"Soccer feeling like unloved child in tale of two sports"

CSF

tastyt wrote: »

I agree but I never suggested a Leinster fc ? I said different regions, doesn't have to be provinces. So what do you suggest, throw money at the clubs currently involved who have shown time and again that they have no idea what to do with it?

And why couldn't you see those people going to Derry or navan?? People from Waterford or cork rarely went to see Munster in limerick 15 years ago and now they go in their thousands.

Because Irish people only want to go to elite level sport weekly. We are a nation of event junkies. Rugby at the moment is fulfilling that need.

The guys who weren't arsed with having a team around the corner, certainly aren't going to be arsed going to Derry to see a team that would also be pretty poor relative to Europe. The same problems would be there as in the current model.

We can't get people in the door without an elite 'product', we can't achieve that without throwing serious cash at it, we can't get serious cash unless we have lots of people in the door. A serious amount of startup cash is required, which would be better used on clubs that already have a supporter base to begin with.

Your argument about clubs not knowing what to do with money doesn't tell the full story. No club has had enough money to have a great 'product' and great facilities. There has to be a tradeoff and as I'm led to believe by many on here, we need both if they're going to grace us with their presence.

So with the clubs fighting against the tide, it can be difficult for clubs to make ends meet. Plenty can't even get a shirt sponsor.

There is very little evidence to suggest that these arbitrary regional teams that you're discussing would be any better with dealing than the other clubs with the sort of startup cash that could really get a team going, the ability to develop facilities and put together a competitive first team squad that even the event junkies want to watch.

CSF

noodler wrote: »

Over the same period:

Northern Ireland have beaten England, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Greece

Wales have beaten Israel, Italy and Scotland.

Scotland have beaten us, France (twice) and Croatia (twice).

Thats just stuff that comes to mind - others may think of more.

Now, obviously, I prefer that we are usually a bit more consistent overall but I do think it is pretty amazing that we haven't had an 'upset' (at least as defined by seeds or rankings) over that time.

We beat France 1 nil in Paris

Ferris_Bueller

noodler wrote: »

Over the same period:

Northern Ireland have beaten England, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Greece

Wales have beaten Israel, Italy and Scotland.

Scotland have beaten us, France (twice) and Croatia (twice).

Thats just stuff that comes to mind - others may think of more.

Now, obviously, I prefer that we are usually a bit more consistent overall but I do think it is pretty amazing that we haven't had an 'upset' (at least as defined by seeds or rankings) over that time.

This post kind of backs up ArmaniJeanss point though, none of them three countries have qualified for a tournament since Scotland qualified for the World Cup in 1998. We've qualified for two in that time frame, I know what one I'd prefer. Obviously though it would be nice if we could get a scalp against a big team every now and then, it's gotten to the point where a draw is the best we can hope for when we're playing bigger teams.

Arghus

CSF wrote: »

We beat France 1 nil in Paris

Do you remember all that craic about a handball....?

Wacker The Attacker

Korat wrote: »

There are a lot of soccer fan scribes feeling sorry for themselves these days.

This piece is especially sad:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/official-ireland-falls-in-love-with-rugby-31102551.html

It all conveniently forgets that before Jack Charlton bandwagon came along the soccer team were even less popular nationally than they are now. Begrudging rugby's success plays to a stereotypical view of local soccer, that it's too busy looking over the fence to tend it's own garden.

Werent the Rugby team crap for decades.

How many leinster rugby jersey did you see out and about before 2000.

seachto7

Leinster etc are also promoting the game outside of the cities to non rugby areas in the provinces.

CSF

Arghus wrote: »

Do you remember all that craic about a handball....?

That was AET. The result for that match was 1 nil Ireland and the records would show that. The result of the tie was 2-1 France AET.

Arghus

I don't really know what to say to that.

ArmaniJeanss

CSF wrote: »

That was AET. The result for that match was 1 nil Ireland and the records would show that. The result of the tie was 2-1 France AET.

Unfortunately for ranking purposes (FIFA ranking points, UEFA coefficient etc) and for the official records it went down as a 1-1 draw. Warped in many ways but that's the method they use.
Bookies obviously paid out on the 90 min result though!

patmac

Not sure if it's been mentioned already but soccer players earnings are way higher than Rugby's so that should make up for the 'lack of love'. It's a Golden age for Irish Rugby so I'm enjoying in it in the same way as I enjoyed the Golden Age of soccer in late 80's and 90's and the Soccer International Team is very poor at the moment.

CSF

Arghus wrote: »

I don't really know what to say to that.

That it's correct. If you had a bet on an Ireland win you would have been paid out.

We won the 2nd leg but lost the tie.

sydthebeat

CSF wrote: »

That it's correct. If you had a bet on an Ireland win you would have been paid out.

We won the 2nd leg but lost the tie.

the official result was 1-1

its incredibly sad that you would try to use this as an example

Shanotheslayer

CSF wrote: »

That it's correct. If you had a bet on an Ireland win you would have been paid out.

We won the 2nd leg but lost the tie.

I'd rather win the tie than a 2nd leg that means we got nothing.

CSF

sydthebeat wrote: »

the official result was 1-1

its incredibly sad that you would try to use this as an example

When you go around and call things official there is an onus on you to provide proof of that.

sydthebeat

CSF wrote: »

When you go around and call things official there is an onus on you to provide proof of that.

you can find the OFFICIAL result on the FIFA website

i wont hold your hand

ArmaniJeanss

CSF wrote: »

When you go around and call things official there is an onus on you to provide proof of that.

In fairness you are the one who said the records would show it, so is it not your responsibility to come up some official record.

Anyway.

Official results.
Ireland 0, France 1.
France 1, Ireland 1.

Not saying I agree with it but its the way its always been for the use in rankings and coefficients. Thought this was fairly common knowledge to be honest.

http://www.fifa.com/world-match-centre/teams/country=irl/matches/year=2009/index.html

Shanotheslayer

CSF wrote: »

That it's correct. If you had a bet on an Ireland win you would have been paid out.

Surprised you're really arguing this CSF, let's be real here, nobody cares that we won in Paris, it'll always be remembered that we got knocked out.

If you look at every CL game, if Barca where to win a leg 5-0 away and then lose 1-0 at home to some scutter team, nobody really cares. The fact Barca got through, that's more important.

Did anybody celebrate Irelands 'Win' ? I doubt anyone in Ireland came out and said 'YES WE WON IN PARIS' nobody cares, we lost the tie more importantly

Korat

The gist of recent articles from my point of view is that rugby is undeserving of the profile it now has and that it's support is superficial in contrast to soccer which in the eyes of these journalists is the better game with real fans who sacrifice to watch their team in good times and bad.

As a fan of both sports this kind of attempt to compare or pit these sports against each other annoys me. The truth is both sports have come a long way in my life time. Soccer has always had the allure of a truly global stage and when the Irish team or even just an Irish player excels I feel proud and walk a little taller as an Irishman.

I feel the same when Irish rugby teams or individual players succeed, so it's miserable for some to try undermine the achievements of the people who built Irish rugby up from near rock bottom to where it is now.

I went to more rugby matches than soccer matches during the '90s and I'll happily admit it was more the social occasions surrounding games than an expectation of winning that I went for. This is what kept the game going during the bad times, same way there'll always be a solely social element to supporting the soccer team.

Sports in Ireland should be seen as symbiotic. I think that there are a lot less people who are growing up as one sport fans now.

What I'd really like to see is more inter-sport ticketing deals. There are people who are in and out of the country who might find themselves at home during a period where they'd like to see a GAA match, a rugby match and possibly a soccer match. With the right packaging the FAI could fill some of the empty seats at low grade friendies with cross-sport ticket deals.

Arghus

CSF wrote: »

That it's correct. If you had a bet on an Ireland win you would have been payed out.

And if you had a bet on Ireland going to the world cup you would have lost.

I can't agree with your definition of victory in this case. Extra time determined the final result. You can mention bookies paying out and how the result was offically recorded but that does not change the fact that the final definitive result of that game, which I had never ever heard anyone argue with, was 1-1.

To say that we won in Paris as a counter argument to other teams results is extremely one eyed and silly. We did not win in Paris. After 90 minutes we were winning but so what? The game wasn't finished.

noodler

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

This post kind of backs up ArmaniJeanss point though, none of them three countries have qualified for a tournament since Scotland qualified for the World Cup in 1998. We've qualified for two in that time frame, I know what one I'd prefer. Obviously though it would be nice if we could get a scalp against a big team every now and then, it's gotten to the point where a draw is the best we can hope for when we're playing bigger teams.

I dunno, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were all ranked well below the teams they beat in my example.

Bridge93

Although not winning many we, until 2014 qualifiers didn't lose many, and far less than Wales, North and Scotland. Focusing away from home We have gone to places like Slovakia, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Italy, Switzerland, France twice and drawn in recent years. Our ranking often dictates we only get two chances a campaign to beat a higher ranked team ( quite different now.)
Since the Dutch in 2001 was the cut off point we also drew with the Germans and Spanish and the World Cup, while beating Cameroon

Ferris_Bueller

Bridge93 wrote: »

Although not winning many we, until 2014 qualifiers didn't lose many, and far less than Wales, North and Scotland. Focusing away from home We have gone to places like Slovakia, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Italy, Switzerland, France twice and drawn in recent years. Our ranking often dictates we only get two chances a campaign to beat a higher ranked team ( quite different now.)
Since the Dutch in 2001 was the cut off point we also drew with the Germans and Spanish and the World Cup, while beating Cameroon

Agree with your points but didn't we draw with Cameroon? Even though I would consider Traps era a success the most depressing part was that when we were playing some of these games we drew there was absolutely no fear of us winning, we set out not to lose and succeeded in many cases. Even under Staunton it felt like there was a chance we could have beaten Germany or the Czechs. If we beat Scotland and get this monkey off of our back and then beat Georgia & Gibraltar I think we will go into the Germany & Poland games with a bit of confidence, although it's very hard to see us winning either of those games.

GLaDOS

We did draw with Cameroon. Only win was against Saudi Arabia.

Bridge93

I was about 7 at the time, memory a bit fuzzy apologies!

The_Kew_Tour

We are the kings of the 1-1 draw.

I would bet big that this is mos common result we ever produce.

6 of our 19 games at major championships have been this score.

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

We are the kings of the 1-1 draw.

I would bet big that this is mos common result we ever produce.

6 of our 19 games at major championships have been this score.

And they were ...
Drew 1-1 with USSR at Euro 88 (Ronnie Whelan Spectacular mid air kick)
Drew with England and Holland 1-1 at the 1990 World cup
Drew with Germany, Cameroon and Spain in Korea 2002


In general though it is a fairly common result for us with the Euro 92 Qualifying campaign (England x2), Northern Ireland 1993, Portugal 2000 and 01, also springing to mind.

gosplan

My girl started a GAA camp this week. The local club came into her school for a bunch of free days during school term. Then they told us about the Easter camp. Loads of kids, all ages, no matches and no mention of a first team. Great atmosphere for everyone there.

No idea if there's a football club but we're in North Dublin so there probably is.

If there is though I imagine that like the clubs I remember, they're pretty much about the first team.

Football has the smallest culture of the big three sports in Ireland and it's doing nothing about that.

Iused2likebusts

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

We are the kings of the 1-1 draw.

I would bet big that this is mos common result we ever produce.

6 of our 19 games at major championships have been this score.

I've been saying for years that you would make a few bob if you bet 1 1 on every Ireland game against all teams in our groups bar the minnows.

TheDoc

While I do not like or enjoy Rugby, I don't take solice in having sly digs at their fanbase.

There was LARGE portions of the infamous Irish support who jumped on a major bandwagon to Poland, have no interest in football or the national team, and went for the social experience. Many people I know did this. And while I'm no inherent problem with it, I'll pull people up on it if they deride my opinion with"you didn't even go out and support the team" and that sort of ****e.

It somewhat ties into UFC as well, with a surge in interest with McGregor obviously grabbing headlines. I don't know if it happens in every country, but for some reason we get really snotty at bandwagon jumpers, when in reality we should probably be fine with a sport increasing in popularity, as it means an Irish connection to it is doing well.

It only grates or annoys me when recent converts or bandwagonees start talking like they have followed the game for years, or shortly after taking up their new interest start bashing the thing they were passionate about for ages.

I don't see the major problem.

The Irish Rugby team and the province teams are doing really well, competing with the best and winning major tournaments and recording big victories.

The Irish national football team has been on a massive slide, the LOI is dire and more and more fans are just flocking to attend or view games in England, and elsewhere in Europe.

As someone who has been involved with Golf for 16 years, I didn't take some offence or get annoyed at the peak in golf interest when Harrington racked up some majors, or when people come on board for the Ryder Cup when it was in Ireland, or the irish lads were doing well. I see it as a positive to potentially grow the reputation and numbers in the game, and creating more platforms for discussions and chats, where as previously it would be something rather niche.

As a teenager I could speak about Golf with two friends, there was never a discussion about Rugby as none of us gave a ****, and all sport discussion was around soccer, or between some of the boys that played GAA. That's totally changed now.

The topics of discussion are still predominantly football, but there was Cricket for a while, Hockey comes into the mix, darts, snooker, GAA, rugby, so much more. There is also the point that with the advancement in TV packages, the internet, and the reduction in barrier to entry for sport, that you can actually watch so much more stuff then ever before.

Personally, while I still catch every United game, I've lost interest in the other fixtures over a weekend in England. I watch more games from La Liga and Bundesliga over the last two years then I do from England each week.

Wasn't so long ago your only exposure to European teams week in week out was when the Champions league came around.

Paz-CCFC

TheDoc wrote: »

The Irish national football team has been on a massive slide, the LOI is dire and more and more fans are just flocking to attend or view games in England, and elsewhere in Europe.

Why do you keep on with this myth that the LoI is "dire"? It's not. Not being at the same level of a multi-billion euro league is not the same thing as dire. You don't call people dire at life just because they're not millionaires, do you?

I don't think you understand the level of skill and commitment it takes to carve out a career, even on a modest wage of €20,000 that's the average in the LoI. How many Irish players currently playing have made it what is often considered to be "big"? Say, EPL, English Football League, around that level. Maybe 50? 100 pushing it. These are the absolute best. In the LoI, there are 20 teams. At an average squad size of 20 players, that's about 400 players, most of whom are Irish. So, we'll say 350 Irish LoI players. The participation in playing football by males is 17% (http://www.esri.ie/pdf/BKMNINT180_Main%20Text_Social%20and%20Economic%20Value%20of%20Sport.pdf), so that's about 750,000. That means that the players that make it in bigger leagues abroad account for about the top 0.01333% of Irish footballers. Irish LoI players are among the next 0.04667% down. They are in the 99th percentile of Irish footballers. They're among the cream of the crop, better than 99.94% of footballers in this country. Change your reference point to something a bit more realistic (ie, Irish football in general), and the players are far from dire.

Remember when you were younger and there was a very very good fella on your team? The guy who absolutely destroyed everyone on the pitch week in, week out. The guy who, at the time, everyone thought could play for a big club? Rarely, these fellas get a trial abroad. The vast vast majority will not be good enough. Chances are, they also won't be good enough for the League of Ireland. Put an LoI player, even one considered to be average, on the pitch with amateurs and when he runs rings around everyone, you'll appreciate his quality.

If you make it in the League of Ireland, then you're a bloody good player.

Maximus Alexander

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

<snip>

If you make it in the League of Ireland, then you're a bloody good player.

While I agree with your overall sentiment, I think you're over egging the custard just a little bit. A couple of lads I went to school with played in the LoI and while they were comfortably better than everyone else in our year, they weren't as mind blowingly awesome as you make out either.

They might have been though, with the proper coaching. Youth development in this country is a real problem.

Fr Tod Umptious

A rugby player from an Irish club has been arrested in Wales for an alleged sexual assault.

Let's wait and see what the media outrage is like.

There are mitigating factors of course.
He is not Irish and only plays for Connaught.
So he is not as high on the totem poll as some others.

But let's just wait and see.

sydthebeat

Let's wait to see if there's an actually charge before anyone blows up.

Kirby

sydthebeat wrote: »

Let's wait to see if there's an actually charge before anyone blows up.

Why? It's in the papers and on tv that he was arrested. That means he's guilty.

Personally, I'm completely outraged and am thinking about starting several facebook campaigns to......oh hang X-factor is starting. We'll have to continue this later!

:rolleyes: