Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Waterford GAA Thread - Mod note post #1

Options
17374767879394

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 738 ✭✭✭TheScoringGoal


    Deiseen wrote: »
    Am I the only one who thinks we barely scraped that win and would have been comprehensively beaten only for the fact that they had 14 men for most of the game?

    I know its impossible to tell the impact of being a man up but I thought Limerick were all over us to be honest.

    No I think Waterford were the better team. Limerick scored very little from play in the second half. No doubt the extra man was a huge factor but look at how many cheap scores Waterford gave away in the first half and the amount of times they went for goals when points were on offer. However it was just a league game so nobody is going to get carried away.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭formerlyET


    PTH2009 wrote: »
    One game at a time

    I think Waterford were overly physical in the last Tipp v Waterford league game in Thurles. Cahill wanted it and will want his team to beat Tipp and know they can beat Tipp. If I had to bet, I'd say Cahill will have them up for this one, big time. I know Waterford people don't want to hear this, but Cahill wants that Tipp job down the line. He will want to beat Sheedy every time he plays him.


  • Registered Users Posts: 301 ✭✭waterfordgirl


    Deiseen wrote: »
    Am I the only one who thinks we barely scraped that win and would have been comprehensively beaten only for the fact that they had 14 men for most of the game?

    I know its impossible to tell the impact of being a man up but I thought Limerick were all over us to be honest.

    I agree with this - they didn't make use of the extra man at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 889 ✭✭✭DiscoStew


    Deisegodeo wrote: »
    I think challenge matches still aren't allowed under government restrictions

    They are allowed, but I very much doubt they will be playing one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 428 ✭✭blueflame


    My own opinion is we started sluggishly, with lots of very loose marking, plenty of unforced fumbles, too many times picking the option to go for goals and taking the wrong option - a very nervous start i felt with players taking time to settle into new positions and possibly a lack of belief that we could actually turn over Limerick - all in my estimation understandable given the last couple of years.

    However as we settled into the game, and our confidence started to grow, we became much more effective. We reduced the error count, we competed far better on the breaking ball, and started to mix up our attack. Rather than constantly going for goals we started taking scores from distance, but still running at them when the opportunity arose. - mind you that could have had as much to do with the wind as anything else.

    The sending off will certainly have had a bearing, and while i don't feel we scraped home in the end, I think that any victory over Limerick is going to be a hard fought narrow one - they don't do walkovers. In actual fact, I believe that come the business end of this year, barring the odd exception, there will be very little in any match between the top eight contenders

    I would definitely not get carried away with performance or result, but would have to be optimistic for the direction of where this team is going.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 397 ✭✭carter10


    blueflame wrote: »
    My own opinion is we started sluggishly, with lots of very loose marking, plenty of unforced fumbles, too many times picking the option to go for goals and taking the wrong option - a very nervous start i felt with players taking time to settle into new positions and possibly a lack of belief that we could actually turn over Limerick - all in my estimation understandable given the last couple of years.

    However as we settled into the game, and our confidence started to grow, we became much more effective. We reduced the error count, we competed far better on the breaking ball, and started to mix up our attack. Rather than constantly going for goals we started taking scores from distance, but still running at them when the opportunity arose. - mind you that could have had as much to do with the wind as anything else.

    The sending off will certainly have had a bearing, and while i don't feel we scraped home in the end, I think that any victory over Limerick is going to be a hard fought narrow one - they don't do walkovers. In actual fact, I believe that come the business end of this year, barring the odd exception, there will be very little in any match between the top eight contenders

    I would definitely not get carried away with performance or result, but would have to be optimistic for the direction of where this team is going.

    Would agree with most of this. Very poor start to the game with nervous fumbles and mistimed tackles giving Limerick a number of handy scores. We scored 1 point in the first 15 minutes but after that settled down and found a rhythm. As for going for goals- we had 3 good goal chances in the first half - the first was a long delivery which Shane Bennett missed by a fraction and which fortunately dropped right in front of the keeper- Limerick were very fortunate in that. That happened at 01 to 0-5. The second chance was a nice move which eventually put Prendergast through on goal but he chose to take on the cornerback and was stood up. He should have had a shot on goal when he first received the ball but going for goal was the right option in the circumstances. The third chance was where Calum Lyons was put through on goal, hit a good effort which was well saved, again the shot on goal was the right option.

    Once the nerves settled I thought we played quite well- taking into consideration this was effectively the 1st teams first proper outing of the year. In the second half the fact that Nolan was driving the ball into the full forward line helped as well.
    A few positives- Jack Fagan continuing the form he showed in the semi final last year. Patrick Curran picking off 3 lovely points- hopefully this will be the turning point for him to show the undoubted talent he has. Seamus Keating- while he was only ok in the time he was on - he looks like he will be a good addition to the panel. 10 players got on the scoresheet.
    We need to sort out the first touch issue though- each game we are giving away a lot of unnessary scores due to this. Both Daly and Austin Gleeson were guilty of this on Sunday, failing to pick easy ball and leaving it behind them resulting in an easy score for Limerick.
    I went for Austin for centre back before the start of the league and I thought he did well enough there on Sunday (other than the missed pick ups) his distribution is excellent and his reading of the game and physical presence more than makes up for the loss of De Burka. However, we are losing the 4/5 points he is contributing in the forwards. Big decision for Cahill to make with that.While a half back line of Lyons- Gleeson- Daly would be a great platform- we do lose in the forwards.
    And scoring forwards is what we need more of- Jack Fagan got a great goal and won some good ball but scored no points. Shane Bennett scored a point, Prendergast 2 points, outside of Bennetts frees one third of our points came from backs and midfield- it's an area we need more of a return from.
    Overall though the result will boost confidence and I think there's a lot more in the team.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭garv123


    one match suspension for Daly for the knee


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,199 ✭✭✭big_drive


    garv123 wrote: »
    one match suspension for Daly for the knee

    Hard to argue against it. There was a lot of players involved but it was very clear on tv etc


  • Registered Users Posts: 38,289 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Brainfart by Daly but these things happen

    Will Aussie stay in the backs do you say?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,868 ✭✭✭deisedude


    While you cant condone what Daly did it shows the mindset Cahill has bred into this group of Waterford players that they weren't going to be bullied. Daly is only a young fella and he wasn't intimidated by 6ft5 man-mountain Kyle Hayes


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,028 ✭✭✭Billy Ocean


    deisedude wrote: »
    While you cant condone what Daly did it shows the mindset Cahill has bred into this group of Waterford players that they weren't going to be bullied. Daly is only a young fella and he wasn't intimidated by 6ft5 man-mountain Kyle Hayes
    Noticeable too that Stephen Bennett made a beeline for Will O'Donoghue in the incident. He'd be Limerick's chief enforser so definitely a statement to that I believe.


  • Registered Users Posts: 428 ✭✭blueflame


    Daly's case certainly wasn't helped by Sunday game panelists who seem to think that kneeing a guy in the thigh is a far greater sin than pulling across a guy's ribs with the hurley. I am not defending Daly but his reaction was based on he having a close up and personal view of Kyle Hayes pull across Curran. (have a look back for anyone that may have missed it, i certainly did first time around) Yes Hayes was frustrated at being bottled up but how the two panelist didn't see the fact that he pulled across Curran's waist when the sliothar was above head height is laughable. The linesman was about two feet away and had no hesitation in pointing it out, but much better for the panelists to point the finger at Daly- typical - When RTE actually zoned in close on the melee , they only did so did so after the pull, highlighting Daly's involvement. One wonders if Aussie had made that pull would they have missed it - not a chance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭killbillvol2


    blueflame wrote: »
    Daly's case certainly wasn't helped by Sunday game panelists who seem to think that kneeing a guy in the thigh is a far greater sin than pulling across a guy's ribs with the hurley. I am not defending Daly but his reaction was based on he having a close up and personal view of Kyle Hayes pull across Curran. (have a look back for anyone that may have missed it, i certainly did first time around) Yes Hayes was frustrated at being bottled up but how the two panelist didn't see the fact that he pulled across Curran's waist when the sliothar was above head height is laughable. The linesman was about two feet away and had no hesitation in pointing it out, but much better for the panelists to point the finger at Daly- typical - When RTE actually zoned in close on the melee , they only did so did so after the pull, highlighting Daly's involvement. One wonders if Aussie had made that pull would they have missed it - not a chance.

    I'm assuming they didn't focus on Hayes as he'd been given a red ccard so it had been dealt with


  • Registered Users Posts: 738 ✭✭✭TheScoringGoal


    blueflame wrote: »
    Daly's case certainly wasn't helped by Sunday game panelists who seem to think that kneeing a guy in the thigh is a far greater sin than pulling across a guy's ribs with the hurley. I am not defending Daly but his reaction was based on he having a close up and personal view of Kyle Hayes pull across Curran. (have a look back for anyone that may have missed it, i certainly did first time around) Yes Hayes was frustrated at being bottled up but how the two panelist didn't see the fact that he pulled across Curran's waist when the sliothar was above head height is laughable. The linesman was about two feet away and had no hesitation in pointing it out, but much better for the panelists to point the finger at Daly- typical - When RTE actually zoned in close on the melee , they only did so did so after the pull, highlighting Daly's involvement. One wonders if Aussie had made that pull would they have missed it - not a chance.

    Twice on the TG4 commentary Fleury commented about Austin getting involved in off the ball incidents. Neither time was he involved but it seems that it's just easier blame him than rely on facts.

    Agree with all the above posts. The one match ban for Daly is correct but I doubt Cahill will be too hard on him as they want the players to stand up for themselves. And it's very hard to see why Will O Donoghue got a yellow card as Bennett caught him early in the row so Donghue did nothing from what I saw.


  • Registered Users Posts: 157 ✭✭deise man


    I thought the tg4 commentary was very poor. They seemed to be very unsure about a number of incidents.


  • Registered Users Posts: 602 ✭✭✭Giveitfong


    My view that Waterford were shadow-boxing in their first two league games was confirmed when the team brought an entirely new level of intensity and commitment to bear in their excellent win over Limerick last Sunday. While their performance was pock-marked by frequent errors (especially in the first half), it was still a display of some substance in terms of character, as the team stood up to Limerick’s physicality and provided regular flashes of the skill which we know they possess.

    While Waterford were largely outplayed in the first quarter (not helped by frequent fumbles and cheap concessions of possession), from an early stage I detected what I thought was a new approach in this period, as they came forward from midfield with quick short-passing movements with the clear intention of creating goal chances. By the end of the game Waterford had six shots at goal to Limerick’s two, while Shane Bennett was somewhat unfortunate not to make contact with Austin Gleeson’s long ball into the Limerick goalmouth. There were also several further situations where Waterford forwards passed up easy point-scoring opportunities, opting instead to go in search of goals.

    Some posters here have been critical of Waterford passing up easy point chances in this quest for goals which, for the most part, went unfulfilled. However, I am inclined to disagree. One of the things I liked about Liam Cahill was the way his Tipperary under-age teams went in pursuit of goals, which they obtained in plenty. I have always felt that there should be a lot more goals in intercounty senior hurling, especially given the skills of the players nowadays.

    Cahill made his focus on goal-scoring quite plain in his after-match interview in the Irish Times:

    “I’ve always said that if this team is to progress and try to win silverware, we’re going to have to be raising green flags, that’s part and parcel of the next couple of matches, to keep practising that and hopefully it’ll come right when the time comes for championship.”

    Waterford would probably have won last Sunday’s game much more comfortably if they had taken the point chances that went abegging in the search for goals. However, these league games are the only chance Cahill has of putting his own stamp on the team, and I am confident that, come championship time, Waterford will have the sharpness to convert several of the kinds of goal chances they created last Sunday. I would have been happy with a good performance on the day but, as it happened, when the prospect of a victory hove into sight in the final quarter (especially after the Jack Fagan goal in the 54th minute), Waterford abandoned their quest for goals and started shooting points from all over the place. In that period they outscored Limerick by 1-8 to 0-5.

    Limerick started the game very confidently, in contrast to Waterford, whose play was characterised by multiple fumbles, balls being given away and players getting caught in possession and being turned over. In addition, some Waterford players, playing in unfamiliar positions, took some time to get their bearings and figure out what the players they were supposed to be marking were up to. As the game progressed, the team settled and began to compete on more equal terms.

    The extra man and wind assistance undoubtedly were a help after half-time, but Waterford were still finding it difficult to reel Limerick in, and remained two points behind going into the final quarter. However, Fagan’s goal gave them a huge confidence boost and they closed out the game with some superb scores.

    I was somewhat amused to hear Mark Foley, in his half-time observations on the game on TG4, refer to the weakness of the Waterford bench and how this could be a problem for them in the later stages of the game. This was to ignore how important the contribution of second-half substitutes had been to Waterford’s success in 2020. That said, I was concerned about the absence from the bench of Darragh Lyons and Neil Montgomery, who were Waterford’s leading impact subs last year.

    However, into the breach stepped Patrick Curran who, apart from his three marvellous points, also won two vital possessions in the closing stages. It is ironic that, while Limerick are widely regarded as having the strongest panel in the country, none of their six substitutes had much of an impact on the game.

    For Waterford, Billy Nolan dealt comfortably with the one shot he had to save, and varied his puckouts nicely. However, some work is required on puckout strategy. All three teams that Waterford have met so far have well-worked-out and well-practised routines for working short puckouts up the field, which is not the case with Waterford. Meanwhile, Limerick won twelve of Waterford’s 20 long, contested, puckouts, which needs to be improved on.

    Apart from the outstanding Conor Prunty, I thought that Iarlaith Daly had an excellent game for Waterford. Conor Gleeson spent much of the game chasing Peter Casey around the place, and while Casey is a tricky customer, Gleeson put in a good shift. Limerick seemed to leave Seamus Keating on his own a lot on the left side of defence, with other defenders finding him regularly. Although he did not use the ball particularly well, I still regard him as a very useful addition to the panel. I wonder if his injury had anything to do with his exertions the previous week against Westmeath, when he put in a very busy and full shift, and looked quite exhausted by the end.

    It was great to see Calum Lyons back to his best, and his scoring ability from distance is a huge resource. The placing of Austin Gleeson at centre back was a major item of interest. Apart from his late long-distance point, Gleeson got little opportunity to show his spectacular side, mainly because Limerick rarely send ball down the middle. Nonetheless, Gleeson did a very effective job, linking with other defenders and then finding team mates out the field with excellent long passes.

    Jamie Barron was my man-of-the-match, due to the driving force he brought from midfield and the creativity of his use of the ball. Despite the fact that this was his first outing of the season, he was getting stronger as the game moved into the closing stages, as reflected in his own super point and the opening he provided for Patrick Curran’s third score. Not surprisingly, he topped the Waterford possessions list with a total of 15.

    I remain at a loss as to why Jake Dillon remains a member of the Waterford panel, never mind getting game time. He got his first possession of the game in the 42nd minute, and while he got two more subsequently, we can’t have a midfielder at this level who manages to get on the ball just three times in virtually an entire match. Given his all-action performance from the previous week, I was surprised that Peter Hogan was not called in as a replacement until the 70th minute.

    Among the forwards, I thought Jack Fagan did quite well, Jack Prendergast showed glimpses of what he is capable of, and Stephen Bennett came into the game strongly in the second half. Kieran Bennett is much improved this year, and his striking is a joy to watch. I felt sorry for Dessie Hutchinson and Shane Bennett in the corner forward positions, as they got virtually no supply of the kind of ball they needed to show their wares. Neither Michael Kiely nor DJ Foran had any impact when introduced midway through the second half. Kiely, in fact, did better during his short temporary first-half substitution, when he was unfortunate not to score a point and also provided a good off-load to Hutchinson.

    Waterford possession counts: B. Nolan (3); I. Daly (11), C. Prunty (10), C. Gleeson (11); S. Keating (6), A. Gleeson (13), C. Lyons (9); J. Barron (15), J. Dillon (3); J. Fagan (8), J. Prendergast (7), K. Bennett (8); D. Hutchinson (3), Stephen Bennett (8), Shane Bennett (3); K. Moran (2), M. Kiely (2), DJ Foran (0), P. Curran (5), B. Power (0), P. Hogan (1).


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭garv123


    Giveitfong wrote: »
    I remain at a loss as to why Jake Dillon remains a member of the Waterford panel, never mind getting game time. He got his first possession of the game in the 42nd minute, and while he got two more subsequently, we can’t have a midfielder at this level who manages to get on the ball just three times in virtually an entire match. Given his all-action performance from the previous week, I was surprised that Peter Hogan was not called in as a replacement until the 70th minute.


    This x1000.

    Waterford were back in the game when it was 14 vs 14.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭Gardner


    Giveitfong wrote: »
    My view that Waterford were shadow-boxing in their first two league games was confirmed when the team brought an entirely new level of intensity and commitment to bear in their excellent win over Limerick last Sunday. While their performance was pock-marked by frequent errors (especially in the first half), it was still a display of some substance in terms of character, as the team stood up to Limerick’s physicality and provided regular flashes of the skill which we know they possess.

    While Waterford were largely outplayed in the first quarter (not helped by frequent fumbles and cheap concessions of possession), from an early stage I detected what I thought was a new approach in this period, as they came forward from midfield with quick short-passing movements with the clear intention of creating goal chances. By the end of the game Waterford had six shots at goal to Limerick’s two, while Shane Bennett was somewhat unfortunate not to make contact with Austin Gleeson’s long ball into the Limerick goalmouth. There were also several further situations where Waterford forwards passed up easy point-scoring opportunities, opting instead to go in search of goals.

    Some posters here have been critical of Waterford passing up easy point chances in this quest for goals which, for the most part, went unfulfilled. However, I am inclined to disagree. One of the things I liked about Liam Cahill was the way his Tipperary under-age teams went in pursuit of goals, which they obtained in plenty. I have always felt that there should be a lot more goals in intercounty senior hurling, especially given the skills of the players nowadays.

    Cahill made his focus on goal-scoring quite plain in his after-match interview in the Irish Times:

    “I’ve always said that if this team is to progress and try to win silverware, we’re going to have to be raising green flags, that’s part and parcel of the next couple of matches, to keep practising that and hopefully it’ll come right when the time comes for championship.”

    Waterford would probably have won last Sunday’s game much more comfortably if they had taken the point chances that went abegging in the search for goals. However, these league games are the only chance Cahill has of putting his own stamp on the team, and I am confident that, come championship time, Waterford will have the sharpness to convert several of the kinds of goal chances they created last Sunday. I would have been happy with a good performance on the day but, as it happened, when the prospect of a victory hove into sight in the final quarter (especially after the Jack Fagan goal in the 54th minute), Waterford abandoned their quest for goals and started shooting points from all over the place. In that period they outscored Limerick by 1-8 to 0-5.

    Limerick started the game very confidently, in contrast to Waterford, whose play was characterised by multiple fumbles, balls being given away and players getting caught in possession and being turned over. In addition, some Waterford players, playing in unfamiliar positions, took some time to get their bearings and figure out what the players they were supposed to be marking were up to. As the game progressed, the team settled and began to compete on more equal terms.

    The extra man and wind assistance undoubtedly were a help after half-time, but Waterford were still finding it difficult to reel Limerick in, and remained two points behind going into the final quarter. However, Fagan’s goal gave them a huge confidence boost and they closed out the game with some superb scores.

    I was somewhat amused to hear Mark Foley, in his half-time observations on the game on TG4, refer to the weakness of the Waterford bench and how this could be a problem for them in the later stages of the game. This was to ignore how important the contribution of second-half substitutes had been to Waterford’s success in 2020. That said, I was concerned about the absence from the bench of Darragh Lyons and Neil Montgomery, who were Waterford’s leading impact subs last year.

    However, into the breach stepped Patrick Curran who, apart from his three marvellous points, also won two vital possessions in the closing stages. It is ironic that, while Limerick are widely regarded as having the strongest panel in the country, none of their six substitutes had much of an impact on the game.

    For Waterford, Billy Nolan dealt comfortably with the one shot he had to save, and varied his puckouts nicely. However, some work is required on puckout strategy. All three teams that Waterford have met so far have well-worked-out and well-practised routines for working short puckouts up the field, which is not the case with Waterford. Meanwhile, Limerick won twelve of Waterford’s 20 long, contested, puckouts, which needs to be improved on.

    Apart from the outstanding Conor Prunty, I thought that Iarlaith Daly had an excellent game for Waterford. Conor Gleeson spent much of the game chasing Peter Casey around the place, and while Casey is a tricky customer, Gleeson put in a good shift. Limerick seemed to leave Seamus Keating on his own a lot on the left side of defence, with other defenders finding him regularly. Although he did not use the ball particularly well, I still regard him as a very useful addition to the panel. I wonder if his injury had anything to do with his exertions the previous week against Westmeath, when he put in a very busy and full shift, and looked quite exhausted by the end.

    It was great to see Calum Lyons back to his best, and his scoring ability from distance is a huge resource. The placing of Austin Gleeson at centre back was a major item of interest. Apart from his late long-distance point, Gleeson got little opportunity to show his spectacular side, mainly because Limerick rarely send ball down the middle. Nonetheless, Gleeson did a very effective job, linking with other defenders and then finding team mates out the field with excellent long passes.

    Jamie Barron was my man-of-the-match, due to the driving force he brought from midfield and the creativity of his use of the ball. Despite the fact that this was his first outing of the season, he was getting stronger as the game moved into the closing stages, as reflected in his own super point and the opening he provided for Patrick Curran’s third score. Not surprisingly, he topped the Waterford possessions list with a total of 15.

    I remain at a loss as to why Jake Dillon remains a member of the Waterford panel, never mind getting game time. He got his first possession of the game in the 42nd minute, and while he got two more subsequently, we can’t have a midfielder at this level who manages to get on the ball just three times in virtually an entire match. Given his all-action performance from the previous week, I was surprised that Peter Hogan was not called in as a replacement until the 70th minute.

    Among the forwards, I thought Jack Fagan did quite well, Jack Prendergast showed glimpses of what he is capable of, and Stephen Bennett came into the game strongly in the second half. Kieran Bennett is much improved this year, and his striking is a joy to watch. I felt sorry for Dessie Hutchinson and Shane Bennett in the corner forward positions, as they got virtually no supply of the kind of ball they needed to show their wares. Neither Michael Kiely nor DJ Foran had any impact when introduced midway through the second half. Kiely, in fact, did better during his short temporary first-half substitution, when he was unfortunate not to score a point and also provided a good off-load to Hutchinson.

    Waterford possession counts: B. Nolan (3); I. Daly (11), C. Prunty (10), C. Gleeson (11); S. Keating (6), A. Gleeson (13), C. Lyons (9); J. Barron (15), J. Dillon (3); J. Fagan (8), J. Prendergast (7), K. Bennett (8); D. Hutchinson (3), Stephen Bennett (8), Shane Bennett (3); K. Moran (2), M. Kiely (2), DJ Foran (0), P. Curran (5), B. Power (0), P. Hogan (1).

    The possession counts are back hahaha :D:D:D you must have got a new button for the sky box :D:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 38,289 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Regarding the footballers, anything other than a Wexford win over Carlow will guarantee us a place in the Division 4 semi finals more than likely against Antrim.

    Points difference will be used if Wexford win

    Munster under age fixtures

    Under 20 Hurling- QF Tipperary vs Waterford- 12th July Thurles

    Under 20 Football- QF Waterford vs Clare- 8th July Fraher Field

    Minor Hurling- Semi final Waterford vs Tipperary/Kerry- 27th July Pairc Ui Rinn

    Minor Football- QF Waterford vs Cork- 21st July Fraher Field


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭killbillvol2


    Gardner wrote: »
    The possession counts are back hahaha :D:D:D you must have got a new button for the sky box :D:D

    Another erudite and insightful contribution. You must be a beacon of light to all those around you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭killbillvol2




  • Registered Users Posts: 851 ✭✭✭Deskjockey


    Jake Dillon has impressed a lot of Waterford managers who see him training three nights a week as opposed to those of us who only see him in matches. (or in club games). So he is obviously doing something right.

    Don't know him personally.


  • Registered Users Posts: 301 ✭✭waterfordgirl


    Deskjockey wrote: »
    Jake Dillon has impressed a lot of Waterford managers who see him training three nights a week as opposed to those of us who only see him in matches. (or in club games). So he is obviously doing something right.

    Don't know him personally.

    Its baffling from the outside looking in though!


  • Registered Users Posts: 38,289 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    With Carlow's win over Wexford, Waterford footballers finish 2nd place and go through to the Division 4 semi finals. ATM we will play Antrim


  • Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭Venom69


    Footballers one game away from promotion to division 3.

    Would be fantastic if they could achieve this in shane ronaynes first year in charge.


  • Registered Users Posts: 38,289 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Venom69 wrote: »
    Footballers one game away from promotion to division 3.

    Would be fantastic if they could achieve this in shane ronaynes first year in charge.

    Forgot 2 teams go up

    Great chance and no fear of Antrim or Sligo/Louth


  • Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭Venom69


    I think its Antrim we are playing in 2 weeks time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 38,289 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Venom69 wrote: »
    I think its Antrim we are playing in 2 weeks time.

    Looks very likely


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 38,289 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    At home to Antrim in the Division 4 semi final


Advertisement