Republic of Ireland Team Talk/News/Rumours

miroslavklose

Sin City wrote: »

Poland are a good team but we tend to do well against the big teams. I think we can snatch something. Boruc in goal is nothing special so I can see us scoring. If the lads have the hunger and passion for the game I think we can come out of it with 3 points

Fabianski will play, not Boruc.

Sin City

miroslavklose wrote: »

Fabianski will play, not Boruc.

Your right I misread the post
Apologies

Sin City

briany wrote: »

That Croat side was a bit better than decent, to be fair. They gave Spain and Italy a good game each, and that Italy game was a scoring draw. Very tough group of course, but the lack of belief, of guile in Ireland's game was still very tough to watch. Watching the bubble of belief burst was sad, and quite unlike any previous Irish tournament I had witnessed.

I don't want Ireland to say 'anything can happen', 'cause to me it implies a hope of luck and I don't want to merely hope things go well, I want them to be of the attitude to make things go well, and that you make your own luck.

Good point but we are no world beaters to be fair, we do need a slice of luck to go into a game like this... going on our recent games anyway. I understand you want us to play to our strengths and give it a go but we will never dominate anyone. We will have shots at goal just need luck that one of them finds the back of the net

Sin City

Dempsey wrote: »

3-5-2 wouldnt surprise me as it suits the best players available. He's used it alot during his career. The time to work on it is the issue. MON will prefer a counter attacking style against fairly equal to better opposition.

It would suit alright but can you see MON ever dropping McGeady. We may need his assists here, or will he opt to play him in the hole ahead of Wes, thats a concern. I would imagine MON will go counter attacking as he will not want to loose

MaroonAndGreen

Crazy if we go out and attack Poland in a 4-4-2 without 2 holding or defensive minded midfielders anyway. We aren't good enough to dominate teams IMO.

Dempsey

miroslavklose wrote: »

Fabianski will play, not Boruc.

Better for Ireland if you ask me

Sin City wrote: »

It would suit alright but can you see MON ever dropping McGeady. We may need his assists here, or will he opt to play him in the hole ahead of Wes, thats a concern. I would imagine MON will go counter attacking as he will not want to loose

McGeady is better in the hole behind the striker despite some ineffective displays there. He's ineffective on the wing despite playing most of his career there. When allowed to run through the middle, he's racked up most of his goals/assists. I dont think Wes has a look in tbh, MON will go for the players that offer the most off the ball and he's not an asset in that way.

briany

Sin City wrote: »

Good point but we are no world beaters to be fair, we do need a slice of luck to go into a game like this... going on our recent games anyway. I understand you want us to play to our strengths and give it a go but we will never dominate anyone. We will have shots at goal just need luck that one of them finds the back of the net

I think it's still true that if Ireland play an overly defensive game, reliant on a bit of fortune for a set piece, knock-on, or defensive howler, they'll always be walking a tightrope between success and disaster. Ireland will never dominate comparable/better teams if they play in the way they have been wont to, but what's galling is so many of these teams in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th seed pots, if you get at them a little bit, just a little bit, suddenly the game doesn't seem so one-sided, suddenly Ireland look okay on the ball, suddenly Ireland are making coherent chances and posing a genuine threat.

noodler

sugarman wrote: »

Well how the hell were they 3rd seeds for the qualifiers, ahead of Ireland who 4th seeds then?!?

They were ranked slightly above us when the draw was made in Jan 06, as theyd just qualified for 2006 WC and we didnt.

Then by the time we played them in 2007, they were even further ahead having got to the QF of the WC the year previous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Euro_2008_qualifying#Seedings

Fair enough.

You indicated in your post or at least seemed to indicate that it was rankings rather than coefficient that mattered and since it was was coefficients I was almost certain we were seed three in that draw but I see we were a lower coefficient as well.

Kermit.de.frog

The idea of England, Wales, Scotland and the north making it and us not would be disasterous for football in this country, make no mistake. It's laughing stock territory all other considerations accepted like the poxy group we ended up with compared to others. We need a result and I think we need a win.

ebbsy

I agree we have to win tonight. Need to go out and make a statement, just like Wales did last night. However if we start doing crazy things again like dropping our top goal scorer or playing like we did against Scotland then a disaster is on the cards.

A draw me thinks. We haven't beaten anyone half decent in ages and Poland will score.

Paully D

Sin City wrote: »

The question is really will MON go attacking or have a counter or defensive mentality

:pac::pac::pac:

Hercule Poirot

Poland a class striker, a decent right midfielder and a decent right back - but they can't win games on their own. We have no divine right to beat Poland but we shouldn't fear them either. Saying that, I have a bad feeling it will be another valiant defeat. I just hope we go for it and don't fall into the trap of playing for a draw, if we do they will tear us apart.

briany

When's the last time that Ireland beat a team who out ranked them over 30 places in competitive play?

Fr Tod Umptious

briany wrote: »

When's the last time that Ireland beat a team who out ranked them over 30 places in competitive play?

Probably France in 09, technically a 1-0 win in Paris

TheCitizen

Paully D wrote: »

:pac::pac::pac:

MON in his successful day's managing Celtic would often send his teams out with a positive attitude on the front foot against top European sides. I think things went negative with Sunderland perhaps, but Sunderland are a club with a loser mentality that never come close to winning anything. Running to stand still to keep their place in the EPL making up the numbers is the height of their ambition. How have Sunderland been doing since MON's time there?

tonycascarino

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

Poland a class striker, a decent right midfielder and a decent right back

The decent right back and right midfielder are injured for tonight's match. There is no way we should fear Poland. Too much hype around them. It's not Brazil we are playing.

Wacker The Attacker

TheCitizen wrote: »

MON in his successful day's managing Celtic would often send his teams out with a positive attitude on the front foot against top European sides. I think things went negative with Sunderland perhaps, but Sunderland are a club with a loser mentality that never come close to winning anything. Running to stand still to keep their place in the EPL making up the numbers is the height of their ambition. How have Sunderland been doing since MON's time there?

Equally as bad, if not worse than when he was there. They are very real candidates for relegation. Then can you really expect Sunderland to compete with the chelsea and Man city' of this world as things stand.

Wacker The Attacker

briany wrote: »

When's the last time that Ireland beat a team who out ranked them over 30 places in competitive play?

Who cares?

PhlegmyMoses

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

Who cares?

Agreed. These stats eventually come to an end and have very little bearing on how things will play out.

The fact that Poland are so far ahead of us in the rankings is obviously relevant to tonight, but our record against teams above us isn't really.

Hulk Hands

noodler wrote: »

His sole achievement of beating Armenia and Estonia?

Yes his sole achievement. Unless we are breaking things a managers reign until things as stupidly specific as individual results, we're going to judge him on his overall body of work. He had 3 campaigns. One was average - beating Bulgaria to second, yet not being good enough to get by Italy to top, or France in the playoffs was standard expectation for the Irish side. Any less was terrible, any more was exceeding expectation. The WC2014 campaign was an utter disaster. The point of contention is whether you regard the second place finish over Armenia and subsequent terrible show in Poland as an overall success.

noodler wrote: »

How blind to context would you have to be to actually downplay such results in the backdrop of the Ireland national team?

Armenia were extremely tough in that campaign, they trampled Slovakia twice and held Russia in Yerehvan. We were the only team to win in Yerevan.

The context of Armenia magically becoming a decent side? Armenia finished 6th of 6 in their 2010 campaign. They finished 5th of 6 in 2014. Unless we believe there was some anomoly whereby they became Euro's finals standard for one campaign, we have to come to the conclusion that they were average to poor. The reason they held Russia in Yerevan is because Russia were also a quite average side, as shown by their terrible performance in Euro2012. We managed a total of 1 point from 6 against Russia.

noodler wrote: »

I also remind you, that since the Ireland football team has not beaten a team of a higher seed since Holland in 2001, why would you use this as a stick to beat Trap specifically?

Who said it was only Trap specifically? Nobody is arguing that Kerr or Staunton weren't failures. We expected far far better when we started paying millions for this footballing great to manage us. Being an improvement on Staunton hardly justifies him.

noodler wrote: »

Arguably his greatest achievement was beating France 0-1 in Paris or a 1-1 in Italy or a 0-0 with Russia - all fine results. More importantly though - we qualified. We had to finish second in the group - something we hadn't managed since the 2002 WC qualifiers.

It's laughable how you mention context above and yet fail to include it every time you bleat on about this success. Saying that it was our first qualification since 2002 seems like a great achievement. Add in context like has been mentioned multiple times and anything less than that achievement would have been an utter catastrophe.

noodler wrote: »

The selective memory apparent in some of the posts in here is mindboggling.

Something you could also be accused of. Instead of focusing on his results (which dont back up your argument either), why don't you address the other factors which have affected us long term?

He got paid upwards of 2 million a year, and yet never made the effort to attend games, promote the grassroots in the country, or grasp the language. Amounts to nothing more than utter disrespect.
In a small country with a limited playing pool, the enstragement of one single player could be deemed a failure. We are also trying to attract certain players to playing for Ireland, and a good example needs to be set. Yet Trap caused enstrangement and offense time and again - Stephen Reid, Andy Reid, Darren Gibson, Ian Harte, Shane Long, Kevin Doyle, Kevin Foley.
Talented Premier League players (Coleman, McCarthy, Gibson, Long, Hoolahan, Pilkington) have lost years off their international careers by Trap's refusal to pick or play them. Obviously this is managerial choice, but when the alternatives were players like Green, Sammon, Cox, O'Dea, and Kelly, he hasnt much of a leg to stand on.

BTW- You're quite aggressive in your responses and insults to other posters, which having a brief look at your posting history is quite rich to say the least. Leave it out

briany

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

Who cares?

I can't think it's a fact that escapes the Irish side, and nothing that heaps extra pressure and expectation on the side can be good when I've already witnessed too many fragile mentality moments from the side. Whatever you want to say about numbers not mattering, the fact still remains that Ireland have disproportionately struggled v. even comparably able teams like Poland, and they're exactly the kind of team Ireland need to be beating if they want to keep qualification in their hands.

Hulk Hands

Hulk Hands wrote: »

BTW- You're quite aggressive in your responses and insults to other posters, which having a brief look at your posting history is quite rich to say the least. Leave it out

Great post.

But actually I found the whole "you're childish/it's a fact that Trap was good/I'm getting a mod to defend my integrity" very funny!

tastyt

How many polish fans do we reckon will be there tonight??

Hope we won't be out shouted and sung in our own back yard

Copper_pipe

tastyt wrote: »

How many polish fans do we reckon will be there tonight??

Hope we won't be out shouted and sung in our own back yard

thought i saw somewhere about 15k

monkey9

What time is KO?

briany

monkey9 wrote: »

What time is KO?

19.45. The time is in match thread title.

This games going to be a neutral venue tonight isn't it. The poles are going to be much louder than us!

Pro. F

TheCitizen wrote: »

MON has had lots of success in his career to date. If he can get this Irish team to play with the spirit and application of his Celtic and Leicester sides in particular in the past we'll qualify out of this Group.

I should have said "his career trajectory to date". If MON were to reproduce his earlier managerial career form we could be on to something all right.

I was against MON's appointment, but I'm still hoping that international management might suit him and that the make-up of his staff might result in good ideas. The signs to me are very much looking like he's going to continue on with his Villa/Sunderland level, which won't be near good enough, but it's still early days.

Paully D

TheCitizen wrote: »

MON in his successful day's managing Celtic would often send his teams out with a positive attitude on the front foot against top European sides. I think things went negative with Sunderland perhaps, but Sunderland are a club with a loser mentality that never come close to winning anything. Running to stand still to keep their place in the EPL making up the numbers is the height of their ambition. How have Sunderland been doing since MON's time there?

Come on mate, Celtic was 10-15 years ago.

I really don't see what relevance Sunderland's prospects have to O'Neill's style of football. However, in any case there's about 14 sides in the Premier League every year who never come close to winning anything (though Sunderland did reach the League Cup final last season) and who have the primary objective of staying in the league so it's hardly just Sunderland, but he was given as good a chance as anyone to succeed there, being allowed to spend over £30m in his time at the club, including £12m on one player and £10m on another. I'd be astonished if anyone outside of the traditional financial powerhouses spent more money than that over the same period.

I'd be very surprised if O'Neill set up to attack Poland tonight. It's something his sides haven't done in quite some time.

noodler

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Yes his sole achievement. Unless we are breaking things a managers reign until things as stupidly specific as individual results, we're going to judge him on his overall body of work. He had 3 campaigns. One was average - beating Bulgaria to second, yet not being good enough to get by Italy to top, or France in the playoffs was standard expectation for the Irish side. Any less was terrible, any more was exceeding expectation. The WC2014 campaign was an utter disaster. The point of contention is whether you regard the second place finish over Armenia and subsequent terrible show in Poland as an overall success.

I think above is a great example of the unrealistic expectations of some Irish fans. Apparently qualifiying second in our WC 2010 group was "average" despite the fact we hadn't finished 2nd in a qualfiiying group for 8 years previously.

Again, the implication is that Bulgaria were atrocious when in actual fact what matters is that we went to Cyprus and held our nerve whereas Bulgaria capitulated. Such results matter - they shouldn't be taken for granted.

Hulk Hands wrote: »

The context of Armenia magically becoming a decent side? Armenia finished 6th of 6 in their 2010 campaign. They finished 5th of 6 in 2014. Unless we believe there was some anomoly whereby they became Euro's finals standard for one campaign, we have to come to the conclusion that they were average to poor. The reason they held Russia in Yerevan is because Russia were also a quite average side, as shown by their terrible performance in Euro2012. We managed a total of 1 point from 6 against Russia.

Again, we have another example where any achievement is denigrated by simply poormouthing the opposition.

Labelling Russia average is a really strange one for me. There is nothing average about Russia then or now - they are easily a couple of levels above us. Certainly I have heard people stretch and say Slovakia lost to Armenia twice so we can somehow argue Slovakia are muck (alhough, using your own criteria, if we look at their previous campaign they qualifed for WC 2010 and indeed reached the quarter-finals - does this not matter? Or does referencing other campaigns only come into it when it suits your argument ala Armenia?.

Calling Russia average is new. Not sure what reality it is based however.

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Who said it was only Trap specifically? Nobody is arguing that Kerr or Staunton weren't failures. We expected far far better when we started paying millions for this footballing great to manage us. Being an improvement on Staunton hardly justifies him.

I think there is a lack of perspective here. The jump in compeitiveness between the Stan era and Trap's first campaign is night and day. We didn't lose a single group game. Implying Trap was some mild improvement over Stan is simply nonsense. I wish Trap had evolved his strategies a bit more once the team's structure and competitiveness returned.

Hulk Hands wrote: »

It's laughable how you mention context above and yet fail to include it every time you bleat on about this success. Saying that it was our first qualification since 2002 seems like a great achievement. Add in context like has been mentioned multiple times and anything less than that achievement would have been an utter catastrophe.

Again, just to be completely clear because you seem once more to have a comment about context (cleverly disguised with an emotive "laughable" remark to cushion the fact but whatever) which absolutely FAILS to take into account context.

Are you saying, for the record, that we should not have finished 2nd in Euro 2004, WC 2006 and EURO 2008 qualifying? You keep saying finishing second in WC 2010 qualifiying was some sort of absolute minimum and that failing to do so would have been a "disaster". Is the implication that the three campaigns previous were disasters? Does that not make Trap's campaign a success? If not, what is your expectation of succes? To top a group with the worlc champions in it?

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Something you could also be accused of. Instead of focusing on his results (which dont back up your argument either), why don't you address the other factors which have affected us long term?

He got paid upwards of 2 million a year, and yet never made the effort to attend games, promote the grassroots in the country, or grasp the language. Amounts to nothing more than utter disrespect.
In a small country with a limited playing pool, the enstragement of one
single player could be deemed a failure. We are also trying to attract certain players to playing for Ireland, and a good example needs to be set. Yet Trap caused enstrangement and offense time and again - Stephen Reid, Andy Reid, Darren Gibson, Ian Harte, Shane Long, Kevin Doyle, Kevin Foley.
Talented Premier League players (Coleman, McCarthy, Gibson, Long, Hoolahan, Pilkington) have lost years off their international careers by Trap's refusal to pick or play them. Obviously this is managerial choice, but when the alternatives were players like Green, Sammon, Cox, O'Dea, and Kelly, he hasnt much of a leg to stand on.

There is merit to this, perhaps not in every case you have mentioned and in some cases your "years" comment is an exaggeration but definitely some merit to it. It is noteworthy that only really Coleman, and McCarthy to a lesser degree, have actually made serious impacts at international level so far. Pilkington and Hoolahan have been around for years and were not in starting lineups, even MON hasn't seen fit to use him so far in competitive games.

Nonetheless, does success in the qualifiying groups trump these criticims? Yes, quite clearly. His job was to get to play-offs and he did it in 2/3 cases.

Hulk Hands wrote: »

BTW- You're quite aggressive in your responses and insults to other posters, which having a brief look at your posting history is quite rich to say the least. Leave it out

Hulk Hands wrote: »

It's laughable how you ..

I haven't much time for hypocrisy on internet message boards. I hope you'll ensure your own posts are written in a polite and non-insulting manner in the future before you start calling others out.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

I haven't much time for hypocriciy on internet message boards. I hope you'll ensure your own posts are written in a polite and non-insulting manner in the future before you start calling others out.

You should call him childish and run for a mod.

noodler

Deleted User wrote: »

You should call him childish and run for a mod.

He did not try to misrepresent my position on Trap's reign by referencing a years old quote where I criticised him.

You did.

But you already knew that.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

He did not try to misrepresent my position on Trap's reign by referencing a years old quote where I criticised him.

I like direct quotes. It means there is no possibility of misrepresentation. And 3 years into Traps reign you said...

noodler wrote: »

Hmm....I think we are unbelievably lucky so far and in many cases are where we are in spite of Trap's decisions rather than because of them.

It's the "unbelievably" and "many" adjectives that I like best!

Did the mods get back to you on you complaint that someone was directly quoting you? Or, like me, are they still laughing?

Pro. F

noodler wrote: »

I think above is a great example of the unrealistic expectations of some Irish fans. Apparently qualifiying second in our WC 2010 group was "average" despite the fact we hadn't finished 2nd in a qualfiiying group for 8 years previously.

I like the way you pretend that all qualification groups are equally difficult and that Stan and Kerr's tenures should be used as any sort of yardstick for setting expectations.

SantryRed

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Probably France in 09, technically a 1-0 win in Paris

It's not classed as a win as the game had to go into ET. Goes down as a 1-1 draw.

Hercule Poirot

tonycascarino wrote: »

The decent right back and right midfielder are injured for tonight's match. There is no way we should fear Poland. Too much hype around them. It's not Brazil we are playing.

That was kind of my point - but now that they are injured we should definitely win - brave selection by MON - I like it

Adamocovic

Match against Scotland is going to be massive. Just hoping we can get the result needed.

Despite what a lot of people think I actually think we have been playing nice football since Martin O'Neil took over. We've been having a lot more possession but still in the final third we have lacked a cutting edge.

Keane in his prime was great but he is getting old, Long is a hard worker and good player but has yet to shown he can offer a consistent amount of goals, hopefully hell start scoring more now.

We've have relied on Keanes goal scoring for a long time and it's getting to the point where we desperately need someone to step up and take over.

noodler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I like direct quotes. It means there is no possibility of misrepresentation. And 3 years into Traps reign you said...



It's the "unbelievably" and "many" adjectives that I like best!

Did the mods get back to you on you complaint that someone was directly quoting you? Or, like me, are they still laughing?

I'm not sure you understand the concept of misrepresentation. It's not just quoting an old post, it is quoting it and than making ridiculous inferences from it.

Check back to your post in question.

noodler

Pro. F wrote: »

I like the way you pretend that all qualification groups are equally difficult and that Stan and Kerr's tenures should be used as any sort of yardstick for setting expectations.

A yardstick? Don't be ridiculous however, like it or not, Trap wasn't hired in a bubble.

He didnt have the players available that Mick did, was coming off the back of a disaster of a campaign with Stan and had to introduce a number of new faces to the squad. Yet, still hemade a decent fiat of qualifying first time and bettered it the second.

Denigrating second place finishes simply because you didn't like the manager just smacks of pettiness.

Pro. F

noodler wrote: »

A yardstick? Don't be ridiculous however, like it or not, Trap wasn't hired in a bubble.

This is a completely meaningless sentence. You were pretending that Trap having done better than Stan and Kerr means that he did something special. You were acting as if Stan and Kerr are the yardstick we should measure managers by.

noodler wrote: »

He didnt have the players available that Mick did, was coming off the back of a disaster of a campaign with Stan and had to introduce a number of new faces to the squad. Yet, still hemade a decent fiat of qualifying first time and bettered it the second.

Denigrating second place finishes simply because you didn't like the manager just smacks of pettiness.

It is not in any way unfair to say that Trap's two second place finishes - considering the quality of player at his disposal and the opposition - were an acceptable managerial performance rather than a special one. But you'll keep acting like Trap was turning water into wine and then talking as if all qualifying groups are equally difficult and that Stan and Kerr the level to compare managers to whenever anyone challenges you on it.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

I'm not sure you understand the concept of misrepresentation. It's not just quoting an old post, it is quoting it and than making ridiculous inferences from it.

Would misrepresentation be like taking someone's criticism of Traps regime and saying it was just a reaction to 3 bad months? Would that be a misrepresentation? Don't worry, if it was I won't run off to the mods or anything.

Now, there is nothing ridiculous about the inference that, 3 years into Traps reign you said we were "unbelievably" lucky and in "many" cases succeeded in spite of him rather than due to him. Cos that's what you said. And you now apparently think differently. But you do not see this change of mind as a change of mind.

Laois_Man

Adamocovic wrote: »

Match against Scotland is going to be massive. Just hoping we can get the result needed.

Yep. Looking at the current points and remaining fixtures, it's probably a case of the winner gets 3rd and goes into the playoffs and the loser (or if it's a draw, Ireland) goes out.

noodler

Deleted User wrote: »

Now, there is nothing ridiculous about the inference that, 3 years into Traps reign you said we were "unbelievably" lucky and in "many" cases succeeded in spite of him rather than due to him. Cos that's what you said. And you now apparently think differently. But you do not see this change of mind as a change of mind.

Why do you continue to move the goalposts with every reply? What was the initial debate about? It was whether or not Trap's reign was an overall success.

Why do you think criticism of a manager is incompatible with judging his reign a success? There is no such thing as a fan who has never criticised a manager - it doesn't preclude weighing up the positives and negatives of his reign and coming up with an overall positive judgement.

I remember criticising Trap for staying with a the rigid 4-4-2 at home, I remember saying we were fortunate that we got Georgia in Mainz rather than Tblisi, I remember saying we had a fortunate red in Bari.

I also remember saying how impresses I was to see us win 2-1 in Cyprus when it mattered after losing 5-2 there in the previous campaign, how organised we looked when we played Montenagro away, how solid we generally looked in every away game, how went to Yerehvan and won etc.

So again I say, finding some evidence that somebody criticised a manager, as all do at some point for some reason, does not preclude one from judging his reign a success overall.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

Why do you continue to move the goalposts with every reply? What was the initial debate about? It was whether or not Trap's reign was an overall success.

Your "incredibly lucky"/"in many cases...in spite of him" analysis came more than half way through his Irish career.

And one might have thought that you hardly warmed to him from the performances during the Cox/Green/Sammon era of the following 2 years. Maybe you did mind you.

Incidentally, you missed this bit...

Deleted User wrote: »

Would misrepresentation be like taking someone's criticism of Traps regime and saying it was just a reaction to 3 bad months? Would that be a misrepresentation? Don't worry, if it was I won't run off to the mods or anything.

noodler

Deleted User wrote: »

Your "incredibly lucky"/"in many cases...in spite of him" analysis came more than half way through his Irish career.

And one might have thought that you hardly warmed to him from the performances during the Cox/Green/Sammon era of the following 2 years. Maybe you did mind you.

Incidentally, you missed this bit...

Warmed to him?

I said his reign was a success as we fufilled our long standing aim of qualifiying for the play-offs on two out of three occasions coupled with actual qualification.

Whats this warming to him stuff about? You still seem to be conflating two seperate issues here.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

Warmed to him?

I said his reign was a success as we fufilled our long standing aim of qualifiying for the play-offs on two out of three occasions coupled with actual qualification.

Whats this warming to him stuff about? You still seem to be conflating two seperate issues here.

It's only a turn of phrase. Would "appreciated him more" be preferable?

It's just that if anything I would have thought that his best days on our sidelines came in the era where you said we were incredibly lucky and anything we did was in many cases in spite of him rather than due to him. That was 3 years into his regime. I would have though the last 2 years were his weaker ones, and surprised they were the years that caused you to change your mind.

noodler

Deleted User wrote: »

It's only a turn of phrase. Would "appreciated him more" be preferable?

I appreicate the relative success he achieved with the team.

Deleted User wrote: »

It's just that if anything I would have thought that his best days on our sidelines came in the era where you said we were incredibly lucky and anything we did was in many cases in spite of him rather than due to him.

We were pretty damn lucky to get Georgia in Mainz and the red card in Italy. I also thought we were lucky Cyprus didn't equalise in Dublin in our 1-0 win.

Deleted User wrote: »

That was 3 years into his regime. I would have though the last 2 years were his weaker ones, and surprised they were the years that caused you to change your mind.

This is where you, for the third or fourth time, misrepresent my quotes.

I haven't "changed" my mind about anything - if I have to keep repeating it then I will but it is perfectly possible to criticise a manager during his reign and still deem his tenure to have been a success overall.

Could you stop doing that now? I have explained the situation yet you keep suggesting I changed my mind about something.

Kerrydude1981

Its been a long time since the team performed like that at home all be it in the second half but still though it was step in the right direction,

If the team can continue in the same vein against Scotland then we should be beating them,

We have to beat them.

eire4

Laois_Man wrote: »

Yep. Looking at the current points and remaining fixtures, it's probably a case of the winner gets 3rd and goes into the playoffs and the loser (or if it's a draw, Ireland) goes out.

Thats pretty accurate I would say. We simply have to beat Scotland and follow that up with wins over Gibraltar and Georgia in the following 2 games to have any chance of qualifying.

eire4

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Its been a long time since the team performed like that at home all be it in the second half but still though it was step in the right direction,

If the team can continue in the same vein against Scotland then we should be beating them,

We have to beat them.

To add to that theme it has been a long time since we played really well and won in a competitive game against quality opposition. If we are to have any change of qualifying we simply have to come up with a big performance and win when play Scotland in Dublin next June.