Poland V Ireland 19:45 [RTE2] 11/10/2015

Pro. F

briany wrote: »

I understand that but it seemed to be to a man last night, and players making stupid unforced errors both in midfield, and at the back (even O'Shea), along with poor discipline in making tackles at times. Just a more sluggish and nervy display overall.

Of course they made more bad mistakes in midfield and at the back. Of course they were more sluggish overall and the whole team's performance level dropped.

Those are the normal results of being unable to string a few passes together. Keeping and using possession is really important. It gives the team time to recover their energy; it allows them to get back into a good shape after the defensive phase; it gets you playing the game in more favourable areas of the pitch; it fills them all with more confidence and it saps some energy and confidence from the opposition.

aindriu80

Why don't we pick the best starting 11 for Ireland based on footballing ability for a few home and away games ? I still can't understand why successive Irish managers always go physical and never play football. I was really disappointed with Mo'N selection.

Sweden would out play us.

fullstop

Mickeroo wrote: »

Fahey made his debut for Birmingham 17 months before his first senior cap. McLean was a good bit quicker but didn't get called up until he became a starter for Sunderland and was on a good run of form in the PL.

I'm not saying Towell doesn't deserve a chance, it would be great to see more LOI players getting in to the national team as it would be a sure sign the league is on the up but I just think there's more logical reasons for players being called up once they move to stronger leagues than a conspiracy against clubs in the LOI.

Wasn't that Lenihan lad called up to the national side after signing for Hull from Cork City despite not having played a game for Hull?

briany

aindriu80 wrote: »

Sweden would out play us.

The starting XI of the All-Girls School for the Tragically Handicapped would outplay the team if they follow on with the regression shown last night.

aindriu80

briany wrote: »

The starting XI of the All-Girls School for the Tragically Handicapped would outplay the team if they follow on with the regression shown last night.

Poland was all over us like a bad rash, I don't know if the players could do anything to stop them or play their way into the game but we never had any shots/attempts on goal. All challenges and everything in the air.

TheDoc

aindriu80 wrote: »

Why don't we pick the best starting 11 for Ireland based on footballing ability for a few home and away games ? I still can't understand why successive Irish managers always go physical and never play football. I was really disappointed with Mo'N selection.

Sweden would out play us.

Because that would probably raise some eyebrows. Because if it resulted in a loss, I'm sure section of the fanbase would query while premier league players were being omitted.

The problem with the catch 22 for O'Neill is that too many of the players at the established teams are bit part players, or barely making dents in the premier league. **** even some of the players operating at Championship level are struggling.

There would need to be a very clear indication from O'Neill, supported by the FAI(Which I doubt it would be) so expectations can be re-aligned, should he decide to start playing inform players ahead of established credentials.

While I'm not familiar with all the the championship players, in our squad at present Hoolihan, Coleman and McCarthy are about the only players that are making proper headway in the premier league in anything resorting positive performances.

Idbatterim

lads it appears to me, if Long is out, we are f**cked, likewise with Hoolihan. We will have to pray for a good draw in the play offs. Id hope we play the away game first! Some bloody brutal performances from some of our players yesterday...

briany

Idbatterim wrote: »

lads it appears to me, if Long is out, we are f**cked, likewise with Hoolihan. We will have to pray for a good draw in the play offs. Id hope we play the away game first! Some bloody brutal performances from some of our players yesterday...

Keane was basically invisible in the game last night, so attacking options off the bench don't look great. That said, Long made no huge impact, either, but then it's not as if the players were doing much to attack, and hence little service or support given to the front men. I think, outside of Keogh's diving header straight at the keeper, the only real chance I can remember from play was the shot looped way over the bar by Hoolihan. If the team plays like that in the playoff, it won't matter if the team has Maradonna from 1986 up there, because he'll be rendered impotent.

Idbatterim

I was justch checing Whelans are there, 31, I was hoping he was 33 or 34 OR that we had a coach he didnt have him in the starting 11! The set pieces last night were brutal from us and with 11 of our men in the box for their opening goal, one should have been positioned around the D...

Corholio

Hugely disappointed with the set pieces and crossing last night. Once that starting XI was known then things like that become even more important. Brady wanted everything on his left foot and when he tried to change he got caught and dispossessed a few times, probably his worst game for Ireland. His corners and crosses were pretty awful as well. Hendrick from the right as well, how many times did the keeper catch the ball last night? Very frustrating.

Soups123

Idbatterim wrote: »

I was justch checing Whelans are there, 31, I was hoping he was 33 or 34 OR that we had a coach he didnt have him in the starting 11! The set pieces last night were brutal from us and with 11 of our men in the box for their opening goal, one should have been positioned around the D...

I know its fashionable to attack Whelan.

Yet every manager has continued to call him up and he has been the most consistent and probably the most played Irish midfielder in the Premier League the last 5+ seasons............. people look for excuses and the masses cling to them

Pro. F

Soups123 wrote: »

I know its fashionable to attack Whelan.

Yet every manager has continued to call him up and he has been the most consistent and probably the most played Irish midfielder in the Premier League the last 5+ seasons............. people look for excuses and the masses cling to them

By "every manager" what you really mean is Trap and O'Neil, two deeply conservative managers. Whelan is exactly the type of player they prefer, but that does not mean that he is as good as the other options.

If you use the Premier League as your guide to which midfielders to pick then you'll generally end up with more hard workers and fewer skilful players. British managers generally build rubbish midfields, there's no need to copy their mistakes.

LuckyLloyd

Pro. F wrote: »

By "every manager" what you really mean is Trap and O'Neil, two deeply conservative managers. Whelan is exactly the type of player they prefer, but that does not that he is as good as the other options.

If you use the Premier league as your guide to which midfielders to pick then you'll generally end up with more hard workers and fewer skilful players. British managers generally build rubbish midfields, there's no need to copy their mistakes.

Well there's been four managers over the past half decade who have placed repeated faith in him:

Pulis
Trapp
O'Neill
Hughes

Why?

Idbatterim

you will get lots of arguments and grey area's in football & obviously I cant say for 100% certain that replacing Whelan with Hoolahan would always yield a better result, but I would be 95-99% certain of it, which in football terms is pretty conclusive...

Pro. F

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well there's been four managers over the past half decade who have placed repeated faith in him:

Pulis
Trapp
O'Neill
Hughes

Why?

Because they are all conservative managers who favour hard work and discipline over skill. This should not be up for debate.

ctrl-alt-delete

Whelan was not the biggest problem against Poland, would Hoolahan have made much more of a difference? I am not too sure about that myself.

We lost the focal point of our gameplan (whether you agreed with that plan or not) in Shane Long, and who we were left with as a result can not play that role like Long can. That being Keane (for obvious reasons) and Walters.

Brady, McClean and to a lesser extent Hendrick let us down with their delivery. We might have got unlucky in that they all under performed in the same match, even when McGeady came on he had (from what I can remember) one good delivery in his half hour on the pitch ( maybe to be expected with his lack of gametime).

The introduction of Keane ( and I am a massive fan) was baffling considering our performance and quality of possession up to that point.

There was just too much wrong with our performance, and I don't place any of it on the possibility that we over exerted ourselves against Germany. Unfortunately some of what was wrong was through choice, the managers choice. He may not be happy with some of the individual performances and may feel let down in that regard - but I dare bet he will not learn anything from it and some of our possible opponents would love to come up against either of our German or Polish performances.

briany

Pro. F wrote: »

By "every manager" what you really mean is Trap and O'Neil, two deeply conservative managers. Whelan is exactly the type of player they prefer, but that does not mean that he is as good as the other options.

If you use the Premier League as your guide to which midfielders to pick then you'll generally end up with more hard workers and fewer skilful players. British managers generally build rubbish midfields, there's no need to copy their mistakes.

I think we should probably stop calling a style of play "conservative" when the team basically concedes midfield possession, fires hopeful longballs up the field, physically harries opponents and generally lives dangerously. For Ireland's 'conservative' play last night, they got beaten 2-1 and had a couple of players suspended. Real conservativeness would surely be trying to hold the ball and generally make life as easy for your own team as possible while still getting the desired result, and on that definition, Ireland's downfall is that they're not conservative enough.

Pro. F

briany wrote: »

I think we should probably stop calling a style of play "conservative" when the team basically concedes midfield possession, fires hopeful longballs up the field, physically harries opponents and generally lives dangerously. For Ireland's 'conservative' play last night, they got beaten 2-1 and had a couple of players suspended. Real conservativeness would surely be trying to hold the ball and generally make life as easy for your own team as possible while still getting the desired result, and on that definition, Ireland's downfall is that they're not conservative enough.

Yeah, it's hard to sum up these managers' approach in one word. The style I'm talking about usually involves only having organised pressing in your own half, giving the ball away cheaply and favouring athleticism and discipline in players over skill. It is conservative in that they are all overly preoccupied with not getting beaten rather than winning, but it does still come with lots of risks as you say.

GavRedKing

McGeadys delivery is usually shocking but the one ball he gets in that was on the money, Keogh fluffed our greatest chance of getting a 2nd goal.

Que 5mins later and McGeady is balloning a cross over and onto the top of the net from a similar situation.

Idbatterim

lads this "make sure you hit the target" is the aim not to score, not to "hit the target" what are we meant to get from hitting the target, a warm fuzzy feeling for having an extra attempt at goal?! Keogh just mentioned this last night and I have heard it so many times, at that level in that game, its not good enough...

briany

GavRedKing wrote: »

McGeadys delivery is usually shocking but the one ball he gets in that was on the money, Keogh fluffed our greatest chance of getting a 2nd goal.

Que 5mins later and McGeady is balloning a cross over and onto the top of the net from a similar situation.

It was sickening alright, but it doesn't surprise me that a centre back, who may have only seen the ball late, and on a nervy occasion, would put it straight at the goalie.

LuckyLloyd

If it falls to Robbie we'd be qualified. Instead it fell to a warrior centre back at altitude. I wouldn't be throwing much blame at Keogh for missing.

Was a serious moment of quality from McGeady though - worth putting up with the frustration for moments like that imo.

Sand

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

If it falls to Robbie we'd be qualified.

Robbie Keane misses chances too so I wouldn't be as sure.

Alex Meier

Pro. F wrote: »

Because they are all conservative managers who favour hard work and discipline over skill. This should not be up for debate.

Hard work and discipline are as important as skill

Dob74

Pro. F wrote:

The players' skill levels didn't drop, it was different players playing in midfield. This really isn't so hard to understand. When you play with more skilful players, especially in midfield, you keep and use the ball better.

Keep the ball better? Germany had 70% possession and or goal was along ball.
Wes was injured and played like it. Robbie Brady played the worst 90 minutes of football I've every seen. He miss hit all his free kicks and give the ball away constantly in good positions.
However the echo land of the media are still going after whelan and McGeady.

Deedsie

Dob74 wrote: »

Keep the ball better? Germany had 70% possession and or goal was along ball.
Wes was injured and played like it. Robbie Brady played the worst 90 minutes of football I've every seen. He miss hit all his free kicks and give the ball away constantly in good positions.
However the echo land of the media are still going after whelan and McGeady.

Brady was played out of position in two games in this campaign. Both times against Poland and both times he played terrible. It's unfair to play him there, he is a good player but if we continue to play him out of position that is the level of performance we can expect, it had an affect on his set pieces both times.. McClean was indisciplined, petty, put his team mates under unnecessary pressure and offered nothing in attack. Glen Whelan was also very poor, he couldn't pass the ball in front of a player running forward. How many times did players have to readjust to accept a pass from Whelan rather than flowing on to a ball place in front of them.

It was a bull**** performance from a lot of players. Walters booking was down to sheer frustration at the lack of any kind of structure or competence behind him.

If we pick those players again in those positions we may forget about any hope of getting through a playoff. Such a frustrating low after an exhilarating high on Thursday.

LuckyLloyd

The results dominate people's perspective on performance. Germany having 70% possession and missing a few guilt edged chances gets portrayed as Ireland being positive and proactive and deserving. We actually manage 50% possession against Poland and it's deemed a negative performance.

Nonsense tbh. Truth is we played to our abilities both games and got more bounces in one game than the other.

Deedsie

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The results dominate people's perspective on performance. Germany having 70% possession and missing a few guilt edged chances gets portrayed as Ireland being positive and proactive and deserving. We actually manage 50% possession against Poland and it's deemed a negative performance.

Nonsense tbh. Truth is we played to our abilities both games and got more bounces in one game than the other.

That's just not true, we played some sensible stuff on Thursday, aware of our limitations. When we got the ball we held on to it much better and passed much better against Germany. There were far more unforced errors against Poland, sloppy approach, awful passing.

There were five changes to the starting team for the Poland game. McClean played poor, Whelan played poor, Brady was out of position and played poor...

We can definitely play better than we did against Poland Sunday night. As we have done many times.

LuckyLloyd

Deedsie wrote: »

That's just not true, we played some sensible stuff on Thursday, aware of our limitations. When we got the ball we held on to it much better and passed much better against Germany. There were far more unforced errors against Poland, sloppy approach, awful passing.

There were five changes to the starting team for the Poland game. McClean played poor, Whelan played poor, Brady was out of position and played poor...

We can definitely play better than we did against Poland Sunday night. As we have done many times.

But like it or lump it we had far more time with the ball on Sunday as compared to Thursday and the ratio of chances at either end was more even than Thursday. There was a couple of inches here and there between Thursday being a 1 - 4 defeat.

To be clear, my position is that the players are trying their absolute best and I'm unsure how much more the managerial team can do when faced with such dramatic quality limitations. My issues with Sunday's selection was starting proven impact players like Long and McClean rather than not starting a player unsure of his own fitness in lieu of a proven premiership midfielder. But ultimately I see a broad consistency between the Georgia / Germany / Poland games in terms of our approach and performance levels and I think it is the results that are colouring assessment of each.

Deedsie

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But like it or lump it we had far more time with the ball on Sunday as compared to Thursday and the ratio of chances at either end was more even than Thursday. There was a couple of inches here and there between Thursday being a 1 - 4 defeat.

To be clear, my position is that the players are trying their absolute best and I'm unsure how much more the managerial team can do when faced with such dramatic quality limitations. My issues with Sunday's selection was starting proven impact players like Long and McClean rather than not starting a player unsure of his own fitness in lieu of a proven premiership midfielder. But ultimately I see a broad consistency between the Georgia / Germany / Poland games in terms of our approach and performance levels and I think it is the results that are colouring assessment of each.

Georgia aren't actually a bad side. They were 1-1 with Germany at 60 mins gone.

The reason we had more possession is Poland are not actually a great side and they were nervous wrecks but even still Ireland tripped and stumbled over the ball.

They more I think back on it I don't know how we were so bad. Whelan, Brady and McClean performances knocked the confidence of the other players I think.

Regardless, almost the same team in the second half v Poland at home wiped the floor with Poland and should have won that game...

Coleman, Wilson, O'Shea, Whelan (Long came on for Whelan at 84 minutes), McGeady (McClean came on for McGeady at 68 minute), McCarthy, Keane, Walters, Brady, Hoolahan...

So to say we played to the level of our abilities is patently untrue considering the exact same team harried and harassed the Polish all over Landsdowne Road where they should have won the game.

LuckyLloyd

Deedsie wrote: »

Georgia aren't actually a bad side. They were 1-1 with Germany at 60 mins gone.

The reason we had more possession is Poland are not actually a great side and they were nervous wrecks but even still Ireland tripped and stumbled over the ball.

They more I think back on it I don't know how we were so bad. Whelan, Brady and McClean performances knocked the confidence of the other players I think.

Regardless, almost the same team in the second half v Poland at home wiped the floor with Poland and should have won that game...

Coleman, Wilson, O'Shea, Whelan (Long came on for Whelan at 84 minutes), McGeady (McClean came on for McGeady at 68 minute), McCarthy, Keane, Walters, Brady, Hoolahan...

So to say we played to the level of our abilities is patently untrue considering the exact same team harried and harassed the Polish all over Landsdowne Road where they should have won the game.

Ah I think people are nuts on this stuff tbh. 'Wiped the floor with Poland in the second half at home'...really? We were better than them that 45 minutes and fully deserved our equaliser in the end but for all the possession and territory we had we struggled to carve out clear chances. It also needs to be remembered that you don't play in a vacuum, Poland retreated and retreated in that second half (just as Germany arguably took the pedal off the metal in the last 20 against us at home). AND that they had looked vastly superior to us in the first half of the game in question.

In anycase, if you were really happy with that second half performance it has to be noted that Whelan and McClean were on the pitch for much of it.

We've been playing roughly similar stuff for coming on seven years now really. Our performance in the Stade de France in November 2009 a true outlier, but that is now six years ago and - to be honest - the team we had that day and the general squad was much stronger than that which is available to us today. The mistake is in people thinking 1 competitive performance in exactly 45 games is the 'real' us. I think we are who we have been in the other 44 (or 43 if you take Estonia away, a brilliant performance in a must win pressure tie). And I'm okay with that because I have no illusions about the quality of the players available.

Deedsie

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Ah I think people are nuts on this stuff tbh. 'Wiped the floor with Poland in the second half at home'...really? We were better than them that 45 minutes and fully deserved our equaliser in the end but for all the possession and territory we had we struggled to carve out clear chances. It also needs to be remembered that you don't play in a vacuum, Poland retreated and retreated in that second half (just as Germany arguably took the pedal off the metal in the last 20 against us at home). AND that they had looked vastly superior to us in the first half of the game in question.

In anycase, if you were really happy with that second half performance it has to be noted that Whelan and McClean were on the pitch for much of it.

We've been playing roughly similar stuff for coming on seven years now really. Our performance in the Stade de France in November 2009 a true outlier, but that is now six years ago and - to be honest - the team we had that day and the general squad was much stronger than that which is available to us today. The mistake is in people thinking 1 competitive performance in exactly 45 games is the 'real' us. I think we are who we have been in the other 44 (or 43 if you take Estonia away, a brilliant performance in a must win pressure tie). And I'm okay with that because I have no illusions about the quality of the players available.

Ya I just told you Whelan and McLean were on the field for the second half so yes I realise that. Whelan went off Shane long came on for ten minutes hit the post and scored. In comparison to the performance Sunday night we did wipe the floor with them in the second half in Dublin...

Germany eased off in the last 20? What the hell? They were going nuts trying to get the ball up the field in the last twenty, Ireland frustrated the ****e out of them. If another country does that it's savvy play, if Ireland do it its clinging on and getting lucky. Load of ****e. We had two terrible performances in this group. Scotland away and Poland away, Georgia away wasn't great either to be fair.

Those games were outliers as in the other games we played well.

Pro. F

Dob74 wrote: »

Keep the ball better? Germany had 70% possession and or goal was along ball.

Keep and use the ball better, yes.

We completed 173 passes against Poland and 179 against Germany. But, as opposition, Germany and Poland are entirely different propositions. You are ignoring the fact that passing the ball against Germany - world champions and exponents of tiki taka - is a much more difficult proposition than it is against Poland who are a far more ordinary side (albeit with one world class centre-forward) and were happy to give away possession relatively cheaply and defend deeper for a lot of the game. You cannot ignore the nature of the opposition and just use percentage of possession to equate the performances. It is ridiculous that this has to be explained.

Long scoring from a long ball and there were long balls played throughout the game. But the presence of long balls does not indicate that we did not also pass the ball short and do well keeping and using possession under pressure. We showed an ability to keep the ball under pressure and use it constructively that was completely absent from the first hour of the performance against Poland.

Dob74 wrote: »

Wes was injured and played like it. Robbie Brady played the worst 90 minutes of football I've every seen. He miss hit all his free kicks and give the ball away constantly in good positions.

Wes played well and was involved in nearly all of our good play while he was on the pitch, which represented most of the good play we had on the night. It is laughable that you would try to apportion blame for the poor performance to him.

Also lol at saying that Brady played the worst 90 minutes of football you've ever seen. His set pieces were poor, but with regards to possession it's normal for the wide men to struggle in attack when the midfield can't string three passes together. Notice how in the last 20 minutes, when the team were doing much better in possession and pinning the Poles back, Brady played better and started getting things working attacking down the wing.

Dob74 wrote: »

However the echo land of the media are still going after whelan and McGeady.

I don't care what the media say, so there's no use involving them in your discussion with me.

Pro. F

Alex Meier wrote: »

Hard work and discipline are as important as skill

You need a balance. When we are struggling to string four passes together against a nervy Poland we clearly don't have that balance.

Pro. F

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The results dominate people's perspective on performance. Germany having 70% possession and missing a few guilt edged chances gets portrayed as Ireland being positive and proactive and deserving. We actually manage 50% possession against Poland and it's deemed a negative performance.

Nonsense tbh. Truth is we played to our abilities both games and got more bounces in one game than the other.

Nonsense, I would have been praising the performance against Germany even if we'd lost 2-0 because it was a relatively good performance.

The percentage of possession share in the two games is a terrible indicator of what our approaches and performances were. Because, quite obviously, Germany are a much more difficult side to keep the ball against.

Wacker The Attacker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NryT1Pr_TyQ

noodler

I definitely agree some people are getting carried away with the Germany result. They should have scored 3/4.

We were pretty fortunate. I didn't feel our possession improved until we scored.

That being said, i can't agree the drivel against Poland is the height of our abilities.

Mistakes everywhere. Only one chance. No control at all. Poor team selection. And in one or two cases, a lack of effort.

Lucas Hood

I'd like to think this was some bitter Irish fan.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/babb/11952772/Robert-Lewandowski-facing-prospect-of-arrest-for-drinking-on-the-pitch-during-Polands-Euro-2016-celebrations.html

noodler

Lucas Hood wrote: »

I'd like to think this was some bitter Irish fan.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/babb/11952772/Robert-Lewandowski-facing-prospect-of-arrest-for-drinking-on-the-pitch-during-Polands-Euro-2016-celebrations.html

Although his playacting drove me mad that night it's obviously a ludicrous complaint.