Should Trapattoni manage Ireland for the 2014 World Cup Campaign?

[Closed Account 2]

Did Trapp actually get us to the Euro finals? He got us to the play-offs by virtue of coming second in a very soft group. The luck of the draw got us to the finals. Any of the other sides in the play-offs would probably have beaten us. On that score his record is no better than Mick's. We now know what a Trapp future would look like and it's a hideous spectacle of wasted talent, alienated players and dreadful football. Mick is no world-beater abd there are other options out there, but he would be greeted as a footballing saviour by most of our players and I suspect a growing number of supporters if he came back now.

I dont think the group was that soft. Russia have an impressive home record, and were semi finalists in Euro 2008. They fluffed their lines in the WC10 play offs, conceeding an injury time away goal to the Slovenes and then getting 2 men sent off in Slovenia.

Slovakia eliminated Italy at the last world cup and were only edged out 2-1 by Holland in the second round in Durban. We've seen Armenia were an improving side, playing decent football and not the easy touch they might have appeared to be on paper.

You say we were lucky to get Estonia in the play-offs and it's hard to argue with that - but equally well Mick's team was lucky to get Iran in the playoffs. Some of the other teams (Germany, Turkey, Czechs, Romania) could have given us a hard game then.

If we look at qualification we had some very poor results in key games under McCarthy. In the 1998 campaign the defeat in Bucharest was acceptable although coupled with a 1-1 at home it was dissapointing not to get more points off them. However, drawing 0-0 at home to Iceland and Lithuania, losing 3-2 in Skopje, we ended up 10 points behind Romania, and more crucially ended up 5 points behind the Scots in the "best second place" table (results against 1st, 3rd and 4th were counted). The Scots were the best second place team and so got to the WC directly. In the playoffs we were poor against Belgium in both legs and the Belgians themselves were not the hardest team we could have faced (we could have got the likes of Italy, Russia, Croatia or Yugoslavia).

The Euro 2000 and WC 2002 qualifications were better with less sloppy results and arguably in harder groups. We got good home results especially 1-0 vs Croatia and 2-1 vs Yugoslavia, but the only away victory was limping past Malta 3-2 in Valetta. Dropped points again in Skopje were our undo-ing.

[punkrocket]

:O Many of us here remember travelling long distances seeing good Irish teams losing. Give me Trap's unbeaten run away from home (the tournament aside) with a mediocre team any day of the year. Do you want not only not to be beaten away from home but also watch good football?

I've a minimum 8 hour journey for all our home games.
I'd miss Manuela though.

[Stuttgart88]

Yep, Manuela has to stay.

So, is the consensus keep Trap but hope he proves more adaptable and gets his act together on man management?

[tricky_colour]

I don't agree with all his decisions but if we fire the manager that brought us to our first major tourno in years theres something wrong.

Hopefully he can adapt to new a rejuvanated squad with a better philosophy. I won't be holding my breath though.

We got rid of Mick McCarthy soon enough

[OwlsFan]

I've a minimum 8 hour journey for all our home games.
I'd miss Manuela though.

Ahhh, home games. Pretty dire stuff there ok.

Manuela. I took a picture of my friend with Manuela as she strolled through Poznan prior to the Croatia game. Anyone interested?

[geysir]

Any good vibes towards Tardelli taking over?
That would allow Trap to save face, giving way to his protégé. Trap can maintain a respectful distance. He needs to be closer to home, less travelling. That excuse worked when he wanted to leave Benfica, there could be still some milage left on it

[SwanVsDalton]

I'd be positive on Tardelli. Danger of same old, same old approach, but Tardelli is a better communicator and knows the players better since he's essentially Trap's eyes and ears. Plus did I read on here (or on one of the papers) that he was remonstrating with Trap during the Croatia match? Like he was describing a problem and was being ignored.

Marco might retain the positives under Trap (discipline, good defence) and marry it with some freedom on the ball.

[Junior]

Manuela. I took a picture of my friend with Manuela as she strolled through Poznan prior to the Croatia game. Anyone interested?

Was it Eamon Keegan?

[osarusan]

I'd be more concerned with who will take over from Koevermans that who would take over from Trap if he left.

Our problems run deeper than an inflexible manager at senior level.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Did Trapp actually get us to the Euro finals? He got us to the play-offs by virtue of coming second in a very soft group. The luck of the draw got us to the finals. Any of the other sides in the play-offs would probably have beaten us. On that score his record is no better than Mick's. We now know what a Trapp future would look like and it's a hideous spectacle of wasted talent, alienated players and dreadful football.

Don't forget the previous play-off draw was more blatantly fixed in terms of opponents and probably outcome, latterly, once that was in question...

[mypost]

What would it take for you to question this judgement. We have just turned in the worst ever performance by a Euro finals qualifier. We disgraced ourselves and would appear to have alienated and demoralised a significant number of our most important players.

Most neutral observers recognise the gulf in our resources and record compared to Italy and Spain. Yet we "disgraced ourselves" by not beating two world champion sides with world-class players that nobody else with far greater resources, has managed to beat either.

As for the "lucky" play-off we got, we earned that luck over the past 4 years, by getting enough results to be top seeds. Otherwise we would be in the same pot as Estonia.

Despite our problems, we don't lose heavily now very often. 0-4 results are an aberration now rather than the norm. The last coach had us losing 5 in Cyprus of all places. He had already lost by 4 by that point. That's the sort of days some people want us to go back to. The moral victory rather than the major championship.

[the bear]

There is no shame in getting beaten by Spain. Its the manner of the performances that were unacceptable.

[Stuttgart88]

Man management issues, overtraining and inlexibility require scrutiny too. Everyone accepts (to varying degrees) how getting there was an achievement and that there's a gulf in class between the top nations and our level. Nobody wants to go back to the days of chaos or moral victories.

My view is that IF man management issues continue to alienate good players (if indeed we're sure they do) then that in itself minimises chances of success, and that requires change. What this change is I don't know. I'm only a punter.

Here's a seemingly trivial but actually important question: Did Marc Wilson ever return that text? The question relates more to Wilson's attitude than Trap's btw.

[tetsujin1979]

Man management issues, overtraining and inlexibility require scrutiny too. Everyone accepts (to varying degrees) how getting there was an achievement and that there's a gulf in class between the top nations and our level. Nobody wants to go back to the days of chaos or moral victories.

My view is that IF man management issues continue to alienate good players (if indeed we're sure they do) then that in itself minimises chances of success, and that requires change. What this change is I don't know. I'm only a punter.

Here's a seemingly trivial but actually important question: Did Marc Wilson ever return that text? The question relates more to Wilson's attitude than Trap's btw.
What's a little worrying to me at the moment, is that a one line yet-to-be-confirmed quote from one player has been spun out into near squad revolution in a matter of days

[paul_oshea]

No smoke without fire Tets, and its been an ingredient of the Traps recipe since he took over.

MyPost that point losing 5 and losing 4, do you mean conceding, what are you on about? we conceded 3 and 4 in 2 euro matches, so what? Your point as usual is ridiculous. We also scored 2 in that game, so what? So if you take 2 from 5 you get 3, and then its not as bad?!?! :confused: Obviously conceding 5 is not good, but not scoring and losing 4-0(and it could have been 6 or 7), is worse to imo.

New Zealand drew with Italy at the last world cup - granted a poor Italy, which we drew with, but a poor italy - they are way below Italy in the rankings. Upsets are always possible, no matter who we play, yet the manner in which we were destroyed over there, is the big problem here, and we never came close to causing any sort of an upset. It has nothing to do with beating a top tier nation, but at least perform against them is what we ask for. Stutts also points out many of the other failings too, there is a culmination of things, and everyone should be able see these.

The thing is, if trap had gone with 4-5-1 or 4-3-3, or played with gibson and andrews, and advised us to be more attacking, we might still have lost 4-0 against spain and 3-1 against Croatia, but id be pretty sure we would have had a lot more chances and more than likely scored more than one solitary goal. The system/tactics didn't work, and it could not have been any worse trying a different formation at that point.

[tetsujin1979]

Robbie Butler examines the stats from the group games for the Independent: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/robbie-butler-ireland-were-rubbished-for-not-trying-at-euro-2012-but-the-stats-proved-they-worked-their-socks-off-3151178.html

[mypost]

MyPost that point losing 5 and losing 4, do you mean conceding, what are you on about? we conceded 3 and 4 in 2 euro matches, so what? Your point as usual is ridiculous. We also scored 2 in that game, so what? So if you take 2 from 5 you get 3, and then its not as bad?!?! :confused: Obviously conceding 5 is not good, but not scoring and losing 4-0(and it could have been 6 or 7), is worse to imo.

The thing is, if trap had gone with 4-5-1 or 4-3-3, or played with gibson and andrews, and advised us to be more attacking, we might still have lost 4-0 against spain and 3-1 against Croatia, but id be pretty sure we would have had a lot more chances and more than likely scored more than one solitary goal. The system/tactics didn't work, and it could not have been any worse trying a different formation at that point.

So we measure success now by how many chances we create, do we? As Russia showed everyone last year, you can 1 chance or 31 chances, but if the ball doesn't go in, it means nothing.

We got destroyed by better countries with better players who play for better clubs than ours, who were superior in every area of the pitch. Our system has got us where we are over the past 4 years. It's very doubtful whether changing tactics or personnel would have made any difference against that level of opposition. That's what Trap has to work with.

[geysir]

There will always be questions after we look at the performances and results at the Finals.
Rumours are being accepted as fact. Even the rumours of being overtrained are being put out as a definite contributing factor to our demise at the Euros.
Remember those rumours from another era about how our lack of training was a contributing factor?
People will believe things must be true based on something is wrong somewhere, therefore such and such a thing must be valid.
Painting Trap as some ogre might be a comfortable thought for some, but it doesn't hold water.

Trap refused to see the limitations of our game before the Finals, when by then the evidence was clear that his chosen players were not responding or able to respond to an outmanoeuvred and outnumbered midfield. He constantly stated that the players had the belief and the ability to work his system despite clear evidence to the contrary.
There is not that much to change with a squad who were capable to get to the Finals, as long as the management are prepared to recognise the failings and are prepared to change things. If Trap isn't prepared to do that, then even the Faroes will pass us off the park.

[Stuttgart88]

Robbie Butler examines the stats from the group games for the Independent: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/robbie-butler-ireland-were-rubbished-for-not-trying-at-euro-2012-but-the-stats-proved-they-worked-their-socks-off-3151178.htmlAnd I think everyone's sympathetic to that angle Tets, but it's not the only angle. 2 mid-table (at best) midfielders against a 5 man Spanish midfield with maurauding full backs makes no sense, especially when the man tasked with mucking in to help was Simon Cox. We had no plan to deal with Modric just as Hodgson had no plan to deal with Pirlo. Martin Samuel in the Mail today writes that Phil Jones should have been tasked with tracking Pirlo. Along similar thinking, John O'Shea might have been tasked with doing the same for us. "Might", I know. Whelan may or may not be good enough at this kind of level but when he personally appeals for a 3 man midfield I'd listen to him over and above a UCC economist.

[Stuttgart88]

We went out early in the 2007 RWC to two teams quite a bit better than us at the time, FRA and ARG. Did we just rest on our laurels and say we lost to two better teams, or did we ask questions about man management, cliques and preparation? Even my rudimentary knowledge of rugby showed me that ARG adapted to the rules in place at the time by kicking long and chasing the guy fielding the ball. A better team also outdid us tactically.

[p2011]

For what it's worth, I think we were quite lucky to qualify. The day we qualified was the day we were drawn against Estonia. I think we would have lost to all 6 other teams in the draw (I know it was seeded and there were only 3 other possible opponents). We deserved it on balance over the four years, but we were lucky.

I wouldn't mind Tardelli (face-saver for Trap, continuity, generally sound defensive tactics) with someone with a bit more adventure and knowkledge of the players (Liam Brady, Hughton, Mick McC). Trap's argument before the tournament was more or less "I can't experiment because we'll get hammered", but we did get hammered! Bringing on Green and playing 2 in the middle against Spain was just crazy. And I don't buy this business about Cox being a 5th midfielder, I didn't see it. I just saw two strikers standing around all the time while we were being overrun. The lack of a Plan B is a sacking offence in my books. There's no excuse for conservatism when the worst case happens anyway!

[tetsujin1979]

And I think everyone's sympathetic to that angle Tets, but it's not the only angle. 2 mid-table (at best) midfielders against a 5 man Spanish midfield with maurauding full backs makes no sense, especially when the man tasked with mucking in to help was Simon Cox. We had no plan to deal with Modric just as Hodgson had no plan to deal with Pirlo. Martin Samuel in the Mail today writes that Phil Jones should have been tasked with tracking Pirlo. Along similar thinking, John O'Shea might have been tasked with doing the same for us. "Might", I know. Whelan may or may not be good enough at this kind of level but when he personally appeals for a 3 man midfield I'd listen to him over and above a UCC economist.
oh yeah, I wouldn't use that article as a reason for playing 3 in midfield, but it was interesting to note that we did cover more ground than the opposition in the first two games, just didn't make anywhere near as good use of it.

[Noelys Guitar]

Forget about player rumours and tactics for the moment. Selecting Given, Whelan, O'Shea (at right back) Ward and Keane for all three games was a bizarre decision. They all had very poor tournaments and yet all 5 started every game. Thats poor management. And whats worse MickMacs comments about us going to enjoy 2002 or Traps comments about playing the team that got us to 2012 regardless of their form.

[OwlsFan]

For what it's worth, I think we were quite lucky to qualify. The day we qualified was the day we were drawn against Estonia. I think we would have lost to all 6 other teams in the draw (I know it was seeded and there were only 3 other possible opponents). !

Yes, we were really outplayed by Bosnia in Dublin recently and 2 campaigns unbeaten away from home we would have given any of them a run for their money. We deservedly came second in the group and the rest is academic. So easy for people to say what might have been if something else happened. Fact we qualified. Fact we deserved it. If you want to talk about unlucky, we were unlucky to be drawn against Spain, Italy and Croatia in the same group and to concede 3 unlucky goals to the latter.

The dreaded mention of cliche Plan B. He tried 3 or was it 4 forwards in one of the games (Plan B). He did try and move Cox back in to midfield and we only conceded 1. Changed it and we conceded 3 in the second half. So much for Plan B. What is this myterious Plan B? Green only came on when we were 3 down. Hardly worth mentioning unless you think a Plan B could have got us out of that hole. What was France's Plan B against Spain (to not have a shot on goal all night?). Where are all these Plan B's that the 12 teams out of the tournament have?

[ArdeeBhoy]

Yeah, fair play Owls. Those ***** owed us an easier draw anyway after being cheated the last time.

[p2011]

Bosnia looked totally disinterested in that end-of-season friendly, and I think they'd have done us over two legs. (More quality than us, more ECL players.) As would (in my opinion) all the others involved.

Plan Bs amongst the 12 teams? Croatia are/were flexible, Ukraine seemed able to rejig, Greece were able to shift gear and chase the game v Germany (albeit with little success ultimately apart from keeping their pride intact), France harried Spain, even mediocre England were able to switch focus somewhat by bringing on Carroll, even if it meant switching to hoofball! One mysterious plan B is going man-for-man in midfield and giving our midfielders/defenders/goalkeeper an out-ball. Not doing this was our undoing. If you're not going to attack (e.g. v Spain), why waste 2 strikers? Why waste even one?

[p2011]

PS: Can we stick to dicussing the tactics, players, matches and not get personal by attacking the poster? ("The dreaded mention of cliche Plan B.", "What is this myterious Plan B?") And any way, surely anything other than 4-4-2 would be a plan B!

[mypost]

The day we qualified was the day we were drawn against Estonia.

The day we qualified was November 15. Same day as Portugal, Czech Republic, and Croatia. All 4 teams qualified on merit, not in a draw.


I think we would have lost to all 6 other teams in the draw (I know it was seeded and there were only 3 other possible opponents).

Well we'll never know, will we?


We deserved it on balance over the four years, but we were lucky.

Either we were lucky or deserved it. It can't be both.


Bosnia looked totally disinterested in that end-of-season friendly, and I think they'd have done us over two legs.

This is the side that conceded one more goal in the play offs than Estonia, yet they would have "done us"?


Croatia are/were flexible,

Out


Ukraine seemed able to rejig,

Out


Greece were able to shift gear and chase the game (ableit with little success)

Out


France harried Spain,

Out


even mediocre England were able to switch focus somewhat by bringing on Carroll, even if it meant switching to hoofball!

Out

All joining Ireland on the scrapheap. Their Plan B's weren't all that effective.

[Stuttgart88]

If you wait until Monday mypost you can say that about 15 teams. If we had had Greece's tournament the Phoenix Park might have been busy again. Or Denmark's.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Be fair Stutts, that's easily yer man's best post I've read on here.

And I'd largely agree...
:@

[Stuttgart88]

Just because some teams that showed some flexibility are out is no argument that we were right not to be flexible :)

[tetsujin1979]

Van Marwijk after resigning after the Dutch went out in the first round

[ArdeeBhoy]

Just because some teams that showed some flexibility are out is no argument that we were right not to be flexible

Except yer man's not saying that.

[Noelys Guitar]

Van Marwijk after resigning after the Dutch went out in the first round

Fair play to him. He was on a 6 year contract with 4 years still to go.

[Stuttgart88]

I think I said it at the time here, but the Dutch were flattered by their WC Final in 2010 so maybe expectations were a bit too high? They got a fortunate goal to beat Japan, they failed to impress against Slovakia and Brazil shot themselves in the foot (Julio Cesar missed a cross) when comfortably defending a 1-0 lead. OK, they won a good game against Uruguay. Football is a game of fine margins - look at the last 2 pens tonight: underside of the bar and out, inside of the post and in.

[p2011]

Dear dear, why all the aggression?


The day we qualified was November 15. Same day as Portugal, Czech Republic, and Croatia. All 4 teams qualified on merit, not in a draw.

The most important factor was the draw in my opinion, getting the worst and least ambitious team by a mile. Of course – ....being 1000% literal and not going on any flights of fancy or opinion.... – we qualified when the final whistle went on the 15th Nov. But surely one can analyse things a bit more subtly than that.



Either we were lucky or deserved it. It can't be both.

Surely it can be both. There doesn't have to be a direct correlation between deserved it and lucky, does there? We've been lucky and yet deserved it dozens of times over the years (v Holland 2001, v Germany and Spain 2002 etc.). Or is subtle opinion-forming banned here too?



This is the side that conceded one more goal in the play offs than Estonia, yet they would have "done us"?

Does everything have to be soooo literal? They were chasing the game against a serious team, Portugal, and conceeded a few at the end of the game. Big deal, that hardly makes them comparable with Estonia (check the various rankings). Bosnia also should have won their group ahead of France, only getting done by a soft penalty in the St*de de Fr*nce. And they looked disinterested against us and didn't press us at all at the back the whole game. Which is something serious teams do in competitive games, making you spit up the ball and putting you right back under pressure again. Which is perhaps why a different approach is needed to the "running into the knife" one we took.




Out

All but three teams have to be out at this stage, no matter what, so that hardly proves anything. And two have to go out of each group.

By your reasoning, if Spain beat Germany/Italy on Sunday or the other way around, then the two losers (Spain or Italy or Germany) didn't have a Plan B either and, by my logical extension, are somehow tactically inflexible or not worth aspiring to.

[mypost]

Dear dear, why all the aggression?

There was no aggression, just seeing things differently.


The most important factor was the draw in my opinion, getting the worst and least ambitious team by a mile. Of course – ....being 1000% literal and not going on any flights of fancy or opinion.... – we qualified when the final whistle went on the 15th Nov.

Like ourselves, our opponents qualified for the playoffs on merit. There are plenty of teams who would love to play at this tournament, but only 16 can get there. We succeeded where 37 others failed. A point that is lost on many.


Surely it can be both. There doesn't have to be a direct correlation between deserved it and lucky, does there? We've been lucky and yet deserved it dozens of times over the years (v Holland 2001, v Germany and Spain 2002 etc.).

There have been plenty of times we were unlucky down through the decades, most recently in Macedonia in 99. The team that got through from our group, went out of the finals losing their quarter final 6-1, and shipped 10 goals in their last two games. Did anyone else care?


They were chasing the game against a serious team, and conceeded a few at the end of the game.

As we did at the finals. For them it's a "big deal", for us it's apparantly a "disgrace" and an "embarrassment". Slightly OTT I think.


And they looked disinterested against us and didn't press us at all at the back the whole game. Which is something serious teams do in competitive games, making you spit up the ball and putting you right back under pressure again.

I was there, and no they didn't look disinterested. It was a better game than most expected.


All but three teams have to be out at this stage, no matter what, so that hardly proves anything. And two have to go out of each group.

That is correct, but I'm not on about that. I pointed out the teams you stated that had their flexible Plan B's lined up, are all gone by now as well.

[p2011]

That is correct, but I'm not on about that. I pointed out the teams you stated that had their flexible Plan B's lined up, are all gone by now as well.

I don't understand your point. Just because they're out doesn't mean their anything to aspire to? Just because they're out means they're not role models? And shouldn't we have alternatives? I disagree in all 3 cases.

My 2 cents: I think we should aspiring to be Croatia/Greece/Denmark/Ukraine. Able to act/react, playing to their potential, giving their fans a couple of moments to cheer about.

[mark12345]

Sorry, but I'm replying to a post on a thread that's been closed:


MINE

Originally Posted by mark12345

The reason Gerrard looks great is because he plays with great foreign players ever week. Ditto all the ENgland players and ditto all (or a few of) the Ireland players. England are better than Ireland, but are still crap. They don't even play football, only a version of a game that resembles football. And the same can be said for us.


AND Owls Fan Reply:


Who are these "great foreign players" Gerrard plays with at Liverpool and bearing in mind he seems to be better than most of his clubmates when playing for Liverpool they can't be that great since he is a pub player (apparently)?

If we are that crap, I assume you would like to pass a vote of thanks to Trapp for getting us to the elite Finals of Europe with such crap players?

The great foreign players that Gerrard has played with: - Torres, Alonso, Suarez, Arbeloa, Cisse, Agger, to name but a few. And I don't disagree he is quite good among his clubmates. But put him in with average players (or let me rephrase that, English born Premier League superstars or so we're led to believe) and you see the real Steven Gerrard. Problem with him is he's one dimensional - compare him to Pirlo, which is what we're doing. Pirlo strutted around all day long, played simple intelligent passes and tore England, Ireland and Germany apart. Could Gerrard have done the same. If so, why didn't he? Probably because he's too programed to the 100 miles an hour thought process of the English and Irish footballer. And in essence Gerrard is no different from any of the Irish players at Euro 2012 who played mindless football at the tournament.

And of Trap? He did make us hard to beat in qualifying, which he deserves some credit for. Other than that he's done nothing for this team. He should have learned lessons after the home defeat to Russia and definitely after the performance away. In fairness to the manager though, he can only do so much with such sub-standard players who can't even string two passes together.

The common demonator for these very low standards? English football.

[Stuttgart88]

I was thinking Gerrard might have made a difference for Germany in the second half tonight. They had plenty of chances to get good balls in to Klose but they kept hitting the Italy CBs or going too close to Buffon. I've always had the view that Gerrad (and Lampard actually) is not a great midfielder but is a superb ball striker, with a great knack of arriving late, not picked up. The problem with that kind of player is that in order to be regularly effective you need others to secure midfield for you. For England, securing midfield is also his job. He can't do both.

[tricky_colour]

Forget about player rumours and tactics for the moment. Selecting Given, Whelan, O'Shea (at right back) Ward and Keane for all three games was a bizarre decision. They all had very poor tournaments and yet all 5 started every game. Thats poor management. And whats worse MickMacs comments about us going to enjoy 2002 or Traps comments about playing the team that got us to 2012 regardless of their form.

I think that might have been a bit of clever psychology by Mick.
1) Make the opposition think you are not a serious threat.
2) Helps the players relax, there is enough pressure on them already, put to much on them and they may just crumble beneath
the pressure and freeze on the day. That is what may have happened with Trap, I think he said himself they played with fear, and that
may have been fear of him perhaps, or just the weight of expectations.

I remember seeing the players in the tunnel before one of the matches, seriously, they looked like they were about to be fed to the lions!!

But whatever we had the real group of death.

[back of the net]

I remember seeing the players in the tunnel before one of the matches, seriously, they looked like they were about to be fed to the lions!!

But whatever we had the real group of death.



Was it in the tunnel before the Croatia game by any chance tricky? I was in the pub in Toronto watching it and when the camera went into the tunnel where the teams were waiting, it showed Given, Duff, Dunne and Andrews. I turned to my mates and said they look like they have the fear of god in them especially Dunne. They looked fierce nervous.

Trap has blamed nerves and fear for our performance in the euros and to a big extent I completely agree with him.
That does not mean I am condoning his tactics or selections, but we way underperformed , shockingly so.

Beaten by the better teams, definitely so.....but we drastically underperformed to our abilities.

Dont think I have ever seen Dunne play so bad, one of our better more experienced players.

We are better than what we saw in Poland.

[mypost]

I don't understand your point. Just because they're out doesn't mean their anything to aspire to? Just because they're out means they're not role models? And shouldn't we have alternatives?

The point is that all the alternatives didn't work either. We achieved our goal of getting to the Championships. The final line up shows what we were up against.


I think we should aspiring to be Croatia/Greece/Denmark/Ukraine. Able to act/react, playing to their potential, giving their fans a couple of moments to cheer about.

Ukraine have Shevchenko, we had Shane Long. Croatia had Modric, we had Glenn Whelan, Italy had Pirlo, we had Keith Andrews. The calibre of player of the opposition was something we don't have at this time. We can aspire to be as good as them, when we have the players to match their abilities.


And of Trap? He did make us hard to beat in qualifying, which he deserves some credit for. Other than that he's done nothing for this team.

In fairness, qualifying for the finals with what we have, was an achievement in itself.

[back of the net]

The point is that all the alternatives didn't work either. We achieved our goal of getting to the Championships. The final line up shows what we were up against.



Ukraine have Shevchenko, we had Shane Long. Croatia had Modric, we had Glenn Whelan, Italy had Pirlo, we had Keith Andrews. The calibre of player of the opposition was something we don't have at this time. We can aspire to be as good as them, when we have the players to match their abilities.



In fairness, qualifying for the finals with what we have, was an achievement in itself.



Agree with alot of your points Mypost but , was it an achievement to qualify for the finals?

I would view us as better than slovakia and every other team in our Qual group bar Russia.
So that leaves us with second place , and if Trap had been a bit more attack minded especially at home to slovakia and we should have beaten them away , would that not have left us in a position where we would have been serious contenders for the automatic highest runners up qualifying spot which sweden got.

When the Qual draw was made, I was expecting us to be at least challenging for that spot. But due to some bad tactical decisions we prevented ourselves from competing for it.

That kind of leaves me thinking that it actually wasnt as great an achievement to qualify from our group.

[mypost]

Agree with alot of your points Mypost but , was it an achievement to qualify for the finals?

I would view us as better than slovakia and every other team in our Qual group bar Russia.
So that leaves us with second place , and if Trap had been a bit more attack minded especially at home to slovakia and we should have beaten them away , would that not have left us in a position where we would have been serious contenders for the automatic highest runners up qualifying spot which sweden got.

When the Qual draw was made, I was expecting us to be at least challenging for that spot. But due to some bad tactical decisions we prevented ourselves from competing for it.

That kind of leaves me thinking that it actually wasnt as great an achievement to qualify from our group.

This one was a great achievement. We hadn't qualified for anything in 10 years. We hadn't qualified for this in 24 years. Germany haven't always qualified by winning their group, nor have France, nor have Italy, nor have England. It doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you get there.

[back of the net]

This one was a great achievement. We hadn't qualified for anything in 10 years. We hadn't qualified for this in 24 years. Germany haven't always qualified by winning their group, nor have France, nor have Italy, nor have England. It doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you get there.

Agreed on it doesnt matter how you get there once u get there, but there is a part of me that feels we didnt get the results in our qual group that we should have been getting and therefore avoiding the potential agony of the playoff which we are all well used to at this stage

[mypost]

If it doesn't matter, why bring it up?

Germany won 15 games on the trot, but are going home empty-handed today again. Sweden took the best runners-up spot, yet were the next team eliminated after us despite having all their games in the one place. Getting there is the important part, and bar the Russian home result, I was happy enough with our other results. Without them, we wouldn't be in Poland.

[jbyrne]

And of Trap? He did make us hard to beat in qualifying, which he deserves some credit for. Other than that he's done nothing for this team.

we were a complete and utter shambles when Trap took over. in his first campaign he drew with Italy twice and was only cheated out of the WC finals. That performance away against France was better than anything id seen away from home in 30 years supporting the team. He then managed us to qualify for the Euros. You can discuss the quality of our group all day but we were third seeds and we hadnt qualified in 24 years, often with far better players than we have now. Id say he's done a fair bit for our team to be honest

[back of the net]

If it doesn't matter, why bring it up?

Germany won 15 games on the trot, but are going home empty-handed today again. Sweden took the best runners-up spot, yet were the next team eliminated after us despite having all their games in the one place. Getting there is the important part, and bar the Russian home result, I was happy enough with our other results. Without them, we wouldn't be in Poland.

I mean in the sense of we were lucky to be drawn with Estonia in the playoff , if we had gotten one of the stronger nations who were 2nd seeds in the pot then we may well have been staying at home this summer.

We should be beating slovakia at home and we should have been gunning for the automatic second place qualifying spot and not relying on a kind playoff draw. If the playoff draw wasnt so kind to us then Trap could very well been out of a job come last november. I dont think it was a great achievement to finish ahead of slovakia, macedonia, andorra and armenia. An achievement ,yes but not a great one.


Were you happy enough with the performance and result against slovakia at lansdowne?

I give alot of credit to Trap for making us organised but his tactics against teams at home that we should be beating are worrying and potentially could cost us in the WC quals if he doesnt reconsider them

[mypost]

I mean in the sense of we were lucky to be drawn with Estonia in the playoff , if we had gotten one of the stronger nations who were 2nd seeds in the pot then we may well have been staying at home this summer.

I've already covered the issue in an earlier post.


We should be beating slovakia at home and we should have been gunning for the automatic second place qualifying spot and not relying on a kind playoff draw.

Russia should have beat Slovakia at home. Russia should have won in Armenia. Slovakia should have won in Armenia. Armenia could have got a result in Russia. Everyone dropped points they should have won at some stage in a very competitive group. That's the way it goes. Fortunately, we got over the line, so it doesn't matter in our case.


Were you happy enough with the performance and result against slovakia at lansdowne?

Wasn't bothered by the performance. The result kept us in qualifying contention and gave us the head-to-head advantage over the Slovaks thanks to our score draw over there. 2 vital points that helped get us to Poland.