we are slowly going in the right direction, and the Euros came a few months to early for a number of the squad, such as Dykes only really found his form with QPR from March onward, and think we will see some return from him now he has a full season and a pre-season at QPR under his belt.... all the Celtic players were massively out of form (especially Christie).... and Adams was probably a call up or two for a squad to late to really get into the team.

Totally agree. And I honestly think pretty much every subsequent squad is getting better and better, either because of new personnel or players showing more form.

Patterson is/will be better than Palmer. Gilmour is better than Fleck. Turnbull is better than C.Paterson. Adams is better than McBurnie.

Goalkeeper is the only position that hasn't gotten stronger in the past 2 years. 

 

[wanderer]

9 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

Totally agree. And I honestly think pretty much every subsequent squad is getting better and better, either because of new personnel or players showing more form.

Patterson is/will be better than Palmer. Gilmour is better than Fleck. Turnbull is better than C.Paterson. Adams is better than McBurnie.

Goalkeeper is the only position that hasn't gotten stronger in the past 2 years. 

 

I think we are starting to see some real depth in the squad, and its also showing in terms of better quality.

4-5 years ago we literally had no defense to speak of, now McTomiany is out and its hardly Earth shattering (big loss yes, but is easily manageable), as moving him into midfield is not a option as Gilmour is probably going to be a shoo-in for next few games (plus Turnbulls form for Celtic of late can not be ignored), and even though we have played him at the back, Hendry has shown he can step in (granted he did failed to shine in the Euros) and we still have about 2 or 3 others to select upon.

I also think the upgrades with the coaching staff this week will probably pay off in the long run (MacPhee might not be to everyone's taste, but you do not get some of the jobs he has had without having some uses, and Northern Ireland have certainly benefited from having him around).

[Tartan blood]

29 minutes ago, wanderer said:

I think we are starting to see some real depth in the squad, and its also showing in terms of better quality.

4-5 years ago we literally had no defense to speak of, now McTomiany is out and its hardly Earth shattering (big loss yes, but is easily manageable), as moving him into midfield is not a option as Gilmour is probably going to be a shoo-in for next few games (plus Turnbulls form for Celtic of late can not be ignored), and even though we have played him at the back, Hendry has shown he can step in (granted he did failed to shine in the Euros) and we still have about 2 or 3 others to select upon.

I also think the upgrades with the coaching staff this week will probably pay off in the long run (MacPhee might not be to everyone's taste, but you do not get some of the jobs he has had without having some uses, and Northern Ireland have certainly benefited from having him around).

With McTominay the problem we have now is where to fit him in. He's too good not to start, you'd think. I personally would rather he wasn't in defence, but with the emergence of Gilmour and the electric form of McGregor, we don't really need him in a holding midfield role. Plus Jack and McGinn can play there.

Turnbull could become a conundrum similar to the Tierney/Robertson debate. McGinn is too good not to play, but we could very well be saying the same thing about Turnbull very soon.

Why is MacPhee not to everyone's taste?

Edited August 26, 2021 by Tartan blood

[wanderer]

5 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

With McTominay the problem we have now is where to fit him in. He's too good not to start, you'd think. I personally would rather he wasn't in defence, but with the emergence of Gilmour and the electric form of McGregor, we don't really need him in a holding midfield role. Plus Jack and McGinn can play there.

Turnbull could become a conundrum similar to the Tierney/Robertson debate. McGinn is too good not to play, but we could very well be saying the same thing about Turnbull very soon.

Why is MacPhee not to everyone's taste?

MacPhee, a lot of the old guard Scottish pundits seem to love to ridicule him and Cathro at every turn because of their "absurd" laptop tactics and methods (even though that is the way coaching is going elsewhere in the world) and this seems to have trickled down to a fans level as some of the comments on his appointment I have seen have been quite simply over the top.

 

[ceudmilefailte]

1 hour ago, Tartan blood said:

Totally agree. And I honestly think pretty much every subsequent squad is getting better and better, either because of new personnel or players showing more form.

 

 

By default results should too?

[Malcolm]

18 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

With McTominay the problem we have now is where to fit him in. He's too good not to start, you'd think. I personally would rather he wasn't in defence, but with the emergence of Gilmour and the electric form of McGregor, we don't really need him in a holding midfield role. Plus Jack and McGinn can play there.

Turnbull could become a conundrum similar to the Tierney/Robertson debate. McGinn is too good not to play, but we could very well be saying the same thing about Turnbull very soon.

Why is MacPhee not to everyone's taste?

turnbull needs to move to a bigger club if he is to cement his place in midfield.  The three automatic picks will be Mctominay, gilmour and Mcginn.  
 

[Tartan blood]

57 minutes ago, wanderer said:

MacPhee, a lot of the old guard Scottish pundits seem to love to ridicule him and Cathro at every turn because of their "absurd" laptop tactics and methods (even though that is the way coaching is going elsewhere in the world) and this seems to have trickled down to a fans level as some of the comments on his appointment I have seen have been quite simply over the top.

 

For crying out loud. I remember Kris Boyd apparently mocking Cathro when they were doing their coaches badges at the same time because he was taking notes, or something like that. It's pathetic that that culture still exists.

[Tartan blood]

47 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

turnbull needs to move to a bigger club if he is to cement his place in midfield.  The three automatic picks will be Mctominay, gilmour and Mcginn.  
 

Based on the Euros, McTominay is more likely to play in defence, but I see what you mean. 

Turnbull is more than capable of going to the premier league, or elsewhere, but at least 1 more stand out season with Celtic will do him no harm.

[vanderark14]

6 points is acceptable. If we are serious about qualifying we must get 6 points.

[AlfieMoon]

1 hour ago, Tartan blood said:

With McTominay the problem we have now is where to fit him in. He's too good not to start, you'd think. I personally would rather he wasn't in defence, but with the emergence of Gilmour and the electric form of McGregor, we don't really need him in a holding midfield role. Plus Jack and McGinn can play there.

Turnbull could become a conundrum similar to the Tierney/Robertson debate. McGinn is too good not to play, but we could very well be saying the same thing about Turnbull very soon.

Why is MacPhee not to everyone's taste?

I’ve not seen anything to suggest that McTominay is too good not to start but I do recognise that people seem to have that notion.
 

I think people get carried away because he plays for Man Utd but I don’t think he delivers consistently enough and is prone to errors. He may grow into a fine player as he matures but I think we have better options for now.