Steve Clarke - loyalty, squad mentality...and of course Oli McBurnie

[GaryWood34]

1 hour ago, vanderark14 said:

Completely agree

Mcburnie fucked his chances completely by divulging this information, I was very keen to see him called up because he is going through a purple patch, if he had matured, he would be a great asset but I'm with Clarke on this one

Sums it up for me 

[exile]

It would be good for Clarke to signal that any/all of our potential strikers (or any players actually) still have a chance if they hit form at their clubs from now till the end of the season. That could be an extra incentive for them to impress, and we would be the beneficiaries. 

(I am taking about for the squad positions. assuming the first picks are already picked.)

If McBurnie regained his form and the others were toiling, he could then be called up without complaint. If a younger striker delivered the goods, he could be considered ahead of McBurnie, irrespective of how good or bad McBurnie was.

[Diamond Scot]

I doubt very much that McBurnie called Clarke directly and put him on the spot. Thats not how these things work. 

His agent will have got in contact with the SFA liason officer who in turn would have asked Clarke if he wanted to talk. It would then have been setup so Clarke will have had time to think about what he was going to say.

I also doubt that the content of the conversation was asked to be kept a secret. Clarke will know that players are asked questions about international call ups, especially if they are on the verge of a call up. McBurnie is likely to have been told that he can speak about it.

Where I think McBurnie has possibly miscommunciated is when talking about 1st and 2nd choice as opposed to 3rd or 4th. Id imagine what Clarke meant was that he see's McBurnie as competing with 1 or 2 guys who are of a similar style to him and that he is currently behind those guys.

Id put McBurnie in a bracket with Dykes and Hirst and possibly Adams in terms of how Clarkes uses them. 

The 2nd bracket being Shankland and 1 other. Atm Conway but would also be the likes of Bowie. 

[scotlad]

15 hours ago, noctonjock said:

Being loyal to players doesn't win you games at a World Cup 

Correct. 

One of my favourite Scotland managers was Craig Brown, but one of his weaknesses was an unwavering loyalty towards certain players even when they had past their peak - and those were usually better players than Adams or Dykes.

It was a bold move by McBurnie (although I get the impression with him he has never been lacking in boldness, quite the opposite!) but he shouldn't have gone public about the conversation. That displays a lack of trust, IMO. As a result his chances of a call-up have probably receded even further.

[immcinto]

43 minutes ago, scotlad said:

Correct. 

One of my favourite Scotland managers was Craig Brown, but one of his weaknesses was an unwavering loyalty towards certain players even when they had past their peak - and those were usually better players than Adams or Dykes.

It was a bold move by McBurnie (although I get the impression with him he has never been lacking in boldness, quite the opposite!) but he shouldn't have gone public about the conversation. That displays a lack of trust, IMO. As a result his chances of a call-up have probably receded even further.

Loyalty seems be inversely proportional to ability unfortunately. I don't think the Dutch have much time for such sentimentality

[Malcolm]

Pish and unreliable.  Next.

[Bzzzz]

Can understand the loyalty aspect but also feel that international fitba is or at least should be a form game. Saying that, is anyone really making waves out with the normal squad?  

[bdgsct]

37 minutes ago, Bzzzz said:

Can understand the loyalty aspect but also feel that international fitba is or at least should be a form game. Saying that, is anyone really making waves out with the normal squad?  

I think there is a big difference between experienced players in form and inexperienced players in form. You can argue that youngsters will benefit from going to the WC in the long term but you also need to see who can do a job right now. I'd be a lot more confident of a contribution from McBurnie or Ross Stewart than Barney Stewart or Bowie for example. I think both youngsters will doe well in due course.

[scotlad]

1 hour ago, immcinto said:

Loyalty seems be inversely proportional to ability unfortunately. I don't think the Dutch have much time for such sentimentality

No, they don't.

I can totally understand trying to avoid chopping and changing the team too much - that just unsettles people - but the danger is going too far in the other direction and ending up with an almost 'closed shop' situation. It sends the signal to players not in the squad that no matter how well they're playing they won't get in the squad because someone who did well three years ago is still in there, just because. 

[Diamond Scot]

2 hours ago, scotlad said:

No, they don't.

I can totally understand trying to avoid chopping and changing the team too much - that just unsettles people - but the danger is going too far in the other direction and ending up with an almost 'closed shop' situation. It sends the signal to players not in the squad that no matter how well they're playing they won't get in the squad because someone who did well three years ago is still in there, just because. 

Who would be in the current squad and who would be dropping out if that was the case though?

McBurnie is currently playing slightly better than Dykes and Hirst but only slightly better and only this season. 

I think to break into the squad you either need to be performing much higher than the person you are replacing, have a blatantly obvious higher ceiling (like Doak or Gilmour) or the person you are replacing has started not performing for Scotland.

Im not sure that criteria applies to anybody currently. 

[thesaint]

1 hour ago, Diamond Scot said:

Who would be in the current squad and who would be dropping out if that was the case though?

McBurnie is currently playing slightly better than Dykes and Hirst but only slightly better and only this season. 

I think to break into the squad you either need to be performing much higher than the person you are replacing, have a blatantly obvious higher ceiling (like Doak or Gilmour) or the person you are replacing has started not performing for Scotland.

Im not sure that criteria applies to anybody currently. 

Think McBurnie is playing a bit more than slightly better .His goals total is equal to Hirst,Dykes and Conway combined playing in the same league.Plus lot's more assists.The facts are there.Surely the fact that it is this season he is doing it is in his favour.Who cares how somebody was playing two or three seasons ago.

[AAAfather]

On 4/16/2026 at 9:21 PM, romanticscot said:

..... I fear we are going to be pedestrian, predictable and frustrated once again and Clarke hasn't given himself much wiggle room. 

Clarke probably sees his job as making the knock out stages by any means - to be the most successful manager in Scottish history at a World Cup. 

Mathematically, that means beating Haiti and losing narrowly (without a gubbing) to qualify as a third place team with a goal difference of -2 or better.  Clarke wants tried and tested players to attempt this.   Pedestrian and predictable is exactly what he wants.  Cohesion, unity.  Tight and no risks.  Japan and Ivory Coast matches are exactly what he thinks will work.  

[Diamond Scot]

3 hours ago, thesaint said:

Think McBurnie is playing a bit more than slightly better .His goals total is equal to Hirst,Dykes and Conway combined playing in the same league.Plus lot's more assists.The facts are there.Surely the fact that it is this season he is doing it is in his favour.Who cares how somebody was playing two or three seasons ago.

Does McBurnie not have 14, Hirst 10, Conway 9 and Dyles 3?

McBurnie is probably competing with Hirst and Conway for the 4th striker position. I dont think those numbers are significantly better. If he had 10 goals in a top division it would be different.

Personally I like McBurnie better than Hirst but equally I can see what Clarke has done over the years.

It wasnt long ago we were calling up anybody who had a good game and we were also getting 2 or 3 call offs from every single squad.

[mccaughey85]

4 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Does McBurnie not have 14, Hirst 10, Conway 9 and Dyles 3?

McBurnie is probably competing with Hirst and Conway for the 4th striker position. I dont think those numbers are significantly better. If he had 10 goals in a top division it would be different.

Personally I like McBurnie better than Hirst but equally I can see what Clarke has done over the years.

It wasnt long ago we were calling up anybody who had a good game and we were also getting 2 or 3 call offs from every single squad.

Also I think Conways been playing deeper and not as a proper striker. He's also only 23 so theres a decent chance he can step up a level in the future.

Edited April 18 by mccaughey85

[romanticscot]

10 hours ago, AAAfather said:

Clarke probably sees his job as making the knock out stages by any means - to be the most successful manager in Scottish history at a World Cup. 

Mathematically, that means beating Haiti and losing narrowly (without a gubbing) to qualify as a third place team with a goal difference of -2 or better.  Clarke wants tried and tested players to attempt this.   Pedestrian and predictable is exactly what he wants.  Cohesion, unity.  Tight and no risks.  Japan and Ivory Coast matches are exactly what he thinks will work.  

Surely by any means equals having 'multiple means'. I get your point, Clarke is a pragmatic coach. Beating Haiti is doable, avoiding heavy defeats is also but if we are 3-0 down in either of the matches, 3-1 might seriously affect our chances. From the scores of simulations I have done if we make it to the second round.our most likely opponents seem to be Japan and Netherlands and Mexico is a distant occurrence. The Third round is Croatia or Morocco again. All good teams, I just think at any point we may find ourselves with 20 minutes to go, its 0-0 and who do we turn to on the bench? Someone much the same just with fresh legs. Clarke hasn't picked his squad yet, his 'up to 55' will be telling, I am expecting a few things 1. He wont name 55 players  2.There will be a strong contingent of youth and 3. McBurnie will not be named. From the ones he names, it will be clear which 28 are his realistic pool. We are not the Manager, he has qualified for three tourneys, I understand that, thats a record that he will forever have. He could accomplish something historic, getting out the group and maybe even further but please Clarke give yourself options and potentially take a risk. As I said above, I.am not certain McBurnie is the risk, but he could be. 

Edited April 18 by romanticscot

[Tartan blood]

20 minutes ago, romanticscot said:

Surely by any means equals having 'multiple means'. I get your point, Clarke is a pragmatic coach. Beating Haiti is doable, avoiding heavy defeats is also but if we are 3-0 down in either of the matches, 3-1 might seriously affect our chances. From the scores of simulations I have done if we make it to the second round.our most likely opponents seem to be Japan and Netherlands and Mexico is a distant occurrence. The Third round is Croatia or Morocco again. All good teams, I just think at any point we may find ourselves with 20 minutes to go, its 0-0 and who do we turn to on the bench? Someone much the same just with fresh legs. Clarke hasn't picked his squad yet, his 'up to 55' will be telling, I am expecting a few things 1. He wont name 55 players  2.There will be a strong contingent of youth and 3. McBurnie will not be named. From the ones he names, it will be clear which 28 are his realistic pool. We are not the Manager, he has qualified for three tourneys, I understand that, thats a record that he will forever have. He could accomplish something historic, getting out the group and maybe even further but please Clarke give yourself options and potentially take a risk. As I said above, I.am not certain McBurnie is the risk, but he could be. 

In the tournaments we have qualified for, Clarke has thrown in a few wildcards. 

Euro 2020: Gilmour, Patterson, Fleck and Turnbull

Euro 2024: Conway, McRorie, Morgan, BGD (though dropped out through injury)

Based on that, I think we might see a wildcard or two. Curtis and Bowie would count as wildcards, I'd say. 

If Calvin Miller continues his form against the 5 best teams in Scotland, I wouldn't be averse to him being that left field callup. He would be a true wildcard.

[Caledonian Craig]

4 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

In the tournaments we have qualified for, Clarke has thrown in a few wildcards. 

Euro 2020: Gilmour, Patterson, Fleck and Turnbull

Euro 2024: Conway, McRorie, Morgan, BGD (though dropped out through injury)

Based on that, I think we might see a wildcard or two. Curtis and Bowie would count as wildcards, I'd say. 

If Calvin Miller continues his form against the 5 best teams in Scotland, I wouldn't be averse to him being that left field callup. He would be a true wildcard.

Luke Graham could be a wildcard too.

[Tartan blood]

23 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Luke Graham could be a wildcard too.

Good shout. I've heard nothing but good things about Luke Graham.

Ryan Gauld wouldn't necessarily be a wildcard, but he'd be a somewhat unexpected inclusion. Kind of like how Ryan Jack and James Forrest were called up for the last Euros.

 

[Caledonian Craig]

2 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

Good shout. I've heard nothing but good things about Luke Graham.

 

 

Whenever I've watched him in matches he has impressed

 Tall, rangy, comfortable with the ball bringing it forward out of defence. Being looked at by Rangers and EPL clubs. Rumour has it he has already signed a pre-contract with Rangers.

[Diamond Scot]

1 hour ago, romanticscot said:

Surely by any means equals having 'multiple means'. I get your point, Clarke is a pragmatic coach. Beating Haiti is doable, avoiding heavy defeats is also but if we are 3-0 down in either of the matches, 3-1 might seriously affect our chances. From the scores of simulations I have done if we make it to the second round.our most likely opponents seem to be Japan and Netherlands and Mexico is a distant occurrence. The Third round is Croatia or Morocco again. All good teams, I just think at any point we may find ourselves with 20 minutes to go, its 0-0 and who do we turn to on the bench? Someone much the same just with fresh legs. Clarke hasn't picked his squad yet, his 'up to 55' will be telling, I am expecting a few things 1. He wont name 55 players  2.There will be a strong contingent of youth and 3. McBurnie will not be named. From the ones he names, it will be clear which 28 are his realistic pool. We are not the Manager, he has qualified for three tourneys, I understand that, thats a record that he will forever have. He could accomplish something historic, getting out the group and maybe even further but please Clarke give yourself options and potentially take a risk. As I said above, I.am not certain McBurnie is the risk, but he could be. 

The 55 man squad thing is a FIFA requirement. Its not a new thing. Countrys dont name a 55 man squad in the sense the players or press find out. The SFA provide FIFA with 55 players from which their final squad will be picked. That allows FIFA to do all the relevent checks and presumably the host countries do a provisional VISA check.

Id also suggest that if we are 0-0 with 20 mins to go against a much higher ranked team like Croatia or Japan that Clarke will be thinking its going to plan so will want to do a like for like replacement.

Lets face it, we have no maverick players atm who would offer something majorly different. The nearest we have is Burke purely for his pace but Clarke obviously feels the rest of his game isnt worth it. (I disagree with that).

My point being is that if we were nil nil as above, replacing Dkyes or Adams with Hirst, Conway, Shankland, McBurnie, Bowie, Ure or anybody else is unlikely to make any difference. All these players are capable of scoring or adding some value on occasion but they are hardly game changers in their own right.

[Caledonian Craig]

1 hour ago, Diamond Scot said:

The 55 man squad thing is a FIFA requirement. Its not a new thing. Countrys dont name a 55 man squad in the sense the players or press find out. The SFA provide FIFA with 55 players from which their final squad will be picked. That allows FIFA to do all the relevent checks and presumably the host countries do a provisional VISA check.

Id also suggest that if we are 0-0 with 20 mins to go against a much higher ranked team like Croatia or Japan that Clarke will be thinking its going to plan so will want to do a like for like replacement.

Lets face it, we have no maverick players atm who would offer something majorly different. The nearest we have is Burke purely for his pace but Clarke obviously feels the rest of his game isnt worth it. (I disagree with that).

My point being is that if we were nil nil as above, replacing Dkyes or Adams with Hirst, Conway, Shankland, McBurnie, Bowie, Ure or anybody else is unlikely to make any difference. All these players are capable of scoring or adding some value on occasion but they are hardly game changers in their own right.

For at least five years now our wins have relied heavily on the midfield weighing in with goals on the big games and reckon that this summer will be the same. McGinn, McTominay and Christie have scored 40+ goals for us whereas Dykes and Adams have only half of that total. We can succeed and get results against big sides but to do so the midfield must tick.

Edited April 18 by Caledonian Craig

[ceudmilefailte]

1 hour ago, Diamond Scot said:

The 55 man squad thing is a FIFA requirement. Its not a new thing. Countrys dont name a 55 man squad in the sense the players or press find out. The SFA provide FIFA with 55 players from which their final squad will be picked. That allows FIFA to do all the relevent checks and presumably the host countries do a provisional VISA check.

Id also suggest that if we are 0-0 with 20 mins to go against a much higher ranked team like Croatia or Japan that Clarke will be thinking its going to plan so will want to do a like for like replacement.

Lets face it, we have no maverick players atm who would offer something majorly different. The nearest we have is Burke purely for his pace but Clarke obviously feels the rest of his game isnt worth it. (I disagree with that).

My point being is that if we were nil nil as above, replacing Dkyes or Adams with Hirst, Conway, Shankland, McBurnie, Bowie, Ure or anybody else is unlikely to make any difference. All these players are capable of scoring or adding some value on occasion but they are hardly game changers in their own right.

Most clubs change attacking players on or around the hour mark simply to bring in fresher legs not to change formation. Unfortunately a Clarke tends to wait until eighty minutes plus

A Burke style player would be great to have on the bench to mix things up   Problem is Burke isn’t very good. 

[Gemmill78er]

That story to me would typify why Clarke is a good manager but not a great one. His record in qualifiers (barring Euro 2020 where we relied on our Nations League record under McLeish), though, vindicates his approach. Let's just hope we make a decent account of ourselves at this World Cup as the two Euros have been underwhelming, especially Euro 2024 after qualifying so well.

[romanticscot]

Having an underwhelming tournament is what I am concerned about. This is our third tournament with Clarke, rarely when I watch tournament football do I see teams coming in with a pragmatic low risk approach for three guaranteed matches.  I am wanting to believe that Clarke truly has some regret with EURO 24. We dont have a deep pool, our only real maverick is BGD but if Clarke can think why not take a risk with having one from Barney Stewart, McBurnie, Burke or one or two others available. Your not sacrificing too much. Do we really need 10 defenders judging on his last squad, I dont think so 

[GHfaeGTA]

16 minutes ago, romanticscot said:

Having an underwhelming tournament is what I am concerned about. This is our third tournament with Clarke, rarely when I watch tournament football do I see teams coming in with a pragmatic low risk approach for three guaranteed matches.  I am wanting to believe that Clarke truly has some regret with EURO 24. We dont have a deep pool, our only real maverick is BGD but if Clarke can think why not take a risk with having one from Barney Stewart, McBurnie, Burke or one or two others available. Your not sacrificing too much. Do we really need 10 defenders judging on his last squad, I dont think so 

Burke a good shout. Just scored again in Bundesliga