Euro 2016 Qualifying

[NeverFeltBetter]

Also, that article, from Google translate, seems to indicate this idea would replace friendly fixtures, not Euro qualifiers and the Euro's themselves.

Which it won't of course.

[geysir]

Table-tennis tomorrow stutts if you are up for it.

I have a good feeling about Friday.

CD you said it was the third behind bundesliga and Spain.flavour of the month with posters on here regards the leagues but that's what you said. You added something about mid table Spanish beating mid table premiership I doubted it and at the time it was possible to prove.I think Swansea winning 3-0 refutes your assertion.

Don't tell me you are also one of the silly Daily Sun type readers who haven't a clue about spanish league football, who select the travails of one spanish team and use that as proof of the demise of Spanish football, proving that all those here who like Spanish football are prematurely ejaculating morons who haven't a clue about real football, poke fun at them for reading other larger papers with more words in them, suggesting that the poor spanish football loving morons might in fact be brainwashed by the Guardian.

[ArdeeBhoy]

What a cast-iron source.

Did anyone say it was?



Though UEFA/FIFA become more gormless with every passing year.

[Junior]

In fairness to Paul I think he was taking a swipe at those who accept our fate because "we don't have the players" or the occasional wise owl who prefers the devil he knows, despite knowing his faults, and who thinks there's no merit in discussing anything other than plain old 442 and hoofball.

Well Stutts if you are going to step in as Pauls beeatchhh (or even spin doctor?)- Are there many (if any) posters on here who have just accepted our fate of this last campaign based on the above? Has anyone ever posted "there is no merit in discussing different formations? I dont think so. There are elements in what you say that I consider valid points but not to the extent of blind defeatism and acceptance of mediocrity.Revisionism....

At what point should Trap have been fired then?

A- Before the play off defeat to France?
B- Before we qualified for the Euro's?
C- After the poor showing in Poland?
D-After the 1-6 defeat to Germany, which was followed by credible away results and performances v Faroes 4-1 and Sweden 0-0 ?
E- After the 2-2 draw versus Austria?
F- After the double header defeat to Sweden at home and Austria away?


On reflection perhaps point C was the time for him to go. I didnt think so at the time despite the disappointment after the Euros. However, once he was kept on for another campaign I dont see when he should have gone any earlier than when he did. Posslbly at point E but it was all fairly marginal at that point and a home victory versus Sweden could have made a difference to the campaing - even if it was only papering over the cracks. He went after the next games anyway. Lets not forget the financial implications of getting rid of Trap mid campaign either (whether we like it or not Im certain that was a factor in any of the Board discussions regarding Traps role).

On a positive note, I really hope Noel's teams have a good go over the next couple of games - nothing to lose and the fans need something now to get excited about.

[Charlie Darwin]

Table-tennis tomorrow stutts if you are up for it.

I have a good feeling about Friday.

CD you said it was the third behind bundesliga and Spain.flavour of the month with posters on here regards the leagues but that's what you said. You added something about mid table Spanish beating mid table premiership I doubted it and at the time it was possible to prove.I think Swansea winning 3-0 refutes your assertion.

If I said that perhaps I was being hyperbolic. Certainly mid-table La Liga sides are technically superior to their EPL counterparts in general. Swansea beat a Valencia team in financial and on-field crisis after they'd have a player sent off within 8 minutes. It's hardly indicative of the leagues' relative strengths.

[ArdeeBhoy]

At what point should Trap have been fired then?

A- Before the play off defeat to France?
B- Before we qualified for the Euro's?
C- After the poor showing in Poland?
D-After the 1-6 defeat to Germany, which was followed by credible away results and performances v Faroes 4-1 and Sweden 0-0 ?
E- After the 2-2 draw versus Austria?
F- After the double header defeat to Sweden at home and Austria away?


On reflection perhaps point C was the time for him to go. I didnt think so at the time despite the disappointment after the Euros. However, once he was kept on for another campaign I dont see when he should have gone any earlier than when he did. Posslbly at point E but it was all fairly marginal at that point and a home victory versus Sweden could have made a difference to the campaing - even if it was only papering over the cracks. He went after the next games anyway. Lets not forget the financial implications of getting rid of Trap mid campaign either (whether we like it or not Im certain that was a factor in any of the Board discussions regarding Traps role).

This.

[Junior]

This.

With a €3m payoff I presume?

[ArdeeBhoy]

Up to the FAI & O'Brien. And call his bluff, too. Never mind the morons who signed off that extension at that price...
A small price anyway, maybe to avoid alienating 'the wider Irish soccer public' ?

But he's gone now anyway.

[Stuttgart88]

Well Stutts if you are going to step in as Pauls beeatchhh (or even spin doctor?)- Are there many (if any) posters on here who have just accepted our fate of this last campaign based on the above? Has anyone ever posted "there is no merit in discussing different formations? I dont think so. There are elements in what you say that I consider valid points but not to the extent of blind defeatism and acceptance of mediocrity.Revisionism....

At what point should Trap have been fired then?

A- Before the play off defeat to France?
B- Before we qualified for the Euro's?
C- After the poor showing in Poland?
D-After the 1-6 defeat to Germany, which was followed by credible away results and performances v Faroes 4-1 and Sweden 0-0 ?
E- After the 2-2 draw versus Austria?
F- After the double header defeat to Sweden at home and Austria away?


On reflection perhaps point C was the time for him to go. I didnt think so at the time despite the disappointment after the Euros. However, once he was kept on for another campaign I dont see when he should have gone any earlier than when he did. Posslbly at point E but it was all fairly marginal at that point and a home victory versus Sweden could have made a difference to the campaing - even if it was only papering over the cracks. He went after the next games anyway. Lets not forget the financial implications of getting rid of Trap mid campaign either (whether we like it or not Im certain that was a factor in any of the Board discussions regarding Traps role).

On a positive note, I really hope Noel's teams have a good go over the next couple of games - nothing to lose and the fans need something now to get excited about.

The clue was in the term "wise owl"! Yes, I think there have been some who have laughed off manager change / tactical change as fantasy talk or suggesting that we'd be the new Wales if we did. Most here have been pretty clear in the criticism of the campaign, but there have been more than a few who found it hard to be overly critical of Trap. Quite a few even thought we played well against Austria in Dublin.

Regarding the other question: I'd have probably kept him on after C, on balance, and I was very disillusioned after D but still would have resisted making the call if it was my decision (though I wouldn't have been unhappy if he had gone then), but I was apoplectic after E and felt that he had to go then. I was also apoplectic that Trap ignored the lessons from a good showing in Stockholm.

I had no confidence at all after Austria at home that what we needed to do at home to Sweden would be done. I was hopeful as all fans probably are, but not expectant.

[DeLorean]

Quite a few even thought we played well against Austria in Dublin.

You say that like it's a fact that they're wrong. I was definitely one of those. We were excellent in the first half in my opinion. I don't have a problem with it being down to attitude and tempo more than guile. I remember your views on the performance, which you're more than entitled to but not necessarily right. Nor does somebody believing we played well mean they are finding it difficult to be critical of Trap. I thought we looked like we had goals in us in that first half, especially, more so than the Sweden away match. We might not have looked as tidy and kept the ball as well but we were far more threatening.

I can't remember the moment that we retreated into ultimate submission but there was plenty to be annoyed about from that point forward, and plenty of blame attributed to the manager who did worse than nothing to stem the tide. Literally worse than nothing.

[Junior]

The clue was in the term "wise owl"! Yes, I think there have been some who have laughed off manager change / tactical change as fantasy talk or suggesting that we'd be the new Wales if we did. Most here have been pretty clear in the criticism of the campaign, but there have been more than a few who found it hard to be overly critical of Trap. Quite a few even thought we played well against Austria in Dublin.

Without going back over old posts in the forum 'The new Wales' type comments (and I didnt make them) may have been based on what type of manager we would get in as a replacement. TBH, I was always (incorrectly as it happens) of the opinion that the next manager would be on a package which was a fraction of Traps and hence the quality of candidate would be severly lacking - something that could have seen a repeat of the Staunton type era. I don't know, its all if's but and maybe's at the moment but we'll have to wait and see out the new guy pans out.

Our 2nd half performance against the Austrians was a disaster. I read a few comments suggesting we were unlucky to concede so late but that is all I recall - I think almost everyone to a man, accepted that the equaliser was inevitable. If you recall posters suggesting we played well, then fair enough I dont doubt you - It was hard reading this forum in the aftermath of that result

Regarding the other question: I'd have probably kept him on after C, on balance, and I was very disillusioned after D but still would have resisted making the call if it was my decision (though I wouldn't have been unhappy if he had gone then), but I was apoplectic after E and felt that he had to go then. I was also apoplectic that Trap ignored the lessons from a good showing in Stockholm.

I had no confidence at all after Austria at home that what we needed to do at home to Sweden would be done. I was hopeful as all fans probably are, but not expectant.

So that pretty much mirrors my thoughts exactly. If I had the decision to make it was borderline to do it after E (but little point at that stage) and certainly after point F.

So I dont get where this view (from Paul) is that some of our supporters are happy to accept being rubbish. A few wanted to give Trap a bit longer than the majority of fans, thats about it......

[Closed Account 2]

To be fair at point C he intimated there would be changes in the make up of the team as he acknowledged Euro 2012 wasnt a success. He talked about players like McClean and McCarthy allowing us to see if we could "change the system" (or words to that effect). Obviously it didn't pan out that way, we just ended up with the rigid system with some of our better players (Duff, Given) leaving, but back in the summer of 2012 he was making noises about changing the approach.

The other question to ask (at any of the stages, A to F) is who would we have got in. Even when people on this forum were clamouring for him to go after Kazakhstan (or it might have been Germany) there wasn't really a big list of viable candidates, even now there still isn't that much to chose from. At least at the end of a campaign there are in theory more options available - in 1-2 months there could be the likes of Hodgson, Terim, Morten Olsen, Paolo Bento, Deschamps, Tabarez, Fernando Santos available - all of them have done well at international tournaments with unfancied teams (although with Bento and Deschamps its with clubs in the CL rather than countries).

[Stuttgart88]

DeLorean, I hope you know that I rarely say anyone is wrong when I don't agree with him. I never say that I am right either, though by definition I almost always think I'm right! We all think we're right. But all it ever is is an opinion.

Unlike your opinion, I thought we were all huff and puff in the first half at home to Austria, but it was purposeful huff and puff and we played on the front foot and at times at a high tempo. In that sense it was a pleasant change, but coming so soon after an away performance where we played in a controlled and effective manner I thought it was a big step backwards.

Junior, you still think I might be talking about you. You're not actually that old anyway. I did offer you a clue by saying "wise owl". I'll make it even more clear. Take away the word "wise". You're left with "owl". Now add an "s" and the word "fan". That's who I think Paul was referring to.

Anyway, Paul can defend himself from now on.

[Fixer82]

Well Stutts if you are going to step in as Pauls beeatchhh (or even spin doctor?)- Are there many (if any) posters on here who have just accepted our fate of this last campaign based on the above? Has anyone ever posted "there is no merit in discussing different formations? I dont think so. There are elements in what you say that I consider valid points but not to the extent of blind defeatism and acceptance of mediocrity.Revisionism....

At what point should Trap have been fired then?

A- Before the play off defeat to France?
B- Before we qualified for the Euro's?
C- After the poor showing in Poland?
D-After the 1-6 defeat to Germany, which was followed by credible away results and performances v Faroes 4-1 and Sweden 0-0 ?
E- After the 2-2 draw versus Austria?
F- After the double header defeat to Sweden at home and Austria away?


On reflection perhaps point C was the time for him to go. I didnt think so at the time despite the disappointment after the Euros. However, once he was kept on for another campaign I dont see when he should have gone any earlier than when he did. Posslbly at point E but it was all fairly marginal at that point and a home victory versus Sweden could have made a difference to the campaing - even if it was only papering over the cracks. He went after the next games anyway. Lets not forget the financial implications of getting rid of Trap mid campaign either (whether we like it or not Im certain that was a factor in any of the Board discussions regarding Traps role).

On a positive note, I really hope Noel's teams have a good go over the next couple of games - nothing to lose and the fans need something now to get excited about.

To be fair to the FAI, the deal was 'if you get us qualified, we will extend your contract'
And that's often the way it goes with these contract.s If you hit the targets we set, you get a contract extension.

Germany drubbing was followed by credible performances and it may have been unfair to sack him until it was plainly obvious it had to happen after Sweden and Austria.
We were all very very hopeful with half an hour gone in the Sweden game.
An hour later everyone wanted him out.

EURO 2012 was a disaster and we were all pretty sick of Trap's system by then.
But until that point he had succeeded in hitting his targets

[ArdeeBhoy]

Have people only just noticed he got the sack...

[Junior]

Oh dont worry Stutts, I got the Owl reference and I didnt think you (or Paul for that matter) were really referring to me. So thats it then, Paul got his knickers in a twist because one poster was a more staunch supporter of Trap than seemed reasonable. If only he had put it that way and we could have saved ourselves some typing.

Anyway, Im sure he's finished in the Jacks by now and can come back and see the anguish he has caused

[DeLorean]

DeLorean, I hope you know that I rarely say anyone is wrong when I don't agree with him. I never say that I am right either, though by definition I almost always think I'm right! We all think we're right. But all it ever is is an opinion.

Of course, and I know you don't.

there have been more than a few who found it hard to be overly critical of Trap. Quite a few even thought we played well against Austria in Dublin.

This just reads to me like you're saying that some people only thought we played well because they didn't want to criticise Trap, or something similar. I think most people can separate the good from the bad regardless of personal affinities or indifferences.

[Stuttgart88]

The jist of some commentary was that criticism of Trap was futile because we might get worse. That's like not dumping the girlfriend you've grown tired of in case the next one is worse. There was also a fair bit of sophistry thrown in wrt formations.

Anyway, I thought Andy Reid's comments in all the papers today was interesting. He says all the Irish players have experience of playing in different shapes and formations anyway. As has been argued here before, it's not about the formations anyway, but about the players and the type of players picked.

[shakermaker1982]

The Guardian have now got an article up about this international league. Can't put it up because I'm using my mobile.

[back of the net]

The Guardian have now got an article up about this international league. Can't put it up because I'm using my mobile.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/...gue-friendlies