Rep. of Ireland vs Poland - March 29th 2015 (RTE2/19:45)

mzungu

After a dodgy start last night, the team really stepped up a gear. If we played with that urgency and intensity from the start of every game, we would most likely be group leaders. We had Poland on the back foot for all of that half, they were lucky to come away with a draw. Even if we do pip Scotland to third place (no foregone conclusion) there is still the matter of a 2 leg playoff to contend with. Not beyond this team to grab a win in the return leg in Warsaw, but thats getting ahead of things a bit. At least our fate is somewhat in our hands after last night.

Corholio

Pro. F wrote: »

The big issues for me are whether MON will have the courage to start Keane and Hoolahan in the rest of the games, including against Scotland and Germany at home, and whether we can start to play with that fluency and conviction when we aren't a goal down. I have my doubts, but it's still early days in MON's tenure.

The second half 'Keane and Hoolahan' though of course. I share your worry about that though, it seemed we only started to hold onto the ball when we really needed to. It should be that way from the start. McCarthy and Whelan actually had the ball in the second half to keep it moving quickly, instead of O'Shea launching it up to Walters countless times in the first half.

Call Me Jimmy

I know everyone's aware of it but our midfield functioning going forward was dependent on there being no polish players anywhere near them. The scotland game will be huge pressure all over the pitch so I see it going largely as the first half went yesterday in terms of our performance.

I enjoyed last night and obviously hope we can do it against scotland, but evidence doesn't support it imo.

rebelomar

We saw the good and the bad of this team last night. What I'm interested in is what can be done to eliminate the bad and the reasons why it occurs.

First half last nIght was similar to both Georgia and Scotland. No pressing, nobody looking to get on the ball, nobody trying to grab the game by the scruff of the neck. Our set pieces were abysmal and generally looked rudderless.

Second half was the complete opposite. We tore into them and really put them on the backfoot. This allowed us the time and space in midfield and at the back to get on the ball and pick a few passes, we were able to get our wideplayers and Wes on the ball on advanced areas and we looked to carry some threat at least.

This for me all came from an improved attitude. It wasn't any tactical switch imo that brought about the change it was the overhaul of our attitude. We got amongst them...outfought and outran them. Very basic stuff but it's this Irish team playing to it's strengths. It may not be cultured or endearing to some but the facts are we should embrace our natural aggression as Irish footballers and use it to our advantage.

I'm 100% not saying we should play hoofball...absolutely not. Use the ball as best you can when you have it but we won it back so quickly in the second half it was a huge plus.

Now the bit that frustrates and confuses me.
Why are we so timid and unadventurous at 0-0

Is it the management team's tactical instructions causing this or are our players simply too nervous to play as per second half while the game is in the balance? Are they afraid to go and try and affect the game from the get go.

If it was a one off you could overlook it but it's a trait seen in every competitive game so far under O Neill..and he needs to root this out before Scotland game.

His selection last night was certainly positive on paper to be fair to him but I'd argue how he set the team up counter productive.

Firstly Mccarthy needs to be left off the leash in midfield. He's not the deep playmaker we all hoped he would become. He can however run (huge engine) tackle and pass all very well. I'd like to see him have licence to go and press the opposition 10-15 yards higher up the pitch rather than infront of back four. I think he's lost there.

I think Gibson's fitness issues are a huge blow. he can play the deeper role and allow Mccarthy to play further up. I'd play Wes and McCarthy infront of Gibson if all are available.

I think Brady did very well second half and I'd play him again vs Scotland. Ok he had a howler for the goal but it's not as if Ward doesn't have a mistake in him. Brady is a huge plus when this team are on the front foot. If you want to shore it up Ciaran Clark is also a viable option at left back.

Now to our striking options. I'm sorry but I don't see a starting place for Robbie any longer. Has been an amazing servant and amazing goalscorer for us but he no longer carries a threat and his legs are gone.

I'd go with Long up front on his own. A three man midfield listed above and two wide players. Walters is very affective playing right side of a three at Stoke. Also brings a valuable physical pressence to the side.

Toss up between McGeady and James on the other wing.

tastyt

I don't think Poland are as poor as they looked last night either. They had a couple of their top players injured and sat back all night long.

I really think Wel see a totally different polish team in warsaw and by the sounds of it some Irish fans believe all we need to do is play like we did in the second half and Wel definitely win over there. I think it's our toughest remaining fixture.

jmayo

A few things stood out for me last night.

Brady was very poor for the goal and his crossing, corner kicks and free kicks were poor.
He continued to try, but he needs to do a lot better.

McCLean added a little bit of much needed bite and people complaining about his hard tackle as being reckless is displaying the type of mentality that is turning football into a pansies game where a good hard tackle is now deemed fouls and carded.
Surprising with how one sided the ref was that he didn't book him or even red card him.

Holohan might add a bit of something, but he is light weight, he lost the ball too much, he even slowed down/stopped and let Pole get tackle in when they had made good ground down the wing on one occassion.
There is a reason he has never really played PL (even he wasn't always assured his starting place when Norwich were there)

Keane is gone and just because he has high international goal scoring rate or he was better than Heskey or Grouch doesn't mean he was ever world class.
He was very good for Ireland, dug us out of a fair few holes, but never world class.

What was also getting me was why they walloping short passes to each other which meant the guy getting the pass was finding it hard to control and letting Poles get tackle in.
Were they nervous and feeling rushed or are they that poor at passing.

International football is poor.
Poland who are topping the group are not all they are hyped up to be.
Scotland are no great shakes either.
Maybe a good game against Scotland will help get us through ?

Fudge You

J. Marston wrote: »

Brilliant tackle.

Milik's poor touch took it away from him and McClean won it cleanly and fairly.

Aggression and contact is still allowed in football, thankfully.

I completely disagree with you.
Aggression and contact???? Its got nothing to do with either.
Here is the gif on newstalk to see it again.

http://www.newstalk.com/WATCH:-McClean-shows-Keane-edge-to-rattle-Poles

After watching this a few times. It is a yellow card.
The rules are there, and the ref should have booked McClean.
He was reckless, so therefore a yellow. And reckless means a player has acted with complete disregard to the danger, or consequences to his opponent.(copied & pasted from fifa btw)

And I know many will disagree with me, he got the ball, it was a fair and hard tackle. But that still doesnt change the rules of football.
He followed through and actually ended up wrapping his legs around Milik.
McClean was not in control of himself, when he made contact with the ball and followed through. Freekick and yellow card.
Getting the ball doesnt matter.

And by the way, I dont think McClean went to do him or anything like that. He was trying his heart out to win the ball. But a tackle like that is not allowed.

SantryRed

Fudge You wrote: »

I completely disagree with you.
Aggression and contact???? Its got nothing to do with either.
Here is the gif on newstalk to see it again.

http://www.newstalk.com/WATCH:-McClean-shows-Keane-edge-to-rattle-Poles

After watching this a few times. It is a yellow card.
The rules are there, and the ref should have booked McClean.
He was reckless, so therefore a yellow. And reckless means a player has acted with complete disregard to the danger, or consequences to his opponent.(copied & pasted from fifa btw)

And I know many will disagree with me, he got the ball, it was a fair and hard tackle. But that still doesnt change the rules of football.
He followed through and actually ended up wrapping his legs around Milik.
McClean was not in control of himself, when he made contact with the ball and followed through. Freekick and yellow card.
Getting the ball doesnt matter.

And by the way, I dont think McClean went to do him or anything like that. He was trying his heart out to win the ball. But a tackle like that is not allowed.

It's not a foul. It's most definitely not a yellow card.

The day that type of tackle is outlawed in football is the day I stop watching.

Fudge You

SantryRed wrote: »

It's not a foul. It's most definitely not a yellow card.

The day that type of tackle is outlawed in football is the day I stop watching.

It already is outlawed. The ref made a mistake.
You cannot be reckless in a tackle, getting the ball doesnt change that. McClean was not in control of himself in the tackle.

SantryRed

Fudge You wrote: »

It already is outlawed. The ref made a mistake.
You cannot be reckless in a tackle, getting the ball doesnt change that. McClean was not in control of himself in the tackle.

I don't see how he isn't in control of himself tbh. Every slide tackle should be outlawed if that's the case. Nobody knows exactly where you're gonna stop sliding!

Fudge You

SantryRed wrote: »

I don't see how he isn't in control of himself tbh. Every slide tackle should be outlawed if that's the case. Nobody knows exactly where you're gonna stop sliding!

No no, not every slide tackle ends with a player wrapping their legs around the opponent.

But, was it reckless? Yes
Did Mcclean endanger the opponent? Yes.
So by the rules, foul & yellow.
Now we all might not agree with rules of the game, but thats what they say.

Mushy

Fudge You wrote: »

No no, not every slide tackle ends with a player wrapping their legs around the opponent.

But, was it reckless? Yes
Did Mcclean endanger the opponent? Yes.
So by the rules, foul & yellow.
Now we all might not agree with rules of the game, but thats what they say.

You can be not reckless and still injure somebody. There was no other way McClean was going to be able to win the ball, there was no follow through, he maintained full control.

miroslavklose

Fudge You wrote: »

No no, not every slide tackle ends with a player wrapping their legs around the opponent.

They do when the other player steps between your legs. Honestly, if Milik had nipped the ball away it would have been a foul. He didn't nip the ball away, Milik missed it by some distance and hurt himself as a result.

Paul Tergat

If that tackle from McClean is to be outlawed then I might be pretty close to giving up on footie.

The_Kew_Tour

I know its bit off topic but Steven Fletcher hattrick yesterday for Scotland was the first time a Scottish player has scored 3 goals in a game since 1969.

Was surprised when heard it.

newballsplease

Fudge You wrote: »

No no, not every slide tackle ends with a player wrapping their legs around the opponent.

But, was it reckless? Yes
Did Mcclean endanger the opponent? Yes.
So by the rules, foul & yellow.
Now we all might not agree with rules of the game, but thats what they say.

Is the game Non contact all of a sudden?

Fudge You

Paul Tergat wrote: »

If that tackle from McClean is to be outlawed then I might be pretty close to giving up on footie.

How many people have said that in this thread? Too many.
That tackle is outlawed already, so just give up then.
And at the weekend when a player for your team gets fouled, you'll be the one shouting at the telly, ahh ref ffs, he should be off.

Please read the rules. Thats all I'll say, cause I'm going off topic. But most on here think I'm wrong. Ive lost this one

Fudge You

miroslavklose wrote: »

They do when the other player steps between your legs. Honestly, if Milik had nipped the ball away it would have been a foul. He didn't nip the ball away, Milik missed it by some distance and hurt himself as a result.

He hurt himself???
He stepped between his legs???

Good night all.

Fudge You

newballsplease wrote: »

Is the game Non contact all of a sudden?

Yes, thats exactly what I said.

The_Kew_Tour

Trap did a very good job from 2008 to November 2011.

He made us a solid, hard to beat outfit again. He got us back on our feet again after the joke of Stan and for that I'm grateful but he should have left after Euros and he was plain to see once Germany stuffed us 6-1..

After that not only did we go down hill it shattered the morale in the team and fans too and it did lot more damage then people think. We lost all types of records in WC 2014 campaign and Trap was most to blame.

Pro. F

noodler wrote: »

Wow, very hostile.

It was worth pointing out that for all the "defensive shape" changes you are noticing that the tangible result is that we are conceding sloppy goals. I think it is worth noting what tangible difference you feel you have noticed as a result.

I would point out that we conceded sloppy goals under Trap too. You would probably deny that and we could argue about it endlessly. However, that would be a pointless argument at this stage. We need to first establish if we can see any significant differences in how the team plays under O'Neil before there would be any purpose to talking about which style we think is better.

Lloyd was talking like he could see no difference, so I asked him about the defensive depth, which is the most obvious and simple difference that I can see.

I already know that you see no significant difference. I remember that you were already - utterly ridiculously - saying that you couldn't see much difference between the styles played under the two managers during O'Neil's early series of friendlies. The games where he was trying a more expansive, skill based style which was completely different to that which Trap had played and the style which O'Neil has subsequently played in competitive games.

noodler wrote: »

When a team defends deep, it means they are retreating deeper towards their own goal.

I don't think this is what you mean? I think you better expand for me.

I'm talking about the depth of the team between the deepest defender and the first defender. The first defender being the nearest goal-side defending player to the opposition player in possession.

In Trap's team the midfield tended to sit back very close to the back four. The front two often stayed further forward. That left more space for the opposition to play in front of our defensive block, in our half of the pitch. In O'Neil's team I'm seeing more of an even spread in the team, front to back, with the midfield pushing forward more and so providing more depth to the defence.

I'm not saying that O'Neil's defensive organisation is definitely better - it's early days yet, we'd need to see more games and from what I've seen so far there are still issues - but it's definitely different. And maybe the midfield will drop deeper when they have a lead to protect, everything will be clearer when we've played more games.

noodler wrote: »

Wow, another outrageously hostile post. I was obviously making the comment in reference to the national team itself but you can take in a wider perspective if it helps you exaggerate your response.

I'd say it quite clearly extended to Stan's era anyway. Actually probably Kerr as well, after getting early goals against Israel twice we reacted with cautious substitutions and reactive defensive tactics.

You said exactly these words:
"The fear at 0-0 seems to be built in to the national psyche."

There was no exaggeration in my response. I used the exact same words that you had used.

If you want to clarify now that you were only talking about the national team's psyche then that doesn't change my response much. It is still beyond ridiculous to conclude that caution while at 0-0 is built into the national team's psyche rather than related to the influence of two managers with records of cautious, reactive football.

The fact that Kerr was also a cautious, reactive manager doesn't add any weight to your argument that the fear while playing at 0-0 is down to the players' psyches rather than the managers' influence.

It should be obvious to you that Stan was an awful manager and concluding anything significant about the players' abilities or psychological flaws from his tenure is ludicrous.

noodler wrote: »

It seems you are desperate after four games of the MON era to find some reason to justify why he is better than his predecessor. There is no need to lash out just because you are struggling to do so.

I'm reserving my full judgement on MON until he's had longer at the job, probably until the end of this qualification campaign. I was critical of MON's appointment from the start and have been critical of how he's done plenty of things since. It's possible to be critical of both Trap and MON. It's also possible to point out things that MON does that I approve of while still thinking that overall he's probably not good enough.

miroslavklose

Fudge You wrote: »

He hurt himself???
He stepped between his legs???

Good night all.

I think you need to go look at the tackle again.

The ball is there to be won, agreed?

Both players go in and McClean gets there first, agreed?

Milik steps past the ball rather than trying to play the ball, agreed?

Milik is then swept up by McClean's legs as his momentum takes him through, agreed?

I'm not sure where you can assign blame to McClean here. If Milik had gone for the ball instead of stepping past it, there'd have been nobody hurt.

Bridge93

Grateful fro Trap for bringing us from a joke to a half decent, solid side. But it must be said we got very, very lucky in the Euro playoffs. We would not have qualified had we drawn anyone but Estonia most likely. It showed when we got there. Lucky swings in roundabouts though after the Paris fiasco.

Kermit.de.frog

Ireland worst 2nd seed performers in qualifying so far and, even worse, heading for 4th seeds in world cup qualifying.


http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/international/ireland-in-danger-of-being-left-behind-next-summer-by-nearest-neighbours-1.2159109

The outlook is grim unless Ireland start actually winning big games.

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I know its bit off topic but Steven Fletcher hattrick yesterday for Scotland was the first time a Scottish player has scored 3 goals in a game since 1969.

Was surprised when heard it.

I can remember Kenny Miller scoring a hattrick for Rangers when they were in the top flight about 5 years ago.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

Wow, very hostile.
...
Wow, another outrageously hostile post.
...
There is no need to lash out just because you are struggling to do so.

noodler wrote: »

I hope you'll ensure your own posts are written in a polite and non-insulting manner in the future before you start calling others out.

noodler wrote: »

it's quite clear, from a financial and performance point of view that hiring Trap was a massive positive. Childish to even question it...

Noodlers posts are becoming my favourite!

For a poster who, more than halfway through Traps Irish career, was of the view that...

noodler wrote: »

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

I still like the "unbelievably" and "many" adjectives most of all. They just left so little...wriggle room. And then it became "childish" to even question any view of his tenure that did not conclude it was a "massive positive"!

noodler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Noodlers posts are becoming my favourite!

For a poster who, more than halfway through Traps Irish career, was of the view that...



I still like the "unbelievably" and "many" adjectives most of all. They just left so little...wriggle room. And then it became "childish" to even question any view of his tenure that did not conclude it was a "massive positive"!

Conor74 - the only poster in the world who believes criticism of a manager is incompatible with judging his reign an overall success.

Keep quoting the same 4 year old post though, your line of argument is amusing, well what little of it there is anyway - I struggle to remember the last time you made a point that didn't involve trawling through my post history to misrepresent 5 year old posts.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

Conor74 - the only poster in the world who believes criticism of a manager is incompatible with judging his reign an overall success.

Keep quoting the same 4 year old post though, your line of argument is amusing.

Well then we amuse each other, which is great all round!

In fact, to borrow your adjectives, "outrageously" "massively" "unbelievably" great! And you'll agree it would be childish to even question that.

noodler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well then we amuse each other, which is great all round!

In fact, to borrow your adjectives, "outrageously" "massively" "unbelievably" great! And you'll agree it would be childish to even question that.

Do you find adjectives novel?

Nalz

diving feckfecks n all so they were