Faroe Islands v Republic of Ireland - 16/10/2012 - 19:00 - RTE2

applehunter

To see the full-backs cross the half way line was heartening.

McCarthy collecting the ball from the defence was heartening.

Westwood looking for shorter option was heartening.

We still concede a l lot of needless possession just by not pressing as a team. Against the Faroes this wasn't punished but against any half decent outfit it will result in easy pressure on out own goal.

Too little too late. Goodbye Trap.

gosplan

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Exactly, the champions league argument is stupid. Everton, for example, are a far better team than many CL teams.

You could look at the Europa league records between these clubs and premiership ones but i'm not sure that would give a fair reflection.

For me it comes down to to things.

1: They're historically better. Since we qualified for Euro 88, they've missed one Euros whereas we've missed 5. Since we qualified for the WC in 90, they've missed 2, we've missed 3.

2: They're better now. If you were Swedish which Irish player(s) would you like to have a Sweedish granny?

Carlos_Ray

gosplan wrote: »

You could look at the Europa league records between these clubs and premiership ones but i'm not sure that would give a fair reflection.

Seriously? You honestly think that this level of analyses needs to come into play to ascertain whether or not players playing for Everton are playing a higher level of football than those playing for Celtic?

gosplan wrote: »

For me it comes down to to things.

1: They're historically better. Since we qualified for Euro 88, they've missed one Euros whereas we've missed 5. Since we qualified for the WC in 90, they've missed 2, we've missed 3.

2: They're better now. If you were Swedish which Irish player(s) would you like to have a Sweedish granny?

There are a number of Irish players that are of the standard to make it into the hypothetical Swedish set up. IMO Doyle/Long/McCarthy/Coleman/McGeady/Dunne off the top of my head would almost certainly merit a call up.

That said. Sweden are a better team. Fact.

In terms of teams on paper there's not a massive gulf in class though.

Francie Barrett

gosplan wrote: »

Nice argument.

Try picking the players that actually played though.

I get...

Kasımpaşa
Genoa
WBA Anderlecht (CL)
Celtic (CL)
CSKA (CL)
CSKA (CL)
Istanbul
Sunderland
PSG (CL)
Galatasary (CL)

The three subs added players from Fulham, Spartak (CL), and Ajax (CL).

Hmmm.

In half of those cases, we have better alternatives. Our fullbacks (Wilson and Coleman are better than their lads at Celtic and Anderlecht. Our wide players (McGeady and McClean) are better than theirs. We also have McCarthy, who is better than one of their central midfielders. I would also take Walters or Long over the likes of Elmander.

I don't disagree that Sweden are a better team (the Ibra factor alone tilts the odds in their favour), but they definitely aren't massively better than us on paper.

Francie Barrett

gosplan wrote: »

2: They're better now. If you were Swedish which Irish player(s) would you like to have a Sweedish granny?

Westwood, Wilson, Coleman, Dunne, McGeady, McClean, McCarthy, Long, Walters. Not saying all of them would start, but they would all make it into a Swedish squad at least.

If Trap wasn't so pig-headed, then I think the likes of Clark, Foley, Gibson, Hoolahan and Doyle would also have a chance at making the team.

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

If you were Swedish which Irish player(s) would you like to have a Sweedish granny?

McClean, Coleman, McCarthy, Long, Cox, Wilson, Dunne. The Swedes would be very glad for any of them.

Ibra is the only player that sets them apart.

ush

The Premiership ruins alot of lads. The Secret Footballer mentioned that he thought footballers who made started their professional careers in smaller leagues were more mature individuals. So if you're gonna compare Sweden and Ireland, you're going to have to compare the cultures. Swedes are beter at taking individual responsibility and also working toward a collective goal. In terms of organisation and professionalism, the FAI don't come near SvFF; and they're not that great. They've also got a culture of qualifying.

I've always maintained that its cultural similiarites and geograhical proximity that has so many Irish lads in "the greatest league in the world". I'm not sure that a lad who is making up the numbers at Stoke City is necessarily better than someone at AIK or IFK.

IRISHSPORTSGUY

Pro. F wrote: »

McClean, Coleman, McCarthy, Long, Cox, Wilson, Dunne. The Swedes would be very glad for any of them.

Ibra is the only player that sets them apart.

I agree with 90% of your post, but Simon Cox?!

Pro. F

ush wrote: »

The Premiership ruins alot of lads. The Secret Footballer mentioned that he thought footballers who made started their professional careers in smaller leagues were more mature individuals. So if you're gonna compare Sweden and Ireland, you're going to have to compare the cultures. Swedes are beter at taking individual responsibility and also working toward a collective goal.

I would criticise kick and rush English football culture for a lot of things, but the one thing I would say that British and Irish national teams nearly always have is a good work ethic.

I think the Scandinavians are generally the same. But this Swedish team throws that out the window by having Ibra swanning around the place and only working when he feels like it.

Pro. F

IRISHSPORTSGUY wrote: »

I agree with 90% of your post, but Simon Cox?!

Yeah he's deadly imo.

(as a striker)

ush

Pro. F wrote: »

I would criticise kick and rush English football culture for a lot of things, but the one thing I would say that most British and Irish national teams nearly always have is a good work ethic.

I think the Scandinavians are generally the same. But this Swedish team throws that out the window by having Ibra swanning around the place and only working when he feels like it.

Yeah, Zlatan should be grafting.

Oat23

Pro. F wrote: »

McClean, Coleman, McCarthy, Long, Cox, Wilson, Dunne. The Swedes would be very glad for any of them.

Ibra is the only player that sets them apart.

You don't rate Rasmus Elm at all then?

Pro. F

Oatesy23 wrote: »

You don't rate Rasmus Elm at all then?

I like him. And Kallstrom too. But that doesn't mean the Swedes wouldn't have a use for the likes of McCarthy.

ush wrote: »

Yeah, Zlatan should be grafting.

I presume you are being sarcastic. But it's hardly a wild theory to say that the ultimate non-team player like Ibra might harm Sweden's teamwork.

ush

A fish rots from the head...



If you look at organisation, expectations, footballing cultures; thats where you'll see the big differences that lead to success. Swedish sports at grass roots level is better funded. We can't just be congratulating ourselves over players in the premiership. Our domestic managers aren't in demand. They're ignored on the who should replace Trap thread. There's a bigger picture here. In a way I can understand some of Trap's frustrations with the Irish. He's been told to do his job by people who haven't won anything. Countries all over Europe with similiar populations are producing players as good as ours.

ush

Pro. F wrote: »

I presume you are being sarcastic. But it's hardly a wild theory to say that the ultimate non-team player like Ibra might harm Sweden's teamwork.

They're happy to let him do that little bit of magic.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

Nice argument.

Try picking the players that actually played though.

I get...

Kasımpaşa
Genoa
WBA Anderlecht (CL)
Celtic (CL)
CSKA (CL)
CSKA (CL)
Istanbul
Sunderland
PSG (CL)
Galatasary (CL)

The three subs added players from Fulham, Spartak (CL), and Ajax (CL).

Hmmm.

As has been pointed out, marking a team "CL" is not some automatic guarantee of quality. The 32 teams in the CL are not the 32 best teams in Europe.

If you'd rattled off a list of Swedes tonight with "CL" for clubs in Eng/Spa/Ger/Ita then I'd hold up my hand and say you might have a point. But I don't see a single one there on that list.

Celtic for example qualified for the CL group stage on the back of nothing more than winning the SPL (not too hard these days) and then beating a team from Finland and another from Sweden. That's them in the group stage.

Similarily CSKA Moscow, Galatasary, Ajax, Anderlect in terms of quality. No denying they're in the CL, but let's talk again when we see how many of them are still around for the QF's and SF's next March/April.

==

However, that's all unintentionally sidetracking tho. Getting back to my initial comment of "if we could get a manager who made us play like that them" it was not meant as an implication by me one way or the other that Ireland are as good as Sweden man-for-man.

It meant I would like a manager who would at least try get us playing the way Sweden did during their comeback. They were 4-0 down but they didn't just camp in front of their box and accept defeat. The came out and stunned a German team who probably thought they were in for another gutless performance like they came up against last Friday.

In tonight's comeback there was nothing technically spectacular about Sweden's play beyond the fact that they were actually trying. They defended as a team and attacked as a team. They pressurised high up the pitch and they did the simple things effectively. I'm not even saying we could do it as good as Sweden but I'd rather see us play that way that in this half-hearted , zero pressure, uber-defensive style that is a waste of time because it's easily exploited by any team with a bit of class and rather than making it harder for them to score/win actually (I'm convinced anyway) makes it easier.

kippy

Points from the match:

1. Great result, some good goals and good play.
2. Another 3 points in the bag.
3. Should help to get the heads up after Germany.


A few things to point out:
It is patently obvious that we have dropped back a good bit defensively. This is most likely to be expected in the past two games as Dunne is injured and it is impossible to underestimate how big a loss this is.
Coupled with a new Keeper in Westwood and and some other defensive injuries we are pretty much a new defence in action. Even with Dunne back in place we do have a new keeper between the posts and a plethora of relatively new/inexperienced players all over the pitch. One excuse used a lot in the PL is that these players and this squad needs time to "gel" and get used to each other. Evidently not an issue at international level. (Sarcasm)

While the quality of the opposition was poor, again you have to look at their past 6 or 7 results to put the Irish result in comparison.

Ultimately Traps job is to get us into the WC and until that is an impossibility I don't see any logic at all in replacing him.

gosplan

kitakyushu wrote: »

As has been pointed out, marking a team "CL" is not some automatic guarantee of quality. The 32 teams in the CL are not the 32 best teams in Europe.

If you'd rattled off a list of Swedes tonight with "CL" for clubs in Eng/Spa/Ger/Ita then I'd hold up my hand and say you might have a point. But I don't see a single one there on that list.

Celtic for example qualified for the CL group stage on the back of nothing more than winning the SPL (not too hard these days) and then beating a team from Finland and another from Sweden. That's them in the group stage.

Similarily CSKA Moscow, Galatasary, Ajax, Anderlect in terms of quality

Ok, fine.

But if it makes no real difference, then can I ask why you left all those clubs out when arguing that there's no gap between Sweden and us?

I mean you're the one that initially left out all the CL clubs to strengthen your argument so there's no point telling me it's not relevant ... as you seem to think it is.

SantryRed

gosplan wrote: »

Seriously??

You're now saying that there wouldn't be much of a difference between the list that I gave, more than half of which are in this year's CL, and the playing staffs of three Swedish clubs, Kasımpaşa, İstanbul BBSK, and Seattle Sounders.

What, do you have your fingers in each others bums or something??

I was comparing them to Ireland,

elefant

Only watched a bit of the game, and missed the German game thankfully as I was on a flight, but has there been any discussion about why Long is hardly getting a run out for us? To me he's the best Irish striker by a distance atm, and whenever he gets a proper chance for Ireland he is excellent.

Dempsey

kitakyushu wrote: »

Celtic for example qualified for the CL group stage on the back of nothing more than winning the SPL (not too hard these days) and then beating a team from Finland and another from Sweden. That's them in the group stage

Nothing more?? You make it sound like they didnt earn their spot. They came from 15 points down in the SPL to winning it convincingly. Celtic won the league and played 2 rounds of the champions qualifiers as a seeded team. They earned their place like everyone else thats in the UCL so less of the nonsence.

For the record, Mikael Lustig was poor when he join Celtic last January but he was carrying an injury aswell. Had a poor half season with Celtic & had a poor Euros too. This season, he's playing alot better and is keeping a full back that I'd rate better than Seamus Coleman out of the Celtic team, such is the drastic improvement in his performances.

Neeson

elefant wrote: »

Only watched a bit of the game, and missed the German game thankfully as I was on a flight, but has there been any discussion about why Long is hardly getting a run out for us? To me he's the best Irish striker by a distance atm, and whenever he gets a proper chance for Ireland he is excellent.

The thing where Trap said he was injured and he said he was fit to play probably has something to do with it.

Predalien

Much of last night was justification for many of criticisms against Trapatonni, first time in ages our full backs supported our wingers, made things easier for Brady and McGeady and in turn they all played well. We actually had a midfielder who closed down, looked for the ball and passed confidently, McCarthy made a very good case for himself (unfortunately Andrews was same old, gave the ball away too much under no pressure). Sadly this was against part-timers and you can't read too much into it but you'd like to hope Trapatonni would at least know now that the likes of McCarthy, Wilson and Coleman are strong candidates for first choice selection. What I'd like to see now is use of Meyler as a holding midfielder, although I can't fault Andrews in terms of commitment and he has done well on bigger occasions, we need someone more consistent in that area.

The other thing I'd like to see is phasing Keane out of the starting eleven, still a great option to have off the bench, and as a squad player but Long is now the better player and deserves a proper go.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

Ok, fine.

But if it makes no real difference, then can I ask why you left all those clubs out when arguing that there's no gap between Sweden and us?

I mean you're the one that initially left out all the CL clubs to strengthen your argument so there's no point telling me it's not relevant ... as you seem to think it is.

I didn't "leave out" anything. I picked those handful of English/Scottish club names precisely because they were clubs that also currently/recently employed our own Irish players. It was to demonstrate there is strong similarities between these two nations selections and "this is a squad where player from club X Y Z are actually getting called up and that we're not talking about some nation here where you have to be playing for a top 4 club to even get a call up". It was to say that this is a team Ireland could genuinely aspire to play like.

Also, If it'd make you feel better I'm sorry I didn't include "Spartak Moscow" (CL) in my initial post because the Swede's have one there too and I missed it.

Besides, if you think I "left out" the CL teams deliberately then please explain why I also "left out" Elfsbourg, Seattle Sounders etc in my initial comment too as including them would have only helped my case if all I was attempting to do was make Sweden look weak and "strengthen my argument".

kitakyushu

Dempsey wrote: »

Nothing more?? You make it sound like they didnt earn their spot. They came from 15 points down in the SPL to winning it convincingly. Celtic won the league and played 2 rounds of the champions qualifiers as a seeded team. They earned their place like everyone else thats in the UCL so less of the nonsence.

Talk about nonsense. "They came from 15 points down". Not too hard when your supposed nearest rival is going into meltdown and losing to clubs like Kilmarnock and St.Mirren. I had a check and I saw that Celtic didn't even beat Rangers on head-to-head on points last season (W2 L2), so essentially you won a title on the back of a better record against a bunch of minnows. Congrats!

Also that 15 point gap on 5/11/2011? Rangers had played 14 games, Celtic just 12. So in real terms it was a 9 point gap with a home game v Rangers to come. See I don't give a fiddlers about the SPL, but I know that much and I'm not impressed by such half-truths.

Like I said, won SPL and qualified on the back of beating a team from Sweden and another Finland (both leagues about half-a-step up from the LOI in standard).

No, Celtic earned their spot alright. Just like Ireland earned a place in Euro 2012 by beating Armenia and Estonia.

Ardent

eagle eye wrote: »

And what may I ask are you expecting? Do you think that the squad we had were good enough to win the Euros? Do you think that Spain and Italy getting to the final kinda shows how difficult our group was? I personally think Croatia are in the top five teams in Europe at the present time. We hadn't an earthly hope of doing anything in that group if we had Jose Mourinho, Alex Ferguson or any other top manager in charge.

Trap tells it as it is, its a result based business and he has shown with Ireland and for most of his career that he can get the results.

The big problems in this country are unrealistic fans who want us to play an attractive brand of football with a team thats not capable of doing it at a high enough level. They also want a man who was 69 when he took the Irish job to suddenly become a fluent english speaker so they can understand everything he says.

To those people I say get real, understand that we are a small country which overachieves every now and then. We have overachieved under Trap by reaching the Euros. We possibly could do so again in this World Cup campaign.

People were on here tonight talking about goal difference which shows you the level of knowledge or lack of it which they possess. In this thing its all about your record against the other team if two teams end up level on points.

I honestly think that the modern day football fan is like a spoiled child who wants everything his own way or he isn't happy. We got a good result tonight and everybody brushes it under the carpet because it doesn't suit their agenda. They want to tell us how Sweden made an incredible comeback and drew and how much better they are than the Irish team. Well lets just wait until they meet us and then you can talk and if we fail miserably then you can take the soap box and scream and people will listen.

Great post! Finally some common sense.

Dempsey

kitakyushu wrote: »

Talk about nonsense. "They came from 15 points down". Not too hard when your supposed nearest rival is going into meltdown and losing to clubs like Kilmarnock and St.Mirren. I had a check and I saw that Celtic didn't even beat Rangers on head-to-head on points last season (W2 L2), so essentially you won a title on the back of a better record against a bunch of minnows. Congrats!

Also that 15 point gap on 5/11/2011? Rangers had played 14 games, Celtic just 12. So in real terms it was a 9 point gap with a home game v Rangers to come. See I don't give a fiddlers about the SPL, but I know that much and I'm not impressed by such half-truths.

Like I said, won SPL and qualified on the back of beating a team from Sweden and another Finland (both leagues about half-a-step up from the LOI in standard).

No, Celtic earned their spot alright. Just like Ireland earned a place in Euro 2012 by beating Armenia and Estonia.

What a load of waffle. Congrats

1) Celtic were 10 points+ ahead of Rangers before their meltdown.

2) Celtic were 15 points behind at one stage, imaginery points or wins dont count.

3) Celtic won the SPL, then beat the champions of Finland & Sweden by solid margins to gain entry to the UCL. Maybe Celtic should just have automatic entry since there is a gulf in class between them and the champions of countries like Sweden & Finland.

kitakyushu

Dempsey wrote: »

What a load of waffle. Congrats

1) Celtic were 10 points+ ahead of Rangers before their meltdown.

2) Celtic were 15 points behind at one stage, imaginery points or wins dont count.

3) Celtic won the SPL, then beat the champions of Finland & Sweden by solid margins to gain entry to the UCL. Maybe Celtic should just have automatic entry since there is a gulf in class between them and the champions of countries like Sweden & Finland.

So Celtic were 10pts ahead when Rangers were losing to Kilmarnock and St. Mirren in Nov/Dec 2011 (ie the beginning of the meltdown)? Not according to the record books! Like I said, you're talking nonsense and half-truths.

But while your fielding suggestions that could suit Celtic maybe the SPL should schedule next season so that Celtic only start their fixtures in December. That way they can have a nice long holiday and claim they won the league from *30pts* behind and we can all be wildly impressed by your nonsense statistics.

KELTICKNIGHTT

Ardent wrote: »

Great post! Finally some common sense.

was good post and made good sense

gosplan

kitakyushu wrote: »

I didn't "leave out" anything. I picked those handful of English/Scottish club names precisely because they were clubs that also currently/recently employed our own Irish players. It was to demonstrate there is strong similarities between these two nations selections and "this is a squad where player from club X Y Z are actually getting called up and that we're not talking about some nation here where you have to be playing for a top 4 club to even get a call up". It was to say that this is a team Ireland could genuinely aspire to play like.

Also, If it'd make you feel better I'm sorry I didn't include "Spartak Moscow" (CL) in my initial post because the Swede's have one there too and I missed it.

Besides, if you think I "left out" the CL teams deliberately then please explain why I also "left out" Elfsbourg, Seattle Sounders etc in my initial comment too as including them would have only helped my case if all I was attempting to do was make Sweden look weak and "strengthen my argument".

In fairness, you're getting a bit wrapped up in this one.

You made a sarcastic comment about the Swedish team being strong and tried to evidence their weakness by listing a few of the poorest club sides to have representation on the national team.

I pulled you up on it saying that you weren't really giving an accurate picture.

That is all.


You're now talking about an earlier conversation I gather where you tried to point out that we're very close to Sweden because we both have players from 'Celtic, Blackburn, West Brom, Fulham, Sunderland and La Galaxy' - type clubs.

What I'd be pointing out there is that half of the players your're talking about above didn't start for Sweden. Also, you could equally say that Jack Rodwell, Campbell and Agbonlahor were all in an England squad last year when they ere playing their club football alongside Coleman, McLean and Dunne.

So are we comparable with England on that basis?

gosplan

kitakyushu wrote: »

Just like Ireland earned a place in Euro 2012 by beating Armenia and Estonia.

Jesus, and you have the nerve to talk to other people about half-truths.

Try and stay rational when discussing things please.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

In fairness, you're getting a bit wrapped up in this one.

You made a sarcastic comment about the Swedish team being strong and tried to evidence their weakness by listing a few of the poorest club sides to have representation on the national team.

I'll throw you a bone. Where's my sarcastic comment about Sweden being strong? If you're talking about me rattling off some English clubs (which were actually not the poorest representation btw) then you missed the point. I rate them as a team and I rate their play and results. It's far ahead of us. I don't however believe they are that far ahead of us man for man and are definitely the sort of team we could aspire to be like and imho we'd actually be getting better results if we tried it that way rather than Traps way which is self-defeating in the longterm .

Everything else you say after that is just utter nonsense, esp the England comparison which proves nothing. I didn't see Rodwell, Campbell etc getting much of a look-in when it came to the real games, so clearly guys from the clubs I mention are generally acceptable to Ireland and Sweden when it comes to the big time, but not to England.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

Jesus, and you have the nerve to talk to other people about half-truths.

Try and stay rational when discussing things please.

Yeah you're right. We did great to beat Armenia, and Estonia. I'm surprised it didn't send shockwaves across Europe prior to the finals.

gosplan

kitakyushu wrote: »

I'll throw you a bone. Where's my sarcastic comment about Sweden being strong?

kitakyushu wrote: »

Yeah you're right. We'd be doing well to get crack players from top clubs like Kasımpaşa, Helsingborgs, Malmö FF, Brugge, İstanbul BBSK, Elfsborg and Seattle Sounders.

kitakyushu wrote: »

Everything else you say after that is just utter nonsense

I know, I was pointing out your own logic to you


So what exactly are you saying now? We can or can't judge the comparitive strength of international sides by the clubs represented (remember now that you're the one who introduced this idea in the first place).

I think I finally get your thinking though, correct me if I'm wrong but it goes something like ...

'Of course we can ... but only if we take a few players that may or may not be on a starting team ... and as long as the better ones on the Swedish team don't count ... and the CL doesn't count as how good a club is ... actually nothing outside the top four in the four big countries counts as a decent club ... so we're all pretty much the same ... but this doesn't apply to a team like England cause their poor players obviously don't count and the good ones do ... which is exactly the opposite to what we did with Sweden.'

Interesting viewpoint.

gosplan

kitakyushu wrote: »

Yeah you're right. We did great to beat Armenia, and Estonia. I'm surprised it didn't send shockwaves across Europe prior to the finals.

Me too. You'd think someone would have noticed that there was just Armenia and us in the group.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

I know, I was pointing out your own logic to you


So what exactly are you saying now? We can or can't judge the comparitive strength of international sides by the clubs represented (remember now that you're the one who introduced this idea in the first place).

I think I finally get your thinking though, correct me if I'm wrong but it goes something like ...

'Of course we can ... but only if we take a few players that may or may not be on a starting team ... and as long as the better ones on the Swedish team don't count ... and the CL doesn't count as how good a club is ... actually nothing outside the top four in the four big countries counts as a decent club ... so we're all pretty much the same ... but this doesn't apply to a team like England cause their poor players obviously don't count and the good ones do ... which is exactly the opposite to what we did with Sweden.'

Interesting viewpoint.

My point is if you have national squad made up of players from weaker CL teams, lower EPL teams, Swedish League players, MLS players and a club promoted from the Turkish 2nd division, then chances are they're probably not a collection of world beaters and that something is going on there to get the very best out of them. Clearly you disagree but as you've demonstrated already you don't really know much generally.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

Me too. You'd think someone would have noticed that there was just Armenia and us in the group.

They were probably too blown away by our besting of Armenia and Estonia to notice. Wins of that magnitude tend to steal all the limelight & headlines.

Dempsey

kitakyushu wrote: »

So Celtic were 10pts ahead when Rangers were losing to Kilmarnock and St. Mirren in Nov/Dec 2011 (ie the beginning of the meltdown)? Not according to the record books! Like I said, you're talking nonsense and half-truths.

But while your fielding suggestions that could suit Celtic maybe the SPL should schedule next season so that Celtic only start their fixtures in December. That way they can have a nice long holiday and claim they won the league from *30pts* behind and we can all be wildly impressed by your nonsense statistics.

Rangers meltdown started late January/early February, i.e. selling Jelavic & 4 years of season tickets and the subsequent fall into administration over unpaid taxes that season. Celtic were close to winning 15 game consecutive wins at that stage. Celtic leapfrogged Rangers on the 28th December when they beat them in a Old Firm match and continued their unbeaten league run until the 25th of March. Rangers didnt have European Competition last season, Celtic did and a severe injury crisis throughout the group stages of the EL where untested u19 players were called in and we couldnt even name a full set of subs when it was at its worst because so many players were unavailable. They are the facts. Most of which you have ignored to save face.

Its not a nonsence statistic, its actually what happened. I find it ironic that you bang on about half truths while spouting crap like this

Rangers had played 14 games, Celtic just 12. So in real terms it was a 9 point gap with a home game v Rangers to come.

As the for the rest of your nonsence, i'll just ignore.

Pro. F

It is true to say that we got to the Euros by beating Armenia and Estonia. We beat Armenia to second place in the group and we beat Estonia in the play off. That is an absolute gift of a qualification route.

noodler

Pro. F wrote: »

It is true to say that we got to the Euros by beating Armenia and Estonia. We beat Armenia to second place in the group and we beat Estonia in the play off. That is an absolute gift of a qualification route.

Head hurts with this type of nonsense.

We played 12 games to get there. We lost one.

Pro. F

noodler wrote: »

Head hurts with this type of nonsense.

We played 12 games to get there. We lost one.

So?

gosplan

kitakyushu wrote: »

My point is if you have national squad made up of players from weaker CL teams, lower EPL teams, Swedish League players, MLS players and a club promoted from the Turkish 2nd division, then chances are they're probably not a collection of world beaters and that something is going on there to get the very best out of them.

What about Croatia - they just have Modric at Madrid.

What about Russia - they have no players outside Russia except a non-player at Arsenal and a Reading striker.

What about Czech Republic - they have Cheh and no-one else at a really big club.

What about Denmark - they've Agger at Liverpool and Bendtner at Juve but apart from that are very similar to Sweden.

So I'm asking you - are Ireland comparable to all of these teams. If they're not can you explain why they're not but are to Sweden?? And remember again, you're the one who thinks we can judge national team but simply comparing club sides represented.

kitakyushu wrote: »

Clearly you disagree but as you've demonstrated already you don't really know much generally.

I know you're full of it, and that appears to be enough in this thread.

gosplan

Pro. F wrote: »

It is true to say that we got to the Euros by beating Armenia and Estonia. We beat Armenia to second place in the group and we beat Estonia in the play off. That is an absolute gift of a qualification route.

No, no it's not true. We played 10 games and finished on 21 points.

Oat23

gosplan wrote: »

What about Croatia - they just have Modric at Madrid.

Perisic - Dortmund
Mandzukic - Bayern
Srna - Shakhtar
Kranjkar - Dinamo?
Lovren - Lyon?
Rakitic - Sevilla

Dinamo Zagreb are in the CL group stage this year, aren't they? I'm sure the NT has some of their players too..
Then add in players who play for decent teams but not top ones like Badelj (Hamburg), Jelavic (Everton) and Olic (Wolfsburg).

gosplan wrote: »

What about Czech Republic - they have Cheh and no-one else at a really big club.

Necid - One of the Moskow teams
Rocisky - Arsenal still?
Jiracek - Hamburg
Selassie - Bremen
Kadlec - Bayer
Plasil - Ligue 1

The Croats and Czechs are in much better shape than we are and that is a fact.

gosplan

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Perisic - Dortmund
Mandzukic - Bayern
Srna - Shakhtar
Kranjkar - Dinamo?
Lovren - Lyon?
Rakitic - Sevilla

Dinamo Zagreb are in the CL group stage this year, aren't they? I'm sure the NT has some of their players too..
Then add in players who play for decent teams but not top ones like Badelj (Hamburg), Jelavic (Everton) and Olic (Wolfsburg).




Necid - One of the Moskow teams
Rocisky - Arsenal still?
Jiracek - Hamburg
Selassie - Bremen
Kadlec - Bayer
Plasil - Ligue 1

The Croats and Czechs are in much better shape than we are and that is a fact.

Agree 100%.

There's some gorilla logic going on in here though. Some people would argue that if you ...

kitakyushu wrote:

rattled off a list of Swedes Croats/Czechs tonight with "CL" for clubs in Eng/Spa/Ger/Ita then I'd hold up my hand and say you might have a point.

Other clubs don't count I think or something??

Me personally, I'd look at the players in question, hopefully have watched them play and then make a judgement on something other than the ignorant assumption that Gisbon/Coleman and Fellaini/Pienaar are basically the same level of players because they're all at Everton.
(that last part's abviously not directed at you Oatsey)

My take on it is that when it comes to very good players, a little goes a long way in terms of national teams and two or three top class proper footballers make all the difference. You could argue for Richard Dunne but realistically we have none right now.

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

No, no it's not true. We played 10 games and finished on 21 points.

Which was good enough to beat Armenia to second place. Obviously we did more than just beat Armenia, nobody is saying otherwise. But in the race for second place it came down to us and Armenia, that is a sweet qualification group.

gosplan

Pro. F wrote: »

Which was good enough to beat Armenia to second place. Obviously we did more than just beat Armenia, nobody is saying otherwise. But in the race for second place it came down to us and Armenia, that is a sweet qualification group.

We didn't drop any points in the group to anyone ranked lower than us and i think that might be the second campaign in a row that's happened.

I've an issue with no credit going to the team or the manager for that because despite what people think, it's not always a given.

I mean Staunton was villified for losing to Cyprus, and drawing with NI and Lichtenstien was the end for Jack but when it comes to Trap it takes a couple of posts for people to even acknowledge that games against lesser teams actually took place at all.

kitakyushu

gosplan wrote: »

What about Croatia - they just have Modric at Madrid.

What about Russia - they have no players outside Russia except a non-player at Arsenal and a Reading striker.

Russia are effective because they are practically a club team. They usually

What about Czech Republic - they have Cheh and no-one else at a really big club.

What about Denmark - they've Agger at Liverpool and Bendtner at Juve but apart from that are very similar to Sweden.

So I'm asking you - are Ireland comparable to all of these teams. If they're not can you explain why they're not but are to Sweden?? And remember again, you're the one who thinks we can judge national team but simply comparing club sides represented.

Ok, here is the current squads of those teams you mentioned and the clubs represented in each:

• Czech (Anorthosis Famagusta , Augsburg , Baumit Jablonec , Bayer Leverkusen , Beşiktaş , Bordeaux , Chelsea , Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk , Hamburg , Hertha Berlin , Nürnberg , Shakhtar Donetsk , Sparta Prague , Spartak Moscow , Viktoria Plzeň , Watford , Werder Bremen)
  

• Russia ( Anzhi Makhachkala , CSKA Moscow , Dynamo Moscow , Lokomotiv Moscow , Spartak Moscow , Zenit Saint Petersburg )
  

• Denmark ( Aarhus , Ajax , Brøndby , Celta Vigo , Copenhagen , Évian , Juventus , Liverpool , Monaco , Nordsjælland , OB , Sampdoria , Stuttgart , Wolfsburg , Young Boys )
  

• Croatia (Bayern Munich , Borussia Dortmund , Dinamo Zagreb , Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk , Dynamo Kyiv , Dynamo Moscow , Everton , Hajduk Split , Hamburg , Lokomotiv Moscow , Lyon , Monaco , Pescara , Real Madrid , Rostov , Sevilla , Shakhtar Donetsk , Sparta Prague)

OK, now look at that list of clubs. Now tell me how many of the Irish lads currently or have ever played for any of those clubs? I see McGeady matching one team? Coleman matching another? Anyone else?

Now look at Sweden representation. we actually have (and recently had) SEVERAL players AT THE VERY SAME clubs that Sweden do now. That was the original basis for comparison. It was to say that Sweden operating on resources whereby they readily accept guys at that level into their squad from the very same clubs as our players play at and yet somehow they are able to pull of exceptional results and performances year after year. It was about as straight forward a comparison as is possible between international teams. So if you can't understand that much then it's your own problem.

I know you're full of it, and that appears to be enough in this thread.

It that's the prerequisite then I guess you're right at home.

leonidas83

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Perisic - Dortmund
Mandzukic - Bayern
Srna - Shakhtar
Kranjkar - Dinamo?
Lovren - Lyon?
Rakitic - Sevilla

Dinamo Zagreb are in the CL group stage this year, aren't they? I'm sure the NT has some of their players too..
Then add in players who play for decent teams but not top ones like Badelj (Hamburg), Jelavic (Everton) and Olic (Wolfsburg).




Necid - One of the Moskow teams
Rocisky - Arsenal still?
Jiracek - Hamburg
Selassie - Bremen
Kadlec - Bayer
Plasil - Ligue 1

The Croats and Czechs are in much better shape than we are and that is a fact.

What is with this mad obsession with players who are in a squad that plays champions league football.

When we had Gibson, O'Shea at utd, Keane at Liverpool, Duff at Chelsea it didnt mean **** all as werent qualifying for anything & doesnt mean **** all now.

The truth is we have a team/squad capable of playing good football & being competitive. We could have a team of premier league regulars playing week in week out which we give us better balance than having 2 or 3 world class champions league players & the rest championship standard. Mclean, Coleman, Wilson, Long, Walters, Clarke, Gibson, McCarthy, McGeady are all on a similar level & could make us a very strong outfit. Trap has ignored most of them

kitakyushu

Dempsey wrote: »

Rangers meltdown started late January/early February, i.e. selling Jelavic & 4 years of season tickets and the subsequent fall into administration over unpaid taxes that season. Celtic were close to winning 15 game consecutive wins at that stage. Celtic leapfrogged Rangers on the 28th December when they beat them in a Old Firm match and continued their unbeaten league run until the 25th of March. Rangers didnt have European Competition last season, Celtic did and a severe injury crisis throughout the group stages of the EL where untested u19 players were called in and we couldnt even name a full set of subs when it was at its worst because so many players were unavailable. They are the facts. Most of which you have ignored to save face.

Its not a nonsence statistic, its actually what happened. I find it ironic that you bang on about half truths while spouting crap like this

As the for the rest of your nonsence, i'll just ignore.

Oh so Rangers losing to Kilmarnock and St.Mirren (with Jelavic both times btw, so its fairly weak using him as a factor) was alll part of the plan and was not a sign of trouble? Oh ok, I must watch some more SPL. I had no idea the league had such strength in depth that results like this for a team like Rangers were just par for the course!

Everything after that is just irrelevant fan waffle. You had ups, you had downs. You then won the SPL. You are now the best team in the SPL (as tho that means anything) and then played a team from Sweden and Finland to get a place in the CL. That's the point.