Internationals....yawn

Savman

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but feck it. I think International games are the most monotonous matches in the world. I could watch a Sunday league side quicker than I could watch any of the qualifiers next weekend, in fact I'm just counting the days til the next round of Premiership games.

A few of us went to Lansdowne for the Ireland V Holland friendly last year, snooze fest even if the Dutch were good for the 4 goals. We hardly put in a tackle worthing shouting about and I haven't felt any passion from the Ireland team since the days of Big Jack. I guess you could say I'm a bad Ireland fan, I'll freely admit I only watch the big games or ones when I know they have to actually break a sweat. And our English buddies are no different, normally a team consisting of Premiership stars would make exciting viewing. That is, until they don that cursed white jersey and go out to play like overpaid, over exposed muppets who couldnt kick snow off a rope. How do you make Gerard, Rooney, Lampard & co. look crap? Hand them an England jersey.

In fact, other than the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to) and the European Championships, I would go so far to say I have absolutely no interest in any international fixture. Even Brazil in friendlies look like they couldn't be arsed and I wouldn't spend 2hrs of my life watching all these superstars going thru the motions. I dont ever remember it being this bad, but IMHO a lot of International football has lost it's guts. Seems the prima donas are more worried about getting injured and losing out with their clubs than they are prepared to die for the old fashioned honour of representing your country. I'm sure there are some odd exceptions, but generally right across the board you can see the players have Champions League and other things on their mind. Then there's the clubs who, like Newcastle with Owen, will take the national FA to the cleaners if their precious cargo comes back as tainted goods.

So unless it's Rep. of Ireland V England, Brazil V Argentina or some other local heated rivalry, I'll be channel hopping or websurfing next weekend while these torrid affairs take place. Come on Ireland etc etc, I genuinely hope they do Slovakia and I'll be looking out for the result. But you couldn't get me to watch these games for love nor money.

But that's just me, interested in hearing thoughts of others...

jameshayes

I would imagine you would prefer a game with 10 goals than a 1-0 win? (i dont mean it's not a bad thing)


This is because some people like different games, I would prefer a slow game like an international where it's more like chess... drawing out the defense, slowing the ball down, keeping posession... A game where you use your head rather than your ability to hit 1 in every 5 balls on target...

I like internationals...

Savman

jameshayes wrote:

I would imagine you would prefer a game with 10 goals than a 1-0 win?

Absolutely not, I watched a bit of Liverpool's 6-0 last week and got quite peeved at the awful defending by Derby.

I would prefer a slow game like an international where it's more like chess

That's fair enough, but it's not chess.

_blank_

I agree.

vorbis

I find myself agreeing with the OP. The majority of international matches lately haven been dull. Defensive football dominates and most teams seem unable to play well together. Even in the last world cup, after the group stages, the football was pretty poor in terms of entertainment value. Very few chances on goal, few goals and just a low overall intensity.

Comparing it to chess is a good description. Problem is I don't like watching chess! I'm not looking for 4 - 5 goals a match but a bit of attacking football wouldn't go amiss.

BaZmO*

Savman wrote:

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but feck it.

Always find it interesting when someone starts a post with that line. It generally indicates that the poster is well aware of the fact that they're about to spout out a load of sh1te.

Savman wrote:

A few of us went to Lansdowne for the Ireland V Holland friendly last year, snooze fest even if the Dutch were good for the 4 goals.

Exactly, you went to a friendly. What were you expecting?

Savman wrote:

We hardly put in a tackle worthing shouting about and I haven't felt any passion from the Ireland team since the days of Big Jack.

Ah things aren't what the used to be eh?
Small boys, in the park, jumpers for goal posts, etc. etc.

Savman wrote:

I guess you could say I'm a bad Ireland fan

Well you said it.

Savman

vorbis wrote:

Even in the last world cup, after the group stages, the football was pretty poor in terms of entertainment value. Very few chances on goal, few goals and just a low overall intensity.

The World Cup is a good example, I was routing for Germany simply because they set out to win it from the start, you could see what it meant to them.
Brazil, for a team with Ronaldo, Kaka & Ronaldinho, were a massive let down. In fact, the eventual winners Italy were the only team out with a point to prove and as a result got their just reward. This is what good players do when the chips are down, they go hell for leather and get stuck in. After all the controversy in Italian football, you'd have thought the Italians would play their usual defensive game but they actually conjured up some superb goals.

Although I was never a fan of Serie A, it is entirely possible the tide may be turning there. The way AC Milan beat Man U in last year's CL Semi Final epitomised everything a good team can be. Youth, experience, flair, aggression, determination, all the usual cliches. It was marvellous to watch.

I honestly don't think this chess game approach ever works in the long run, it has been tried, tested and failed. The basic flaw in that game plan, is that sooner or later you are gonna need to score a goal. England, under Eriksson, tried this "containment" idea, which was all well and good til they went a goal behind and found that when they needed to score they couldn't buy a goal. Same with the old Italian method of "score one goal and defend" - they were perennial underachievers until last year when they threw caution to the wind, probably to save their country's ass when its national league was crumbling beneath itself.

Brian CLough wrote:

Football is a simple game made complicated by people who should know better.

FWIW I agree with the big man, you can discuss tactics and formations til the cows come home but the fact is the team that scores the most goals wins. I like that idea, although maybe that makes me an idealist.

WellyJ

I agree,

Sure I enjoy watching Ireland, but only to stoke the memories of Italia 90 and USA 94. The current crowd are very boring to watch.

I would say that the standard of International football has dropped steadily over the last 10 years.

I mean, the WC last year was terrible. Not one memorable game.

AnCapaillMor

Lost interest in the internationals along time ago. all the pointless friendlies turned me off. Greece in the 2004 euro cup killed international football for me, great to see an underdog win but god it was boring. The WC is about the only thing worth watching and euro games when 2 decent teams are playing.

BaZmO*

WellyJ wrote:

Sure I enjoy watching Ireland, but only to stoke the memories of Italia 90 and USA 94. The current crowd are very boring to watch.

So you're a fan of Route 1 football?

WellyJ

BaZmO* wrote:

So you're a fan of Route 1 football?

Not at all,

Back then it was about crowding the local and having genuine hope that we could win games. It wasn't about the football, well I was a nipper so to me football was football. Tactics never came into it.

When I watch them now I don't get the same excitement. I think my interest died when Packie made a meal of things against the Dutch.

Savman

BaZmO* wrote:

Always find it interesting when someone starts a post with that line. It generally indicates that the poster is well aware of the fact that they're about to spout out a load of sh1te.

It does, does it? Starting off on the offensive I see, maybe you're right I should just pretend to like it cos that's the popular opinion.

Exactly, you went to a friendly. What were you expecting?

People who are honoured to play for their country in front of 30 odd thousand fans. I, like many, would give my right arm for a chance like that.

Ah things aren't what the used to be eh?

No they're not, that's kinda the whole point. Obviously I didn't make this clear enough for you bud.

Well you said it.

Yes I did and Yes I am. It was an honest admission of loss of interest. Have you actually got anything to contribute or should I put my flame jacket on for your next barrage of wisdom?:rolleyes:

eirebhoy

vorbis wrote:

I find myself agreeing with the OP. The majority of international matches lately haven been dull. Defensive football dominates and most teams seem unable to play well together. Even in the last world cup, after the group stages, the football was pretty poor in terms of entertainment value. Very few chances on goal, few goals and just a low overall intensity.

Italy v Germany was fantastic.

tbh I don't really care if Ireland are good to watch as long as we win.

Savman

BaZmO* wrote:

So you're a fan of Route 1 football?

Jaysis. Is that the choice? Defend or Route 1? FFS it's not too much to ask to see a team proactively trying to win the game rather than kill it. Possession counts for nothing. Put the ball in the back of the bloody net or you will get nowhere, I would've thought it was fairly straight forward.

Funny, this "long ball" jibe that gets bandied about. When the pass is right and a striker gets on the end of it to score, I don't hear anybody complaining?

Pighead

Savman wrote:

In fact, other than the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to) and the European Championships, I would go so far to say I have absolutely no interest in any international fixture.

Savman wrote:

Brazil, for a team with Ronaldo, Kaka & Ronaldinho, were a massive let down.

Its obvious you're just throwing out random general statements that you've heard down the pub recently.

On one hand you say the South American flair is all that is good about the World Cup and a minute later you're saying Brazil were rubbish. So what S. American teams brought flair to the last world Cup then? Argentina........... eh thats about it. The best games were mainly those involving European teams.

gustavo

Does your support for Aston Villa wane when they arent playing breathtakingly attractive football ? I know this must be a very rare occurance but still.

herbieflowers

Qualifiers have traditionally been boring for the most part, the only games which I've thoroughly enjoyed involving Ireland have been at WCs...but that's the nature of qualifying isn't it? The formal, monotonous prelude to the real stuff!

shatners basoon

Thats one thing i can never understand. Ireland played awful awful football back then, possibly the worst team by far in both tournaments at the knock out stages especially considering we'd some fine footballers. It was probably under McCarthy that we played the best football and actually got at teams (at least when we were underdogs), i especailly remember the draw against Germany where we really went at them to equalise, very enjoyable stuff.

Regarding Italy underachieving? Lost 94 on penalties, euro 2000 in extra time was it? When push comes to shove they generally perform no matter what tactics they've used. International friendlies are a complete waste of time especially with all the substitutions, can't ever see a team gelling with 10 bloody changes at half time.
England have always underachieved, noone really knows why, guess they find it very hard to get a balanced team. Too much of the same type of player and they've no one to control the midfield (whenever i watch them play its always Rio or Terry spraying the ball around poorly which makes no sense given their wealth of talent in midfield.

Not one memorable game in the world cup? Argentina Slovakia was memorable as Argentina played fantastic football. Great match against mexico too. Italy Germany was good and Italy vs the Ivory Coast was an excellent match. Spain had some good matches as did the Netherlands. France had two good games against Brazil and Spain (memorable for being Zidane's last moments of brilliance), and the final was memorable for Zidane's last moments of madness (in professional football at least...)

I blame friendlies for this thread.

Savman

Pighead wrote:

Its obvious you're just throwing out random general statements that you've heard down the pub recently.

Ok....

Pighead wrote:

The best games were mainly those involving European teams.

Hmmm....you and I both perhaps?

Can you please try not to misquote, I know it's hard.

me wrote:

the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to)

you wrote:

you say the South American flair is all that is good about the World Cup

Not exactly the same thing now is it? Try understand what's been discussed before you just dive in.

gustavo wrote:

Does your support for Aston Villa wane when they arent playing breathtakingly attractive football ? I know this must be a very rare occurance but still.

Sarcasm aside, it's a valid point. I've supported Villa thru some rough times, but the fans over there always demand better or someone's blood will be spilled.

I really don't know why it's different at Lansdowne. Maybe it's the Irish fans' subconcious acceptance that Ireland aren't world beaters. Like I said, Jack Charlton got the whole country believing we could beat the big boys and low and behold we eventually did. Seems lately it's just excuses about the lack of talent or resources (despite Kerr having a hugely successful youth team a few years back).

I'm sure some will point the blame at FAI, giving the job to a rookie with no experience. It's hard to care when decisions like that are made which quite clearly go against the fans' desires.

Pighead

Savman wrote:

Not exactly the same thing now is it? Try understand what's been discussed before you just dive in.

Deepest apologies Savman, didn't realise you were in such foul humour. Right I'll try again and this time I'll word it properly for you.

You said "In fact, other than the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to)"

Exactly what South American teams brought flair to the last World Cup or indeed the last couple of World Cups.

Or were you just writing down the first thing that came into your head?

herbieflowers

shatners basoon wrote:

Thats one thing i can never understand. Ireland played awful awful football back then, possibly the worst team by far in both tournaments at the knock out stages especially considering we'd some fine footballers. It was probably under McCarthy that we played the best football and actually got at teams (at least when we were underdogs), i especailly remember the draw against Germany where we really went at them to equalise, very enjoyable stuff.

It's not necessarily about the standard of football, though. It's pride in one's country, passion and everything that goes with it. Being underdogs and mixing it with bigger nations, I don't think one could necessarily legitimately argue that that style of football (route one for the most part) was particularly alluring, it was more about seeing our "boys in green" succeed etc...without meaning to sound corny!

Savman

Pighead wrote:

Exactly what South American teams brought flair to the last World Cup or indeed the last couple of World Cups.

Or were you just writing down the first thing that came into your head?

Of course I was, wouldn't be a rant otherwise
Even though Brazil underperformed last year, there was still the odd moment of magic but barely a glimpse I will admit. Argentina were superb, got that goal of the tournament with the 20+ odd passes they strung together. Ecuador looked good at times too. There were some other good teams, Ivory Coast etc but traditionally the South Americans are well represented at the World Cup, maybe not so much last year in comparison to recent years with Colombia, Mexico but generally you can expect some goals from these teams

I think the African teams are on the up as they're players have spreaded across the top leagues in Europe and then there's the Japanese, Togo or South Korean surprise package. It's always interesting watching these cultures go head to head. Most are a credit to the beautiful game, as is any team who go out to win. I can't stand the 4-5-1 mentality as employed by England under Eriksson considering the players he had at his disposal.

There may be an argument against International friendlies but I can't see how they can get rid of them in reality. So I guess the players just come over, dragging their heals, trying not to get injured. The result is usually a borefest.:rolleyes:

Pepe LeFrits

International games outside of the WC and the EC bore me. The whole qualifying process should be streamlined so that the likes of Italy never have to play dross like San Marino. In Europe having a couple of seeded qualifying stages would be good. The sh1te teams can play against eachother (and actually avoid getting hockeyed for once) and the best of them gets into the next qualifying stage, where the next band of teams repeat the process. The best of them then joins the qualifying proper where the top seeded teams compete for places in the major tournaments.

Germany vs somebody half decent like Poland, Ireland, Switzerland or Slovakia is a game I might have an interest in. Germany vs the Faroe Islands is not.

Guy:Incognito

Frienlies should be done away with and footballers should have to work 1 1months of the year like the rest of us. ( a month break is more than enough at the end of the season) Between club seasons there should be a few weeks for all the competitive internationals to be played.

Savman

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

International games outside of the WC and the EC bore me. The whole qualifying process should be streamlined so that the likes of Italy never have to play dross like San Marino. In Europe having a couple of seeded qualifying stages would be good. The sh1te teams can play against eachother (and actually avoid getting hockeyed for once) and the best of them gets into the next qualifying stage, where the next band of teams repeat the process. The best of them then joins the qualifying proper where the top seeded teams compete for places in the major tournaments.

This I agree with. I'm sure we all remember the discussion regarding the San Marino's, why they even bother etc etc.
The other argument is that these small nations need the constant beatings if they are ever to improve. The only way you get better is to play against better opposition so I doubt the bureaucrats in FIFA would never be open to such a big change. They claim to be doing it "for the love of the game" but it seems the mickey mouse internationals are having the opposite effect. These are the same genius folk who decided the present World Cup holders have to re-qualify for the next tournament.:rolleyes:

Although I'd personally be in favour of a better seeding system.

Pepe LeFrits

Savman wrote:

This I agree with. I'm sure we all remember the discussion regarding the San Marino's, why they even bother etc etc.
The other argument is that these small nations need the constant beatings if they are ever to improve. The only way you get better is to play against better opposition so I doubt the bureaucrats in FIFA would never be open to such a big change. They claim to be doing it "for the love of the game" but it seems the mickey mouse internationals are having the opposite effect. These are the same genuis folk who decided the present World Cup holders have to re-qualify for the next tournament.:rolleyes:

Although I'd personally be in favour of a better seeding system.

I'd question the educational value of getting obliterated 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 - nil every time they play. The fact of the matter is that with such a tiny population they will never amount to anything on the international stage, and will continue to approach these games as an exercise in damage limitation.

Besides, even amongst the minnows, there are differences in quality. San Marino could probably learn something from playing Luxembourg, for example.

Savman

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

The fact of the matter is that with such a tiny population they will never amount to anything on the international stage

I'm sure someone, somewhere, at some time, said the very same thing about our little island.

_blank_

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

San Marino could probably learn something from playing Luxembourg, for example.

...or Ireland.

Pepe LeFrits

Savman wrote:

I'm sure someone, somewhere, at some time, said the very same thing about our little island.

Clever.

chopperbyrne

They should go back to only three subs allowed for friendlies. Changing most of the team each match does nothing for the squad.

tdv

Only South American teams are worth watching during the internationals.

Limerick Dude

chopperbyrne wrote:

They should go back to only three subs allowed for friendlies. Changing most of the team each match does nothing for the squad.

But on the other hand, younger players need to get experience some how...

Andrew 83

With regards to the weaker nations - surely they 'learn something' from playing against teams and players of a similar standard to themselves in club football week in week out. Over the years there's been enough stumbling blocks for many big teams with weaker nations to show it's worthwhile. Also when else will these players get to play against the top nations and players and when else will their fans see these teams and players in competitive action?

If you look at rugby I'm not sure Italy would ever have got better if they hadn't joined the 6 nations. Also since the South Americans adopted the one big qualifying competition many of their nations have improved.

Pepe LeFrits

In 17 years San Marino have only ever won one game, that is hardly worthwhile. One year ago Germany beat them 13-0. Seriously, what is the point in that?

If they were in seeded pre-qualifying groups, a) they might actually win a game and b) the winners of the groups would still get to play better sides in the next stage. I really don't see the merit of a few 90 minute long attack vs defence sessions every few months. There's only so much improving a nation of 28,000 people can do.

// Incidentally - they've already got this system going in various parts of the world.

Group 2 (Apia, Samoa)
1.Vanuatu 4 3 1 0 16- 2 10
2.Fiji 4 3 0 1 19- 5 9
3.Papua New Guinea 4 2 1 1 17- 6 7
4.Samoa 4 1 0 3 5-11 3
5.American Samoa 4 0 0 4 1-34 0

Won't somebody think of poor American Samoa, how are they going to improve unless they get to play Brazil?

_blank_

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

Won't somebody think of poor American Samoa, how are they going to improve unless they get to play Brazil?

Well given the example you gave has nothing to do with Brazil, that sentence makes little sense.

This is group two from the Oceania Nations Cup 2004.

Here is the complete story.

http://www.rsssf.com/tables/04oc.html

Australia and New Zealand got a bye to the second round.

Australia have since left the region and joined Asia.

eirebhoy

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

// Incidentally - they've already got this system going in various parts of the world.

I think UEFA and South America are the only 2 regions that don't have some sort of pre-qualifiers.

shane86

Completely disagree, I find internationl qualifiers far more tense and exciting than any Prem match. For any of the top 4 in the prem losing a match or two in the opening weeks is not desireable, but it isnt the end of the world. And note again, the top 4. International football is a section where minnows can exceed their expectations, and you find that when it happens the whole world is behind them. Ireland did it in 1990. Australia in 2006. Even France werent hugely fancied in 1998. In the WC I never support the likes of Brazil or Italy, I back the underdogs like the Aussies and Ghana last year. The prem, however, even before it starts we all know its a four horse race between the big 4. Even if, lets say, Villa make it into 4th place and edge one of the big dogs into 5th, its still only 4th out of 20 teams. The winner is probably 20 pts plus ahead. I have far more interest in watching Ireland than even a prem team I like like Liverpool, because Ireland is my country whereas the pool is just a team I like to see do well. Im baffled as to how anyone has mre interest in watching English teams with mainly foreign players rather than that of their own country.


Now, while I would love if Ireland were in Germanys position of whereby there is next to no worry of not making the finals, its going to be gripping stuff this winter if we can get the points against the E Europeans.

re the friendlies, are Ireland friendlies really more boring than seeing Man U or Chelsea wipe the floor with x and y MLS or Chinese league team in pre season tours?

Pepe LeFrits

DesF wrote:

Well given the example you gave has nothing to do with Brazil, that sentence makes little sense.

It makes perfect sense. The point is that you don't have to play one of the world's best teams to improve, and to be honest when the difference is that great you aren't going to improve anyway.

This is group two from the Oceania Nations Cup 2004.

Here is the complete story.

http://www.rsssf.com/tables/04oc.html

Australia and New Zealand got a bye to the second round.

Australia have since left the region and joined Asia.

I know this. This sort of setup is better, and considering there are enough countries in Europe to adopt something similar, I don't know why they don't.

Savman

shane86 wrote:

For any of the top 4 in the prem losing a match or two in the opening weeks is not desireable, but it isnt the end of the world. And note again, the top 4. International football is a section where minnows can exceed their expectations, and you find that when it happens the whole world is behind them. Ireland did it in 1990. Australia in 2006. Even France werent hugely fancied in 1998.

When you say "exceed expectations" - I presume you mean get past the group stage of a major competition? There's always a dark horse, yes, but generally world football is no different to league football in the sense that the team(s) with the best players will always be stronger. That's not to say they are undefeatable, quite the opposite. The WC throws up all sorts of surprises, a lot of players fold under that kind of pressure.

The prem, however, even before it starts we all know its a four horse race between the big 4. Even if, lets say, Villa make it into 4th place and edge one of the big dogs into 5th, its still only 4th out of 20 teams.

Again, it's no different to any competition. There will be good teams and mediocre teams. Anyone can win it, it's just that the best team always does, without exception.

I have far more interest in watching Ireland than even a prem team I like like Liverpool, because Ireland is my country whereas the pool is just a team I like to see do well. Im baffled as to how anyone has mre interest in watching English teams with mainly foreign players rather than that of their own country.

That's commendable, but I'm your polar opposite. I live and die Villa whereas I'd only have a passing interest in the Ireland team. I know that's not a popular thing to say, but it's the truth. Even if you take the Championship or whatever it's called now, there's a real dogfight there every season between teams of similar standard and it makes for great viewing. I'm not saying every game is a 6 goal thriller but them teams really go out to win and give it their all and it has to be admired.

re the friendlies, are Ireland friendlies really more boring than seeing Man U or Chelsea wipe the floor with x and y MLS or Chinese league team in pre season tours?

Ah in fairness nobody takes any notice of Man U V Glentoran type games, it's not even a contest. Like any of those recent "All star" charity games, such a shockingly pussy footed display of crap exhibition football. And it has come to resemble a lot of International friendlies.

I just think the entire format is all over the place, and I'm no know-it-all but I'd be willing to speculate quite confidently, that International Friendlies and the Qualifying layout is/are less than popular with Premiership managers. Countless managers have voiced their discontent at their big players getting dragged away to play a bunch of part timers from some tiny European island whose name nobody can spell. It's very well possible that the Premier League, or Serie A, or La Liga, could be decided on the injury of a key player for ManU/Chelsea/Barca getting injured whilst on international duty. You could say that's par for the course, but when you look at some of the god awful games they are made to play you have to wonder who designed this format and why it's not more competitive.

If it was make-or-break important matches I'm sure there'd be a lot more commitment and as a result more passionate performances. But more often than not it's a dull affair and we have to endure talented players trying to see out 90mins safely. You call that tense? Being terrified of making a challenge because you could get injured and miss the big club game V AC Milan next week? No player will risk it and in some ways I don't blame them.

Perhaps an overhaul of the Qualifying system and complete review of Friendly policy would be a good thing, but I don't know who in FIFA has the will to make it happen.

thebaz

i kind of agree too, its been depressing supporting ireland recently , and i think i prefer club football too ... wearing the jersey ain't what it used be ... and i hate the political games FIFA play of starting the international games a week after the season kicks off ... i cringe a bit also when the ole ole leprauchaun hat crowd come out to play ;-) .. having said that all my heroes have been irish , and when done right the international nights are something to remember

shane86

I agree, it has been depressing supporting Ireland over the last while at certain times, but its your team and when (hopefully) the glory times return the times of hurt will have been worth it. Awful lows only produce an even greater high when they win If Ireland could climb from the ashes of Cyprus and the awful SM display to at least make the finals and hope upon hope the last 8 and beyond, it would be an even better buzz to remember the state we were in last October/November odd.

thebaz

shane86 wrote:

I agree, it has been depressing supporting Ireland over the last while at certain times, but its your team and when (hopefully) the glory times return the times of hurt will have been worth it. Awful lows only produce an even greater high when they win If Ireland could climb from the ashes of Cyprus and the awful SM display to at least make the finals and hope upon hope the last 8 and beyond, it would be an even better buzz to remember the state we were in last October/November odd.

things ceretainly have improved recently , and Stan is doing a lot better (it still was a stupid gamble to appoint him) ... but if fit this team ain't bad

Given
Finnan
McShane
Dunne
O'Shea
Hunt
Ireland
Carsely
Duff
Keane
Doyle

Savman

thebaz wrote:

things ceretainly have improved recently , and Stan is doing a lot better (it still was a stupid gamble to appoint him) ... but if fit this team ain't bad

Given
Finnan
McShane
Dunne
O'Shea
Hunt
Ireland
Carsely
Duff
Keane
Doyle

This is exactly my point, on paper and going by their club form that's quite a decent side. Not spectacular but balanced. But I still maintain most, if not all, those players when playing for their respective clubs somehow magically "find" and extra 20% commitment. Bar maybe Dunne who is always solid, McShane who's still young and Hunt who actually looks like he wants to be there. I like Doyle too.

I think it may lie with the big club players and I wonder if they are unofficially under the thumb from club managers. Take Keane for example, for Spurs he is absolutely sublime a real class act. Surely at the back of his mind he must know if he picks up an injury he'll drop down the pecking order behind Bent & Defoe? I'm not saying he's not a very good player, I just think he can be guilty of "cruising at 60" rather than going all or nothing. I spose he has no real competition in the Ireland setup.

The Rooster

Savman wrote:

Take Keane for example, for Spurs he is absolutely sublime a real class act. Surely at the back of his mind he must know if he picks up an injury he'll drop down the pecking order behind Bent & Defoe? I'm not saying he's not a very good player, I just think he can be guilty of "cruising at 60" rather than going all or nothing. I spose he has no real competition in the Ireland setup.

Disagree.

Keane has generally been disappointing in this qualifying campaign but its nothing to do with "cruising". He never gives less than 100%, but I feel as captain he tries to take too much on and doesnt use his team-mates enough. His general decision making is the cause of his bad form IMO.

International friendlies are a pile of poo, but qualifying games are usually good. With some exceptions, I generally find most Ireland and England qualifying games entertaining. The two qualifiers coming up for both countries should be really good, and if we're still in with a shout of qualiying Ireland v Germany in Croke Park on a Saturday night should be brilliant.

_blank_

thebaz wrote:

i cringe a bit also when the ole ole leprauchaun hat crowd come out to play

Wánkers, the bloody lot of them.

No idea how to support a team. Boo random players for no reason. Can't see past 'score a goal' and 'yay we scored a goal'. ASKING who the 'number six for Oirland is'.

Wánkers.

eirebhoy

Savman wrote:

This is exactly my point, on paper and going by their club form that's quite a decent side. Not spectacular but balanced. But I still maintain most, if not all, those players when playing for their respective clubs somehow magically "find" and extra 20% commitment. Bar maybe Dunne who is always solid, McShane who's still young and Hunt who actually looks like he wants to be there. I like Doyle too.

I think it may lie with the big club players and I wonder if they are unofficially under the thumb from club managers. Take Keane for example, for Spurs he is absolutely sublime a real class act. Surely at the back of his mind he must know if he picks up an injury he'll drop down the pecking order behind Bent & Defoe? I'm not saying he's not a very good player, I just think he can be guilty of "cruising at 60" rather than going all or nothing. I spose he has no real competition in the Ireland setup.

You didn't mention Duff who hasn't performed at club level in 2 and a half years but always tries his heart out for Ireland. Of course Shay Given. I don't think there's any Irish player that puts in less effort when playing for Ireland.

_blank_

Stephen Carr?

BaZmO*

Savman wrote:

Starting off on the offensive I see

No, just calling a spade a spade.

Savman wrote:

People who are honoured to play for their country in front of 30 odd thousand fans. I, like many, would give my right arm for a chance like that.

I'm sorry but you're being extremely deluded if you think you're going to get a full on 90 minute battle in any International friendly. Granted you'll get the odd game that's a cracker but invariably they're nothing special and they just provide a chance for a manager to give other squad members a run out.

Savman wrote:

No they're not, that's kinda the whole point. Obviously I didn't make this clear enough for you bud.

Yes I did and Yes I am. It was an honest admission of loss of interest. Have you actually got anything to contribute or should I put my flame jacket on for your next barrage of wisdom?:rolleyes:

Yeah cos we've got such a long history of making it to International Tournaments and then to the Quarter Finals.

Savman wrote:

Have you actually got anything to contribute

How about you just go back to supporting Aston Villa then and come back to support your country when they start making it to the finals of every tournament they play in. How's that?

Savman wrote:

Jaysis. Is that the choice? Defend or Route 1? FFS it's not too much to ask to see a team proactively trying to win the game rather than kill it. Possession counts for nothing. Put the ball in the back of the bloody net or you will get nowhere, I would've thought it was fairly straight forward.

Funny, this "long ball" jibe that gets bandied about. When the pass is right and a striker gets on the end of it to score, I don't hear anybody complaining?

Go back and read what I was commenting on.

thebaz

DesF wrote:

Stephen Carr?

he never made my starting 11, which is a shame cause he's a really talented full back, pity the attitude is not more Denis Irwin .

The Rooster

DesF wrote:

Stephen Carr?

No. He's shíte for Newky too.

aidan24326

International friendlies are a total yawn and near enough to a waste of time. But the competitive games are still important. Stan has turned it around a bit after a horrible start and it will be interesting to see if we can get a result in Slavakia. A win is needed though, a draw no use.