Republic of Ireland Team Talk/News/Rumours 2020/2021 - see Mod Note in OP [18/11/20]

gormdubhgorm

I saw a headline on RTE News Now - Coleman wants to deliver World Cup for Nation

https://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2021/0323/1205654-coleman-want-to-deliver-world-cup-for-nation/

First thought f**k that is optimistic he expects Ireland to win a world cup?!!
Then I realised that he meant qualifying for one. But even that seems a pipe dream at the moment.

Rhys Essien

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Not too long ago we had Parrott looking good at Spurs, Masterson and Kelleher looking promising at Liverpool, Ryan Nolan progressing at Inter, Lee O'Connor and O'Hara at Man U and Johansen at Bayern.

That all went to **** pretty quickly.

Kelleher still looking promising I would think.

I’m going to call it that he’ll get a game against Real Madrid next month.

gormdubhgorm

Lachlan Some Shuffleboard wrote: »

These conversations are depressing enough in general tbh had a look at the 2002 team the other day and there are lads that weren't starting there that would be absoloute stars in this team. Shame that the rice grealish partnership never happened even the young generation that we where looking forward to a few months back are faltering now

It is even more sickening that England are flying with players Ireland could have had. As regards the 2002 team you are spot on.

Connolly, Breen, Dunne, Quinn, Morrison, Reid, Carsley (I left out Kinsella because he became a starter instead of some Cork midfielder)

~Rebel~

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Kelleher still looking promising I would think.

I’m going to call it that he’ll get a game against Real Madrid next month.

I doubt that, barring injury to Alisson, but he is definitely hugely promising. Made a big big step up this season.

Rhys Essien

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I doubt that, barring injury to Alisson, but he is definitely hugely promising. Made a big big step up this season.

Well, he’s going to get to play against Real. You heard it here first.

Citizenpain

It’s slightly more encouraging If you look at the team that drew in Serbia 5 years ago
Or am I clutching at straws ?
Randolph; Ward (Quinn 70), Keogh, O’Shea, Coleman, Brady, Hendrick; (Murphy 77), Whelan, McClean, Walters, Long; (Clark 90)

simongurnick

Serbia can flatter to deceive some times. They have a new coach, which can be a good or a bad thing. No fans is a good thing for us but looking at that Irish panel, pretty much every player plys their trade at a low level and some arent even regular starters.
Huge ask to get a result, as much as it kills me to say it.

Cake Man

Yeah hate to say it but I reckon a backs-to-the-wall 0-0 would probably be as good as it would get for us. I'd nearly put my house on it that we won't score a goal so I'd say it'll be a fairly routine 2-0 with for Serbia. If we were to even score more than 2 goals in the next 2 games (Serbia and Luxembourg), that wouldn't be a bad outcome IMO. Just shows the state we are at really.

topmanamillion

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Not too long ago we had Parrott looking good at Spurs, Masterson and Kelleher looking promising at Liverpool, Ryan Nolan progressing at Inter, Lee O'Connor and O'Hara at Man U and Johansen at Bayern.

That all went to **** pretty quickly.

More a case of people absolutely running away with themselves when they saw certain club names beside players names.

The reality is bar Kelleher, not one of those players made a single appearance for the big club they were at.

I'm all for giving young players a chance but at the end of the day if a young player is thought highly of at a club they'll give them a run out in the last few minutes of a league game or in the cups.

Luca Connell is another one that springs to mind, turning 20 next month and on loan in the 4th tier of Scotland now.

Kermit.de.frog

"Jack was wrong"

I'll make a prediction - we won't qualify for any tournaments for the next 15 - 20 years at least.

Some are saying "but we are running them close"....yeah but that doesn't matter because in the end they score (not always granted) and we don't qualify. Yeah we might get a few draws and the odd very lucky win but I 100% agree with Charlton.

We are aping Scotland from 20 years a go. They ran close all the time too....to playoffs they didn't make. Notions cost them dearly and it cost them two decades.

If we try play even the low moderate tier with our technically inferior players at their game we lose 9/10.

It's as simple as that.

They rub their hands at us playing like that as we do playing Liechtenstein.

brilou23

Despite all the negativity I am buzzing for tonight. Is it to early to open a beer and dance around to put em under pressure.

athlone99

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

He wasn't really.

Really? We had what 4/5 starters for Liverpool who were winning European cups. If you listen to any of the players really speak, they hated the way Jack had them playing albeit that they were successful. No footballers wants to run around a pitch like a headless chicken chasing the ball and humping it long.

Pawwed Rig

athlone99 wrote: »

Really? We had what 4/5 starters for Liverpool who were winning European cups. If you listen to any of the players really speak, they hated the way Jack had them playing albeit that they were successful. No footballers wants to run around a pitch like a headless chicken chasing the ball and humping it long.

They weren't to be fair. Liverpool and English teams were banned from europe during most of the Charlton era and the English league was behind other European leagues. The best players were all in Italy in that era.

ArmaniJeanss

tastyt wrote: »

If we finish third in the group it’s probably expected so would deserve another campaign, any lower and questions will rightly be asked

To me it's a competitive third place that's the minimum target - going into the home Portugal match (game 7 of 8) with it still in our own hands to qualify. And if as likely they beat us to finish us off, so be it.

An uncompetitive 3rd place where we are effectively dead after game 5 (v Serbia) but scrape enough points in a mini-league with Azb/Lux to get a distant third place wouldn't be acceptable.

johnnyryan89

athlone99 wrote: »

Really? We had what 4/5 starters for Liverpool who were winning European cups. If you listen to any of the players really speak, they hated the way Jack had them playing albeit that they were successful. No footballers wants to run around a pitch like a headless chicken chasing the ball and humping it long.

Charlton played a high pressing style with emphasise on playing football in their half of the pitch, so I don't know how you think lads were just running around the pitch like headless chickens. That's what we got at the end of MONs reign when the ball was just being hoofed.

Managers now play a high pressing style and guys like Klopp are showered with praise but yet the guy 30yrs ago who was successfully using a high pressing style is labeled a dinosaur.

To make a long story short, Jack Charlton was gegenpressing before the world knew who Klopp was or what gegenpressing even is. Just slap a fancy name on it and people will laud it up.

noodler

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Charlton played a high pressing style with emphasise on playing football in their half of the pitch, so I don't know how you think lads were just running around the pitch like headless chickens. That's what we got at the end of MONs reign when the ball was just being hoofed.

Managers now play a high pressing style and guys like Klopp are showered with praise but yet the guy 30yrs ago who was successfully using a high pressing style is labeled a dinosaur.

To make a long story short, Jack Charlton was gegenpressing before the world knew who Klopp was or what gegenpressing even is. Just slap a fancy name on it and people will laud it up.

I guess pressing is really just a feature of football tbf. I don't agree it is a revolutionary system all on its own.

Jack's team's were unashamedly long ball, Klopps teams play out from the back. Keep possession etc.

I think you are being way too simplistic.

Mantis Toboggan

I'd take a draw right now, even a few chances being created would be nice just not the drivel we've been served so far under Kenny.

johnnyryan89

noodler wrote: »

I guess pressing is really just a feature of football tbf. I don't agree it is a revolutionary system all on its own.

Jack's team's were unashamedly long ball, Klopps teams play out from the back. Keep possession etc.

I think you are being way too simplistic.

Playing out from the back was non existent 30years ago compared to today when you've schoolboy teams, amateur teams etc etc trying to play out from the back. Klopp also successfully utilities the long ball too.

Who was that famous manager that once said football is a simple game?

ebbsy

Its a crazy suggestion, but I would love to see Robbie Keane playing tonight. Stick him on the shoulder of the last defender !!!!!!!!!!

Its such a pity that there were much better teams in the 2nd pot than Serbia, but we are in a real mess.

Probably a 2-0 loss.

ebbsy

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

I'd take a draw right now, even a few chances being created would be nice just not the drivel we've been served so far under Kenny.

+1

Although the problem is we would have to beat them at home, and that has not really been happening lately.

And also score heavily against the lesser lights, which also has not been happening.

JeffKenna

ebbsy wrote: »

+1

Although the problem is we would have to beat them at home, and that has not really been happening lately.

And also score heavily against the lesser lights, which also has not been happening.

Yeah sometimes you can't think too far ahead though. A draw would be a great result to steady the ship and hopefully have 4 points by the end of the weekend.

DM_7

athlone99 wrote: »

Really? We had what 4/5 starters for Liverpool who were winning European cups. If you listen to any of the players really speak, they hated the way Jack had them playing albeit that they were successful. No footballers wants to run around a pitch like a headless chicken chasing the ball and humping it long.

We should be careful to not revise history too much.

England football at the time was a direct football culture. Players were used to playing a certain way, the back pass was allowed which promoted safe play.

When the back pass rule came players could not be indecisive at the back and managers like Jack were going to leave figuring out the back pass to club managers. Charlton himself as a player would not have wanted the ball at his feet as a player in or around the box. His outlook on football related to his own experience and beliefs. He didn't want anyone playing the ball into midfield or around the box. In the 70s he was Middlesbrough manager with a style that was like his plan for Ireland.

However his style was not out of keeping with what was the prevailing style in England.

In Jack's time as manager, English play is well defined as an era of POMO - play the ball into the 'position of maximum opportunity'. Charles Hughes was the FAs director of coaching who believed in POMO. Wimbledon had great success going from the 4th division to the top division and winning an FA Cup. Watford went from 4 to 1 and got into an FA Cup and League cup final. Graham Taylor went on to be England manager.

POMO was about getting the ball and then players into certain areas of the pitch as quickly as possible and possession was just an opportunity to get the ball into the place where the opponents would make mistakes or wilt under pressure..

Jack wanted use the English based players in a style that they would all be familiar with, easily understand and naturally be more suited to playing as a group. Ireland had Paul McGrath who dealt easily with the back pass changes but Jack was not going to have McGrath playing the ball to teammate who didn't want or have the ability to play on the ball like him in that part of the pitch. It made more sense to go long, use the midfield quality near the opponents goal for second balls.

It was some time after Jack left the Ireland post that better pitches, the changes to tackling from behind or the foreign players and managers arriving in England would take hold and see teams trying to utilise possession more. Even Jose Mourinho and Rafa Benitez came to England in the mod 00s and were not believers in possession as a strength and saw the opponents having the ball as a weakness that could be exploited in transition phases.

LuckyLloyd

athlone99 wrote: »

Short term thinking is what has us in this stage. Read champagne football if you havent already.

So you would rather we go back to parking a bus, defending for 90 mins and try nick a goal?

I can already see a style of play developing and trying to change years of muck football. Thats progress for me and for people who understand football. If we change the style of play and bring in young players and we finish 3rd as i expect us to, that is progress, if you cant see that we are wasting our time.

As mentioned previously the defence has been pretty good and if we can build on that and score more goal ill be happy.

Really dont know about tomorrow. Our squad is the worst its been in a long time and id be delighted with a draw. Its hard to know what to make of Serbia.

What do you term competitive? Going around smashing lads in a tackle? Doesnt happen anymore in football. Things have moved on, most teams now try and play football.

The way football is stacked now ita next to impossible for a country like Ireland to qualify for a wc and as i said we only qualified in 2016 because they expanded the Euros. Italia 90, Euro 88, wc 94, 2002 and 2012 were big achievements, 2016 is not as good as those.

Great, so people who disagree with you or have criticism about Kenny:

A) are Delany apologists
don't understand football

I can see already this campaign will be fun.

===================

Being "competitive" is competing. Staying in games against opponents who are better than us, hanging around like a bad smell and trying to nick bits and pieces where we can. "Playing football" by knocking it around the back and keeping possession isn't worth a ****e if you're not competing.

You say you've played at a high level, so you should know this better than most. Getting a result is more satisfying than knowing you played some nice stuff but were never in the game. Or, at least, you need plenty of the former to keep a group buying in together over a season and beyond.

Ideally we hang in there for most of the game tonight and make a fist of it. The dream is we impose our play on them of course, but being realistic it's unlikely that we have the capability to do that. This is where compromise is necessary in the short term. It's a World Cup Qualifier after all, not a 7 a side youth blitz.

johnnyryan89

https://twitter.com/KennysKids/status/1374674147742261250

DM_7

Match thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=116676069#post116676069

Francie Barrett

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/KennysKids/status/1374674147742261250

That is interesting. It kind of leads me to believe that we might play something more like a 4-5-1 than a 4-3-3 with the wide players tucking in a bit to provide some cover to the full-backs.

---

Travers
Coleman - Duffy - O'Shea - Stevens
Doherty - Cullen - Hendrick - Brady

---

Knight

---

Long/Connolly

That is how I am thinking we might be set up now with Hendrick/Knight in switching.

Tchaikovsky

Francie Barrett wrote: »

That is interesting. It kind of leads me to believe that we might play something more like a 4-5-1 than a 4-3-3 with the wide players tucking in a bit to provide some cover to the full-backs.

---

Travers
Coleman - Duffy - O'Shea - Stevens
Doherty - Cullen - Hendrick - Brady

---

Knight

---

Long/Connolly

That is how I am thinking we might be set up now with Hendrick/Knight in switching.

Yeah I think you have it spot on there. Was thinking he might stick with Horgan on the right but if Doherty's in then it should be on the right wing.

johnnyryan89

Francie Barrett wrote: »

That is interesting. It kind of leads me to believe that we might play something more like a 4-5-1 than a 4-3-3 with the wide players tucking in a bit to provide some cover to the full-backs.

---

Travers
Coleman - Duffy - O'Shea - Stevens
Doherty - Cullen - Hendrick - Brady

---

Knight

---

Long/Connolly

That is how I am thinking we might be set up now with Hendrick/Knight in switching.

For me you need to switch Doherty and Coleman. Doherty works best when he's got someone ahead of him to link up with.

DM_7

This is a good story about English Football in the mid 90s and the extent of how alien playing possession play was to many (not all) in English Football. Even Hoddle who went abroad with his skills and wanted to play had to abandon his plans as so many of the English trained players were so resistant to it.

A few years later Chelsea would go on to be the first to field a full side with no English, British or Irish players in it as they went the "Continental" route.


https://www.espn.com/soccer/blog/tactics-and-analysis/67/post/3137184/ruud-gullit-rocked-the-premier-league-excerpt-from-michael-cox-the-mixer

In his new book, "The Mixer," Michael Cox looks at the tactical evolution of the Premier League and how the game has developed over the last quarter century. Here, he details Ruud Gullit's sensational arrival in English football.

English football was changed significantly in the mid-1990s, courtesy of the arrival of top-class foreign players who demonstrated the value of different roles, positions and styles, and encouraged managers to think outside the box -- and outside boxy 4-4-2 formations.

A classic example was Ruud Gullit, who was unquestionably one of the greatest players of his generation, having won the Ballon d'Or in 1987 and then captaining the Netherlands to European Championships glory the following year, playing as a No. 10 just behind Marco van Basten.

But in his early teenage years, Gullit was fielded in defence for DWS, a small club in the west of Amsterdam, and was renowned for charging forward on solo runs to turn defence into attack. He turned professional at Haarlem in 1979 and was initially played as a centre-back before being moved up front in his second season, then moved to Feyenoord in 1982, generally fielded on the right wing. Upon joining PSV in 1985, Gullit insisted upon playing his favoured role as a rampaging, attack-minded sweeper, with midfielder Willy van der Kerkhof dropping back to cover. PSV won the league in both of Gullit's seasons at the club and while he sometimes switched to a more attacking role, 46 league goals in two seasons is an extraordinary tally for a player generally deployed at the back.

Gullit spent his peak years, between 25 and 33, playing in Serie A, chiefly with Milan where he won three titles and two European Cups under Arrigo Sacchi, who created arguably the greatest four-man defence of all-time: Mauro Tassotti, Franco Baresi, Alessandro Costacurta and Paolo Maldini. There was no place in defence for Gullit, who became a world-renowned attacking midfielder instead.

But Gullit always wanted to return to his old sweeper position and in 1995, Glenn Hoddle came calling. Hoddle had been Chelsea's player-manager for the past two seasons, often deploying himself as a sweeper, but realised his playing career was over and wanted to focus on management. Hoddle was a progressive manager who looked outside England for innovations, and, recalling Gullit's performances for PSV earlier in his career, he convinced the Dutchman to join Chelsea and reprise his old role.

"My skills come out better as a sweeper," Gullit announced at his unveiling. This stunned English journalists, who had witnessed Gullit dominating European football as an attacking midfielder, and were accustomed to centre-backs being limited, straightforward destroyers. In the official Premier League sticker album that season, every other Premier League player was listed as "goalkeeper," "defender," "midfielder" or "forward." Gullit, however, was a "libero." He was considered unique.

Gullit started his Chelsea career in that sweeper role but his technically and tactically limited teammates struggled to comprehend his attacking instincts. On his debut, a goalless draw with Everton, Gullit remembers challenging for an aerial ball inside his own box, bringing it down on his chest and then laying the ball sideways to Michael Duberry. He heard two noises: first a gasp of astonishment from the Chelsea fans, and then Duberry screaming "What the f--- are you doing?" after thumping the ball into the stands.

Among that mayhem, Gullit was a revelation -- head and shoulders above any other Premier League centre-back in possession, as one of the world's outstanding technicians playing in a role previously assumed to be purely for "cloggers." Gullit would receive the ball at the back, bring it forward, play a one-two with a midfielder and then find himself between the lines, acting as a number 10. "It was like watching an 18-year-old play among 12-year-olds," as Hoddle put it. Opponents weren't accustomed to the idea of treating opposition defenders as attacking threats, and Gullit always had such time on the ball, with one of Chelsea's midfielders (often Nigel Spackman) playing the "van der Kerkhof" role and dropping back.

Match reports from that 0-0 home draw with Everton demonstrate the extent to which he was revelation. "Gullit brought skills taken for granted in Holland and Italy to the Premiership, where the radar-controlled pass has yet to see off the longbow," read David Lacey's enthusiastic Guardian report. "There were moments when Gullit laid the ball off at angles his new teammates didn't realise existed... he has come to English football as a sweeper, but this is plainly not what he is about."

Frank McGhee's Observer report explored Gullit's position a little further. "He scotched forever the public's image of a sweeper's job," it read. "Too often in the English game, any seasoned defender who can tackle a bit and whack the ball hard gets the job. Gullit proved it demands the most accomplished player in a team."

Chelsea finished in the bottom half that season and Gullit was restricted to 21 appearances in all competitions because of injury. After three months he was usually operating in midfield, primarily because his teammates simply couldn't understand his approach.

"I would take a difficult ball, control it, make space and play a good ball in front of the right-back," Gullit later recalled. "Except that he didn't want that pass. Eventually, Glenn said to me, 'Ruud, it would be better if you do these things in midfield.'" Gullit was, in that sense, light years ahead of his time.

Kermit.de.frog

I think there is a hiding for us coming tonight.

3-0 Serbia (conservative - I really thing it could be 5)


Feel free to quote this post afterward.

Tchaikovsky

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I think there is a hiding for us coming tonight.

3-0 Serbia (conservative - I really thing it could be 5)


Feel free to quote this post afterward.

A Serbian massacre.

GLaDOS

Coleman and Doherty both playing could be a move to wing backs with Coleman rcb

Brock Turnpike

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/KennysKids/status/1374674147742261250

There are comments there hunting that Connolly and Robinson have been a front two in the training sessions so possibly a 352 incoming.

johnnyryan89

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

There are comments there hunting that Connolly and Robinson have been a front two in the training sessions so possibly a 352 incoming.

Wouldn't be surprised to see a midfield trio of Cullen, Hendrick and Brady if 352 is used. I'd go with Doherty in the back three and Coleman playing RWB if 3-5-2 is used.

pjohnson

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Wouldn't be surprised to see a midfield trio of Cullen, Hendrick and Brady if 352 is used. I'd go with Doherty in the back three and Coleman playing RWB if 3-5-2 is used.

Christ why do you keep trying to make Doherty out to be a defender. He needs the least amount of defensive responsiblity. He should be either RWB or RM. Not RB/CB

Brock Turnpike

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Wouldn't be surprised to see a midfield trio of Cullen, Hendrick and Brady if 352 is used. I'd go with Doherty in the back three and Coleman playing RWB if 3-5-2 is used.

Wouldn't agree with that. Why go 3-5-2 and then not play Doherty in his natural position?

LuckyLloyd

Talon Calm Bobsled wrote: »

we lose anyway playing horrific low bloc , defend first football.

Except sometimes we draw (Denmark away last campaign, Serbia away 2018, Denmark away playoff 2018, Germany 2016) and sometimes we win (Wales and Austria away 2018).

This bollocks of 'ah sure we lose anyway may as well knock it about while we do' is a load of nonsense. I reject it in its entirety. I can't even fathom it (I bet the players can't either). That people would rather we knock it about and take a less competitive approach rather than doing whatever it takes to try and get the best result possible. It's hard to engage with it, honestly.

johnnyryan89

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Wouldn't agree with that. Why go 3-5-2 and then not play Doherty in his natural position?

Doherty thrived playing in 3-4-3, when he had another player playing RW to link up with when he was making runs from deep. Same reason if we go 4 at the back and both players are starting it makes more sense to have Coleman playing in the more advanced position and Doherty RB. Doherty is also more suited as a CB than Coleman.

athlone99

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Except sometimes we draw (Denmark away last campaign, Serbia away 2018, Denmark away playoff 2018, Germany 2016) and sometimes we win (Wales and Austria away 2018).

This bollocks of 'ah sure we lose anyway may as well knock it about while we do' is a load of nonsense. I reject it in its entirety. I can't even fathom it (I bet the players can't either). That people would rather we knock it about and take a less competitive approach rather than doing whatever it takes to try and get the best result possible. It's hard to engage with it, honestly.

Sure with that attitude the FAI may as well scrap their new coaching plan and go back to being the only country humping it long. We need to move on as a football nation and if that means finishing 3rd in this campaign im quite happy with that.

So you definition of competitive is running after the ball rather than keeping it and trying to create chances? The games you reference we got very lucky and tending to score late to get back into it or scored and just about held on. Yes we got results but it was depressing watching it. At least in my opinion we are trying to win games rather than just hang in there and see what happens in the last 10 mins.

Have you listened to what the players have been saying? They are delighted with the new approach.

Francie Barrett

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

For me you need to switch Doherty and Coleman. Doherty works best when he's got someone ahead of him to link up with.

Doherty cannot defend though.

LuckyLloyd

athlone99 wrote: »

Sure with that attitude the FAI may as well scrap their new coaching plan and go back to being the only country humping it long. We need to move on as a football nation and if that means finishing 3rd in this campaign im quite happy with that.

So you definition of competitive is running after the ball rather than keeping it and trying to create chances? The games you reference we got very lucky and tending to score late to get back into it or scored and just about held on. Yes we got results but it was depressing watching it. At least in my opinion we are trying to win games rather than just hang in there and see what happens in the last 10 mins.

Have you listened to what the players have been saying? They are delighted with the new approach.

The players won't continue to buy in absent of results, you can mark my words on that.

My definition of competitive is being competitive. It's black and white, objective. It's based off results, off qualifying or being in the running for qualifying in the last couple of games of a campaign. Football is a results based business, you can't pretend it isn't.

pjohnson

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Doherty thrived playing in 3-4-3, when he had another player playing RW to link up with when he was making runs from deep. Same reason if we go 4 at the back and both players are starting it makes more sense to have Coleman playing in the more advanced position and Doherty RB. Doherty is also more suited as a CB than Coleman.

Doherty isn't good enough to start RB and you think he is suited to CB? He is at his best nowhere near the backline.

He is best in one position.

McFly85

Serbia are a better side than us, and tonight if we're defensively minded and get a point, that's a good start to the campaign.

The issue with Trap, Mick and O'Neill the last few years is that it was always defensive. 4-4-2 and concentrate on set pieces no matter what. No advancement in ideas, just get draws all the way and hope one of the other teams screws up.

I like that Kenny is trying to use a system he thinks best suits the players at his disposal rather than just sticking 10 men behind the ball. It makes the team infinitely more interesting to watch.

I expect that away from home we'll be more cautious and Luxembourg at home be more adventurous, and that's fine. There will be games Kenny will be happy with a draw and games where he will be looking to win. That mentality in itself is progression for the Irish team.

athlone99

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The players won't continue to buy in absent of results, you can mark my words on that.

My definition of competitive is being competitive. It's black and white, objective. It's based off results, off qualifying or being in the running for qualifying in the last couple of games of a campaign. Football is a results based business, you can't pretend it isn't.

So going off of what you just have said do you think the team was competitive in the Nation League under SK?

Of courses its results based but the way you are talking others would think we are England who have a realistic chance of winning something. We are a small nation and due to negligence on behalf on FAI under the former leadership we are now competing with Georgia, we are Scotland 10 years ago and its about time you wake up to that. Just look at our squad, if you think we should be qualifying with that you need your head checked. Finishing 2nd would be a massive over achievement with this squad, 3rd is par, 4th SK should be sacked.

3rd is where we should and probably will finish. 2nd would be a huge bonus

tayto lover

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The players won't continue to buy in absent of results, you can mark my words on that.

My definition of competitive is being competitive. It's black and white, objective. It's based off results, off qualifying or being in the running for qualifying in the last couple of games of a campaign. Football is a results based business, you can't pretend it isn't.

Any player who is feigning injury or not buying in to the manager’s plan is not professional and not nearly as good as he thinks he is. If he thinks the players around him are of poor quality then it’s up to him to help them and encourage them. Paul McGrath, Roy Keane etc always did this.
Any player not helping his team mates and his country is not worthy of a place himself. Results will only come from hard work and discipline and there is no place in any team for shysters who think they are better than they actually are.

simongurnick

Lads, we'll never be Brasil or spain. I'd be more than happy with a pragmatic approach that delivers results and a qualification.
Week in and week out most of our players are playing in on the back foot, low possession matches.

Christy Browne

Talon Calm Bobsled wrote: »

Yep agreed. While I was excited by a few of them(Parrot Idah Molumby) a lot of that u21s side was over blown. O'Connor for example, will most likely be a L2 player. Its why I'm more wedded to the idea of giving Kenny a good bit of time with the senior side. He did a great job with the 21s in hindsight. Hopefully things pick up starting today.

Ridiculous thing to say. Currently on loan in League 2 and doing really well by all accounts, and still only 20. I've no fears about O'Connor. Celtic was a terrible move for him though, he probably would have gotten game time in Europa League last year for United if he stayed.

Nunu

GLaDOS wrote: »

Coleman and Doherty both playing could be a move to wing backs with Coleman rcb

That’s how I had us lining up couple days ago going through the squad.

c.p.w.g.w

Is tonight's game on rte or sky or both?

Need to get my streaming set up as I'll be in work

LuckyLloyd

athlone99 wrote: »

So going off of what you just have said do you think the team was competitive in the Nation League under SK?

Of courses its results based but the way you are talking others would think we are England who have a realistic chance of winning something. We are a small nation and due to negligence on behalf on FAI under the former leadership we are now competing with Georgia, we are Scotland 10 years ago and its about time you wake up to that. Just look at our squad, if you think we should be qualifying with that you need your head checked. Finishing 2nd would be a massive over achievement with this squad, 3rd is par, 4th SK should be sacked.

3rd is where we should and probably will finish. 2nd would be a huge bonus

This is another straw man, it really is a terrible way to debate. I'm not talking about winning anything, I'm merely referencing our qualification record:

2020: missed out in last group game
2018: playoffs
2016: qualified
2014: missed out with games to go, not acceptable, sacked
2012: qualified
2010: playoffs
2008: missed out with games to go, not acceptable, sacked

What the **** do Georgia have to do with such a record? If Kenny misses out here with games to go, it will not be acceptable and he will be sacked.

The recent Nations League campaign was his time to get acclimated to the job, assess his players, etc. It was disappointing but he was always going to get this qualification campaign. Hopefully he has taken his learnings from the Nations League and will apply them.

All people want is to be in the mix down the stretch. If he achieves that along with us displaying more initiative against lower seeds that would be acceptable. I'm really not asking for much.