Ireland ranked 14th in World

[cullenswood]

1 Brazil
2 France
3 Spain
4 Mexico
5 Argentina
5 Netherlands
5 Turkey
8 Germany
9 USA
10 Italy
11 Czech Republic
12 Cameroon
13 England
14 Republic of Ireland
15 Denmark
16 Nigeria
17 Belgium
18 Sweden
19 Iran
20 Croatia


(Are the US better than Italy??)

[eirebhoy]

Where's France?;)

This month is the first time we actually gained ranking points in nearly a year. We went from 697 to 705. Have a look through previous (http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index/0,2548,Al,00.html?select11=All&cmbMonth=Jun&cmbYear=2004) months and you'll notice that even when we beat the Czech Republic and drew with Brazil we dropped points.

The FIFA rankings are a load of crap TBH.

[Metrostars]

These rankings are always a waste of time. Everyone knows that Mexico shouldnt be number 4 and the US shouldnt be number 9. There isnt a perfect ways of evaluating teams. Only the World Cup is the true ranking.

[tricky_colour]

Actually Mexico have beaten Brazil *twice* in competition,
(CONCACAF Gold Cup 2003 USA/Mexico ), friendlies don't
count as much.
They are a decent side as Mexico is *very* big/keen on football.

Also Mexico knocked Ireland out of the World Cup finals in the USA
if I remember correctly.

Having said that they did draw 0-0 with Iceland recently in a friendly.

The rankings are as good a guide as any. Taking a look at the teams
at the top, Brazil and France, and the bottom, BongoBongoland tells
you that.

And the USA are a good side, look at how far they got on the World
Cup.

Mind you on points per head of poplulation Ireland are top :)

[pineapple stu]

the US shouldnt be number 9... Only the World Cup is the true ranking.

US got to the last 8 of the last World Cup - not too far out?!

[Duncan Gardner]

As long as a team that didn't finish in the TOP TWENTY in qualifying for Europe's championship can be ranked ninth in Europe, these FIFA lists are unlikely to be taken seriously :confused:

[Plastic Paddy]

Luckily we were in the top 20!
As opposed to 124 :eek: ,FFS!

Come on now Dav, be fair. While we're off beating the likes of Holland, our friends are playing all-comers on islands across the Caribbean to get the result. Where next for our intrepid heroes? Watch out Western Samoa... :p

;) PP

[Duncan Gardner]

You weren't in the top twenty dum-dum. Ten groups times a winner and runner up in each.

It seems the Trini posse isn't calc'd until next month btw :mad:

PS Dav, have yer two Tic books, second arrived today. Collect tomorrow at Rosie's if ye like?

[Plastic Paddy]

You weren't in the top twenty dum-dum. Ten groups times a winner and runner up in each.

Ahhh, twist the knife, why don't you? The pain, the pain... :o

:D PP

[Duncan Gardner]

Contradicting rumours in the Belfast press re a game in Suisse in August. Would be nice to meet my namesake, the (Calvinist) bish of Geneva :)

My logic is that, since the quali groups are of a roughly equivalent standard, finishing third in one as you did suggests a weaker standard than any of the runners up. Equally of course it means NI are still pants ;)

[eirebhoy]

As long as a team that didn't finish in the TOP TWENTY in qualifying for Europe's championship can be ranked ninth in Europe, these FIFA lists are unlikely to be taken seriously :confused:
If it was rankings since September 2002 France would be No.1 not Brazil. Italy, England and Germany would also be ahead of Holland and Turkey. I think you meant to say how come a team ranked 9th in Europe didn't make the top 20 in the last qualifiers. ;)

Anyway, the reason I don't take the rankings seriously is because friendlies are counted. Too many teams (ie. England) don't take friendlies too seriously. If friendlies weren't included in the calculations it would be a lot more realistic. Also, they should sort something out with the countries hosting the tournament, Portugal have falling to 22nd.

[1MickCollins]

Contradicting rumours in the Belfast press re a game in Suisse in August. Would be nice to meet my namesake, the (Calvinist) bish of Geneva :)

My logic is that, since the quali groups are of a roughly equivalent standard, finishing third in one as you did suggests a weaker standard than any of the runners up. Equally of course it means NI are still pants ;)

ROI has finished no worse than second in all WC and EC qualifying groups since the qualifier for WC'86 until the this past campaign - that is 9 campaigns in a row whcih is pretty damn consistent. I think based on that we are still top 20, one bad campaign in a tight 3-way doesn't weight heavily enough IMO.

[Duncan Gardner]

No-one's saying you're not consistent Mick, merely that over the last two years (who cares about the last 10?), you're self-evidently not one of the top twenty teams in Europe. You're not as good as Latvia, Slovenia, Wales, Norway or Scotland. You're still better than the occupied illegal six country sectarian statelet, you say? Well, fcukety diddle-doo and bully for ye! :)

[NeilMcD]

You cannot judge just over one qualifying campaign as some groups are a lot harder the others. The reason for this is that some teams on the back of theis quality over the last ten years have a high seeding and then turn out to be crap and others who have a low seeding turn out to be much better than expected. Scotlands group was pretty dire and we would have easily finished second in that one if not topped it. The point is we got to last 16 less than two years ago so we are definately in the top 20 if the world cup is the judge.

[concanta]

Sorry Duncan but I think you are talking rubbish. We are alot better than Scotland and Wales. You cannot say that we are not in the top 20 in europe - as per a previous quote - if we are going by your line of thinking - we are in top 16 in world so naturally we have to be in top 20 in europe.

[parnell ranger]

to be ranked 14th in the world with a population of under 4 million is astounding esp when soccer isnt the no 1 sport.
a lot of the credit must go to the much maligned FAI esp their investment at youth and schoolboy level.
in comparison our friends up north are lagging way behind at all levels.

[Duncan Gardner]

Neil. Like I said, no-one denies you were a good team two years ago. But the evidence you aren't now is that two mediocre teams finished ahead of you.

While the standard in Scotland's group was poor, it did include the World Cup runner-up. So you think you'd have topped them even though Brian's boys got ONE POINT from four matches against the two decent teams in your group?

The seedings aren't perfect of course, but performance in the current qualifying groups has to be a better guide to quality than either the previous competition or recent friendlies.

Contanta. You're quoting something I didn't say! Try and read other posts properly before describing them as rubbish. You are self-evidently not in the top twenty in the World. I won't hazard a guess to your exact position, but does it really matter? Wales took more points in qualifying against Italy than you did against Switzerland and Russia combined.

Parnell. Are you sure? Football is a larger participant sport in the Republic than either GAA code. Northern Ireland qualified for the recent UEFA U-17 Finals- unlike Germany, Italy and the Republic. If you need any info about the game up there, I'd be glad to help.

[Sheridan]

Neil. Like I said, no-one denies you were a good team two years ago. But the evidence you aren't now is that two mediocre teams finished ahead of you.
I'm no huge fan of the Barstool XI or their supporters, but there's no denying that they're one of the top teams in Europe, just on the fringes of the Germany-France-Italy-Netherlands-Spain-England axis (although England's inclusion in that group is questionable; Sweden, one of the most consistent and consistently underrated nations in football, should probably be there instead.) The FIFA Rankings are balls, and Ireland (like Swtizerland) will always have an artificially high position because they were well-placed in the original version 11 years ago, but 14th place is hardly as conspicuously stupid as Mexico in 6th, the USA in 8th or Saudi Arabia in 23rd.

Ireland have been more or less unbeatable at home for thirty years. Euro 2004 was the first time they failed to finish in the top two of a qualifying group since 1986. Every team has its peaks and troughs, but I believe Ireland have established their natural level as one more or less consistent with their ranking (even with a sh*t team, they almost qualified for WC 98.)

[concanta]

DG

I am certainly not misqouting you - and I repeat my opinion that yopu are talking rubbish. Your quote 19 lists a numbmer of teams that we are worse than in your opinion

[Duncan Gardner]

if we are going by your line of thinking - we are in top 16 in world so naturally we have to be in top 20 in europe.

Concanta, I neither said nor inferred that. I think you are outside the top twenty in Europe- for which I offered plenty of evidence. It obviously follows from that, that you must be outside the top twenty in the World NOW- as I say, no-one disputes you were much better two years ago.

If you really think I'm talking rubbish, offer some evidence. Otherwise, keep shtum.

Davros- just to correct your claim that the RoI didn't enter the UEFA U-17, you were knocked out in the first qualifying stage by Austria, Switzerland and Belarus. Meanwhile, we were disposing of Croatia, Malta, Belgium, Scotland and Belarus again.

Sheridan. "More or less unbeatable"? Less, I think they'd say down Suisse way...

[Sheridan]

Sheridan. "More or less unbeatable"? Less, I think they'd say down Suisse way...
Yes, because one exception (or, more accurately, four in nineteen years) renders the phrase "more or less" invalid. :rolleyes:

I suppose Ireland have just been lucky not to come up against quality opposition like Armenia, or that record might have taken a battering.

[Duncan Gardner]

Sheridan. I think we've already covered the 'NI aren't very good' topic exhaustively. As I've said here, we'll remain thus until we qualify for the finals :)

I'm genuinely puzzled why so many of your fans use us as a benchmark, since we're so poor. (And that's even before we get onto the sectarian halfwits with their 'occupied-six-counties-locked-my-granda-out-of-the-house' malarkey, not that I'm suggesting you're one of them). Why not Denmark, a country of roughly equivalent population? Is it because they usually qualify and you don't?

Davros. Let me explain this to you carefully. The references you quote (apart from your own, which are as charmingly incoherent as ever) stress Ireland's consistency in previous tournaments. Something I acknowledge explicitly and repeatedly. But now we're talking about THIS one. In which you've been less than tasty.

Which reminds me. Lunch.

[Sheridan]

Sheridan. I think we've already covered the 'NI aren't very good' topic exhaustively. As I've said here, we'll remain thus until we qualify for the finals :)

I'm genuinely puzzled why so many of your fans use us as a benchmark, since we're so poor. (And that's even before we get onto the sectarian halfwits with their 'occupied-six-counties-locked-my-granda-out-of-the-house' malarkey, not that I'm suggesting you're one of them).
To be honest, I thought (and think) that your arguments on this topic were just reflexive, irrational nonsense with no basis in fact. Once I'd exhausted the didactic route with no success, I decided to hit back in the same spirit ;)


Why not Denmark, a country of roughly equivalent population? Is it because they usually qualify and you don't?
It's because the Danes decided they'd actually put the effort into building a football culture in their country, created a league of appropriate strength to the size of the nation from scratch, and are reaping the rewards. Whereas most muppets here couldn't be bothered with all that.

[gspain]

I think our world ranking is about right.

We were poor against both the Swiss and Russians however performances in recent friendlies and in WC2002 have been excellent.

The next qualifying campaign will tell a lot. I'm still concerned that the 2 biggest games we've played unde rBrian Kerr were the 2 games where we lacked fight and bottle yet we had it in spades for the friendlies. Runners up is the minimum acceptable in the group

[gspain]

BTW football is far and away the biggest sport in the country player wise which is what counts. Yes the gAA draw bigger crowds than our domestic football but we have far more players and consistently draw far bigger tv audiences as well.

[Littlest Hobo]

Concanta, I neither said nor inferred that. I think you are outside the top twenty in Europe- for which I offered plenty of evidence. It obviously follows from that, that you must be outside the top twenty in the World NOW- as I say, no-one disputes you were much better two years ago.

If you really think I'm talking rubbish, offer some evidence. Otherwise, keep shtum.

Davros- just to correct your claim that the RoI didn't enter the UEFA U-17, you were knocked out in the first qualifying stage by Austria, Switzerland and Belarus. Meanwhile, we were disposing of Croatia, Malta, Belgium, Scotland and Belarus again.

Sheridan. "More or less unbeatable"? Less, I think they'd say down Suisse way...

100 and what again :confused: My computer crashed before I could make it all that way to the end of the rankings list. :mad: Please remind me where the north are again????

Oh, Just to remind you, the Norths next friendly will be against our local the Black Bull. I'm presently clearin over a few issues with your FA, regarding the date, venue and tickets allocation. Discussions are coming along fine and theres a good chance it will get the go ahead. :D
I know you lot are pushing for a spot in the top one hundred, we need to exercise to lose the beer guts and are up for kicking the **** out of a few Huns. Also We need our new striker Pat 'the baker' Kelly to finally get off the mark, coz he's bloody awful He's an old git and all, with a gut the size of a whale.
It will be good for your man Healy to try his luck against our central man, Mickey 'The Chopper' Maguire. Now that won't be a pretty sight :eek:

I'm pushing for a home fixture for us at the 'Matador arena'.
What with your usual travelling contingency and our ferverant home support, I'm expecting about 70 or so to turn up.
The IFA are pretty keen, coz they will probably bag about 50 quid from the outing.

Get ready to rumble :D

[eirebhoy]

No-one's saying you're not consistent Mick, merely that over the last two years (who cares about the last 10?), you're self-evidently not one of the top twenty teams in Europe. You're not as good as Latvia, Slovenia, Wales, Norway or Scotland. You're still better than the occupied illegal six country sectarian statelet, you say? Well, fcukety diddle-doo and bully for ye!
:D I actually thought you were being sarcastic at first.

Now, by your logic, and this is 100% by your logic. Because France didn't get a point or score a goal in the last World Cup means that as of 30th June, Senegal, Uruguay, Denmark, South Africa, Paraguay, Spain, Costa Rica, Turkey, Brazil, Poland, Portugal, USA, South Korea, Cameroon, Ireland, Germany, Argentina, Nigeria, England, Sweden, Mexico, Italy, Croatia, Ecuador, Japan, Belgium, Russia and Tunisia were all better than France.

Cop on mate.

[concanta]

Hear Hear eireboy - totally agree with you

[Duncan Gardner]

Ah, my little cretinous friend's back. I hope you cut and pasted that example of searing wit and didn't have to laboriously type it out again. Stick to colouring in, son :)

Eirebhoy. France actually managed a point in the World Cup, agin Uruguay. Maybe you dozed off, it was pretty boring. But even apart from that, your example's misplaced. France were inactive through not having to qualify and then rubbish in the finals (though they seem to have recovered). Your poor performances in qualifying were spread over two seasons. No getting away from it, your team's not as good as it was.

Davros. What are you talking about? Are you suggesting that I really think the South are a great side worthy of at least ninth rank in Europe, and am just saying the opposite to wind up some of your fans? If so, don't be silly. As you- and other readers here- know perfectly well, I've always thought the rankings are pretty distorted. Not because NI don't deserve to be in the bottom ten in Europe- we do- but because the standings generally exaggerate countries in North America and Asia at the expense of the other continents.

Sheridan- try to stick to the point rather than showing off how verbose you are. There's nothing 'didactic' about giving up and reverting to witless sarcasm when someone just as well informed disagrees with you :)

That's a very interesting explanation as to why many of your fans, when all else fails, will resort to "Ah, but we're better than the North'. Sure, the Danish League is better than either in Ireland, but it's not exactly a big source of players for their senior squad. Two players in Portugal, with four caps between them.

[Sheridan]

Sheridan- try to stick to the point rather than showing off how verbose you are.
Bite me.

There's nothing 'didactic' about giving up and reverting to witless sarcasm when someone just as well informed disagrees with you :)
I wouldn't presume to argue with someone who was as well-informed on a particular subject. I try to help, where I'm needed. Look at the thanks I get!

That's a very interesting explanation as to why many of your fans, when all else fails, will resort to "Ah, but we're better than the North'.
Because they're nationalistic a*sholes and that's the only form of argument they understand. As to why you're trying to pretend that Ireland aren't among the top two or three in the second rank of European nations, I'm at a loss.


Sure, the Danish League is better than either in Ireland, but it's not exactly a big source of players for their senior squad. Two players in Portugal, with four caps between them.
I'm pretty sure every single one of them played senior football in Denmark at one point (Gronkjaer was at Ajax as a teenager, but I think even he played league football in Denmark.) This is the crucial point. Denmark achieved this level of football development from an amateur, standing start in the 60s and 70s.

[1MickCollins]

Ah, my little cretinous friend's back. I hope you cut and pasted that example of searing wit and didn't have to laboriously type it out again. Stick to colouring in, son :)

Eirebhoy. France actually managed a point in the World Cup, agin Uruguay. Maybe you dozed off, it was pretty boring. But even apart from that, your example's misplaced. France were inactive through not having to qualify and then rubbish in the finals (though they seem to have recovered). Your poor performances in qualifying were spread over two seasons. No getting away from it, your team's not as good as it was.

Davros. What are you talking about? Are you suggesting that I really think the South are a great side worthy of at least ninth rank in Europe, and am just saying the opposite to wind up some of your fans? If so, don't be silly. As you- and other readers here- know perfectly well, I've always thought the rankings are pretty distorted. Not because NI don't deserve to be in the bottom ten in Europe- we do- but because the standings generally exaggerate countries in North America and Asia at the expense of the other continents.

Sheridan- try to stick to the point rather than showing off how verbose you are. There's nothing 'didactic' about giving up and reverting to witless sarcasm when someone just as well informed disagrees with you :)

That's a very interesting explanation as to why many of your fans, when all else fails, will resort to "Ah, but we're better than the North'. Sure, the Danish League is better than either in Ireland, but it's not exactly a big source of players for their senior squad. Two players in Portugal, with four caps between them.

Duncan you seem to have about 99% of the world's hot air inside you, I'm glad you have found an outlet for it.

The FIFA rankings are a joke, and likewise ranking teams based on group qualification over a season and a half isn't very accurate either. Turkey reached the semi-final of WC2002 along with S.Korea, does that mean that S.Korea are even a top 10 team? A top 20 team?

On any given day any team can beat another, so the longer you measure performance over the more accurate the result. Come back in 2 years time and if we fail to qualify for WC2006 then I will agree with you we are no longer
a top 20 side.

[eirebhoy]

Eirebhoy. France actually managed a point in the World Cup, agin Uruguay. Maybe you dozed off, it was pretty boring. But even apart from that, your example's misplaced. France were inactive through not having to qualify and then rubbish in the finals (though they seem to have recovered). Your poor performances in qualifying were spread over two seasons. No getting away from it, your team's not as good as it was.
Sorry, forgot about that but nearly all of the teams I named still did better than them in the world cup.

I'll give you another example. Are Porto better than Milan, Real Madrid and Arsenal just because they won the CL? Are Greece better than Holland and Spain just because they won their group? Holland came 3rd in their qualifying group for WC2002, does that mean they Slovakia, Scotland, Belarus, Israel, Georgia and Finland would be as good as them?

[Duncan Gardner]

On any given day any team can beat another, so the longer you measure performance over the more accurate the result

No, because you measure results only over a discrete period, not indefinitely. In club/ league football that's over one season, in internationals over a qualifying series across two seasons.

The longer you measure, say, Leeds United's performance over recent years, the more misleading the result. Average last season's points with the previous season, they'd have stayed up; factor in the previous four seasons, qualification for Europe. Two years with eight or ten competitive games is long enough to compare international teams. Go back four, six or eight as you prefer, and you'r talking about largely different squads of players etc.

Eirebhoy. See my previous answer(s). Having seen Spain twice and Greece in this competition, yes the Greeks deserved to win the group and are thus better. The Polish referee in the Greek game was as bent as a nine bob note though... :D

[Duncan Gardner]

But you've ALREADY come third. That is, er, my evidence that you're not as good as you were.

No offence to Sir Laurie with the Dirty Sanchez tag. Mind you, in the unlikely event we make it to D'land 2006, they'll probably name the road to the new Long Kesh Superstadium after him :D

Next.

[1MickCollins]

No, because you measure results only over a discrete period, not indefinitely.

8 games Duncan?? 8 games?? Let me count them

2 versus Russia
2 versus Switz
2 versus Albania
2 versus Georgia

You want to decide on the basis of 8 games we are not top 20? Aaah??? Hmn, no that doesn't make sense to me.

When Holland failed to qualify for the WC2002, did they syop being a Top 20 team?

[Duncan Gardner]

Yes.

Next.

[Plastic Paddy]

"There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics" Benjamin Disraeli

Given that you're doing a grand job as the lone Apprentice Boy at this particular Siege of Derry, Duncan, this one could run and run... ;) :D

:D PP

[Duncan Gardner]

Alas not PP, I have to sign off today (not so much Euro 2004 as I'm about to become both a student and busier at work).

Next class is in libel btw :)

Actually I think half of them agree with me but don't want to break ranks...

[Plastic Paddy]

I saw a post of yours the other day about an interview... the best of luck with your studies. Just what the world needs - more lawyers! :rolleyes: ;)

:D PP

[1MickCollins]

Yes.

Next.

Duncan it is hard to believe that you are as big an idiot as you appear, but I guess it is so. You have nothing to offer this board.

[Plastic Paddy]

Duncan it is hard to believe that you are as big an idiot as you appear, but I guess it is so. You have nothing to offer this board.

You're out of line there Mick. There are plenty who behave far, far worse on this board than Duncan (see the first line here (http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=131630&postcount=22) for an example), and I don't see you calling them to order. Just because he chooses to play devil's advocate doesn't make him an idiot. And, given the debate he can stir up, I'd say he has plenty to offer this board. More than can be said for some who post here.

:) PP

[1MickCollins]

You're out of line there Mick. There are plenty who behave far, far worse on this board than Duncan (see the first line here (http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=131630&postcount=22) for an example), and I don't see you calling them to order. Just because he chooses to play devil's advocate doesn't make him an idiot. And, given the debate he can stir up, I'd say he has plenty to offer this board. More than can be said for some who post here.

:) PP

I wasn't suggesting Duncan was abusive but rather that his opinions are just such a waste of time. To him S.Korea is a top 10 team in 2002 while Holland is not even in the top 20? My granny has more sense.

IMHO there is no easy way to rank teams, but you could group them into levels based on performance over 4 years.

Very often in group qualifiers one bad result can be fatal.

[Plastic Paddy]

I wasn't suggesting Duncan was abusive but rather that his opinions are just such a waste of time. To him S.Korea is a top 10 team in 2002 while Holland is not even in the top 20? My granny has more sense.

I know you weren't labelling him as such, Mick. As far as I see it, Duncan's only fishing, and plenty of people are falling for the hook. Considering some of the abuse he gets on here from certain quarters (you know who you are ;) ) he does well to stick around and not be abusive in retaliation.


IMHO there is no easy way to rank teams, but you could group them into levels based on performance over 4 years.

Very often in group qualifiers one bad result can be fatal.

I'm inclined to agree with you. However, when it comes down to it there's only one way in which these things can be decided, and that's on the field of play in tournaments such as the one we're *ahem* not playing in right now... *sob* :(

:) PP

[lopez]

Sorry but Duncan needs some back up here. Talking a bit of the auld cojones himself perhaps - especially the bit that Greece deserved to win his group - but then don't we all? - my own coup de grace was suggesting RMK singlehandedly helped Ireland come second in the 1998 WC group stages. Anyway he stuck up for me on ourweeminds.com and I'm sticking up for him here (in hope of a beer perhaps). Definitely no eejit! :)

[brine2]

Brian's boys got ONE point from two games. The other two matches were played under d'previous manager. (as he is now known)

Holland failed to get into the playoffs for 2002, and were still fifth in the World, which also shows how ridiculous the system is.

FIFA Rankings: Abolish them now!

[lopez]

You might as well wait for Spain to win a major championship..... :D Good luck in the group decider,Weds.....I'll have a drink off him before then. BTW, my team's group decider will hopefully be a day later unless they haven't been slung out by then... ;)

You're out of line there Mick. There are plenty who behave far, far worse on this board than Duncan (see the first line here (http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=131630&postcount=22) for an example)...I thought you were bringing back your old amigo Siete Braincells, but cripes this bloke is even more intellectually challenged (perhaps 'Seis braincells'?) :eek:

[Plastic Paddy]

I thought you were bringing back your old amigo Siete Braincells, but cripes this bloke is even more intellectually challenged (perhaps 'Seis braincells'?) :eek:

I had a sneaking feeling that this "gmani" character that's joined us recently was ESS reinvented, but the as-yet lack of antediluvian opinion from him/her/it makes me think otherwise.

How's things yourself anyway? Sorry to have missed you at the Jamaica game, although I see you got to meet Liam 18 and his extended family. :)

:) PP

[lopez]

And mine too, Dav.

Paddy, don't know if I got to meet Liam as I was strugling with some Jerk Chi-kahn at the time he was on the platform, while before the game me and Pat O'B were getting a lesson in Jamaican patois from a lad from Ballyfermot via Kensal Rise. Hopefully you take it easy tonight and not smirk too much to the missus when Henry get's his hat-trick. :eek:

[Plastic Paddy]

Hopefully you take it easy tonight and not smirk too much to the missus when Henry get's his hat-trick. :eek:

I think I must have been bad in a former life, since she's invited eight Tans around to watch the match in our living room and I get to play Irish servant-boy (oh, how history repeats... ;) ) by keeping them all plied with beer and snacks. Hmm, maybe it's a good thing that they've scored, otherwise they'd probably defenestrate all the furniture before starting a fight with my cat... :rolleyes: ;)

:ball: PP

[gmani]

Come on now Dav, be fair. While we're off beating the likes of Holland, our friends are playing all-comers on islands across the Caribbean to get the result. Where next for our intrepid heroes? Watch out Western Samoa... :p

;) PP

yeh while we can beat the likes of Holland and draw with the likes of Brazil but we can't beat the likes of jamaica WAKE UP!!! :mad: