PDA

View Full Version : Belgium V Republic of Ireland - Saturday, 18th June 2016 - Euro 2016 Group E



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

DannyInvincible
15/06/2016, 3:43 AM
Just gonna start a thread for the game on Saturday and keep the same title-format as the Sweden game thread.

Kick-off is at 2PM and looks like Walters will miss out. He's "pretty doubtful", according to O'Neill.

I was looking at the ranking of the third-placed teams at USA '94 (as it also had a 24-team format) and here's how that ended up:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ck9C-eDWkAAuzKM.jpg

Of course, this tournament won't be identical, but it gives a good idea of what we might need, which is four points ideally, even if we're to progress from third position in the group. That means we really need to be winning one of the final two games. Two draws are unlikely to be enough for us. It's possible, as I see teams have qualified in third position from groups at earlier World Cups with three (or even two) draws, but it's rare and I wouldn't want to be counting on it. Four points would secure it really.

It'll be interesting to see how Belgium approach this. They're under pressure now after the loss to Italy. Will they be out to prove a point in reaction or are they going to flop? Let's hope it's the latter. They're a team of great individuals, but that doesn't make a great team. I don't know a great deal about internal Belgian politics, but I've often wondered do they lack a sense of national cohesion, maybe related to the fact the team is made up of two distinct ethnic groups (the Walloons and the Flems) who've had their disagreements through history?

Our record against Belgium in the past isn't great. We have to go back to a friendly in 1966 for our last victory. Since then, the record is 2 losses and 4 draws. Overall, our record is 4 wins, 5 losses and 5 draws. The three other victories were all between 1928 and 1930: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matches_of_the_Republic_of_Ireland_national_footba ll_team

thischarmingman
15/06/2016, 7:37 AM
BBC pundits on Belgium not exploiting Italian high line and inability to defend long ball

https://streamable.com/k85f

Stuttgart88
15/06/2016, 8:53 AM
If Wes starts (he must) then I'd also pick Keane. Keane and Long will keep the defenders honest and we can mix aerial balls with balls to feet. See how it goes for 60 minutes. It's a risk as I'm not sure Keane has the legs at this level any more. Otherwise it'd be Murphy or McClean, probably Murphy.

I'd also drop McCarthy. Either not brave enough to seek the ball or not match fit. Meyler or Quinn in instead. Quinn is busier, Meyler more of a keep-it-ticking-over type player. Quinn might be less similar to Whelan - who was great on Monday despite my criticism of his conservatism - which might just shade it, but my own conservatism (ok, my gut) thinks Meyler.

I'm a bit torn on CB. I don't blame Clark for the goal but I think Duffy might be a good weapon and capable of negating Fellaini's aerial threat. I have to say I just haven't seen enough of Duffy to know how he copes with top flight attackers. At least Clark does it week in, week out, which probably shades it for me. He attacks set pieces well anyway.

----------Randolph----------
Coleman-Clark-O'Shea-Brady
--Meyler-Whelan-Hendrick
------------Wes---------
--------Keane---Long--------

Alternatively I'd consider Ward, moving Brady up and playing Hendrick in the middle. Nominally in a diamond but I expect we'll have less of the ball than we did on Monday.


----------Randolph----------
Coleman-Clark-O'Shea-Ward
--Hendrick-Whelan-Brady
------------Wes---------
--------Keane---Long--------

However, I think Hendrick and Brady's understanding on the left was a real highlight from Monday so I'd stick with that. We functioned pretty well on Monday with 2 key players under par*, Walters and McCarthy. Replacing them and nothing much else makes most sense.

O'Neill said the players tired on Monday so McCarthy, McClean, Quinn and McGeady represent our best bench options, then Murphy. I presume Walters hasn't even got 20 minutes in him but let's see.

* I always think the expression should be over par, at least if it's a direct golf analogy!

pineapple stu
15/06/2016, 9:41 AM
Worth noting that if (if!) we can beat Belgium, we'll be good odds to come second in the group I would say. That would give us a game against the Group F winners - either a Portugal side who struggled to open up, and ultimately couldn't beat, Iceland, or else Iceland or Hungary, as Austria look too far back already to win the group. Come third, and we're still looking at France or Spain in the last 16, if we even get through.

Quite an incentive for a good result on Saturday.

dynamo kerry
15/06/2016, 9:43 AM
I'd be amazed if Quinn is capable of starting this game. I'm actually amazed he made the squad but I guess there were limited real options in Mid. He's just not got the control to keep ball against a team like Belgium.


I'd also not drop mccarthy after one mediocre performance. however I would not rule out Mcclean starting ahead of him for tactical reasons - I think it depends on the condition of coleman. Hendrick has to start after his performance the other day. No one is doing for this team was Jeff is doing at the moment.

Agree Keane with Long and Wes is an attractive idea.

I'd go

Randolph
Coleman Clark O'Shea Brady
Mccarthy Whelan Hendrick
Hoolohan
Keane Long

pineapple stu
15/06/2016, 9:53 AM
I see teams have qualified in third position from groups at earlier World Cups with three (or even two) draws
1994 was the first World Cup with three points for a win. So previous World Cups wouldn't be a great guide. Though Holland would still have qualified from the 1990 World Cup group, they'd have done so by one goal from Austria and Scotland, not one whole point.

I think you're right that we need a win somewhere, especially as there's been few enough draws so far.

ifk101
15/06/2016, 10:03 AM
I'd keep the changes to a minimum and bring Stephen Quinn in for Walters. Not Stephen Quinn's greatest fan but feel we need his energy and enthusiasm. Granted Belgium have a better collection of individuals than us but the team performance against Italy was questionable. The longer we can frustrate them, the more likely their individuals will try to do it on their own. I'm quite confident about the game.

DannyInvincible
15/06/2016, 2:48 PM
1994 was the first World Cup with three points for a win. So previous World Cups wouldn't be a great guide. Though Holland would still have qualified from the 1990 World Cup group, they'd have done so by one goal from Austria and Scotland, not one whole point.

Are you aware of any other 24-team tournaments besides USA '94 where three points were on offer for a group-stage win?

Real ale Madrid
15/06/2016, 3:01 PM
2015 FIFA Womens World Cup! 3 points good enough there. Not sure its a great comparison.

shakermaker1982
15/06/2016, 3:07 PM
I think he might go for this

Randolph

Coleman Clark O'Shea Ward
Whelan McCarthy
Hendrick Hoolahan Brady
Long

Unless Long could take Walters role on RHS and Robbie goes up top? Doyle for Walters would have been a nice like for like...both work hard and good in the air.

pineapple stu
15/06/2016, 4:08 PM
Are you aware of any other 24-team tournaments besides USA '94 where three points were on offer for a group-stage win?
The U-20s World Cup has it - so here's how it finished in 2015 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_U-20_World_Cup#Ranking_of_third-placed_teams). Three points was enough to get through - and to not get through.

In 2013, the bottom four teams all got three points. That was one with relatively few draws in the group stages (9 from 36 games - we're on 3 from 13 at the moment, which is almost identical), so I'd say the cut-off is likely to be three points, but some will get through and some won't.

And with so few goals being scored - every match has ended either 1-0, 2-0, 1-1 or 2-1 - it could well come down to goals scored. Or even, though it's still unlikely, another tie-break.

Four points should certainly be enough, and two points almost certainly won't be.

Edit - the 2011 rankings are interesting - England the best third-placed team without scoring a single goal! Three 0-0s in the group stage, and then they lost 1-0 in the first knock-out round.

Stuttgart88
15/06/2016, 4:16 PM
Why is 3 0-0s almost certain to qualify?

pineapple stu
15/06/2016, 4:19 PM
Is it?

Stuttgart88
15/06/2016, 4:44 PM
I heard that before the tournament. Couldn't figure out why.

pineapple stu
15/06/2016, 5:01 PM
OK, thought you picked it up from my post.

I guess it's moot for now seeing as it can't happen here.

I don't konw if it's almost certain to qualify - but 3 points is either one win and two losses (probably a minus goal difference) or three draws (better goal difference), so I guess three 0-0s isn't too bad.

MeathDrog
15/06/2016, 5:33 PM
I said it when the squad is announced and unfortunately it's now definitely true. MON needed to bring another striker, or at the very least a different one than Daryl Murphy. With the absence of Walters, Kevin Doyle or David McGoldrick would be very useful right now. Doyle in particular would be a great straight swap for Walters in terms of his role in the team. Now it looks like we are going to have to shoehorn a player in and inevitably change the diamond that has worked so well for us so far.

Stuttgart88
15/06/2016, 10:16 PM
I have no issue with taking a risk on Walters. I do have an issue with not picking Doyle. Superior to Murphy.

But hey, it is what it is and let's look forward.

TheOneWhoKnocks
15/06/2016, 11:13 PM
What if we had 11 fully fit players instead of 10; what if we had a fully fit, fully functioning attacking trident when we were on top of a wide-open game? What if Walters was given/gave himself the time to be fully fit for the Belgium game? What if Doyle had been brought instead of Keane?

Whelan and McCarthy on yellows already, Walters out of Belgium and doubtful for Italy, the introduction of Keane against Sweden boggling the mind as to Murphy's inclusion and McGeady looking ponderous as always in his cameo when Pilkington & Stokes had a sharper ends to the season and offered cover in more than one position.

Was Walters a risk? The fact that he aggravated his existing condition in the first minute tells you he shouldn't have been considered for selection in the first place and it's hard to say it paid off when Sweden's defence were ragged and we didn't have the legs in the team to make the best use of Hoolahan or test them properly.

Sterling though Hendrick's performance was - and similar to Gerrard & Lampard in their pomp.

tetsujin1979
16/06/2016, 12:34 AM
Yawn. Change the record.

gastric
16/06/2016, 5:24 AM
Yawn. Change the record.

A bit of a subtle insult there Tets. Remember to attack the post, not the poster. ;)

zero
16/06/2016, 11:33 AM
my take on it is that if walters was held back for the first game it was just as likely that he would aggravate his injury against belgium. given that a result in the first game was so crucial, starting him there was a calculated risk.

i would agree that not bringing another striker - or a different one to murphy - was perhaps the wrong choice but we might end up needing all the bodies we brought regardless. i think it's to our advantage that italy play sweden tomorrow. ideally italy win that and then rest players v us...

Stuttgart88
16/06/2016, 11:51 AM
Media chat seems to be McClean to benefit from Walters' injury

TheOneWhoKnocks
16/06/2016, 6:00 PM
Keogh demands that Clark is dropped.


He's badly positioned isn't he? I thought he could have put it into row Z. Clarkey's not been getting sleep and might be a bit tired. 5 days is a short turnaround between games. I won Player of the Year ar Derby so I'll be ready if I get the call.

https://img.rasset.ie/000c6742-800.jpg

Just kidding. Defenders union as players rally behind Clark.


“I thought the centre-halves defended very well and I thought Clarkey was unlucky because it’s a natural reaction to try to defend a cross,” said Keogh (below).

“If Ciaran had left it or missed it, there was a Swedish lad behind him.”


https://www.rte.ie/sport/euro-2016/2016/0616/796086-clark-og/

Fixer82
17/06/2016, 1:10 AM
All geared up and ready to jump on plane tomorrow. Nervous and exited!!! Might bump into some of ya there!

gastric
17/06/2016, 4:39 AM
At Melbourne airport about to fly home. Can't wait to watch.the game in ireland tomorrow with family and friends.Giddy with excitement, COYBIG!

Stuttgart88
17/06/2016, 12:54 PM
Wilmots' management under fire

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/jun/17/belgium-marc-wilmots-euro-2016-defeat-italy-golden-generation#comment-76562051

I read earlier that Courtois might be replaced by Mignolet for his criticism of Wilmots.

TheOneWhoKnocks
17/06/2016, 1:19 PM
Get Conor McGregor to fire up the lads again with a motivational speech and we can beat these lads.

DannyInvincible
17/06/2016, 2:31 PM
Would an Italy victory in this game against Sweden be ideal for us or what are people thinking?

Stuttgart88
17/06/2016, 2:32 PM
That's what I think

DannyInvincible
17/06/2016, 2:50 PM
Sweden have improved considerably and Italy look stifled.

Nugget
17/06/2016, 3:53 PM
Has anyone noticed if many tickets are floating around for this? Just arrived in Bordeaux today so haven't seen anything yet.

TheOneWhoKnocks
17/06/2016, 4:01 PM
Are Italy guaranteed first due to beating Belgium?

pineapple stu
17/06/2016, 4:07 PM
We can still get 7 points.

Deckydee
17/06/2016, 4:09 PM
Hi,

Just going through the papers here. They dont seem to rate Ireland at all, really. I have been going through the sports sections of most Belgian/Flemish papers for the last 2 weeks and Ireland have never been mentioned , twas full of stuff about the Italians but very little about us. Even though their performance against Italy was not good, they still don't consider or even think that Irish are of any competition to them.

I just don't think it is the papers either. Since the draw has been made nobody and I mean nobody that I know or met, has given the Irish a hope in hell of beating 'them'. They seems to consider us as a kind of fodder, an easy 3 points while they deal with the Italians and the Swedish and from what I read today, this has not changed, even after the Italian match.

So, how can we beat them?? Well it seems that most Irish supports & journos are whistling the same tune: THEY ARE NOT A TEAM: The Belgians are not ready to work for each other. They are not a team to be honest about it, its the same thing as is here in this country. Its the Flemish speakers vs the French speakers and if they are not willing to negotiate over things like pensions and governments they they will be able to work together on a field of play. It is their greatest failing that they cannot get on together. So the Irish need to show how we are a team and how team spirit is importance to us and push it into their face.

TheOneWhoKnocks
17/06/2016, 4:16 PM
Fellaini, Nainggolan, Lukaku, Benteke, Origi, Carrasco, Dembele and Witsel off the top of my head aren't ethnically French (Walloon) or Dutch (Flemish) so why would it matter to them?

De Bruyne is half-English on top of that.

I'd also love to know on what grounds Belgium think they can be so arrogant; what have they accomplished in football?

Italy too. We have faced them how many times over the last 20 odd years and the games have been evenly matched every time.

They're both equally deluded.

In saying that, I think we will probably end up getting one point from these two games.

BonnieShels
17/06/2016, 4:22 PM
Fellaini, Nainggolan, Lukaku, Benteke, Origi, Carrasco, Dembele and Witsel off the top of my head aren't ethnically French (Walloon) or Dutch (Flemish) so why would it matter to them?

De Bruyne is half-English on top of that.

That as it may be ethnically, given the nature of the Belgian divide, growing up in either region would embed certain divisions anyway. And with a certain African bias towards French-speaking Wallonia you can guarantee that it would exist within them anyway.

I fail to see how you could think otherwise?

That you have issues with English- and- Northern- born nationals on the basis that they weren't born in the "Free State" but can gladly cast aside the place-of-birth of Belgians as if it has no effect on their politics or outlook because of their ethnicity is rather bizarre!

DannyInvincible
17/06/2016, 4:46 PM
That as it may be ethnically, given the nature of the Belgian divide, growing up in either region would embed certain divisions anyway. And with a certain African bias towards French-speaking Wallonia you can guarantee that it would exist within them anyway.

I fail to see how you could think otherwise?

That you have issues with English- and- Northern- born nationals on the basis that they weren't born in the "Free State" but can gladly cast aside the place-of-birth of Belgians as if it has no effect on their politics or outlook because of their ethnicity is rather bizarre!

Exactly, I know fellas from Derry, for example, who are of African and Indian descent but who support Ireland and would have no sense of affiliation with NI.

TheOneWhoKnocks
17/06/2016, 4:48 PM
I'm pretty sure Congo and Kenya aren't French colonies.

There doesn't need to be any cultural reasons for egotistical footballers to be at each other's throats when they are holed up together like this.

Look at Wesley Sneijder and Robin Van Persie as a textbook example.

Besides De Bruyne and Courtouis have more personal reasons for hating each other.

Don't see the connection between my opinion on the granny rule and this either TBH.

BonnieShels
17/06/2016, 4:48 PM
Exactly, I know fellas from Derry, for example, who are of African and Indian descent but who support Ireland and would have no sense of affiliation with NI.

Naturally enough.

Essentially, the diaspora anywhere are free to support thon "motherlands" but the Irish must remain contrary to this. Seems legit.

pineapple stu
17/06/2016, 4:50 PM
Conte confirms he'll be playing the stiffs against Ireland. Huge incentive for us now to get a good result tomorrow.

DannyInvincible
17/06/2016, 4:54 PM
I'm pretty sure Congo and Kenya aren't French colonies.

There doesn't need to be any cultural reasons for egotistical footballers to be at each other's throats when they are holed up together like this.

Look at Wesley Sneijder and Robin Van Persie as a textbook example.

Besides De Bruyne and Courtouis have more personal reasons for hating each other.

Don't see the connection between my opinion on the granny rule and this either TBH.

But social/cultural/political differences can obviously be a factor in conflict or division. As with everything, it wouldn't be black and white. There can be nuance and multiple factors at play. You continually overlook the fact that multiple factors can contribute to something at once for some reason.

In what sense is De Bruyne half-English? As far as I can make out, his mother, a Flem who was born in Burundi, lived in London for a number of years after her father (also a Flem) moved there to work. She then moved to Belgium when she met De Bruyne's father, who isn't English either, to the best of my knowledge.

Fixer82
17/06/2016, 5:24 PM
Sitting in airport bar having a pint on my own waiting for a delayed flight. Give us a shout if you're here. Navy jacket. Paul McGrath tshirt. I'll buy you a pint (Mi wadi)

TheOneWhoKnocks
17/06/2016, 5:54 PM
It is conjecture bottom line to say that the alleged problems in the Belgian camp are due to an ethnic conflict.

What is without doubt is that the team are on the verge of mutiny due to their manager's tactics; what Courtouis referred tp.

I was also simply pointing out that Benteke, Origi and Lukaku have no connections to France as their origin countries are not French colonies, which Bonnie seemed to apply; or maybe I am misinterpreting that like people seem to be misinterpreting my post?

How on earth anything I said in my original post has anything to do with the eligibility rule is utterly beyond me.

And you know Northern Irish of Asian and African heritage who support ROI? I know Northern Irish of Italian Catholic descent who support Rangers, not to mention the loyalists from Egyptian Muslim heritage.

All free to support whatever cause they wish. No relevance to what I had originally posted!

backstothewall
17/06/2016, 6:26 PM
Not that I don'the find this chat about the intricacies of relations between the Flemish and Wallonia absolutely fascinating, but do the reasons why they have fallen out really matter? The good news from our perspective is that there seem to be problem behind the scenes.

I'd play Murphy myself. We have been getting results with a well settled system and Belgium seem to have problems dealing with the sort of balls we would be playing up to him. On that basis and on the back of a good performance against Sweden i'd make as little change as possible and put Murphy in as a straight swap for Walters

DannyInvincible
17/06/2016, 8:17 PM
I think McClean will come in instead of Walters. That seems to be the talk around the team as well, no? Would be really surprised if Murphy started, but he has started big games before, so may be foolish to rule it out completely.


It is conjecture bottom line to say that the alleged problems in the Belgian camp are due to an ethnic conflict.

Sure, nobody is saying it isn't anything other than conjecture. But it is reasoned or reasonable conjecture. We're simply doing what people do on discussion forums; discussing possibilities and theories. Cultural estrangement or even linguistic separation between those from the two groups within the squad is at least a possibility, if not a probability, as division/tension/suspicion is a feature of Belgian political, religious and public life. There was talk of the country being partitioned a few years ago, if I recall correctly. It'd be entirely possible that that deeply-embedded feature of Belgian life passes through to their national football team. You can't just completely rule out the possibility, which is what you were doing.


I was also simply pointing out that Benteke, Origi and Lukaku have no connections to France as their origin countries are not French colonies, which Bonnie seemed to apply; or maybe I am misinterpreting that like people seem to be misinterpreting my post?

Correct me if I'm wrong on any of this, but are their origins Congolese, as in former Belgian Congo, which was Francophone on account of Belgian-Wallonian influence? Hence, Bonnie's reference to speaking French, I would assume? The fact their families would have been Francophone surely would have aided integration into or connection with Wallonia rather than Dutch/Germanic Flanders.

Wallonia is also more welcoming of immigrants, according to this 2008 BBC piece, which makes some other interesting and relevant observations: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7666514.stm


When Natasha Biryukova arrived in Liege from Moscow in 1995, she was shocked to find out that her new homeland was not really Belgium, but rather French-speaking Wallonia.

"I came from the former USSR, and knew how people lived in Uzbekistan thousands of miles away," she says.

"But now, when I turn on my TV I only know what's happening in Wallonia."

She said people there know nothing about the lives of their Flemish neighbours just a few miles north.

Ms Biryukova is not alone. Immigrants settling in Belgium end up on either side of a fault line that baffles many.

"Foreigners did not study Belgian history at school - whether they are in Wallonia or Flanders, for them, this is Belgium," says Palestinian-born Hamdan al Damiri of Cripel, an immigrant centre in Liege.


And you know Northern Irish of Asian and African heritage who support ROI? I know Northern Irish of Italian Catholic descent who support Rangers, not to mention the loyalists from Egyptian Muslim heritage.

The point I was making is that the lads I know of Ghanaian or Indian heritage support Ireland as they were raised within an Irish nationalist community/culture/social environment where supporting Ireland is the norm. Their national identity has obviously been influenced by the expressed identity of their surrounding community.

The Shoukri brothers (who I assume you're referring to when you talk of Egyptian loyalists, although they were Coptic Christians) were raised within the loyalist community, so naturally that influenced their cultural and political affiliations. This all backs up Bonnie's point - that a "host culture" will culturally/politically influence its "subjects" - rather than your point, which seemed to be that the social, political or cultural environment was completely irrelevant.

As an interesting aside, the term "wal" is a Germanic word roughly denoting "non-German speaking" or "Celt speaker". From it are derived place-names like Wales, Cornwall, Wallonia, Wallachia and surnames like Wallace and Walsh

pineapple stu
17/06/2016, 8:19 PM
As an interesting aside, the term "wal" is a Germanic word roughly denoting "non-German speaking" or "Celt speaker". From it are derived place-names like Wales, Cornwall, Wallonia, Wallachia and surnames like Wallace and Walsh
Just to add to that, this last (Walsh) is pronounced "Welsh" in many parts of Ireland, and the Irish is Breathnach - literally, a Welsh person.

DannyInvincible
17/06/2016, 8:34 PM
Just to add to that, this last (Walsh) is pronounced "Welsh" in many parts of Ireland, and the Irish is Breathnach - literally, a Welsh person.

I've always assumed 'Breathnach' is related to Brittonic or Brythonic, which is the Celtic branch from which Welsh is an off-shoot, along with Cornish and Breton. Is that correct? Irish, Scottish Gaelic and Manx, on the other hand, are from the Goidelic Celtic branch, of course.

Cue tets scolding us off to the current affairs forum! :p

pineapple stu
17/06/2016, 8:54 PM
Quite possible - the Irish for Wales is "An Bhreatain Bheag", or Little Britain.

Great Britain is "Great" to distinguish it from Brittany. (Obviously the Irish saw a different Little Britain) So a definite connection there.

I think the initial Walshes in Ireland came from Wales, hence the name.

Edit - wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walsh_(surname)) agrees with both of us -


Walsh is a common Irish surname, meaning "Briton" or "foreigner", literally "Welshman", taken to Ireland by British (Welsh, Cornish and Cumbrian) soldiers during and after the Norman invasion of Ireland. It is most common in County Mayo and County Kilkenny. It is the fourth most common surname in Ireland, and the 265th most common in the United States. There are variants including "Walshe", "Welsh", "Brannagh", and "Breathnach". Walsh is uncommon as a given name. The name is often pronounced "Welsh" in the south and west of the country.

Deckydee
17/06/2016, 9:33 PM
Fellaini, Nainggolan, Lukaku, Benteke, Origi, Carrasco, Dembele and Witsel off the top of my head aren't ethnically French (Walloon) or Dutch (Flemish) so why would it matter to them?

De Bruyne is half-English on top of that.

I'd also love to know on what grounds Belgium think they can be so arrogant; what have they accomplished in football?

Italy too. We have faced them how many times over the last 20 odd years and the games have been evenly matched every time.

They're both equally deluded.

In saying that, I think we will probably end up getting one point from these two games.

It amazes me the disrespect shown by the Belgians towards the Irish. Again going back to my original post, the paper last week had NOTHING about the irish but had almost a page dedicated to the Italians!. Todays paper gives the usual happy irish craic but lets show them.

This is the remark: https://twitter.com/HLNinEngeland/status/743682767494385665

texidub
17/06/2016, 11:16 PM
It amazes me the disrespect shown by the Belgians towards the Irish. Again going back to my original post, the paper last week had NOTHING about the irish but had almost a page dedicated to the Italians!. Todays paper gives the usual happy irish craic but lets show them.

This is the remark: https://twitter.com/HLNinEngeland/status/743682767494385665

Hopefully it backfires on them big time. Will only motivate our team anyway..