How does it take 13 monkeys to hire a manager? Answer 113 days

shane86

BaZmO* wrote: »

We're getting Venables, whether it takes another six hours or six months is irrelevant.

Exactly. He didnt refuse Bulgaria for nothing. The mystery is why the FAI are prolonging it. Unless, of course, certain figures have been involved in the betting scam by mentioning the likes of Deschamps.

The only other (and better) possibility I can think of is Sanchez. If it aint him, its Tel, end of.

Unless of course they either

a- Keep Givens on the back of a goaless draw against a half arsed Brazil side

or

b- Re hire Stan

Nothing is impossible.

~Rebel~

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Pity. Venables would be up there with Troussier and Aldridge as really awful candidates for the job.

What makes Troussier a really awful candidate?

LuckyLloyd

~Rebel~ wrote: »

What makes Troussier a really awful candidate?

Mercenary, who has achieved nothing tangible at the top level despite numerous jobs (he underachieved in the 2002 WC despite a talented Japanese squad and home advantage / failing to qualify for the champions league with Marseille). His average length of tenure is less than two years. The reason he keeps getting mentioned for international posts has more to do with his nomadic history than his actual level of expertise or previous achievments.

Not what we are looking for right now (or ever).

dubmick

he also sounds like he's turned into a right loon with this muslim stuff

_blank_

That last comment is very silly.

DeadSkin

Agreed.

LuckyLloyd

On the other hand, Venables has consistently failed in management since the Euro Champs in 1996.

- Failed to get Australia to the WC shipping two late goals at home to Iran in the playoffs;

- Was sacked half way through a season at Palace with them nearly going bust;

- Was brought in to help the hapless Bryan Robson at Boro and left when he did (in fairness, he did have somewhat of a positive short - term impact there);

- Did terribly at Leeds and was sacked with them in relegation trouble despite a very good squad at his disposal;

- No.2 to McClaren at England. Nuff said.


If he gets the job - it is a terrible appointment for Irish football. My expectation is that he would be gone after a single campaign and we will be back to square one in two years time.

~Rebel~

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Mercenary, who has achieved nothing tangible at the top level despite numerous jobs (he underachieved in the 2002 WC despite a talented Japanese squad and home advantage / failing to qualify for the champions league with Marseille). His average length of tenure is less than two years. The reason he keeps getting mentioned for international posts has more to do with his nomadic history than his actual level of expertise or previous achievments.

Not what we are looking for right now (or ever).

Id still put him streets ahead of both Venables and Aldridge on the wishlist though.

GuanYin

Dub13 wrote: »

:D:D...woman have no place in top flight football,as the great Mike Newell once said..."She shouldn't be here. I know that sounds sexist but I am sexist. This is not park football, so what are women doing here?
''It is tokenism - for the politically-correct idiots.’’

My banning senses were tingling there

LuckyLloyd

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Id still put him streets ahead of both Venables and Aldridge on the wishlist though.

Ok, but I wouldn't dream of hiring any of them. I'd give the job to Stephen Kenny sooner.

_blank_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

If he gets the job - it is a terrible appointment for Irish football. My expectation is that he would be gone after a single campaign and we will be back to square one in two years time.

Er what?

Kerr didn't qualify, was sacked after one qualification tournament in charge. (I realsie Kerr had the remainder of McCarthy's tournament, but still...)

Stan didn't qualify, was sacked after one qualification tournament in charge.

What makes you think the public/press won't turn against a non-Venables after five games, if he isn't picking the team they think he should be picking? Then he will be as good as gone.

Any new manager is only going to be given a two year contract anyway, otherwise the FAI may go and hang themselves.

dubmick

DesF wrote: »

Yeah, muslims are a crazy bunch alright :rolleyes:

I think you picked me up wrong, I'm not saying anything against islam I'm just questioning why he converted to it his fifties and changed his name. I wouldn't want him as Ireland manager.

LuckyLloyd

DesF wrote: »

Er what?

Kerr didn't qualify, was sacked after one qualification tournament in charge. (I realsie Kerr had the remainder of McCarthy's tournament, but still...)

Stan didn't qualify, was sacked after one qualification tournament in charge.

What makes you think the public/press won't turn against a non-Venables after five games, if he isn't picking the team they think he should be picking? Then he will be as good as gone.

Any new manager is only going to be given a two year contract anyway, otherwise the FAI may go and hang themselves.

Kerr shouldn't have been sacked.

Staunton should have been sacked.

What I am suggesting is that things will be so bad under El Tel (even if he has a 'little scheme') so as to make his sacking obvious. Like Staunton's was.

---

**** the public by the way. We're all idiots and our opinion should be irrelevant. The aim should be to get a competent man in to do a long - term job over a number of years (4 - 6). That is what the FAI should be determined to do differently this time. Bring in someone they will be able to stick by even if we don't make the next world cup.

McCarthy failed a couple of times but was given time - and he got us there. If Kerr had been given time, who knows? He wasn't that far off the mark. Staunton was. Venables, Troussier and the like will be.

LuckyLloyd

dubmick wrote: »

I think you picked me up wrong, I'm not saying anything against islam I'm just questioning why he converted to it his fifties and changed his name. I wouldn't want him as Ireland manager.

If Gus Hiddink changed his name to Mohammed Siddiq and demanded the Ireland job tomorrow I'd be delighted with that. Concentrate on professional credentials - not the image or personal life.

dubmick

thats you mate. Do you mind if I have my own opinion?

Cheers

_blank_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

**** the public by the way. We're all idiots and our opinion should be irrelevant.

indeed...but...

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Bring in someone they will be able to stick by even if we don't make the next world cup.

So, if the new manager makes a huge fúck up, you'd be happy to see the FAI stick by him?

Steve Staunton you mean?

It's either one way or the other. Can't have both.

So, we either give a 2 year contract, so both parties can decide at the end of it what they want to do. If the new man wants to stay on, if the clown association are happy to keep him, and if the Evening Herald are happy, then he gets a new contract.

Not some joke of a SIX YEAR contract, where if he turns out ot be more of a joker than Stan, the clown association aren't forced into another public mockery and huge payout.

What, exactly do you want here?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The aim should be to get a competent man in to do a long - term job over a number of years (4 - 6). That is what the FAI should be determined to do differently this time.

Oh, here is your answer.

Frankly.

What. The. Fúck?

Risk four to six years on someone competent? Are you for real? Seriously?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Staunton was. Venables, Troussier and the like will be.

Finished third under Stan.

So you dismiss Venables, Troussier et al.

Wjo do you envisage as the man to give a six year contract to?

Bizarre tbh.

LuckyLloyd

DesF wrote: »

indeed...but...


So, if the new manager makes a huge fúck up, you'd be happy to see the FAI stick by him?

Steve Staunton you mean?

It's either one way or the other. Can't have both.

So, we either give a 2 year contract, so both parties can decide at the end of it what they want to do. If the new man wants to stay on, if the clown association are happy to keep him, and if the Evening Herald are happy, then he gets a new contract.

Not some joke of a SIX YEAR contract, where if he turns out ot be more of a joker than Stan, the clown association aren't forced into another public mockery and huge payout.

What, exactly do you want here?


Oh, here is your answer.

Frankly.

What. The. Fúck?

Risk four to six years on someone competent? Are you for real? Seriously?


Finished third under Stan.

So you dismiss Venables, The Mad Muslim et al.

Wjo do you envisage as the man to give a six year contract to?

Bizarre tbh.

By your rationale then McCarthy should have been sacked after his first campaign and, infact, we should look at sacking anyone who doesn't qualify so that we get to start again every two years.

You are being argumentative for the sake of it. It is crystal clear that Staunton, Troussier and Venables are not viable candidates for any length of contract because:

- Venables did achieve at the top level in the 80s but had failed in numerous appointments over the past 12 years. No longer competent.
- Troussier never achieved ANYTHING at the highest level and jumps from job to job picking up good money for little or nothing. Never competent.
- Staunton's coaching experience did not extend beyond a couple of months at Walsall under Merson. No qualifications = not competent.

It is pretty clear what I am looking for. A manager with some level of success at the highest levels over the past six years. If we can get someone like that to take the job - give him a four year contract. Things were a joke under Staunton because he was a joke of an appointment.

The mooted appointents of Trappatoni; Jewell or Sanchez would make sense with a four year deal. Why? Because they have enjoyed huge success; or recent success. Therefore it would be a surprise if we massively underperformed with them at the helm.

The other key point to consider regarding two year contracts is that it fuels media speculation because of natural instabillity and uncertainty. If Kerr had another two years remaining on his deal would the speculation have been as intense? No. Media speculation fuels public speculation. They are interlinked.

Staunton was horribly out of his depth. You can say: "finished third". I say: weak group; 0 - 4 Holland at home; 2 - 5 Cyprus away; 2 - 1 last minute winner San Marino away. i.e. new depths not chartered for 30 years.

I think you are smart enough to distinguish between candidates that are lol; and candidates that could work out in time. I'm hoping for a four year deal given to someone from the latter category.

PHB

If we give somebody a 2 year contract, and they get us into a competition, they will without a doubt leave to manage a premiership club. We need a 4 year contract in case it works out.

LuckyLloyd

PHB wrote: »

If we give somebody a 2 year contract, and they get us into a competition, they will without a doubt leave to manage a premiership club. We need a 4 year contract in case it works out.

Yes. Another good point.

Unearthly

PHB wrote: »

If we give somebody a 2 year contract, and they get us into a competition, they will without a doubt leave to manage a premiership club. We need a 4 year contract in case it works out.

The chances of us failing to get to the world cup is far greater than qualifying. 2 year contract is the safer bet

If we lost a manager after a world cup campaign then it wouldn't be that hard to find a decent candidate to replace

_blank_

@lucky and PHB.

Are you willing to take the risk on the FAI appointing a "decent" manager?

A four contract at this stage is a joke.

Get a man in, tell him to do a job in 2 years. None of this "four year plan" bolloxology. (of course, this only works if the players we have are good enough, a premise which a goodly majority of posters here would seem to agree with).

So, if the new man does a half decent job in the two years, sees potential for the next two years and the possibility of qualification for the next tournament, he would be tempted to stay on. Why not. Everyone's happy.

if the new man turns out to be an abject failure, then he can be let go. No harm, no foul, we get the next man in.

Unearthly wrote: »

The chances of us failing to get to the world cup is far greater than qualifying. 2 year contract is the safer bet

And, that my friends, is the truth.

Not even Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger would get Ireland qualified for WC2010.

secman

We were extremely organised under Brain Kerr ,think about it nobody ever hammerd us, when beaten it was by odd goal. In fact I think his all games record beats all, including Mick and Jack. Delaney is a jack ass, he feared Kerr might get too powerful in there and that would not suit him, can only have one too powerful person ! I do accept that we were never going to be a free flowing gem of a team to watch under Kerr, but we do not have the players for that. Tactically and tecnically, possibly the most knowlable Irish man regarding footy, and to think he is not involved at all within the FAI is a national disgrace.

Another rant over

Secman

_blank_

Delaney shafted Kerr for sure. No doubt about it.

secman wrote: »

Tactically and tecnically, possibly the most knowlable Irish man regarding footy, and to think he is not involved at all within the FAI is a national disgrace

I was saying this only last night to someone.

GuanYin

DesF and the others. you're walking on the edge of a ban with the muslim lark. Quit it now and edit that **** out. If I find it there later, there will be bans until the new manager is installed.


Kerr, imo, was a good manager. McCarthy was average, but had Keane to make up for his weaknesses. The same people who called for Kerr to go, now look back with nostaligia

LuckyLloyd

Unearthly wrote: »

The chances of us failing to get to the world cup is far greater than qualifying. 2 year contract is the safer bet

If we lost a manager after a world cup campaign then it wouldn't be that hard to find a decent candidate to replace

DesF wrote: »

@lucky and PHB.

Are you willing to take the risk on the FAI appointing a "decent" manager?

A four contract at this stage is a joke.

Get a man in, tell him to do a job in 2 years. None of this "four year plan" bolloxology. (of course, this only works if the players we have are good enough, a premise which a goodly majority of posters here would seem to agree with).

So, if the new man does a half decent job in the two years, sees potential for the next two years and the possibility of qualification for the next tournament, he would be tempted to stay on. Why not. Everyone's happy.

if the new man turns out to be an abject failure, then he can be let go. No harm, no foul, we get the next man in.


And, that my friends, is the truth.

Not even Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger would get Ireland qualified for WC2010.

I don't believe the current squad of players we have is good enough to qualify from our upcoming group. But a good tactician who is there with a four year plan could gain enough forward momentum to get us to EC2012.

If someone comes in on a two year deal and almost gets us there (narrowly missing out on the playoffs / losing in the playoffs) they will:

- have to face speculation and uncertainty towards the end of the campaign on whether they will stay on and whether that is dependant on qualification (which I think you can see is counter - productive);
- be an attractive proposition in the job market as they will clearly be doing a positive job with the ROI;

Why do we leave the door open like that?

Just because we got burned with Staunton doesn't mean that we will get burned with the next man in - providing he is a proper manager in touch with the game at the highest levels TODAY. There is risk associated with every contract; every appointment.

But I believe the only reasonable way forward is a four year deal.

LuckyLloyd

secman wrote: »

We were extremely organised under Brain Kerr ,think about it nobody ever hammerd us, when beaten it was by odd goal. In fact I think his all games record beats all, including Mick and Jack. Delaney is a jack ass, he feared Kerr might get too powerful in there and that would not suit him, can only have one too powerful person ! I do accept that we were never going to be a free flowing gem of a team to watch under Kerr, but we do not have the players for that. Tactically and tecnically, possibly the most knowlable Irish man regarding footy, and to think he is not involved at all within the FAI is a national disgrace.

Secman, I 100% agree. And was outraged at the time of his dismissal. We lost a huge amount of expertise when he was ousted. And Irish football at all levels will prove to be poorer for it over the long haul.

semibluff

Unearthly wrote: »

If we lost a manager after a world cup campaign then it wouldn't be that hard to find a decent candidate to replace

are you having a laugh?? havnt you witnessed how long it has taken to get a suitable manager in now due to availabilty, budget and desirability to want to manage a team that is a shade of its former self.

we are not the second or first seed in the group, and as such, we are not expected to qualify. So if a manager came third by a whisker, brought through young blood, played a delightful style of football - Des and co would still sack him???

surely not.

After the length of time taken to find this manager, lets assume whoever gets it is suitable and has the criteria we need - and presuming this, he deserves a 4 year contract, (also for all the above mentioned reasons)

Unearthly

semibluff wrote: »

are you having a laugh?? havnt you witnessed how long it has taken to get a suitable manager in now due to availabilty, budget and desirability to want to manage a team that is a shade of its former self.

)

Why are you compairing the situation to now? After a campaign in the world cup, the job would look more attractive, FAI would have a bit more money to due to the croke park match money and world cup money etc

_blank_

Unearthly wrote: »

Why are you compairing the situation to now? After a campaign in the world cup, the job would look more attractive, FAI would have a bit more money to due to the croke park match money and world cup money etc

You think Ireland will be in WC2010?

l o l t b h

Unearthly

DesF wrote: »

You think Ireland will be in WC2010?

l o l t b h

No

Read my earlier posts, I was making the argument that IF(a big one) we qualified and had a wc campaign, then losing that manager wouldn't be the end of the world as there would be a chance to get in a decent replacement.

Have you forgot already about the post you quoted me on saying the chances of us qualifying are slimmer than failing?

_blank_

Unearthly wrote: »

Have you forgot already about the post you quoted me on saying the chances of us qualifying are slimmer than failing?

Oh, that was you.

tbh, I don't really look at who is posting really, just read the posts, and quote as necessary.

Apologies.

But still, it is a very big if. Ginormous in fact. Ireland won't qualify.

semibluff

as for the FAI having a bit more money - they had double the scottish fa's budget for the job, and id take george burley any day of the week

LuckyLloyd

semibluff wrote: »

as for the FAI having a bit more money - they had double the scottish fa's budget for the job, and id take george burley any day of the week

.

Unearthly

semibluff wrote: »

as for the FAI having a bit more money - they had double the scottish fa's budget for the job, and id take george burley any day of the week

Don't really think much of him but he would of picked Scotland over Ireland unless we threw something ridiculous at him.

_blank_

Unearthly wrote: »

unless we threw something ridiculous at him.

Like a banana, or a giraffe?

Unearthly

DesF wrote: »

Like a banana, or a giraffe?

don't know why but that got a cheap laugh :D

~Rebel~

4 year contract idea is for the birds. (Im bringin' that phrase back)

The only real reason anyone has for it is that if we do well, that the guy doesn't leave after 2 years and leave us back to square 1.

We should all know by now that contract or not, if the manager wants to leave for a better job after 2 years, he'll go. Look at Scotland with both McLeish and Walter Smith. Both did well with Scotland and moved on before their contracts were up.

All a 4 year contract will do is guarantee another big pay out if we get another dud.


<edit> Cheers for that one Des, nearly wet myself!

grames_bond

im going to throw quentin tarantinos name in the hat! cant be more "out there" than most of the names we are hearing!

shane86

grames_bond wrote: »

im going to throw quentin tarantinos name in the hat! cant be more "out there" than most of the names we are hearing!

What, like "Quentin Tarantino presents....the Ireland squad" except with different people actually doing the management. A bit like the way he adds his name to films he didnt actually direct in order to promote it more, like Hostel.

That idea didnt really work last time around, seeing as if all had went to plan for the FAI Stan would have been repeating every word Bobby told him through an earpiece. Stan was never meant to be manager, imo the FAI got caught up in this whole nonsense that the manager must be from the country crap the English media never stop going on about.

Daysha

I've been biting my tongue the past 10 minutes reading over the last 10 pages or so and, even though i didn't want to be involved in this debate, theres one point I just have to mention

1. The pessimistic view of the Irish football team held by some of the posters here is a disgrace. To say that Ireland just flat out wont qualify before a new manager is even appointed is bordering on lunacy. There can be no doubting how important a manager is to the team. Compare the Scotland of Berti Vogts to the Scotland of Smith or McLeish. We might not get the biggest name in football, but neither was Walter Smith.

Just MAYBE the team get on really well with the new manager. Just MAYBE the new manager gets the absolute best out of the players. Just MAYBE the new manager will get Keane to bring his Spurs form to Ireland, or will rediscover Duffs form of 2002 or John O'Sheas form of 2003. Just MAYBE the manager will build a resolute, never say die attitude in the dressing room and the players will show real passion in the jersey. Just MAYBE we can fully turn Croke Park into Fortress Croker.

We have a good team, a favourable group and qualification is a possibility. And it doesnt matter if the new manager turns out to be the favourable or the unfavourable, we should give him and the players our absolute 100% backing. Anything else and we just start a losing battle. And that includes giving up on all hope of qualification 9 months before the group even begins.

LuckyLloyd

deise59 wrote: »

We have a good team, a favourable group and qualification is a possibility. And it doesnt matter if the new manager turns out to be the favourable or the unfavourable, we should give him and the players our absolute 100% backing. Anything else and we just start a losing battle. And that includes giving up on all hope of qualification 9 months before the group even begins.

BOLLOCKS.

I can go to Croke park and scream myself hoarse while we still have even a sniff of the game despite the fact that I may not think we will ultimately win. One can be fully in support of a team while still retaining a critical mindset for proceedings.

I may not think we will qualify - doesn't mean that I don't desperately want us to.

Daysha

Theres a difference between not thinking we'll qualify and not wanting to qualify lloyd, and not once did I accuse anyone of wanting us to lose.
And what exactly is BOLLOCKS from that quote?

LuckyLloyd

deise59 wrote: »

Theres a difference between not thinking we'll qualify and not wanting to qualify lloyd, and not once did I accuse anyone of wanting us to lose.
And what exactly is BOLLOCKS from that quote?

The suggestion that thinking we may not be good enough to qualify amounts to not giving the team and manager 100% support at the match.

Daysha

Well Im going to have to disagree with you then. I could be the most fanatical supporter in the world but if im still over critical and never believes we can achieve anything, then im not a true supporter.

Thats just how I feel

estebancambias

Why is it cool to be pessimistic about Irelands chances of qualifying?

The group will be difficult, but it is not 'impossible' we qualify.

LuckyLloyd

estebancambias wrote: »

Why is it cool to be pessimistic about Irelands chances of qualifying?

The group will be difficult, but it is not 'impossible' we qualify.

Huhwah? Not trying to be cool sir. It's just the conclusion I reached after watching our games during the previous campaign / seeing what I have seen from our players in club games since November.

Obviously the 2002 WC team wasn't that much more talented. But they had arguably the best player in the world at that time driving them forward. Also, consider this:

Given: Natural leader, captain of Newcastle on occasions
Kelly: Club Captain at Leeds for an extended period when they were going well
Harte: Weak link in terms of leadership
Dunne: Now Club Captain at City
Staunton: True grit at the back
Keane: Keane
Holland: Club Captain at Ipswich for extended period
Kinsella: Club Captain for years at Charlton
Kilbahne: Worn the armband in certain situations at Everton and Wigan
Duff: Captain for Ireland for a time under Kerr
Quinn: Captain at times for Sunderland / natural weight of experience
Keane: Captain of Spurs / Ireland
McAteer: Club Captain for his last couple of seasons at Tranmere
Breen: Club Captain under McCarthy for a period at Sunderland

---

You can be hugely talented. Or you can be hugely professional and experienced with a small bit of class here and there.

When you are struggling on both fronts you are going to be struggling at the international level imo.

estebancambias

I agree, but the way some people go on you would think we were a team like Cyprus. We finished third playing badly in a group which on the basis of the Fifa rankings was a tougher group than Bulgaria!

Bulgaria's group:
Holland-9
Romania-13
Belarus-62
Albania-80
Slovenia-81
Luxemboug-149

Ireland group:
Czech Republic-6
Germany-5
Slovakia-54
Wales-58
Cyprus-79
San Marino-197

I think everyone agrees that Ireland were terrible in the group, but we played badly and finished third. When people say we have no chance of qualifying, I would like to ask what more do you know about Bulgaria other than Bojinov, Petrov, S.Petrov and Berbatov. What about their new manager, are you aware of his credentials?

Its an even playing field, we can finish 2nd just as much as Bulgaria.

eirebhoy

I'm sure most of our players will have a spell as captain before they retire.

LuckyLloyd

eirebhoy wrote: »

I'm sure most of our players will have a spell as captain before they retire.

Ireland?
Stephen Kelly?
Doyle?
Carr isn't.
Stephen Reid isn't.
Miller?
Douglas?
McGeady?
Long?
O' Shea?

And, in any case, for the next campaign we have more players in the squad who won't have that experience than will. The WC2002 squad was at a more mature stage. And it counts for a lot.

shane86

deise59 wrote: »

I've been biting my tongue the past 10 minutes reading over the last 10 pages or so and, even though i didn't want to be involved in this debate, theres one point I just have to mention

1. The pessimistic view of the Irish football team held by some of the posters here is a disgrace. To say that Ireland just flat out wont qualify before a new manager is even appointed is bordering on lunacy. There can be no doubting how important a manager is to the team. Compare the Scotland of Berti Vogts to the Scotland of Smith or McLeish. We might not get the biggest name in football, but neither was Walter Smith.

Just MAYBE the team get on really well with the new manager. Just MAYBE the new manager gets the absolute best out of the players. Just MAYBE the new manager will get Keane to bring his Spurs form to Ireland, or will rediscover Duffs form of 2002 or John O'Sheas form of 2003. Just MAYBE the manager will build a resolute, never say die attitude in the dressing room and the players will show real passion in the jersey. Just MAYBE we can fully turn Croke Park into Fortress Croker.

We have a good team, a favourable group and qualification is a possibility. And it doesnt matter if the new manager turns out to be the favourable or the unfavourable, we should give him and the players our absolute 100% backing. Anything else and we just start a losing battle. And that includes giving up on all hope of qualification 9 months before the group even begins.

We have arguably the toughest 6th seeders who may drop us 2 pts.

I agree, some are being overly pessimistic, but we have a tough group and it is tough to see us qualifying.

And Im a guy who post Czech pt 2 match did the maths and suggested to the lads that the Czechs arent the team they were, Germany will likely beat the Czechs (which in the end they didnt), the Slovaks might give it all, and Cyprus are an up and coming bogey. I then assured them we would beat Cyprus and Wales, and that beating Germany wasnt impossible.