Trapattoni - who would you replace him with?

[DannyInvincible]

Trap's replacement may not have as tough a job qualifying for Euro 2016 as I'd feared. Greenscene have just published this seeding predictions list: http://greenscene.me/2013/09/euro-2016-qualifying-seeding-predictions/

It potentially sees us as the highest ranked team in the third pot based on World Cup 2010 results (weighted at 20 per cent of the ranking points total), Euro 2012 results (weighted at 40 per cent) and World Cup 2014 results (also weighted at 40 per cent). For some reason, I'd thought our current FIFA ranking within UEFA would play a more significant role in dictating our seeding. If our seeding was dependent on that, we'd be in pot four.

[Charlie Darwin]

Keep digging. The statement is in black and white. It agrees with my summation above. The medical teams made the decision and the manager gave his blessing since we had sufficient cover. It's very simple.

I'm not implying it, I've already stated it above. With his injury record, the fact that he has to protect his livelihood plus the fact that he isn't a starter, it was agreed by all parties that Joey could choose to withdraw from the squad, play for West Ham and receive his treatment during the break.
Or... he was fit enough to play for his club, like most other players in the squad did that weekend, and the management decided that the following week would be better spent resting than flying around Europe to sit on the bench? That's not putting club before country - that's acknowledging that not everybody can play that much football in such a short time when recovering from an injury.

[DannyInvincible]

I'm not implying it, I've already stated it above. With his injury record, the fact that he has to protect his livelihood plus the fact that he isn't a starter, it was agreed by all parties that Joey could choose to withdraw from the squad, play for West Ham and receive his treatment during the break.

But is that to lack commitment in the same way it might be said that Gibson's commitment has been suspect? Isn't that what you were implying?

[Irwin3]

Or... he was fit enough to play for his club, like most other players in the squad did that weekend, and the management decided that the following week would be better spent resting than flying around Europe to sit on the bench? That's not putting club before country - that's acknowledging that not everybody can play that much football in such a short time when recovering from an injury.

We're singing from the same hymn sheet except I define it as club over country. He doesn't really have a choice due to the limits of his body and the fact that he has to earn a livelihood, but to me, that is exactly what it is.

[Irwin3]

But is that to lack commitment in the same way it might be said that Gibson's commitment has been suspect? Isn't that what you were implying?

Yeah, I gave a variety of examples of other players in different circumstances making choices to withdraw from selection.

[DannyInvincible]

We're singing from the same hymn sheet except I define it as club over country. He doesn't really have a choice due to the limits of his body and the fact that he has to earn a livelihood, but to me, that is exactly what it is.

Obviously, the difference is that Joey has little to no choice. Gibson's choice is not limited by an injury concern.

[SwanVsDalton]

You can't let it go. Nowhere have I misrepresented what you said. I explained it earlier with the parentheses.

You were saying that people thought he was ****e because of his performances but that by the same token that these performances helped him to get a move

I never wrote that. I wrote Gibson selections was decried by a small section of support and media. I wrote Moyes would value Trap's opinion and faith in a player he's looking at purchasing.

That's Trap's opinion he values and that which he see with his own eyes (since he likely saw Gibson play for Ireland). Not the media or the fans'.

I've explained this three times, and you swung and missed each time while being
fairly insulting. That's ok, the door's swung both ways but you haven't been able to take much stick back. And if you still can't grasp the very, very obvious distinction between what I wrote and what you think it means, I doubt you ever will.

[DannyInvincible]

Yeah, I gave a variety of examples of other players in different circumstances making choices to withdraw from selection.

Steven Reid was another player, like Joey O'Brien, troubled by long-term injury problems, so a comparison between his virtually forced withdrawal from international duty and Gibson's voluntary opting out is again unfair. And you weren't seriously questioning the commitment of Damien Duff (100 caps in 14 years of service) because he retired from country before club at the age of 33, are you?

[Irwin3]

I never wrote that. I wrote Gibson selections was decried by a small section of support and media. I wrote Moyes would value Trap's opinion and faith in a player he's looking at purchasing.

That's Trap's opinion he values and that which he see with his own eyes (since he likely saw Gibson play for Ireland). Not the media or the fans'.

I've explained this three times, and you swung and missed each time while being
fairly insulting. That's ok, the door's swung both ways but you haven't been able to take much stick back. And if you can't graps the very, very obvious distinction between what I wrote and what you think means, I doubt you ever will.

I've quoted what you said. It's in plain English. You said this:


This despite Gibson's continued selection being held up by a section of support/media as an example of Trap's muppetry.

This clearly implies that people were saying he was ****e, which they indeed were saying. I'm not swinging at anything. You are refusing to acknowledge your own words.

If Moyes valued Trap's opinions then he would have bought Paul Green and Keith Andrews since both were on free transfers and both were rated above Gibson.

I think the one being insulting is the one suggesting that the other is attempting whataboutery, that the other is Darron and that you can tag team someone in to save you from dealing with them.

[Irwin3]

Steven Reid was another player, like Joey O'Brien, troubled by long-term injury problems, so a comparison between his virtually forced withdrawal from international duty and Gibson's voluntary opting out is again unfair. And you weren't seriously questioning the commitment of Damien Duff (100 caps in 14 years of service) because he retired from country before club at the age of 33, are you?

Of course not. Like I said, I simply gave a list of players who made choices.

Duff - retired after years of service at 33. Continues to play well at high level for club.
O'Brien - injury problems mean he has to manage schedule.
Reid - retired to focus on club career but remained open to a recall.

[DannyInvincible]

So, what's their relevance to Gibson in that case?

[Irwin3]

So, what's their relevance to Gibson in that case?

That they all made choices to withdraw from selection. It's pretty clear really.

[Charlie Darwin]

We're singing from the same hymn sheet except I define it as club over country. He doesn't really have a choice due to the limits of his body and the fact that he has to earn a livelihood, but to me, that is exactly what it is.
You can't ask a player to skip a game he's fit for just so he can be potentially sit on the bench for a game the following week. It's madness.

[Irwin3]

You can't ask a player to skip a game he's fit for just so he can be potentially sit on the bench for a game the following week. It's madness.

I don't believe anyone did.

[DannyInvincible]

That they all made choices to withdraw from selection. It's pretty clear really.

Incomparable choices. Wasn't your implication that all mentioned withdrawals could be viewed in a similar light to Gibson's?

[Closed Account 2]

Bert van Maarwijk could be a good shout. He was very impressive in qualification for Wc 2010 and Euro 2012, in tournaments he did very well in South Africa, getting them to the final. Euro 2012 was a stinker for his side though.

[Irwin3]

Incomparable choices. Wasn't your implication that all mentioned withdrawals could be viewed in a similar light to Gibson's?

That's your opinion. They're similar in the fact that they all made choices. We can all compare and judge them how we like.

[DannyInvincible]

That's your opinion. They're similar in the fact that they all made choices. We can all compare and judge them how we like.

But you admitted yourself that Joey O'Brien "doesn't really have a choice due to the limits of his body and the fact that he has to earn a livelihood". He clearly doesn't enjoy the luxury of unrestrained choice that Gibson does.

[Charlie Darwin]

I don't believe anyone did.
Of course they didn't, because common sense prevailed. Yet you'd say he put his club before his country, when in fact all he was doing was playing football.

[Irwin3]

But you admitted yourself that Joey O'Brien "doesn't really have a choice due to the limits of his body and the fact that he has to earn a livelihood". He clearly doesn't enjoy the luxury of unrestrained choice that Gibson does.

He doesn't really have a choice because his club is his one and only viable choice. I'm sure Gibson could argue that he had little choice either, rather than the 'luxury of unrestrained choice' that you put it as. Maybe he is to stubborn like he admitted but he might see it as giving in and therefore damaging to his psychological well-being if he gave in.

[SwanVsDalton]

I've quoted what you said. It's in plain English. You said this:



This clearly implies that people were saying he was ****e, which they indeed were saying. I'm not swinging at anything. You are refusing to acknowledge your own words.

If Moyes valued Trap's opinions then he would have bought Paul Green and Keith Andrews since both were on free transfers and both were rated above Gibson

Again totally disingenuous and misleading. In the previous post you took two quotes in 'plain English' and misread them to make a redundant zero sum rebuttal.

But in this post you've referred to just one quote (which you got right), conviently left out the other and completely ignored the actual substance of what I wrote in my last post - like you've ignored pretty much everything else I've written today. Either respond to the substance of my points or stop trolling.

[Irwin3]

Of course they didn't, because common sense prevailed. Yet you'd say he put his club before his country, when in fact all he was doing was playing football.

Yes, for his club.

[Irwin3]

Again totally disingenuous and misleading. In the previous post you took two quotes in 'plain English' and misread them to make a redundant zero sum rebuttal.

But in this post you've referred to just one quote (which you got right), conviently left out the other and completely ignored the actual substance of what I wrote in my last post - like you've ignored pretty much everything else I've written today. Either respond to the substance of my points or stop trolling.

I'm not misreading anything. It's there for all to see.

[DannyInvincible]

I simply don't agree with anyone who says we haven't got the players to compete against second and third seeded teams. This is the biggest fallacy shooting the rounds at the moment.


Big time. European international football is as congested as it has ever been. Beneath a handful of top class teams - Spain, Germany, Holland, maybe Italy - everyone else, bar the minnows, should be looking to win every game. Sure there's only a hair's breadth between all of them.

Now with qualification for the Euros more open for ever, the idea we can't compete is laughable. Every game - bar a few - will be a lottery, but that was no different when we went to Poland. Barring a nightmare draw, France 2016 is there for the taking.

There's been a bit of over-lap between threads since the loss to Austria and Trap's departure, so I'm not sure if yous saw it, but I posted the following in the "Ireland-Sweden" match thread (http://foot.ie/threads/182297-Ireland-Sweden-(6th-September-2013)?p=1709489&viewfull=1#post1709489) which could be seen as a response of sorts:

Do we genuinely have the ability to consistently compete with the more technically-proficient sides though? A team like Croatia will always be favourites in a game between themselves and ourselves. Qualification will always be more likely for them than it is for us. I use them as a standard or as an example of where we could be with some astute organisation as we share similar populations but they make such a better job of the resources they have available to them.

I suppose what I'm saying is that things could be a lot better than how they are now where we're talking about merely competing with second or third-seeded teams. Can't we hope of consistently beating them some day? It sounds a bit clichéd, but last time we beat a team ranked above us in a competitive game?...

Obviously, I'm not saying we can be Spain or Germany, but we could at least give ourselves a better chance than what we offer ourselves at present.

[Irwin3]

It sounds a bit clichéd, but last time we beat a team ranked above us in a competitive game?...

Someone mentioned it earlier, Stan beating Slovakia.

[DannyInvincible]

Someone mentioned it earlier, Stan beating Slovakia.

Had overlooked that, for some reason. It seems you're right; we were ranked 51st in March of 2007 and Slovakia were ranked 37th.

Why is the Holland game in 2002 often cited as the last time we beat a higher-ranked opponent in a competitive fixture?

Edit: Holland game was in 2001, of course.

[Irwin3]

Had overlooked that, for some reason. It seems you're right; we were ranked 51st in March of 2007 and Slovakia were ranked 37th.

Why is the Holland game in 2002 often cited as the last time we beat a higher-ranked opponent in a competitive fixture?

It's because they were a top 2 seed. There was a piece floating around the other day on how ineffectual we have always been against the 1st & 2nd, 2nd & 3rd or 1st & 3rd seeds throughout the last 25 odd years of qualifying.

[Charlie Darwin]

Yes, for his club.
Yes, his managers both agreed that the best place for him to play would be his club. He has numerous serious knee injuries, injuries that aren't helped by sitting on a plane unnecessarily. The management clearly decided that he wasn't the right fit for this international but if he kept playing football and managed his injury that he was still in the frame. You've attempted to spin this as an example of O'Brien choosing his club over his country similar to Gibson or Given when it is patently untrue.

[SwanVsDalton]

To salvage something from a heartbreaking amount of time wasted on Gibson, I'm wondering - is there anyone currently considered in exile you wouldn't want back?

The slate should be wiped clean for everyone, I feel, although as aforementioned (ad nauseum) I'll always have reservations about Gibson. Still he gets a couple of years under his belt trouble free, and plenty would be forgiven and forgotten.

What about Stokes? Would you have Andy Reid back in the squad? Ireland?! I'd have thought Stevie's blown it simply because he ain't that good, no matter how paltry our resources.

If (big if) a manager was in place for Germany, it'd almost be like unearthing new players to see Gibson, Joey O'Brien et al in the squad and given active roles.

[Charlie Darwin]

I don't think there's anyone I wouldn't have back in principle. On form, Ireland is definitely out and S Reid and Gibson's chronic injury situations mean they're very much in the maybe pile.

[SwanVsDalton]

I don't think there's anyone I wouldn't have back in principle. On form, Ireland is definitely out and S Reid and Gibson's chronic injury situations mean they're very much in the maybe pile.

I didn't even include Steven Reid because I can't see him managing the extra playing load on top of his injuries. Besides would he even be considered a midfielder anymore and do we need him as an RB?

Is Gibson now a chronic injury case? He does pick them up though I hadn't gone that far in my thinking.

[Irwin3]

Yes, his managers both agreed that the best place for him to play would be his club. He has numerous serious knee injuries, injuries that aren't helped by sitting on a plane unnecessarily. The management clearly decided that he wasn't the right fit for this international but if he kept playing football and managed his injury that he was still in the frame. You've attempted to spin this as an example of O'Brien choosing his club over his country similar to Gibson or Given when it is patently untrue.

I agree with most of what you say on this matter except I classify it ultimately as club over country. Disagree all you want but you are not God.

[Charlie Darwin]

I didn't even include Steven Reid because I can't see him managing the extra playing load on top of his injuries. Besides would he even be considered a midfielder anymore and do we need him as an RB?

Is Gibson now a chronic injury case? He does pick them up though I hadn't gone that far in my thinking.
I haven't looked it up, but I'm reasonably sure Gibson has been injured for all, or most, of the international windows since he decided he wouldn't play for Trap. Granted, so had Pilkington until last week, but Gibson seems to be further into the chronic stage. He's missed large chunks of the last three seasons, including the first months of the past two.


I agree with most of what you say on this matter except I classify it ultimately as club over country. Disagree all you want but you are not God.
I could be god, you don't know that. But, yeah, I guess we'll agree to disagree but I think you are failing to see the shades of grey here.

[Spudulika]

looks like the MON meeja love in is about to come to fruition. Nice, intelligent man, but we can forget about nice football and a removal of player conflict. But if that happened there'd be nothing to comment on. Ads don't sell themselves.

[DannyInvincible]

Has Gibson been injured for all? I'd thought there might have been one or two squads where it was expected he'd be available. I don't think he was injured when we played England at the end of May. He was on his stag-do in Marbella at the time, if I recall correctly. Not that that proves he wasn't injured, mind, and I am open to correction on it. Regardless, it's not as if he'd have accepted a call-up anyway as it seems he was intentionally avoiding any of Trap's attempts at communication.


It's because they were a top 2 seed. There was a piece floating around the other day on how ineffectual we have always been against the 1st & 2nd, 2nd & 3rd or 1st & 3rd seeds throughout the last 25 odd years of qualifying.

Indeed, Slovakia were a pot three team for Euro 2008 qualifying whilst we were in the fourth pot. Interestingly, just looking back, the Czechs were top seeds and Germany were in pot two then.


I agree with most of what you say on this matter except I classify it ultimately as club over country. Disagree all you want but you are not God.

Wasn't Darwin the undoing of God?

[ArdeeBhoy]

Tbf, Irwin comes out on top here. Mildly surprised to see him taking on the Doire boys, who're a formidable combination. But with even the Irish soccer team, shocks do happen...

[SwanVsDalton]

Tbf, Irwin comes out on top here. Mildly surprised to see him taking on the Doire boys, who're a formidable combination. But with even the Irish soccer team, shocks do happen...

Rather like the Irish soccer team in their better Trap days, Irwin's refusal to read the writing on the wall/screen made him tough opposition to break down. :)

[SwanVsDalton]

Not sure where else to put this, but there has been some discussion on the 'Belgium' method - but interesting piece by Rory Smith (http://espnfc.com/blog/_/name/espnfcunited/id/9376?cc=5739) says it's no guarantee and every country needs a large slice of luck for a golden generation to emerge.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Well exactly. Belgium are as 'cyclical' as us. Prefer the example of Denmark as an 'aspiration'...

[bishbash]

The frustrating thing is how polar opposite opinions and ideas seem to be. If you criticised Traps style it's suggested that Ireland don't have the players to play like Spain or play free flowing attacking football. Who said we did? I don't expect Ireland to be Spain but , I believe, that it's a reasonable enough expectation to pass the ball a couple of times on the ground. Maybe have a little bit more of a measured approach to attacking while still being a hard team to break down. No doubt I believe our approach should be that we are hard to beat but we do have players, played in a different system, to both attack & defend reasonably well. Inope the new man can utilise what's available to us, which I believe is more than what Trap suggested.

[bennocelt]

down to 59th in world rankings

Iceland, wales , cape verde islands , and uzbekistan are all ahead of us
http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtable/index.html


Strangely enough both might make it to the world cup yet!:eek:

[ArdeeBhoy]

They won't. Even though it'd be ace if they did.

[SwanVsDalton]

Strangely enough both might make it to the world cup yet!:eek:

Cape Verde banished for fielding an illegible player (http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/cape-verde-islands-thrown-out-of-world-cup-qualification-for-fielding-ineligible-player-just-one-round-short-of-reaching-the-showcase-tournament-8812454.html) unfortunately.

Dan McDonnell just tweeted a reported quote from Mick McCarthy saying O'Neill is 'nailed on' and 'a shoo-in' for the job. This could be dusted in record time.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Mick speaks.

http://thescore.thejournal.ie/mick-mccarthy-martin-oneill-1082138-Sep2013/

[legendz]

I'd agree with MO'N as manager at this point in time. There's an underground type movement who would like to see Mick McCarthy return to manage Ireland but I would say not right now.

[DannyInvincible]

Not sure where else to put this, but there has been some discussion on the 'Belgium' method - but interesting piece by Rory Smith (http://espnfc.com/blog/_/name/espnfcunited/id/9376?cc=5739) says it's no guarantee and every country needs a large slice of luck for a golden generation to emerge.

I'm not wholly convinced. Rather than some mysterious or unhidden hand playing its part in your fortunes, I think you make your own "luck". Some wisened young Roman put it best when he said, "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity". I think Smith almost paraphrases in a footballing context and goes some way towards admitting this in his penultimate paragraph:


That is not to suggest there is nothing that can be done. The conditions must be created to allow those players to shine should they arrive.

Besides, I'd rather our ambitions and achievements weren't dependent or reliant on this "luck". We can sit back and dream about being due a fat slice of it, and a golden generation to boot (or our solitary once-in-a-score world-class player, even...), or we can ensure that we organise the Irish game and prepare our footballers properly en masse. The latter approach will always prove more fruitful and likely to breed success. There is no cycle; we're two decades behind the heavyweights and will simply be left further behind as more and more associations follow suit. "Luck" certainly won't be making up the lost ground for us.

Isaac Cuenca, Cristian Tello and Martin Montoya may not be of the quality of Xavi or Iniesta in the eyes of Smith, but it's a sure bet they'll still be exceptionally competent footballers. If a progressive framework can't guarantee winning the World Cup, it can at least guarantee a team's competitiveness and ensure they'll never plummet down the rankings to 59th again. The idea of putting in place what would essentially be a lower threshold buffer line, whilst also giving us a much better chance when opportunity does fall our way, is worth taking very seriously.

[DannyInvincible]

To salvage something from a heartbreaking amount of time wasted on Gibson, I'm wondering - is there anyone currently considered in exile you wouldn't want back?

The slate should be wiped clean for everyone, I feel

Foley from the ashes?

More seriously, I do agree with you though. If a player can perform a functional role for us, let him do his talking on the pitch. How footballers live - and it must be remembered they are also human and share the same flaws as the rest of us - or what they get up to in their private lives is their business. If they're willing to do learn from the past and put themselves forward to do a job for us on the pitch, I'm happy to support that. Stephen Ireland's apparent nonchalance used to irritate me, but, over time, sympathy has become an over-riding feeling when I think about his circumstances.

[Stuttgart88]

So, it looks like we're going to have MO'N in charge?

Some have been saying he pays a negative style of football. I'm not sure it's negative, more direct, no? I know Celtic fans felt there was a lack of style in the team and this was probably true in the latter part of his tenure.

A few things stand out for me about O'Neill:

A bit like Trap he is a "system" manager, but he has employed different systems including 3 at the back.
He always bought players to fill a specific role in his systems. He'll have to make do with what he can pick for us.
He likes a big 9. Can Long, Doyle, Walters do the role he had historically trusted to Sutton, Marshall at Leicester, Hartson, Heskey or Carew?
He genuinely values width and he had some good wide players at Celtic in particular.
He has always got the best out of workmanlike centre backs.
Unlike Trap he does seem to trust talented midfielders. Moravcik and Maloney did well under him, and Miller (when not in a flat midfield 4) played his best football of his career.
Home was a fortress at Celtic, both in Scotland and Europe. Apart from 2003, European away form was awful.
In his first title successes he was a master at eeking out narrow away wins at tricky places.
Players are very loyal to him and I believe he's an extraordinary motivator.

After Mourinho's first season at Chelsea (2003?) I stuck up a new thread in World Football comparing the two. If anyone can dig it out I'd be interested. I'll have a go myself later but I'm stuck for time now. I think a lot of what I wrote might be out of date now, but I have to admit I didn't really study his style at Villa or Sunderland.

I have some concerns but by and large I think it's exciting and he'll give a real shot in the arm to the set up.

I also wonder in xx years will we look at his appointment as what started a shift to a 32 county team? Or will it create a bigger divide?

[DannyInvincible]

After Mourinho's first season at Chelsea (2003?) I stuck up a new thread in World Football comparing the two. If anyone can dig it out I'd be interested.

This looks like it: http://foot.ie/threads/21300-Mourinho-and-Martin-O-Neill?highlight=


I also wonder in xx years will we look at his appointment as what started a shift to a 32 county team? Or will it create a bigger divide?

He's a universally-popular figure across the island, but it'd be interesting to know what NI fans make of what will be our most audacious poaching attempt of them all. :cool:

NB or GR; any idea what the general mood is like amongst OWCers?

[Stuttgart88]

Thanks Danny. So basically I just rehashed a lot of what I wrote in 2005! Of course I should have added the bit about teams managed by each being renowned for set pieces.