Time to go Steve Clarke

[Falcor Roar]

2 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Ill answer all of these same points again sure.

If changing formation and personal isn't a complete tactical turnaround then what is?? What else is there to change?

Now your disagreeing with Steve Clarke, not me.

If a new manager was appointed he may or may not have achieved better results. I dont know, you don't know. So how could I be wrong about this. Personally I think we would be at the world cup right now if we had.

I think if you read back I already admitted i was wrong. What else do you want??

No, what you've done is create a boring straw man argument about whether there has been a 'complete tactical turnaround' or whether it's been a system change which doesn't alter the fundamental characteristics of how Clarke plays (high press, playing out from the back, short probing pass work in the opposition half, quick counter attacking using one touch triangles to build play, strong shape out of possession...)

You've spent the last couple of days proclaiming that everyone else is wrong and crying foul when you've been pulled up for your previous awful takes. Sorry but that's not how public forums work.

[DC92]

21 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

I've used the forum's search function to look through my posts about Hickey, and there's not really anything there that jumps out to me as being wild.

I'd say I've been an enormous fan since I started watching him for Bologna (he never stood out for me much at Hearts but he was very young). My main "negatives" and the reason folk have it in their head that I don't like him or whatever, was that people kept posting about how he could easily play RWB because he had done it already in his career, something that basically wasn't true at the time (any time pre January 2022). I've also said that I don't think he can play centre-back, which I still don't.

Since those posts, he has played it a decent number of times for Bologna (and once, very badly for Scotland), and has also started playing at RB for both club and country to a really high standard. But that in itself isn't a surprise to me since I've said for a while that I thought he could end up in that role.

There are quite a few Scotland players I've got it completely wrong about in both directions - Hendry is probably one of them because I was very unsure about him coming back into the squad at first when he was playing in Belgium, and I've held my hands up a few times about those (probably more on Twitter than on here because a lot of old threads on here stay buried).

Here's a selection of my Hickey posts - feel free to trawl through them all if you want

Well here's one from 3 months ago saying he's "not a very good defender at all" and that "all his strengths are about attacking". He's since produced excellent defensive performances internationally and in the Premier League, showing a maturity way beyond his years.

On 16/06/2022 at 10:48, craigkillie said:

Have you ever seen Hickey play? All his strengths are about attacking and technical ability, he's not a very good defender at all. Every single Bologna game I've seen him spend most of the time in the other team's half of the pitch.

As for Clarke, I've already called out my own post on the other thread because my conclusion was wrong and definitely a bit of a knee-jerk. It wasn't the first and it won't be the last time I make a c**t of it.

I'm sure you'll say that the Hickey post was valid based on the evidence available at the time. I'd say the same for a lot of the criticisms I raised in my post about Clarke (Hampden performances, persistence with the back 3 without Tierney) but he's since proven me wrong by producing our most complete performance at Hampden to date and doing so showing the tactical flexibility I'd criticised him for lacking. Like your post on Hickey, I was wrong because I was premature and underestimated his ability to find another level.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, Falcor Roar said:

No, what you've done is create a boring straw man argument about whether there has been a 'complete tactical turnaround' or whether it's been a system change which doesn't alter the fundamental characteristics of how Clarke plays (high press, playing out from the back, short probing pass work in the opposition half, quick counter attacking using one touch triangles to build play, strong shape out of possession...)

You've spent the last couple of days proclaiming that everyone else is wrong and crying foul when you've been pulled up for your previous awful takes. Sorry but that's not how public forums work.

Its the exact same argument that others are making, we were looking for change. And change did happen, it was a surprise to some that Steve Clarke made the changes. But he did and we have improved dramatically off of the back of it.

If your disagreeing with this again your now disagreeing with Steve Clarke himself. Not just me or other posters.

Its not my fault that other posters were also wrong with their opinions. Unfortunately for you I have just as much right and ability to bring this up.

[Falcor Roar]

20 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Its the exact same argument that others are making, we were looking for change. And change did happen, it was a surprise to some that Steve Clarke made the changes. But he did and we have improved dramatically off of the back of it.

If your disagreeing with this again your now disagreeing with Steve Clarke himself. Not just me or other posters.

Its not my fault that other posters were also wrong with their opinions. Unfortunately for you I have just as much right and ability to bring this up.

I don't care, It's an irrelevant and pedantic argument. Pat yourself on the back for being king of the internet. I haven't said you don't have the right to bore people with your deflection tactics. Fire on.

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, Falcor Roar said:

I don't care, It's an irrelevant and pedantic argument. Pat yourself on the back for being king of the internet. I haven't said you don't have the right to bore people with your deflection tactics. Fire on.

Oh you care alright, you've been going on about it enough.

Its certainly not irrelevant, I think for you its more of an inconvenience.

But the facts are there that the specific changes i mentioned previously were exactly the changes that clarke made. You decided to say that this didn't happen, despite that not being something you could reasonably argue. As the game was there for everyone to see. And now Clarke himself has backed me up, so your snookered.

I thank you for the suggestion that im king of the internet, but I couldn't possibly accept.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, DC92 said:

Well here's one from 3 months ago saying he's "not a very good defender at all" and that "all his strengths are about attacking". He's since produced excellent defensive performances internationally and in the Premier League, showing a maturity way beyond his years.

I'm sure you'll say that the Hickey post was valid based on the evidence available at the time. I'd say the same for a lot of the criticisms I raised in my post about Clarke (Hampden performances, persistence with the back 3 without Tierney) but he's since proven me wrong by producing our most complete performance at Hampden to date and doing so showing the tactical flexibility I'd criticised him for lacking. Like your post on Hickey, I was wrong because I was premature and underestimated his ability to find another level.

The Hickey quote was in relation to a post which described him as "less attacking, less athletic, more about defensive positioning" compared to Tierney, something which I still wholeheartedly disagree with. I'd still say that fundamentally he looks to me (and this is meant as a compliment) to be a luxury Steven Whittaker or an extremely luxury David Wotherspoon, the sort of guy who is so talented relative to their teammates that managers will just play them anywhere to get them on the park. I think in another timeline he could easily forge out a high level career as a number 8 or 10, maybe he still will.

He definitely showed me more to his game in these ones, and I'm more confident in his defensive ability now, so I'm happy to be proved wrong in terms of him "not being a very good defender at all", he's definitely a really good reader of the game and a strong runner which makes him a really good covering full-back in a four. I still reckon you want him up the other end of the park more than in his own half though to get the best out of him, and he's been put in systems at Bologna, Brentford and now Scotland which allow that to happen.

To address the other point from a different poster about Taylor, I think he would also be able to have played at the sort of club level that Hickey is at now - obviously Hickey will go much higher long-term. I think Taylor also showed what he was about on Saturday in particular, he could easily have had a career as our first-choice left-back but for the existence of Robertson and Tierney.

 

[theoriginalhedge]

On 28/09/2022 at 19:36, BingMcCrosby said:

Its sad people are looking to take credit away from Steve Clarke.

He changed us for the better so get on board and stop worrying about being perceived as wrong.

Exactly. The objective of the game on Wednesday was not to lose. We did that , down to every one of Clarke's team playing to his (and Austin McPhee's ) system.

Due to illness and injury our strength was always going to be a disciplined defence and midfield. That turned out to be exactly the case. 

There is little point in anyone comparing our performance on Wednesday against any other game in the last few months as it was a completely different scenario altogether.  

Clarke and McPhee should be absolutely congratulated for getting the performances required from the new guys in that pressured environment. 

[Falcor Roar]

To be honest there were a few question marks about Hickeys positioning and marking at hearts maybe, but that was a dysfunctional side altogether. He was always going to be a top player given his outstanding technique and his intelligence in using his body. I like that he's been clever in his moves up the ladder.

32 minutes ago, theoriginalhedge said:

Exactly. The objective of the game on Wednesday was not to lose. We did that , down to every one of Clarke's team playing to his (and Austin McPhee's ) system.

Due to illness and injury our strength was always going to be a disciplined defence and midfield. That turned out to be exactly the case. 

There is little point in anyone comparing our performance on Wednesday against any other game in the last few months as it was a completely different scenario altogether.  

Clarke and McPhee should be absolutely congratulated for getting the performances required from the new guys in that pressured environment. 

Everyone on here who's had Clarke's back from day one is delighted with Tuesday's result given the players we had missing. We've been backs to the wall in other games and the defensive solidity is usually impressive. It's been a cornerstone of Clarke's philosophy from the beginning even if we've had a few games in the recent past where we've been at 6s and 7s. He's used a number of so called lesser or less experienced defenders but they understand their roles in keeping the shape because of the manager. It shows how versatile we are given the attacking masterclass the week before at home. 

Edited September 29, 2022 by Falcor Roar

[Bing.McCrosby]

Just now, Falcor Roar said:

Everyone on here who's had Clarke's back from day one is delighted with Tuesday's result given the players we had missing. We've been backs to the wall in other games and the defensive solidity is usually impressive. It's been a cornerstone of Clarke's philosophy from the beginning even if we've had a few games in the recent past where we've been at 6s and 7s. He's used a number of so called lesser or less experienced defenders but they understand their roles in keeping the shape because of the manager. It shows how versatile we are given the attacking masterclass the week before at home. 

I would assume personally that all scotland fans would be delighted with the recent results and improvements. The people who insisted 5 at the back was the way forward, the people who criticised clarke, and the people who agree with everything clarke does because he's a football manager.

They are all Scotland fans.

[craigkillie]

Exactly. The objective of the game on Wednesday was not to lose. We did that , down to every one of Clarke's team playing to his (and Austin McPhee's ) system.
Due to illness and injury our strength was always going to be a disciplined defence and midfield. That turned out to be exactly the case. 
There is little point in anyone comparing our performance on Wednesday against any other game in the last few months as it was a completely different scenario altogether.  
Clarke and McPhee should be absolutely congratulated for getting the performances required from the new guys in that pressured environment. 

I think the players deserve a lot of the credit for Tuesday, the manager set them up well, but it's a style that requires a great deal of concentration and discipline from every single player on the pitch, and they all stepped up big time. It's a mark of the type of people they are and how committed they are to playing for their country.

[Loominous]

12 hours ago, BingMcCrosby said:

I would assume personally that all scotland fans would be delighted with the recent results and improvements. The people who insisted 5 at the back was the way forward, the people who criticised clarke, and the people who agree with everything clarke does because he's a football manager.

They are all Scotland fans.

I think you've taken enough shit for this now.

It was just the fickle nature saying you're happy with Steve Clarke when we beat Denmark (playing 5-atb) and then changing your mind after we lost to Ukraine in the next competitive game which is a bit much and I hope in the future that you will maybe not be so knee jerk to results going forward but not expecting it.

.I don't think the whole I was wrong but so were all of you is brilliant either but happy to leave it there and move on now. 

[Donathan]

IF Clarke was to move on, should McPhee be offered the promotion? 

[Donathan]

It’s mental to think that as poor as Strachan was, he’s probably above average in terms of our managers in the 21st century 

 

 

1. Steve Clarke (Certified Demi god. Got us to the euros and league A of the UNL)

 

2. Walter Smith (We’d have surely qualified for Euro 2008 if he hadn’t left)

 

3. Alex McLeish (Good wins over France and Ukraine in his first spell and of course he won us a Nations League group, but Georgia 2007 and Kazakhstan 2018 take him below Smith for me)

 

4. Gordon Strachan (Best of the bad bunch)

 

5. Craig Levein (The 2014 World Cup qualifiers were horrendous, but he at least came close to Euro 2012. We were a last minute dodgy penalty to the Czechs away from a winnable playoff against Montenegro)

 

6. Craig Brown (Only taking into account the 2002 qualifiers. I mark him down for sticking with dad’s army and giving his successor an impossible job)

 

7. Berti Vogts (Horrendous, but as mentioned, following Levein and revamping the squad was a very tough job. I do give him a small amount of credit for building the nucleus of the side that Smith and McLeish went on to have some success with)

 

8. George Burley (Total disaster) 

[Donathan]

If splitting McLeish into two separate spells you probably put them 3rd (2007) and 4th (Second spell)

 

Second spell was poor in terms of the World Cup qualifying but he at least won the nations league group. 

[craigkillie]

I think every single manager on this list would have won that Nations League group.

[craigkillie]

53 minutes ago, Donathan said:

IF Clarke was to move on, should McPhee be offered the promotion? 

 

Absolutely not.

[Gordon EF]

Remember when wanting to get Michael O'Neill in was seen as a genuinely decent shout but the general feeling is that he wouldn't give up the Northern Ireland job and if he did, it would be for a job in the English Championship?

lol

[invergowrie arab]

Still can't fathom the Burley and McLeish part 2 appointments.

Both men clearly unwell. 

[Gordopolis]

1 hour ago, Donathan said:

It’s mental to think that as poor as Strachan was, he’s probably above average in terms of our managers in the 21st century 

 

3. Alex McLeish (Good wins over France and Ukraine in his first spell and of course he won us a Nations League group, but Georgia 2007 and Kazakhstan 2018 take him below Smith for me)

 

They were poor results, but Smith's 1-0 defeat at home to Belarus was woeful as well.

[KingRocketman II]

1 hour ago, Donathan said:

It’s mental to think that as poor as Strachan was, he’s probably above average in terms of our managers in the 21st century 

 

 

1. Steve Clarke (Certified Demi god. Got us to the euros and league A of the UNL)

 

2. Walter Smith (We’d have surely qualified for Euro 2008 if he hadn’t left)

 

3. Alex McLeish (Good wins over France and Ukraine in his first spell and of course he won us a Nations League group, but Georgia 2007 and Kazakhstan 2018 take him below Smith for me)

 

4. Gordon Strachan (Best of the bad bunch)

 

5. Craig Levein (The 2014 World Cup qualifiers were horrendous, but he at least came close to Euro 2012. We were a last minute dodgy penalty to the Czechs away from a winnable playoff against Montenegro)

 

6. Craig Brown (Only taking into account the 2002 qualifiers. I mark him down for sticking with dad’s army and giving his successor an impossible job)

 

7. Berti Vogts (Horrendous, but as mentioned, following Levein and revamping the squad was a very tough job. I do give him a small amount of credit for building the nucleus of the side that Smith and McLeish went on to have some success with)

 

8. George Burley (Total disaster) 

I don't think you can fairly disconnect Paw Broon's tenure. I know we are looking at his performance from 2000 onward but given what he achieved before, in no way should he be behind Levein, Strachan, McLeish or even Smith on a subjective list ie not one assessed by win ratios.