Ireland World Cup 2014 qualifying - insurmountable task?

dsmythy

Underestimation of Austria. Germany will walk the group. Sweden, Ireland and Austria will battle it out for 2nd place and it will be tight.

[-0-]

Why are people comparing previous qualifying campaigns to how they think will will do with the world cup qualifiers? We rarely conceeded goals in the qualification campaign for Euro 2012 yet in the competition we conceeded 9, several of which were scored after the start of a game or the start of the second half.

Just because we've gotten second spot under Trap does not mean we will do it now. This group is tough, very tough. I believe you are as good as your most recent campaign, and that's not very good at all.

Italy and Spain got to the finals, true enough, but how did we play against Croatia? They made us look like foolish headless chickens.

Holland went out spectacularly and I'm sure they would have knocked several past us as well.

It's a shame we are not a second tier team anymore.

Before the Euros I was positive, thinking we could beat Croatia, lose to Spain and draw with Italy. Unless something changes drastically - which it won't, we will not qualify. My heart would love if we did obviously, it would be great to head over to Brazil in 2014 and sing my head off but we have seen absolutely nothing to suggest we can even draw with Germany or Sweeden, and quite frankly I think Austria, the Faroe Islands and Kazakhstan are all capable of getting goals against us.

briany

[-0-] wrote: »

Why are people comparing previous qualifying campaigns to how they think will will do with the world cup qualifiers? We rarely conceeded goals in the qualification campaign for Euro 2012 yet in the competition we conceeded 9, several of which were scored after the start of a game or the start of the second half.

Just because we've gotten second spot under Trap does not mean we will do it now. This group is tough, very tough. I believe you are as good as your most recent campaign, and that's not very good at all.

Italy and Spain got to the finals, true enough, but how did we play against Croatia? They made us look like foolish headless chickens.

Holland went out spectacularly and I'm sure they would have knocked several past us as well.

It's a shame we are not a second tier team anymore.

Before the Euros I was positive, thinking we could beat Croatia, lose to Spain and draw with Italy. Unless something changes drastically - which it won't, we will not qualify. My heart would love if we did obviously, it would be great to head over to Brazil in 2014 and sing my head off but we have seen absolutely nothing to suggest we can even draw with Germany or Sweeden, and quite frankly I think Austria, the Faroe Islands and Kazakhstan are all capable of getting goals against us.

I was hopeful about Ireland's chances in the Euros but not optimistic. I had, like probably many others, bought into the belief that Ireland would at least pull something extra out of the bag for what surely would be a landmark occasion in those players' lives. Sadly, next to those three teams, Ireland looked like the schoolyard nerd who'd had enough bullying but was held at bay by the head as he wailed away at thin air.

Ireland being a second tier team would be counted as an exception for the last 15 years or so. More often than not, they've been an upper half of the third bracket team. They've done OK from that position though but almost by definition they will have to rely on one of the teams above them under performing.

I seriously doubt the Faroes or Kazakhs will put any goals past Ireland but even if they do, they won't be in a sufficient number to get a result. I'm already beyond worrying about Germany as I can accept that but I would wonder how the Sweden and Austria games will go. There's not much telling 'til they're being played. As has been said before, mentality is a little bit different during the qualifiers and teams can suffer from the championship hangover.

Laois_Man

Just a few random facts

Germany, Austria and Kazakhstan were in the same group as each other in Euro 2012 qualifying with the results

Germany 6-2 Austria
Germany 4-0 Kazakhstan

Austria 1-2 Germany
Austria 2-0 Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan 0-3 Germany
Kazakhstan 0-0 Austria

As for Sweden, they failed to even reach the play offs in 2010 World Cup qualification. So it's not accurate to say they're masters of qualification.

Also, Northern Ireland got 4 points from Sweden in Euro 2008 qualification which is something we can take a small bit of encouragement from.

We did get a result at home to Germany during that qualification under Staunton and narrowly lost away. germany are unlikely to win all 10 games so whoever picks up a point or 3 along the way off them may be key.

noodler

Laois_Man wrote: »

As for Sweden, they failed to even reach the play offs in 2010 World Cup qualification. So it's not accurate to say they're masters of qualification.

In fairness, they qualified in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2010 and 2012.

Laois_Man wrote: »

Also, Northern Ireland got 4 points from Sweden in Euro 2008 qualification which is something we can take a small bit of encouragement from.

The North were very good that campaign.

Laois_Man wrote: »

We did get a result at home to Germany during that qualification under Staunton and narrowly lost away. germany are unlikely to win all 10 games so whoever picks up a point or 3 along the way off them may be key.

We did but, IIRC (could be wrong), Germany had already qualified and we had nothing to play for so bit of a dead rubber tie.

Anything against Germany would be a bonus but it is Sweden's unity of purpose and general rigidity / mentality that scares me more than their players.

ozzy jr

noodler wrote: »

Anything against Germany would be a bonus.

I bet Sweden aren't thinking along those lines.

We seem to have accepted we'll lose home and away to Germany.

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

As for Sweden, they failed to even reach the play offs in 2010 World Cup qualification. So it's not accurate to say they're masters of qualification.

Whilst what you say there is certainly a fact, that statement is only a half-truth imho. Check the two teams that finished ahead of them in that group for instance.

Myself, I'd still put Sweden in the top half of the second seeds (probably in the top third of them even).

Since they came back from the international wilderness in 1990 their overall qualifying record is w68-d18-l16 and have qualified for 9 of the 12 tournaments since then. More concerning they haven't put in what I would consider a poor qualifying campaign since Euro96.

All those figures speak of a team that consistently performs close to the level of even some of the tradition European heavyweights.

noodler

ozzy jr wrote: »

I bet Sweden aren't thinking along those lines.

We seem to have accepted we'll lose home and away to Germany.

I am sure the team won't be thinking along those lines but I am just being realistic here.

Germany have the players and the mentality.

I think with top seed we always hope for a team that has a bid of a jeckel and hyde element to them but they are ultra consistent.

Anyway, I will change my tune before the German game - I am just saying that Germany are likely to give neither us or Sweden (or anybody else) anything.

Banjaxed82

Laois_Man wrote: »

Just a few random facts

Germany, Austria and Kazakhstan were in the same group as each other in Euro 2012 qualifying with the results

Germany 6-2 Austria
Germany 4-0 Kazakhstan

Austria 1-2 Germany
Austria 2-0 Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan 0-3 Germany
Kazakhstan 0-0 Austria

As for Sweden, they failed to even reach the play offs in 2010 World Cup qualification. So it's not accurate to say they're masters of qualification.

Also, Northern Ireland got 4 points from Sweden in Euro 2008 qualification which is something we can take a small bit of encouragement from.

We did get a result at home to Germany during that qualification under Staunton and narrowly lost away. germany are unlikely to win all 10 games so whoever picks up a point or 3 along the way off them may be key.

In fairness.... The current Irish team and tactics.

My real worry is us not them.

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

Whilst what you say there is certainly a fact, that statement is only a half-truth imho. Check the two teams that finished ahead of them in that group for instance.

Portugal and Denmark - who were ranked #31 in the world at the start of that campaign

So?

Laois_Man

Also - I don't like the fixture list

Sweden play Germany at home in the last round when it is quite probable that the Germans will have the winning of the group already wrapped up.

Could be a vital advantage for Sweden!

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

Portugal and Denmark - who were ranked #31 in the world at the start of that campaign

Yeah and they were 15th in the world by the middle of it. What's your point? By comparison NIr were 32nd when the draw was made. A year later they were already down in the 50's. A nice juicy weak target for some other lucky group.

So a FIFA ranking "30s" doesn't prove anything or mean anything in itself beyond sorting teams for a draw. (in this case badly). A lot can change very quickly as I have demonstrated.

In this case FIFA rankings threw up a crappy draw and Sweden lost out that time by getting lumped in with two other decent teams who also had very good previous and subsequent qualifying records themselves - Denmark 7 qualifications in the last 10 and Portugal also 7 of the last 10. That tells you more than some fifa ranking.

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

Yeah and they were 15th in the world by the middle of it. What's your point?

The point is, you purposely gave the impression they finished 3rd in their group because they were in with 2 significant world powers. But they were eliminated by 2 teams, at least one of whom (like with us in the upcoming campaign) they were expected to finish ahead of fairly comfortable - not just beacause of Sweden's superior World ranking over Denmark, but also on the basis that they had finished comfortably ahead of them in the previous campaign (when they had also been in the same group) and also on the basis that Denmark hadn't qualified for anything since Euro 2004 - not even finishing runners up and getting into a qualification play off!

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

The point is, you purposely gave the impression they finished 3rd in their group because they were in with 2 significant world powers.

If anything you did exactly that (only in reverse) by initially stating "they (Sweden) failed to even reach the play offs in 2010 World Cup qualification" but then neglected to mention that slots 1 and 2 went to 2 of the most consistent European qualifiers in recent times.

For clarification I said "Check the two teams that finished ahead of them in that group for instance." in the hope that anyone interested enough would see who Sweden lost out to and be suitably impressed by who it was (as I was impressed). I wasn't trying to hide anything seeing as I actually rate Denmark/Portugal quite highly and would have no issue mentioning them in a point.

But they were eliminated by 2 teams, at least one of whom (like with us in the upcoming campaign) they were expected to finish ahead of fairly comfortable - not just beacause of Sweden's superior World ranking over Denmark, but also on the basis that they had finished comfortably ahead of them in the previous campaign (when they had also been in the same group) and also on the basis that Denmark hadn't qualified for anything since Euro 2004 - not even finishing runners up and getting into a qualification play off!

Well then you probably should have made that point instead of vaguely alluding to some Swedish failure (something occuring by virtue of being lumped in a group with Denmark and Portugal).

Either way if you were drawing comparisons two respective threats of Swedens 3rd seed rivals past&future then IMHO they're not particularily reasonable. There is a big difference on average between drawing Denmark as a 3rd seed or us as a third seed. If I was another nation I'd probably take Ireland every time as you know they're already only eyeing up second place before a ball has even been kicked.

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

If anything you did exactly that (only in reverse) by initially stating "they (Sweden) failed to even reach the play offs in 2010 World Cup qualification" but then neglected to mention that slots 1 and 2 went to 2 of the most consistent European qualifiers in recent times.

For clarification I said "Check the two teams that finished ahead of them in that group for instance." in the hope that anyone interested enough would see who Sweden lost out to and be suitably impressed by who it was (as I was impressed). I wasn't trying to hide anything seeing as I actually rate Denmark/Portugal quite highly and would have no issue mentioning them in a point.

FFS its pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that if Sweden finished 3rd in a group, they did so behind 2 teams where at least one of then played in the World Cup and the other was at least in a play off. Denmark were hardly to be cosidered one of "the most consistent European qualifiers in recent times" if they hadn't got anywhere near qualifying for the previous 2 tournaments!

kitakyushu wrote: »

Well then you probably should have made that point instead of vaguely alluding to some Swedish failure (something occuring by virtue of being lumped in a group with Denmark and Portugal).

But if you were drawing comparisons two respective threats of Swedens 3rd seed rivals past&future then IMHO they're not particularily reasonable. There is a big difference imho between Denmark being 3rd Seeds and us being the third seeds.

Denmark have won the European Championhips. Denmark frequently qualify (as I've previously stated) and even win groups groups outright (seven group wins to date). We by comparison have won nothing and have a total of one qual group win to our name (won literally in the final seconds by another team doing us a favour). Denmark qualify competently for tournaments and then try their best once there. We invariably just squeak thru and then try to nullify the opposition (4 finals out of 5 now).

Basically we're not even in the same class as Denmark imho. Denmark are no world beaters or anything but I would still give my back teeth for Ireland to be as good as them and if I was another nation would certainly worry 10 times more about getting Denmark as a third seed as opposed to getting Ireland.

I wasn't vaguely alluding to some Swedish failure. I was clearly pointing out that Sweden failed to come out of a group they were expected to. I called that a failure. Nothing vauge about it!

Do I need to remind you of the context - the thread you're posting in!
The OP asks the question is qualifying for 2014 an insurmountable task? In anybodys world, it clearly isn't - not for the 3rd seeds in ANY UEFA group. Infact I would be willing to bet that of the 9 groups, the 3rd seed will finish in the top 2 in at least 3 of them! Sweden are an aging team and we do have a chance as much as Belguim have over Serbia, Czech Rep have over Denmark, hungary have over Turkey and others. Don't make it sound like it would be something as unbelievable as Leitrim winning the all-ireland

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

FFS its pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that if Sweden finished 3rd in a group, they did so behind 2 teams where at least one of then played in the World Cup and the other was at least in a play off. Denmark were hardly to be cosidered one of "the most consistent European qualifiers in recent times" if they hadn't got anywhere near qualifying for the previous 2 tournaments!

Please! It wasn't like you're talking about Luxembourg here. Denmark had an established track record of over 20 years were always a danger of them sorting their act out eventually and getting back into contention for places. You don't want them as your third seed and it was a bad draw for anyone who got them.

I wasn't vaguely alluding to some Swedish failure. I was clearly pointing out that Sweden failed to come out of a group they were expected to. I called that a failure. Nothing vauge about it!

Sure you were. You said they didn't qualify and 'didn't even reach the play-offs' without even presenting any context. It's like saying "Holland are the joint worst team in the Euro's because they got 0 points, without mentioning they had to play three tough opponents and lost each game by only one goal. Half-truths, like I said.

Do I need to remind you of the context - the thread you're posting in!
The OP asks the question is qualifying for 2014 an insurmountable task? In anybodys world, it clearly isn't - not for the 3rd seeds in ANY UEFA group. Infact I would be willing to bet that of the 9 groups, the 3rd seed will finish in the top 2 in at least 3 of them! Sweden are an aging team and we do have a chance as much as Belguim have over Serbia, Czech Rep have over Denmark, hungary have over Turkey and others. Don't make it sound like it would be something as unbelievable as Leitrim winning the all-ireland

You're only talking in general about a 3rd seed taking 2nd or first. So do I need to remind you of the context - the thread you're posting in! The OP asks the question is qualifying for 2014 an insurmountable task ..... *for Ireland*? where *Germany* and *Sweden* and in our way. Completely different story to make it out like we have the same sort of challenge ahead as the other 3rd seed teams. You're dreaming if you think we're in as good a position as Belgium or Hungary right now. I'd swap groups with either of them right now in a second.

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

Please! It wasn't like you're talking about Luxembourg here. Denmark had an established track record of over 20 years were always a danger of them sorting their act out eventually and getting back into contention for places. You don't want them as your third seed and it was a bad draw for anyone who got them.


Sure you were. You said they didn't qualify and 'didn't even reach the play-offs' without even presenting any context. It's like saying "Holland are the joint worst team in the Euro's because they got 0 points, without mentioning they had to play three tough opponents and lost each game by only one goal. Half-truths, like I said.



You're only talking in general about a 3rd seed taking 2nd or first. So do I need to remind you of the context - the thread you're posting in! The OP asks the question is qualifying for 2014 an insurmountable task ..... *for Ireland*? where *Germany* and *Sweden* and in our way. Completely different story to make it out like we have the same sort of challenge ahead as the other 3rd seed teams. You're dreaming if you think we're in as good a position as Belgium or Hungary right now. I'd swap groups with either of them right now in a second.

2 things

1. Grow up.

2. Go to www.dictionary.com and learn the difference between the word "insurmountable" and "Unlikely". The former is the question that was asked. The latter is the conclusion you're attempting to articulate. And while you're there, look up the word "fail"

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

2 things

1. Grow up.

2. Go to www.dictionary.com and learn the difference between the word "insurmountable" and "Unlikely". The former is the question that was asked. The latter is the conclusion you're attempting to articulate. And while you're there, look up the word "fail"

A "fail" a "grow-up" AND a pointer to dictionary.com! The trifecta of third rate comebacks and all in one post!

Do you want to say something about my mother now while you're on a roll?

I'm actually laughing at your effort.

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

I'm actually laughing at your effort.

Need there ever be a clearer example of your immaturity!

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

Need there ever be a clearer example of your immaturity!

Immature too? How immature would you rate me out of interest?

From my pov I've been trying to discuss the strength of the Sweden 2010 group, while you've given up and are now just resorting to insults and patronising comments about reading the dictionary.

So what else have you got for me?

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

Immature too? How immature would you rate me out of interest?

From my pov I've been trying to discuss the strength of the Sweden 2010 group, while you've given up and are now just resorting to insults and patronising comments about reading the dictionary.

So what else have you got for me?

What insults? I say what I find. And I have found your grasp of the English language or your comprehension questionable. From not knowing the difference between insurmountable and unlikely to know knowin that finishing 3rd in a qualifying group where you're 2nd seeds meets the definition of failing to know not knowing when you tell someone to grow up it means you think they're immature. There is nothing I haven't addressed.

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

What insults? I say what I find. And I have found your grasp of the English language or your comprehension questionable. From not knowing the difference between insurmountable and unlikely to know knowin that finishing 3rd in a qualifying group where you're 2nd seeds meets the definition of failing to know not knowing when you tell someone to grow up it means you think they're immature. There is nothing I haven't addressed.

You presented a half-truth in order to make some weak point about Sweden not being as consistent as presumed. You then made an increasingly weak attempt to defend your position when you were actually addressed about it.

Fairly soon (in an act of someone who 'clearly' advocates maturity) you abandoned the discussion completely and switched to pedantry and patronisation because you had nothing better to contribute.

That's the sum total of your contribution today and level you are operating at. I find the idea of someone who writes like you do doling out intellectual and emotional advice is actually quite huimourous. Your comments in themselves are a joke.

Laois_Man

kitakyushu wrote: »

You presented a half-truth in order to make some weak point about Sweden not being as consistent as presumed. You then made an increasingly weak attempt to defend your position when you were actually addressed about it.

Fairly soon (in act of someone who 'clearly' advocates maturity) you abandoned the discussion completely and switched to pedantry and patronisation because you had nothing better to say.

That's the sum total of your contribution today and level you are operating at. I find the idea of someone who writes like you doling out intellectual and emotional advice is actually quite huimourous. Your comments in themselves are a joke.

I merely stated a fact that Sweden failed to even make the playoffs for World Cup 2010 qualification. That is a fact. The fact that I didn't list every team in the qualifying group or that the 3rd seed was difficult (as most are) doesn't make it not fact or half fact or half truth and it's perfectly valid to question your grasp of the English language if you think it does. As you said yourself, anyone who's interested can find out it was Denmark and Portugal for themselves.

Emotional advice? Seriously. Dictionary.

Now go ahead and have the last word. I have no doubt you'd be perfectly capable of continuing this sillyness in circles for 2 weeks. I however am not. Time for my run. I bid you goodnight.

kitakyushu

Laois_Man wrote: »

Now go ahead and have the last word.

Thanks. I will.

Just a note to say : Good luck with your future half-truths and try not to get so touchy about it when you're called on them by people who can see through your spin.