Steve Clarke Fuck Off

[PSJ84]

It’s possible to think we’re more than capable of getting out of the group whilst not expecting us to do so. 

[Scotty2Hotty]

2 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Im not following your logic here. Shankland got 70 odd minutes but thats not enough over 2 games but  Dkyes got 70 mins in just one game and Adams about 40 over 2 games yet Dykes and Adams are Clarkes clear favourites? Would it not make more sence to say that Clarke doesnt doubt Shanklands ability to score against teams like NI but there were questions about the rest of his game against top level opponents. Hence why he started the Holland game. (And passed that test btw as Clarke stated after).

Ferguson is not currently a better player than McTomminay or McGinn in the attacking mid positions. I agree that id have liked to have seen him start one of the games however as big a fan as I am of him, he has done nothing in a Scotland shirt to push himself into the team.

As for McGinn up front, I have no idea what you are basing this on. He is probably the laziest player in our team, doesnt have pace, cant win headers, doesnt have skill in terms of beating a man and has to my knowledge never played up front in his life. 

If the above is your basis for criticising Clarke then I suggest you rest your case.

I'm going by the previous few years where Shankland has barely had a sniff despite scoring regularly (apart from his time in Belguim). Adams/Dykes were always the preferred main striker. 

Mcginn/McT are undroppable. I love Gilmour, great wee player but I'm not so sure he fits the Scottish team as we are not really the best team at playing possession football like a Chelsea or Brighton are but not sure you can leave him out still. McGregor is a very good player but not testing himself at a high level and wouldn't put him in the undroppable mould. You could rejig the midfield where Ferguson gets a place instead of him and work out a system to fit him in with great effect. Ferguson hasn't been given the opportunities to do an awful lot, he needs a run in the team which he ain't getting as we have been getting results with the current midfield but every good team is always looking to adapt and upgrade if options present themselves...

I don't see McGinn as a lazy player and every other option we have up top lacks pace and we are not really a long ball team anyway and don't score many headers unless it's from a corner. He can use his arse like King Kenny did and he has an eye for goal and could rotate with the other AM's in a fluid formation but aye this is pretty outward thinking and I know i'll get pelters for it but don't really care.

[kumnio]

5 hours ago, Orraloon said:

Two years ago. Things have changed. I think that even the OP has said he wouldn't sack him now. Apologies if I have got that bit wrong? 

How dare you actually read something correctly. That isn't allowed on this thread.

[mccaughey85]

23 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

We have qualified for two euros were twenty four countries do if that’s our pinnacle heaven help us. 
We have five players playing for top six teams in the top leagues in Europe.  
we have a dozen others with EPL experience.

last sixteen should be expected anything more than that and you can start talking pinnacles

We are a country that has never been out of the group stages in 11 major tournaments that we have qualified for and you think getting out of the groups should be expected. Why?

What are you basing that expectation on?

We have some decent players but our squad is very weak in certain areas. 

I am not suggesting that qualifying is the ultimate pinnacle but it's pretty close. Expecting much more than that is delusional based on our history and squad strength.

Thats not to say I don't think we can make it out the groups but it's definitely less than a 50 percent chance imo.

[vanderark14]

53 minutes ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

No idea what you are talking about tbh...

Are you actually gonna weigh in with any constructive feedback?

Nope. I'm enjoying watching the show.

Crack on sir 🍿 🍿 🍿 

[Grim Jim]

For a neutral take on expectations, I took a look at ELO ratings.  They have us out of the picture vs Germany, but close behind Switzerland & Hungary.

So any more than 2 points in the group and we are punching above.

[Scotty2Hotty]

22 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

We are a country that has never been out of the group stages in 11 major tournaments that we have qualified for and you think getting out of the groups should be expected. Why?

What are you basing that expectation on?

We have some decent players but our squad is very weak in certain areas. 

I am not suggesting that qualifying is the ultimate pinnacle but it's pretty close. Expecting much more than that is delusional based on our history and squad strength.

Thats not to say I don't think we can make it out the groups but it's definitely less than a 50 percent chance imo.

What's the past got to do with anything? Expectation is based around our current squad, form and who we are up against.

We are playing on world class team and two above average teams that are beatable.

You've honestly got the most negative mindset I've met of any Scotsman.

 

[Scotty2Hotty]

1 minute ago, vanderark14 said:

Nope. I'm enjoying watching the show.

Crack on sir 🍿 🍿 🍿 

Aye thought as much ya big jessie

[Goozay]

59 minutes ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

I'm not making stuff up, we were a good national team at the time and were favourites to qualify alongside Brazil.

We were slaughtered for being pumped by Morocco especially and Norway

 

So we didn't qualify for the World Cup in 94, didn't make it out of the group (and only scored one goal in three games) at Euro 96, but we were "favourites along with Brazil" to progress from the group stages for the first time in our history? Aye, very good. 

52 minutes ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

No idea what you are talking about tbh...

Are you actually gonna weigh in with any constructive feedback?

He thinks you're a troll with exaggerated zany takes intended to deliberately provoke a reaction. 

 

Are you? 

[Scotty2Hotty]

1 minute ago, Goozay said:

So we didn't qualify for the World Cup in 94, didn't make it out of the group (and only scored one goal in three games) at Euro 96, but we were "favourites along with Brazil" to progress from the group stages for the first time in our history? Aye, very good. 

He thinks you're a troll with exaggerated zany takes intended to deliberately provoke a reaction. 

 

Are you? 

At 96, we had both Holland and England and we narrowly missed out on goal difference. In 98, we were tipped to qualify with Brazil but aye as you say, very good.

Honestly have better things to do than troll mate...

What are my zany takes exactly?

 

 

[Scotty2Hotty]

1 hour ago, PSJ84 said:

It’s possible to think we’re more than capable of getting out of the group whilst not expecting us to do so. 

Careful this is far too positive as a post on this thread.

 

[Goozay]

23 minutes ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

At 96, we had both Holland and England and we narrowly missed out on goal difference. In 98, we were tipped to qualify with Brazil but aye as you say, very good.

Honestly have better things to do than troll mate...

What are my zany takes exactly?

 

 

Takes designed to get a reaction include:

- Crediting McLeish with our recent success 

- 'Everyone' expected us to get past the group stages in the 80s and 90s

- Ferguson and Shankland got 'fuck all' minutes these last two games 

- We should try McGinn upfront, 'he could be the new Fabregas'

[Scotty2Hotty]

2 minutes ago, Goozay said:

Takes designed to get a reaction include:

- Crediting McLeish with our recent success 

- 'Everyone' expected us to get past the group stages in the 80s and 90s

- Ferguson and Shankland got 'fuck all' minutes these last two games 

- We should try McGinn upfront, 'he could be the new Fabregas'

Cool bro, very insightful as always

[Diamond Scot]

54 minutes ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

I'm going by the previous few years where Shankland has barely had a sniff despite scoring regularly (apart from his time in Belguim). Adams/Dykes were always the preferred main striker. 

Mcginn/McT are undroppable. I love Gilmour, great wee player but I'm not so sure he fits the Scottish team as we are not really the best team at playing possession football like a Chelsea or Brighton are but not sure you can leave him out still. McGregor is a very good player but not testing himself at a high level and wouldn't put him in the undroppable mould. You could rejig the midfield where Ferguson gets a place instead of him and work out a system to fit him in with great effect. Ferguson hasn't been given the opportunities to do an awful lot, he needs a run in the team which he ain't getting as we have been getting results with the current midfield but every good team is always looking to adapt and upgrade if options present themselves...

I don't see McGinn as a lazy player and every other option we have up top lacks pace and we are not really a long ball team anyway and don't score many headers unless it's from a corner. He can use his arse like King Kenny did and he has an eye for goal and could rotate with the other AM's in a fluid formation but aye this is pretty outward thinking and I know i'll get pelters for it but don't really care.

Both Adams and Dykes have done a shift for Scotland in previously years. At a time when Shanklands game wasnt where it is at now so im not sure Clarke can be criticised for not playing Shankland then. I think most agree that Dykes and Adams form both at club and international level has dropped this season. Shankland has upped his game and become more rounded. Hence why he has forced his way into the starting conversation rather than being talked about as one who might make the squad. As I said, he started against Holland to see if he could pass the test, he did. Its only natural Dykes then plays against NI as he is still in mix. 

As you say, McTom and McGinn at this point are undroppable. They play in the position that is most suited to Ferguson. Both Gilmour and McGreggor have put in several outstanding performances for Scotland and naturally play in the deeper roles. Its unfortunate for Ferguson but there is no need to rip the strongest part of the team up to shoe horn him in. 

If Ferguson had put in an outstanding performance, scored a vital goal or done something abit special then he would have a stronger case but he hasnt. He is a quality player but at this point he isnt a starter in our strongest 11.

Everyone has their views but I just cant get on board with McGinn as a lone striker and I doubt anybody else will either. Its a mute point as 100% it will not happen.

[Toepoke]

1 hour ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

We were slaughtered for being pumped by Morocco especially and Norway

I had a fair skinful in Bordeaux but I'm pretty sure we drew with Norway.

 

[Scotty2Hotty]

3 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Both Adams and Dykes have done a shift for Scotland in previously years. At a time when Shanklands game wasnt where it is at now so im not sure Clarke can be criticised for not playing Shankland then. I think most agree that Dykes and Adams form both at club and international level has dropped this season. Shankland has upped his game and become more rounded. Hence why he has forced his way into the starting conversation rather than being talked about as one who might make the squad. As I said, he started against Holland to see if he could pass the test, he did. Its only natural Dykes then plays against NI as he is still in mix. 

As you say, McTom and McGinn at this point are undroppable. They play in the position that is most suited to Ferguson. Both Gilmour and McGreggor have put in several outstanding performances for Scotland and naturally play in the deeper roles. Its unfortunate for Ferguson but there is no need to rip the strongest part of the team up to shoe horn him in. 

If Ferguson had put in an outstanding performance, scored a vital goal or done something abit special then he would have a stronger case but he hasnt. He is a quality player but at this point he isnt a starter in our strongest 11.

Everyone has their views but I just cant get on board with McGinn as a lone striker and I doubt anybody else will either. Its a mute point as 100% it will not happen.

An actual constructive conversation.

I agree with most of what you have said and get that we would have to try shoehorn Ferguson in somewhere, it just seems a waste for me tbh as I think he would certianly enhance the quality of the team to me. This is why it has been frustrating during the recent games as I feel Clarke could of tried something different for these frendlies such as playing Christie in the CDM role but he played him in a CAM position again. 

Also, just because its the area of the team where we have the best options doesn't mean we have to continually stick with the same five players. There has been many games (not just the frendlies) where we have been outplayed and midfield has been an issue. Ferguson's defensive and energy capabilities could make a big difference to our team but we are not going to find out now before the euros as Clarke seems to like to stick to a settled team.

[Scotty2Hotty]

12 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

I had a fair skinful in Bordeaux but I'm pretty sure we drew with Norway.

 

Yeah it was a draw so apologies, forgot to add that in but seemed to remember at the time that we were disappointed not to get a win

[vanderark14]

9 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Both Adams and Dykes have done a shift for Scotland in previously years. At a time when Shanklands game wasnt where it is at now so im not sure Clarke can be criticised for not playing Shankland then. I think most agree that Dykes and Adams form both at club and international level has dropped this season. Shankland has upped his game and become more rounded. Hence why he has forced his way into the starting conversation rather than being talked about as one who might make the squad. As I said, he started against Holland to see if he could pass the test, he did. Its only natural Dykes then plays against NI as he is still in mix. 

As you say, McTom and McGinn at this point are undroppable. They play in the position that is most suited to Ferguson. Both Gilmour and McGreggor have put in several outstanding performances for Scotland and naturally play in the deeper roles. Its unfortunate for Ferguson but there is no need to rip the strongest part of the team up to shoe horn him in. 

If Ferguson had put in an outstanding performance, scored a vital goal or done something abit special then he would have a stronger case but he hasnt. He is a quality player but at this point he isnt a starter in our strongest 11.

Everyone has their views but I just cant get on board with McGinn as a lone striker and I doubt anybody else will either. Its a mute point as 100% it will not happen.

At this point I think Clarke has only two difficult choices. 

Shankland, Adams or Dykes upfront. Right now I think shankland edges it. 

The other choice is Gilmour or mcgregor. I think they will both get a start in the group but not together 

[duncan II]

9 hours ago, Scotty2Hotty said:

Yeah it was a draw so apologies, forgot to add that in but seemed to remember at the time that we were disappointed not to get a win

To be honest, I'd stop getting angry at other posters. From your impression of '80s and '90s tournaments it's obvious you weren't around. Perhaps some humility and avoiding attacking those who were there and know what they're talking about. I was 3 when the '74 campaign happened and wouldn't dream of lecturing others about the feeling of expectation around the country at the time. Cos I'd be talking made-up shite.

[Caledonian Craig]

Instead of rounding on Steve Clarke I prefer a bit of realism.

We are a real good side when things fall for us. When all of our key players are fit and in a rich vein of form we have shown what we are capable of but going into these latest friendlies it was clear everything was not falling for us.

Aaron Hickey and Callum McGregor both of whom have been key players for us were out injured. Hanley and McKenna who I am sure would both have got plenty of game time and have played in our big game wins were misses.

Also look around on certain Liverpool fan sites and Robertson's form since coming back from injury has been questionable and I'd say they are better placed to judge than us. Tierney is not long back from injury and has a run of sub appearances for his club so obviously not in sparkling form. Porteous has been in and out of the Watford side - not ideal. Cooper has not had any meaningful game time in weeks. Patterson is similar and confidence is clearly low. Dykes has been in a poor run of form too. 

So you see plenty is not falling for us at present and that cannot happen at the Euros. There is a couple of months for that to change for injured players to get their fitness back and bolster our squad and for players to play themselves into club form and boost their own confidence which in turn is of great benefit to Scotland.

Those are the issues, in my opinion, and not Steve Clarke.

[Tartan blood]

1 minute ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Instead of rounding on Steve Clarke I prefer a bit of realism.

We are a real good side when things fall for us. When all of our key players are fit and in a rich vein of form we have shown what we are capable of but going into these latest friendlies it was clear everything was not falling for us.

Aaron Hickey and Callum McGregor both of whom have been key players for us were out injured. Hanley and McKenna who I am sure would both have got plenty of game time and have played in our big game wins were misses.

Also look around on certain Liverpool fan sites and Robertson's form since coming back from injury has been questionable and I'd say they are better placed to judge than us. Tierney is not long back from injury and has a run of sub appearances for his club so obviously not in sparkling form. Porteous has been in and out of the Watford side - not ideal. Cooper has not had any meaningful game time in weeks. Patterson is similar and confidence is clearly low. Dykes has been in a poor run of form too. 

So you see plenty is not falling for us at present and that cannot happen at the Euros. There is a couple of months for that to change for injured players to get their fitness back and bolster our squad and for players to play themselves into club form and boost their own confidence which in turn is of great benefit to Scotland.

Those are the issues, in my opinion, and not Steve Clarke.

Very good point. We started 3 players who will be extremely low on confidence. Cooper, Dykes and Patterson. We also lost our captain in the first 3rd of the match.

I'm a big fan of Dykes in general, but you can count on 1 hand how many goals he's scored all season. Shankland should have started. 

When plan A and B aren't working, sometimes you just need someone that can take a pop shot from distance. Turnbull would have been ideal, but his form this season doesn't merit a squad place. Armstrong is capable of that, as is Shankland. But they didn't really get an opportunity to have a shot, and didn't start anyway.

[Caledonian Craig]

1 minute ago, Tartan blood said:

Very good point. We started 3 players who will be extremely low on confidence. Cooper, Dykes and Patterson. We also lost our captain in the first 3rd of the match.

I'm a big fan of Dykes in general, but you can count on 1 hand how many goals he's scored all season. Shankland should have started. 

When plan A and B aren't working, sometimes you just need someone that can take a pop shot from distance. Turnbull would have been ideal, but his form this season doesn't merit a squad place. Armstrong is capable of that, as is Shankland. But they didn't really get an opportunity to have a shot, and didn't start anyway.

I suppose Clarke gambled hoping Patterson and Dykes could use the opportunity to find a bit of form which they need whereas Shankland does not need that but more experience for him would have been good.

[Caledonian Craig]

Just to add too that although John McGinn came in for pelters in both games I thought he played very well V Netherlands but granted was poor against Northern Ireland. He is probably our most influential player and if he is off his game that pulls our level down even more.

Edited March 29 by Caledonian Craig

[Scotty2Hotty]

1 hour ago, duncan II said:

To be honest, I'd stop getting angry at other posters. From your impression of '80s and '90s tournaments it's obvious you weren't around. Perhaps some humility and avoiding attacking those who were there and know what they're talking about. I was 3 when the '74 campaign happened and wouldn't dream of lecturing others about the feeling of expectation around the country at the time. Cos I'd be talking made-up shite.

Rightio so you will know we are on the march with Ally's army song pretty well then? 

[Scotty2Hotty]

20 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Instead of rounding on Steve Clarke I prefer a bit of realism.

We are a real good side when things fall for us. When all of our key players are fit and in a rich vein of form we have shown what we are capable of but going into these latest friendlies it was clear everything was not falling for us.

Aaron Hickey and Callum McGregor both of whom have been key players for us were out injured. Hanley and McKenna who I am sure would both have got plenty of game time and have played in our big game wins were misses.

Also look around on certain Liverpool fan sites and Robertson's form since coming back from injury has been questionable and I'd say they are better placed to judge than us. Tierney is not long back from injury and has a run of sub appearances for his club so obviously not in sparkling form. Porteous has been in and out of the Watford side - not ideal. Cooper has not had any meaningful game time in weeks. Patterson is similar and confidence is clearly low. Dykes has been in a poor run of form too. 

So you see plenty is not falling for us at present and that cannot happen at the Euros. There is a couple of months for that to change for injured players to get their fitness back and bolster our squad and for players to play themselves into club form and boost their own confidence which in turn is of great benefit to Scotland.

Those are the issues, in my opinion, and not Steve Clarke.

Fair points but Steve Clarke has made some errors IMO when picking the team that have already been spoken about in this thread but of course not everyone will agree