Italy v Ireland, Poznan, KO 7:45pm

LostinBlanch

Sanity_Saviour wrote:

But, bar one, we didn't lose any of those games. Does that not mean the system is working?

Sh*t on a stick football is still sh*t on a stick football no matter what the result. Just a little less sh*t the fans are being asked to swallow that's all. Wait till you see the empty seats at our next home games.

Trap is incapable of change, he has no respect for any of the players. He was very loyal to them by blaming them cover his arse wasn't he? When was the last time he attended a game to watch McClean or Wes Hoolahan or anyone else play? No he just sits back counts his €2 million a year. He has to go, even his most deluded apologists will see that eventually. But it'll be too late for Brazil, and frankly if all we have to look forward to is more of the same humiliation then we'd be better off not qualifying.

Renn

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

But, bar one, we didn't lose any of those games. Does that not mean the system is working?

How the hell is the system working when you concede so many chances?

I've posted this elsewhere but it's totally relevant. I'm not aware of any system that works that allows so many shots on your goal/concedes so much possession. Fact of the matter is that Ireland's pre-tournament form suggested they would face 60+ shots on goal - so conceding 9 goals shouldn't really come as a surprise to people. The Irish team played as expected/totally predictable (just like some Euro manager said before he played us).

Fixture|Shots (On Target)|Corners|Possession
Ireland vs Croatia (0-0)|13 (1)|3|64%
Italy vs Ireland (0-2)|21 (1)|4|68%
Ireland vs Czech Republic (1-1)|20 (5)|5|60%
Ireland vs Argentina (0-1)|9 (4)|1|68%
Russia vs Ireland (0-0)|24 (10)|12|62%
Ireland vs Russia (2-3)|16 (6)|4|54%


Fixture|Shots (On Target)|Corners|Possession
Ireland vs Croatia (1-3)|14 (8)|7|55%
Spain vs Ireland (4-0)|26 (20)|8|66%
Italy vs Ireland (2-0)|27 (17)|12|60%

spockety

TheDoc wrote: »

I' m on the same sentiment with Keane. If you qualify you should be good enough to compete.

Shows how lucky we were with the qualifiers and how we over achieved.

Does not compute.

djpbarry

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

But, bar one, we didn't lose any of those games.

That would be the one game where we came up against a decent side?

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

Does that not mean the system is working?

Is that the limit of our ambition? Not losing at home to Slovakia? You're calling that a success?

Ferris_Bueller

If we had of gotten Spain, Italy or Croatia in the playoffs we would expect to lose to each of them. We were unlucky to get them in our group, but realistically got what we expected, a point against any of them would have been a great result. It is disappointing that we weren't more competitive, especially in the first two games, but ultimately mistakes cost us dearly and against opposition as good as we played, there isn't room for mistakes.

I feared before the tournament started that if the team lost all 3 games that there would be a sudden "crisis" with the national team, I don't think there is. A few changes will need to be made for the WC qualifiers, but people demanding Traps head are being over the top.

applehunter

Thought we at least put it up to the Italians for the first few minuted but then all the old failings came back.

I think the moment that summed us up was the break Whelan made from the irish half. With options to the left and right he dithered and then made a lob pass into towards the corner flag to Keane.:o

Substitutions had me scratching my head again.

Robbie Keane should have been dropped after first match. A Long-Doyle, Long-Walters etc. combinations would have given us much more life up top.

All in all we were poor again. But we have been like this for the last 4 years so I'm used to it.

The Chessplayer

Really enjoyed the game last night. Has anyone got any links to highlights or post-match analysis?

Thanks!

Samich

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

If we had of gotten Spain, Italy or Croatia in the playoffs we would expect to lose to each of them. We were unlucky to get them in our group, but realistically got what we expected, a point against any of them would have been a great result. It is disappointing that we weren't more competitive, especially in the first two games, but ultimately mistakes cost us dearly and against opposition as good as we played, there isn't room for mistakes.

I feared before the tournament started that if the team lost all 3 games that there would be a sudden "crisis" with the national team, I don't think there is. A few changes will need to be made for the WC qualifiers, but people demanding Traps head are being over the top.

We would finish bottom in any group

Czech Rep, Russia, Poland would destroy us. Greece would beat us just about.

Denmark who were perceived as the weak team in B would trounce us.

Sweden would beat us, Ukraine would beat us, France would beat us.

Someone has to be the worst team in the tournament, and that was us.

Renn

The Chessplayer wrote: »

Really enjoyed the game last night. Has anyone got any links to highlights or post-match analysis?

Thanks!

http://rutube.ru/tracks/5712758.html

The Chessplayer

Samich wrote: »

We would finish bottom in any group

Czech Rep, Russia, Poland would destroy us. Greece would beat us just about.

Denmark who were perceived as the weak team in B would trounce us.

Sweden would beat us, Ukraine would beat us, France would beat us.

Someone has to be the worst team in the tournament, and that was us.

So what? We have a tiny population compared to any of the above countries. Even the Czechs have over 10 million people. Denmark 5.5 million and I'm pretty sure the Danes don't play Rugby, Gaelic football and Hurling.

In most of the above countries, it's football, football and football.

IRISHSPORTSGUY

The Chessplayer wrote: »

So what? We have a tiny population to any of the above countries. Even the Czechs have over 10 million people. Denmark 5.5 million and I'm pretty sure the Danes don't play Rugby, Gaelic football and Hurling.

In most of the above countries, it's football, football and football.

Croatia has a smaller population. We can also pick from NI nationalists and a sizeable diaspora across the water. Sports like handball and tennis are far more popular in countries like Denmark than Ireland.

The small country thing is just becoming an excuse for mediocrity, we can and have in the past performed much better in major tournaments.

Ferris_Bueller

Samich wrote: »

We would finish bottom in any group

Czech Rep, Russia, Poland would destroy us. Greece would beat us just about.

Denmark who were perceived as the weak team in B would trounce us.

Sweden would beat us, Ukraine would beat us, France would beat us.

Someone has to be the worst team in the tournament, and that was us.

I agree we were the worst team in the tournament, but had we have been in group A or D, I don't think we would have lost all 3 games, we would have been much more competitive.

Will I Amnt

The Chessplayer wrote: »

So what? We have a tiny population compared to any of the above countries. Even the Czechs have over 10 million people. Denmark 5.5 million and I'm pretty sure the Danes don't play Rugby, Gaelic football and Hurling.

In most of the above countries, it's football, football and football.

That argument doesn't always work.
Rugby is less popular here than soccer and gaa yet Ireland are currently ranked 8 in the world and I'm pretty sure that's not the highest they have ever been.

The Chessplayer

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

Croatia has a smaller population. We can also pick from NI nationalists and a sizeable diaspora across the water. Sports like handball and tennis are far more popular in countries like Denmark than Ireland.

The small country thing is just becoming an excuse for mediocrity, we can and have in the past performed much better in major tournaments.

Our golden generation included some of Liverpool and Man Utd's best players. We had some of the best defenders in Europe with McGrath, O'Leary, Moran and Lawrenson. Sean St. Ledger has never played in the Premier League.

Population:
Ireland 4.5m
Croatia 4.2m

Any good Croatian Rugby teams lately? What's their standard of gaelic games? Did they do well at the cricket world cup?

"IRISHSPORTSGUY" indeed.

The Chessplayer

cambo2008 wrote: »

That argument doesn't always work.
Rugby is less popular here than soccer and gaa yet Ireland are currently ranked 8 in the world and I'm pretty sure that's not the highest they have ever been.

How many countries play Rugby at a serious level? I count 10, and I've generously included Italy. I didn't count Samoa, Fiji etc.

NufcNavan

The Chessplayer wrote: »

Our golden generation included some of Liverpool and Man Utd's best players. We had some of the best defenders in Europe with McGrath, O'Leary, Moran and Lawrenson. Sean St. Ledger has never played in the Premier League.

Population:
Ireland 4.5m
Croatia 4.2m

Any good Croatian Rugby teams lately? What's their standard of gaelic games? Did they do well at the cricket world cup?

"IRISHSPORTSGUY" indeed.

Look, this argument has been put to bed many times.

Stunned as you might be, but the fact is Ireland isn't the only country in the world where football has to contest with a 'rival' sport.

The problems associated with this Irish team are much more deeper than "If there wasn't any GAA in this country.."

IRISHSPORTSGUY

The Chessplayer wrote: »

Our golden generation included some of Liverpool and Man Utd's best players. We had some of the best defenders in Europe with McGrath, O'Leary, Moran and Lawrenson. Sean St. Ledger has never played in the Premier League.

Population:
Ireland 4.5m
Croatia 4.2m

Any good Croatian Rugby teams lately? What's their standard of gaelic games? Did they do well at the cricket world cup?

"IRISHSPORTSGUY" indeed.

No, but they have more interest in basketball and handball than we will ever have.

Will I Amnt

The Chessplayer wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

That argument doesn't always work.
Rugby is less popular here than soccer and gaa yet Ireland are currently ranked 8 in the world and I'm pretty sure that's not the highest they have ever been.

How many countries play Rugby at a serious level? I count 10, and I've generously included Italy. I didn't count Samoa, Fiji etc.

Well you have 20 in the World cup alone.
What's your definition of a serious level?

WallyGUFC

cambo2008 wrote: »

Well you have 20 in the World cup alone.
What's your definition of a serious level?

NZ frequently bash countries by over 70/80 points in the group stages of the world cup. It's a joke. There's a max of 8-10 teams in the rugby world that are any good at it. Also, the fact that Ireland have played NZ what, 25 times and never won? That's a shocking record.

kitakyushu

Talking about depth in Rugby is like Bill Hicks comparison of army sizes.

Bill Hicks wrote:

“People say "Iraq had the fourth largest army in the world". Yeah, maybe, but you know what, after the first 3 largest armies, there's a REAL big ****ing drop-off. The Hare Krishnas are the 5th largest army in the world, and they've already got all our airports.”

Plus the fact that country with around 5million people is and has been the best team in a particular sport for generations should raise questions in itself. By comparison if Ireland were the best country in the world at football for several generations (like NZ have been in rugby) you'd probably be asking yourself "how seriously are the rest of the world taking this sport?"

handsomecake

The Chessplayer wrote: »

Our golden generation included some of Liverpool and Man Utd's best players. We had some of the best defenders in Europe with McGrath, O'Leary, Moran and Lawrenson. Sean St. Ledger has never played in the Premier League.

Population:
Ireland 4.5m
Croatia 4.2m

Any good Croatian Rugby teams lately? What's their standard of gaelic games? Did they do well at the cricket world cup?

"IRISHSPORTSGUY" indeed.

ireland are about to be blackwashed.

djpbarry

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

...ultimately mistakes cost us dearly and against opposition as good as we played, there isn't room for mistakes.

It’s the repeated stupid mistakes that are infuriating. You can accept the odd mistake in a game – they’re only human. But the performances have been riddled with mistakes – that’s unforgivable when Trap’s emphasis is supposedly on defensive organisation.

applehunter wrote: »

All in all we were poor again. But we have been like this for the last 4 years so I'm used to it.

The last 2 years I would say. I think Trap’s first campaign was promising – we were solid and we were competitive. Even though we were outplayed by the likes of Bulgaria, we didn’t give up too many chances. We never really looked like losing in Sofia, for example. And of course it all culminated in that performance in Paris.

But things went downhill after that. We started well with an excellent result in Armenia, but things slowly deteriorated after that, to the point that we seemed to be hanging on for dear life in every game we played.

kitakyushu

djpbarry wrote: »

The last 2 years I would say. I think Trap’s first campaign was promising – we were solid and we were competitive. Even though we were outplayed by the likes of Bulgaria, we didn’t give up too many chances. We never really looked like losing in Sofia, for example. And of course it all culminated in that performance in Paris.

But things went downhill after that. We started well with an excellent result in Armenia, but things slowly deteriorated after that, to the point that we seemed to be hanging on for dear life in every game we played.

Agreed. Even tho we qualified second time I actually think we were a better team in the first campaign and have been showing signs of decline throughout this campaign.

djpbarry

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

I agree we were the worst team in the tournament, but had we have been in group A or D, I don't think we would have lost all 3 games, we would have been much more competitive.

We hardly look competitive against anyone right now.

The Chessplayer wrote: »

Any good Croatian Rugby teams lately? What's their standard of gaelic games? Did they do well at the cricket world cup?

Clutching at straws.

The Chessplayer wrote: »

Our golden generation included some of Liverpool and Man Utd's best players. We had some of the best defenders in Europe with McGrath, O'Leary, Moran and Lawrenson.

How many major tournaments did Lawrenson play in?

People who refer to the fact that Ireland used to draw representatives from the likes of Utd and Liverpool forget that the English Premier League is far stronger now than it was 15 – 20 years ago. During the 90’s, the EPL was ranked in the region of 5th – 8th in UEFA, but now it’s at the top of the rankings and has been for a few seasons.

Ferris_Bueller

djpbarry wrote: »

We hardly look competitive against anyone right now.
Clutching at straws.

Just like to point out I didn't actually say the comment about Croatian gaelic/rugby/cricket :pac: Must have been whatever way you quoted it came up as me saying it.

Saying we don't look competitive against anyone is a lie, before this tournament we rarely lost under Trap, performances might not be excellent but to say we are not competitive is untrue. You are correct that it is the repeated mistakes that are annoying and costly, but I don't believe these are down to Trap, it has been the players making these mistakes.

Father Damo

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

If we had of gotten Spain, Italy or Croatia in the playoffs we would expect to lose to each of them. We were unlucky to get them in our group, but realistically got what we expected, a point against any of them would have been a great result. It is disappointing that we weren't more competitive, especially in the first two games, but ultimately mistakes cost us dearly and against opposition as good as we played, there isn't room for mistakes.

.

tbh the other "filler" teams like Poland, Greece, Ukraine, Denmark gave it an awful lot more welly than we did. For a team everyone wrote off as probably doing worse than us, given their group, Denmark put in a fine display, on paper their squad play for similar level teams as most of our lads and yet they gave the Germans a great run for their money yesterday. In this tournament there were two hard groups and two reasonable groups. We got saddled with the hard group, but tbh with how we conceded silly goals against Croatia (the team we always knew we needed at least point of, seeing as we never really thought we could beat Spain nd silently hoped we could do Italy due to their poor pre tourno friendly form) ny group would have been tough for us.

tbh I think we would have underestimated alot of teams as well. The stodgy, lethargic French and Italian teams of the past 4 years are back in form.

Liam O

A main problem is age imo, relying on Given(though I'm sure like myself nobody seen this coming), Dunne, Duff, O'Shea and Keane made us a slow team and then you couple that with archaic tactics that allowed some of the best midfield trios in the world free reign to create it's just folly.

That's not even taking the substitutions into account...

nacho libre

djpbarry wrote: »

It’s the repeated stupid mistakes that are infuriating. You can accept the odd mistake in a game – they’re only human. But the performances have been riddled with mistakes – that’s unforgivable when Trap’s emphasis is supposedly on defensive organisation.
The last 2 years I would say. I think Trap’s first campaign was promising – we were solid and we were competitive. Even though we were outplayed by the likes of Bulgaria, we didn’t give up too many chances. We never really looked like losing in Sofia, for example. And of course it all culminated in that performance in Paris.

But things went downhill after that. We started well with an excellent result in Armenia, but things slowly deteriorated after that, to the point that we seemed to be hanging on for dear life in every game we played.

you hang on/ride your luck, and deficiencies can be masked, against lower quality opposition, but are usually exposed against superior footballing nations. THe warning signs were there in our last warm up game against Hungary. The difference being Hungary, unlike the teams we played in Euro 2012, weren't technically good enough to punish us for our mistakes.

The premier league is stronger now than when it was in the era of Paul McGrath, but the likes of McGrath impressed some of the best players around when he was playing. I think a couple of others from that era would make it in some of the top premier league clubs today.

djpbarry

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Just like to point out I didn't actually say the comment about Croatian gaelic/rugby/cricket :pac: Must have been whatever way you quoted it came up as me saying it.

Sorry - fixed now.

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Saying we don't look competitive against anyone is a lie, before this tournament we rarely lost under Trap...

Rarely losing and being competitive are not necessarily the same thing in my opinion. We were blessed in a number of those games - Moscow springs to mind. We didn't compete - we just sat back and hoped for the best. Even the last warm-up game against Hungary - they tore us to pieces and should have been 2 or 3 up by half time.

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

You are correct that it is the repeated mistakes that are annoying and costly, but I don't believe these are down to Trap, it has been the players making these mistakes.

The buck tops with the gaffer. He has to accept responsibility for the disorganisation. And if individuals are consistently making mistakes, then replace them where possible. Granted, our options are limited, but they're not as limited as Trap makes out. We have a decent range of options up front and on the wings for example, but Keane, Duff and McGeady have been virtually guaranteed starting spots regardless of the performances they turn in.

djpbarry

nacho libre wrote: »

The premier league is stronger now than when it was in the era of Paul McGrath, but the likes of McGrath impressed some of the best players around when he was playing. I think a couple of others from that era would make it in some of the top premier league clubs today.

Absolutely - not disagreeing with that.

But let me put it like this - look back at the Blackburn team that one the league in '95. There are a few members of the current Irish squad who would not have looked out of place in that team.

Sanity_Saviour

Renn wrote: »

How the hell is the system working when you concede so many chances?

I've posted this elsewhere but it's totally relevant. I'm not aware of any system that works that allows so many shots on your goal/concedes so much possession. Fact of the matter is that Ireland's pre-tournament form suggested they would face 60+ shots on goal - so conceding 9 goals shouldn't really come as a surprise to people. The Irish team played as expected/totally predictable (just like some Euro manager said before he played us).

Fixture|Shots (On Target)|Corners|Possession
Ireland vs Croatia (0-0)|13 (1)|3|64%
Italy vs Ireland (0-2)|21 (1)|4|68%
Ireland vs Czech Republic (1-1)|20 (5)|5|60%
Ireland vs Argentina (0-1)|9 (4)|1|68%
Russia vs Ireland (0-0)|24 (10)|12|62%
Ireland vs Russia (2-3)|16 (6)|4|54%


Fixture|Shots (On Target)|Corners|Possession
Ireland vs Croatia (1-3)|14 (8)|7|55%
Spain vs Ireland (4-0)|26 (20)|8|66%
Italy vs Ireland (2-0)|27 (17)|12|60%

We only lost two of those games before this tournament though, so tactically it was a mixed success, they just came up against better teams this time round. The history books do not say "Reached the Semi-Finals, but played poor football": Chelsea 2012, Greece 2004, ****e football: Trophy. Even runners-up Holland in 2010 were shíte but effective.

Stats like that mean nothing, I wouldn't care one bit if we reached a final, conceded 40 shots and got an own goal in the 90th minute because that's football.

If you want pretty football watch Swansea and Arsenal. You won't win anything but bygod aren't they wonderful!

djpbarry wrote: »

Rarely losing and being competitive are not necessarily the same thing in my opinion. We were blessed in a number of those games - Moscow springs to mind. We didn't compete - we just sat back and hoped for the best. Even the last warm-up game against Hungary - they tore us to pieces and should have been 2 or 3 up by half time.

But Hungary didn't score? And we only lost one of those qualifying games under Trap? So we must have been doing something right.

Ferris_Bueller

djpbarry wrote: »

Rarely losing and being competitive are not necessarily the same thing in my opinion. We were blessed in a number of those games - Moscow springs to mind. We didn't compete - we just sat back and hoped for the best. Even the last warm-up game against Hungary - they tore us to pieces and should have been 2 or 3 up by half time.
The buck tops with the gaffer. He has to accept responsibility for the disorganisation. And if individuals are consistently making mistakes, then replace them where possible. Granted, our options are limited, but they're not as limited as Trap makes out. We have a decent range of options up front and on the wings for example, but Keane, Duff and McGeady have been virtually guaranteed starting spots regardless of the performances they turn in.

We might have to agree to disagree then, because for me getting results is proof we are competitive in most games. A lot of people are pointing back to the signs being there when we played Hungary, but if you go back another week before that v Bosnia we looked very good, and I would rate them as a decent side. I agree that there shouldn't be any players whos' place in the team is guaranteed. I have not had a single problem with Traps management of this team until the Spanish match, where I wasn't too impressed with his starting XI, I don't think he is as bad as people are making him out to be, but for the next campaign I do think he needs to introduce a few more players to the team/squad.

djpbarry

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

If you want pretty football watch Swansea and Arsenal. You won't win anything but bygod aren't they wonderful!

Eh, Spain?

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

We might have to agree to disagree then, because for me getting results is proof we are competitive in most games.

Doesn’t it depend on who those results are against? For example, a draw at home to Slovakia doesn’t really count as a success in my book.

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

A lot of people are pointing back to the signs being there when we played Hungary...

The signs were there long before that. We were very, very lucky in a number of games – the game in Moscow in particular. But, luck has to run out at some point.
QUOTE=Ferris_Bueller;79289651] ...but if you go back another week before that v Bosnia we looked very good, and I would rate them as a decent side.[/quote] They are a decent side and had we got them in the playoffs, I think they would have knocked us out.

Renn

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

We only lost two of those games before this tournament though, so tactically it was a mixed success, they just came up against better teams this time round. The history books do not say "Reached the Semi-Finals, but played poor football": Chelsea 2012, Greece 2004, ****e football: Trophy. Even runners-up Holland in 2010 were shíte but effective.

Stats like that mean nothing, I wouldn't care one bit if we reached a final, conceded 40 shots and got an own goal in the 90th minute because that's football.

If you want pretty football watch Swansea and Arsenal. You won't win anything but bygod aren't they wonderful!

Tactically they were quite poor - as you can clearly see. Take Chelsea vs Bayern Munich for example: tactically Bayern got it spot on and trumped Chelsea in this regard, but the only thing that failed them was their finishing. Bayern would be silly to play the game any other way again as they exposed Chelsea's weaknesses.

Greece 2004 was far from "****e football". It can actually be fascinating watching a team that knows what exactly it's doing. That can be either defensively or in an attacking sense. Greece 04 was not a case of sitting deep and hoping for the best.

Stats like that do mean something - clearly as they all pointed towards an early exit from the tournament and a number of heavy defeats.

kitakyushu

Renn wrote: »

Tactically they were quite poor - as you can clearly see. Take Chelsea vs Bayern Munich for example: tactically Bayern got it spot on and trumped Chelsea in this regard, but the only thing that failed them was their finishing. Bayern would be silly to play the game any other way again as they exposed Chelsea's weaknesses.

Greece 2004 was far from "****e football". It can actually be fascinating watching a team that knows what exactly it's doing. That can be either defensively or in an attacking sense. Greece 04 was not a case of sitting deep and hoping for the best.

Stats like that do mean something - clearly as they all pointed towards an early exit from the tournament and a number of heavy defeats.

Good call. Lumping what Greece in 04 with what Chelsea did (or what Ireland failed to do) in 2012 is just lazy analysis.

Greece defensive strategy didn't involve giving away two penalites in two games or conceding around 30-40plus shots on goal per game like Chelsea did for example.

Sanity_Saviour

Renn wrote: »

Tactically they were quite poor - as you can clearly see. Take Chelsea vs Bayern Munich for example: tactically Bayern got it spot on and trumped Chelsea in this regard, but the only thing that failed them was their finishing. Bayern would be silly to play the game any other way again as they exposed Chelsea's weaknesses.

Greece 2004 was far from "****e football". It can actually be fascinating watching a team that knows what exactly it's doing. That can be either defensively or in an attacking sense. Greece 04 was not a case of sitting deep and hoping for the best.

Stats like that do mean something - clearly as they all pointed towards an early exit from the tournament and a number of heavy defeats.

The name on the trophy in 2012 will say Chelsea though, so it worked perfectly.

Greece 1-0 Portugal

Shots: 4-16
Corners 1-10
Possession: 42-58

I really don't see the difference?
And Spain and Barcelona are the exception.

bohsfan

Our inability to string passes together is something that will always make life difficult against the 'top teams'. It means that we have to rely on some lucky breaks high up the pitch along with the opposition being profligate with the possession we so readily give them.

Let's compare passing stats from the full backs and midfield last night:

Ward: 24/42 (completed/attempted)
O'Shea: 16/23
Whelan: 19/21
Andrews: 18/26

Balzare: 50/53
Abate: 49/57
Pirlo: 64/75
Motta: 55/59

Ireland: 193/273
Italy: 472/555

We attempted about half of the amount of passes Italy did. Most times we ended a passing phase by hopefully playing the ball into space, where Italy picked it up and started stringing passes together to make advances up the pitch.

Now, I'm not advocating that Ireland need to become Spain overnight- but if we continue to encourage our players to not pass the ball, then results such as those we have seen at the Euros is inevitable.

Ferris_Bueller

djpbarry wrote: »

Eh, Spain?
Doesn’t it depend on who those results are against? For example, a draw at home to Slovakia doesn’t really count as a success in my book.

Well if we were to judge it that way, the home draw to Slovakia and the defeat to Russia would be considered disappointments. But our other 8 results could be considered successful IMO, 80% success rate is very impressive regardless of luck.

Will I Amnt

Fact of the matter is,we are enduring awful,awful outdated football in order to try and grind out qualification for a tournament that we have no chance of doing remotely well in.

It's horrible to watch,Ireland matches are a chore to sit through on television and there's not a chance I would shell out extortionate prices to watch it in the Aviva.

Personally,I would rather enjoy our qualification games with a nice style of football and not qualify than have another 2 years of that shìte and scrape through to another tournament where the only chance of picking up points is against the Saudis and New Zealand's of this world.

It's killing my interest in the national team.
If people are only interested in results and couldnt care less how we play to get to the World Cup,what's the point in even watching or going to the games??
You would be as well off sitting in front of the tv with teletext on.

eyescreamcone

cambo2008 wrote: »

Fact of the matter is,we are enduring awful,awful outdated football in order to try and grind out qualification for a tournament that we have no chance of doing remotely well in.

It's horrible to watch,Ireland matches are a chore to sit through on television and there's not a chance I would shell out extortionate prices to watch it in the Aviva.

Personally,I would rather enjoy our qualification games with a nice style of football and not qualify than have another 2 years of that shìte and scrape through to another tournament where the only chance of picking up points is against the Saudis and New Zealand's of this world.

It's killing my interest in the national team.
If people are only interested in results and couldnt care less how we play to get to the World Cup,what's the point in even watching or going to the games??
You would be as well off sitting in front of the tv with teletext on.

I would rather qualify and beat the Saudis and NZ every time

If you offered me the same result from the next campaign I'd bite your hand off

Realistically we mightn't qualify for 10+ years again

djpbarry

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

The name on the trophy in 2012 will say Chelsea though, so it worked perfectly.

Who do you suppose is more likely to win it in 2013? Chelsea or Bayern?

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Well if we were to judge it that way, the home draw to Slovakia and the defeat to Russia would be considered disappointments. But our other 8 results could be considered successful IMO...

Granted, we beat the teams seeded below us which is something we have struggled to do in the past. But suppose we were facing into that very same qualification campaign again now – would you fancy our chances to taking 3 points away to Armenia or Macedonia? I know I wouldn’t.