Wales v. Republic of Ireland - Monday, 9th October 2017 - World Cup 2018 Qualifier

[osarusan]

I agree with what Kerr said in the article. We can be less negative without being less effective.

[OwlsFan]

I agree with what Kerr said in the article. We can be less negative without being less effective.

Kerr, like Giles, is a former Irish manager who failed to qualify for a tournament and who, as a consequence, have chips on their shoulders. Kerr didn't beat a higher ranked team home or away in a qualifier. Had some good draws ok but mixed with poor results as well and I really don't think he's in a position to criticise someone who has beaten Germany at home and drawn away, and won away in Austria and Wales and never mind the Italian result and the play off victory over Bosnia. I have no memory of us playing attacking football under him. If we needed a result, say away to Switzerland, I know who I would like to have at the helm between O'Neill and Kerr and I say that appreciating only too well that this might come back to bite me in the weeks ahead.

It's easy to say that we can be less negative and still be more effective. Putting that in to practice is another matter. I saw a few goals at the weekend where teams trying to play out from the back gave away goals or chances. We are not easy on the eye at times but as I have said here a hundred times, I don't watch my teams to be entertained. I watch them in the hope they'll win. I watch other matches for entertainment.

I suppose the main difference between Kerr and me (managerial experience etc aside) is that he is now a journalist while I am a supporter.We both look at things from a totally different perspective. The result is secondary to him - it's about the performance. To me the result is everything while the performance is a distant second. He might argue that if we did x,y,z differently, we'd still get the result. If they are the x,y,z he practiced, then we didn't get the results so it's a moot point whether he is correct.

[osarusan]

I suppose the main difference between Kerr and me (managerial experience etc aside) is that he is now a journalist while I am a supporter.We both look at things from a totally different perspective. The result is secondary to him - it's about the performance. To me the result is everything while the performance is a distant second. He might argue that if we did x,y,z differently, we'd still get the result. If they are the x,y,z he practiced, then we didn't get the results so it's a moot point whether he is correct.

I think it's a very unfair misrepresentation of an argument to suggest that people who want to see more attacking football do so purely for the aesthetics of the performance, and the result is secondary, or that people who want to see that kind of football somehow care less about the result.

You talk about the performance and the result like they are separate, but they are obviously linked. As Kerr said, there are times when there really are no options other than battening down the hatches and that's fine. But there are times when, never mind it not being the only option, it is not the most effective option. In my opinion, we are too quick to resort to that against teams that we don't need to be so fearful of. Regardless of the aesthetics of the performance, that kind of set up makes getting a result less likely, because we don't create the number of chances we could otherwise create.

Now, after the result we got in Wales, the criticism is pretty much moot for that game, but in general, it's valid, in my opinion.

[Stuttgart88]

I think it’s great that we can grind out these results away from home. O’Neill has taken what Trap brought to the team and added some. The away results in this campaign have been brilliant, with the exception of Georgia where the performance was dire bar a late flurry when McClean and Long might have snuck it. I think we got away with a bad spell in Serbia but we scored when we had to.

But the home form has been dire under both Trap and MON. If we can improve the home form while retaining the away for we’d be formidable. In my mind it’s fear and a lack of ambition that prevents this. Being tight and organised and nicking a goal is what we do well away but it’s also what other teams do when they come to Dublin and need another way of playing. Germany and Bosnia were our best results in the last 8 years and it’s probably no coincidence that Bosnia needed a result and Germany always play to win against teams like us.

[geysir]

Brian Kerr lost me when he wrote "But we are, and should be, better than that" (Iceland)

Obvious campaign shortcomings aside, beating first seeds Wales, albeit not a classic first seed team, in their acclaimed fortress, in a do or die qualification game was unprecedented in the annals of our history.
Our shortcomings were more evident elsewhere in the campaign.
Brian talks about 2 crucial elements in that game, the Joe Allen exit and the reactions to the goal scored/conceded..
I had thought the crucial elements were firmly cast with our 100% concentration, commitment and team work which nullified and eventually bedraggled Wales.
It was not unexpected that Joe Allen would eventually be the subject of very close attention in that 2nd half. He was not taken out as Brian sorta hints at,
And shucks, we scored a goal which had an added effect on the proceedings. Where was the great Ramsay during all of this?

[DannyInvincible]

I think it’s great that we can grind out these results away from home. O’Neill has taken what Trap brought to the team and added some. The away results in this campaign have been brilliant...

I don't suppose the FAI could let FIFA/UEFA and the association we're drawn against tomorrow know that we'd be more than happy to generously forgo our home tie, in the interests of their convenience of course, and convince them to let us play the two legs away in our drawn opponent's country?...

[DeLorean]

I only got around to actually reading the Brian Kerr article now. From what I had heard I was expecting a bitter moan fest, of which he is well capable, but I think that was mostly accurate and well balanced.

[backstothewall]

I think it's a very unfair misrepresentation of an argument to suggest that people who want to see more attacking football do so purely for the aesthetics of the performance, and the result is secondary, or that people who want to see that kind of football somehow care less about the result.

As someone on the other side of the argument I don't think anyone is suggesting that. I think all football fans prefer to see a good footballing side. Who doesn't like watching Brazil in full flow? I don't think anyone who wants us to play better football would be happy to do so at the cost of losing games.

Where i would respectfully criticise the call for better football is that, in the opinion of this humble correspondent, it is being made despite the evidence of the generally excellent results we have enjoyed in recent years. If we weren't doing well playing like this it would be perfectly reasonable to suggest going on the front foot in an effort to improve. I might even suggest that myself. But without a downturn in results it feels like a solution searching for a problem to solve where none exists.

It isn't broke. Why fix it?

[osarusan]

Again, I think the 'call for better football' is really a call for tactics that (I think) make us more likely to get a result.

I don't think it's a case of fixing something that isn't broken. It's about selecting the personnel and tactics that represent the best chance of getting the best result from a particular match. If the best way to achieve a result is to batten down the hatches for 90 minutes, that's fine with me. If we were trying to play attacking free-flowing football in games were it was going to get us beaten, and where defending in depth was a more suitable strategy, I'd be arguing for us to be more defensive.

My criticism is that we adopt a defensive approach even when we don't need to - tactics for some matches are too conservative, and I think we revert to those tactics too easily.

[Stuttgart88]

But without a downturn in results it feels like a solution searching for a problem to solve where none exists.

It isn't broke. Why fix it?Seriously, are you not worried by the home form?

[Stuttgart88]

Again, I think the 'call for better football' is really a call for tactics that (I think) make us more likely to get a result.

I don't think it's a case of fixing something that isn't broken. It's about selecting the personnel and tactics that represent the best chance of getting the best result from a particular match. If the best way to achieve a result is to batten down the hatches for 90 minutes, that's fine with me. If we were trying to play attacking free-flowing football in games were it was going to get us beaten, and where defending in depth was a more suitable strategy, I'd be arguing for us to be more defensive.

My criticism is that we adopt a defensive approach even when we don't need to - tactics for some matches are too conservative, and I think we revert to those tactics too easily.I'd qualify that by adding / suggesting that it's not necessarily the tactics but the mindset. A manager famous for getting his players riled up seems to have them sedated in the first half of key home games. Against austria all the talk in the week of the match was of a big performance. The first 45 mins were brutal. We were similarly rubbish for 65 mins of the Wales game. Being cautious vs Wales was maybe justifiable as a home game vs Austria still to come meant it was a mustn't lose rather than a must win, but my opinion has always been that seeking to win winnable games must always be the approach, home or away. 10 games is usually too short a season to be mourning lost chances. I have regularly cited Sweden and Denmark as teams that take that approach, and Iceland can clearly be added. 3-0 in Turkey was amazing. Experienced players should be able to tell if a game is there to be won.

[osarusan]

I'm not sure that there is much of a difference between the mindset and the tactics here, really.

Whether, for example, the fullbacks don't push forward in support of the midfielders because they've been explicitly told not to push up, or it's a result of the manager's clear desire to 'keep it tight, keep your shape, don't get caught out of position' even if it's not explicit, it effectively amounts to the same thing.

Either way, the fact that they are so cautious again and again indicates the manager is happy with that caution.

On the point (not made by you) that overall we did well, I agree. We ended up qualifying for the playoffs, only losing once, and eliminating a higher seed, and I say that O'Neill deserves credit for that. It was as much as we could have expected before the campaign. The campaign has been a success, in my eyes.

But the fact that we did well overall doesn't mean that we (and much much more importantly, the manager) shouldn't be looking at each game in the campaign, in particular, games in which we didn't perform well, and trying to understand and remedy those lapses for the future.

[paul_oshea]

Are you talking about Kerr or Paul O'Shea? :o

hold on a minute now there racist Charlie. I'm not old.

[backstothewall]

Seriously, are you not worried by the home form?

That's an excellent question.

Things could be better at LR, but I wouldn't say I am concerned. I'm disappointed by results, but not concerned by the form.

We weren't close to being good enough against Austria in the 1st half. Though we were much better in the second half, and probably should have won the game.

We should have beaten Serbia. They beat us at our own game so we can't complain to much, But I thought we played well.

Against Moldova we got 2 goals up and then closed the shop. I thought it was very professional. I think they came of with plenty of gas left a in the tank and i think that they got the benefit of that in Cardiff.

I don't think anything that happened in those games needs to be put right for Denmark, other than ensuring there is no repeat of the 1st half v Austria. Other than that we are due a bit of luck at home if anything.

[paul_oshea]

how can you say we should have beaten Serbia? That game showed us exactly how limited we are, and our game plan(we only have one) and our tactic(we only have one) . Serbia gave us a masterclass in doing what we tried to do.*

Ive heard more sense from a 2 year old :P

*Wales aside who were not on the same level as serbia

[MeathDrog]

That's an excellent question.

Things could be better at LR, but I wouldn't say I am concerned. I'm disappointed by results, not not concerned by the form.

We weren't close to being good enough against Austria in the 1st half. Though we were much better in the second half, and probably should have won the game.

We should have beaten Serbia. They beat us at our own game so we can't complain to much, But I thought we played well.

Against Moldova we got 2 goals up and then closed the shop. I thought it was very professional. I think hey came of with plenty of gas left a in the tank and i think that they got the benefit of that in Cardiff.

I don't think anything that happened in those games needs to be put right for Denmark, other than ensuring there is no repeat of the 1st half v Austria. Other than that we are due a bit of luck at home if anything.

Have to disagree.

I have an alternative view of our home games of the campaign.

Awful against Georgia who were the better team. Fortunate to come away with three points.

Defensively solid against Wales but never looked like scoring against a team down to 10 for half an hour. Therefore the draw is the max we deserved.

Never set up to win the game v Austria. We were simply awful for the best part of 80 mins.

Again improved v Serbia but created one half chance all game. Again the draw was the best we could have gotten as a result which we didn't get.

I wouldn't have considered the 2nd half v Moldova as "professional". Awful is the word I would have used.


We deserve credit for our fantastic away form but let's not pretend that our home form is a serious area of concern, especially when it seems that it typically takes us til the 2nd of quick games in succession to 'iron out' the mistakes we make in the first game.

[backstothewall]

Have to disagree.

I have an alternative view of our home games of the campaign.

Awful against Georgia who were the better team. Fortunate to come away with three points.

Defensively solid against Wales but never looked like scoring against a team down to 10 for half an hour. Therefore the draw is the max we deserved.

Never set up to win the game v Austria. We were simply awful for the best part of 80 mins.

Again improved v Serbia but created one half chance all game. Again the draw was the best we could have gotten as a result which we didn't get.

I wouldn't have considered the 2nd half v Moldova as "professional". Awful is the word I would have used.

We deserve credit for our fantastic away form but let's not pretend that our home form is a serious area of concern, especially when it seems that it typically takes us til the 2nd of quick games in succession to 'iron out' the mistakes we make in the first game.

I should have asked this earlier, but what do we mean by home form? I took it to mean performance levels in recent games. If it was a club side we were talking about it would be typical to be talking about the last 6-8 home games, but that could take us back years if we take friendlies out. I drew an arbitrary line at the Austria as i don't see how anything that happened as long ago as the Wales game has any impact on anything (i'm dubious about Austria tbh but the sample size was already small enough). An international manager never enjoys the luxury of consistently picking the same team when they are doing well. By the time the next game has come round a few players will be injured, and a few others will have returned. The momentum of a win is lost every time, as is the languidity of defeat, and every round of fixtures offers a fresh start.

I don't disagree that Moldova was awful to watch in the second half, but awful and professional aren't mutually exclusive. Wales had a tough away game in Georgia with 2 long flights, while we had 30 minutes of serious effort, then a quick hop across the Irish Sea. Impossible to say if that was that a factor in why Wales looked jaded compared to us but i would suggest that we very obviously took it easy against Moldova and that overall our preparation was easier than theirs.

The Serbia game we clearly disagree about. I don't know what game some of you were watching, and I'd assume some/many of you feel the same about me.

If we started making changes to our approach we might possibly have picked up a point or 2 more at home, but it isn't guaranteed and opens us up to the risk of an impact on our away form. The difference i mentioned above about club v international football perhaps offers some insulation, but one only has to look to Crystal Palace to see how a side attempting to change a settled style of play can go badly wrong. Given that we are already achieving close to the maximum reasonably possible with the players who have been available this campaign, i feel it madness to make a change.

It's all an academic argument anyway. Martin O'Neill isn't going to change his tactical instructions, as unless he has changed the habit of a lifetime he doesn't give any. Retired player after retired player who have worked under him say he just doesn't do that sort of thing. In recent months I've heard Neil Lennon, Craig Bellamy, Chris Sutton and Robbie Savage tell the same story of his style.

[pineapple stu]

I'll back up the others on the Serbia game benno. Not a hope in hell did we deserve a win from that game. We offered nothing after half an hour once Wes got tired.

There's nothing wrong with being happy to be in the play-offs and concerned as to just how bad this team is.

[jbyrne]

I'll back up the others on the Serbia game benno. Not a hope in hell did we deserve a win from that game. We offered nothing after half an hour once Wes got tired.

There's nothing wrong with being happy to be in the play-offs and concerned as to just how bad this team is.

just a slight exaggeration there I feel

[bennocelt]

I'll back up the others on the Serbia game benno. Not a hope in hell did we deserve a win from that game. We offered nothing after half an hour once Wes got tired.

There's nothing wrong with being happy to be in the play-offs and concerned as to just how bad this team is.

Backtothewall! :)

[pineapple stu]

Oops! Damn avatars!

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration jbyrne. Some of our performances in this group have been among the worst I've ever seen from an Irish team. 5-2 in Cyprus bad. Serbia away was a shambles. Georgia twice was dire stuff.

[jbyrne]

Oops! Damn avatars!

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration jbyrne. Some of our performances in this group have been among the worst I've ever seen from an Irish team. 5-2 in Cyprus bad. Serbia away was a shambles. Georgia twice was dire stuff.

bad performances do not equate to a bad team. in fact id say its the team element that we have that stands to us

[osarusan]

Oops! Damn avatars!

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration jbyrne. Some of our performances in this group have been among the worst I've ever seen from an Irish team. 5-2 in Cyprus bad. Serbia away was a shambles. Georgia twice was dire stuff.

The difference for me is that while Cyprus away was just a shambles where nobody knew what they were doing, our poor performances in this group are because the manager wants to play that way. We give up huge chunks of territory and possession even when there is no real need to do so, and we invite pressure on ourselves...not because there is no organisation, but because we are set up to play that way.

So while Staunton would have looked at the Cyprus performance and been very unhappy, but just didn't have a clue how to fix it, I think that when O'Neill watches us kick it away time and time again, I think that by and large, it's not something he feels needs to be fixed.

[Closed Account 2]

I think it was telling that we played big chunks of the Wales and Serbia games against 10 men, but we never looked like creating anything. Maybe there is/was a case for saying 0-0 at home to Wales wasn't a bad result at that stage of the qualifiers as, but the Serbia game was particularly galling as it seemed as though we were trying to preserve a 1-0 defeat.

I don't mind negative football if the goal is to edge to draw against vastly superior opposition, but I think against 10-man Serbia and Wales we could have tried a little harder to score when we had the man advantage. If we'd drawn that home game vs Serbia we would have ended up topping the group.

[jbyrne]

I think it was telling that we played big chunks of the Wales and Serbia games against 10 men, but we never looked like creating anything. Maybe there is/was a case for saying 0-0 at home to Wales wasn't a bad result at that stage of the qualifiers as, but the Serbia game was particularly galling as it seemed as though we were trying to preserve a 1-0 defeat.

I don't mind negative football if the goal is to edge to draw against vastly superior opposition, but I think against 10-man Serbia and Wales we could have tried a little harder to score when we had the man advantage. If we'd drawn that home game vs Serbia we would have ended up topping the group.

we dominated possession in their half for the last 15 mins or so against Serbia. the red for Serbia came from murphy being clear in on goal and murphy should have had a penalty in the last few mins

[paul_oshea]

We dominated cos they were 1 0 up with 10 men and were happy to sit back and hold out. We created no chances. That's all ifs and buts above. We never looked like scoring. We could have played another 45 mins and still not scored.

As wales also showed having possession and doing nothing with it can come to nothing.

[paul_oshea]

Just recalled these comments from the other week:





https://media.giphy.com/media/l4FGuhL4U2WyjdkaY/giphy.gif

Admittedly, after the deflation of the Georgia and Serbia games, I was, like Paul, very resigned and pessimistic with regard to our chances of making the play-offs, but I'm delighted to have been proven wrong and, besides, I'm surely entitled to a pardon, as, unlike Paul, I'm not the Oracle of Truth.


Even Paul the octopus got one wrong. I am less negative for some reason now, which is not a good thing, but given our performances and even the Wales one, we have had about 1 chance in 180 mins of football against the rivals for qualification, its not good, you don't need to be a football genius to work that out.

I was glad to be wrong but I still think, even now, my thinking was right - even if the prediction was wrong. :)

[DannyInvincible]

I think it was telling that we played big chunks of the Wales and Serbia games against 10 men, but we never looked like creating anything. Maybe there is/was a case for saying 0-0 at home to Wales wasn't a bad result at that stage of the qualifiers as, but the Serbia game was particularly galling as it seemed as though we were trying to preserve a 1-0 defeat.

I don't mind negative football if the goal is to edge to draw against vastly superior opposition, but I think against 10-man Serbia and Wales we could have tried a little harder to score when we had the man advantage. If we'd drawn that home game vs Serbia we would have ended up topping the group.

The way we appeared to be set up or instructed prevented us from exploiting the fact we had an extra man. Instead of taking advantage of the free space and drawing men out by getting into better positions to receive and pass/deliver the ball, we continued to lump the ball forward in the general direction of the opposition's heavily-fortified defence. It clearly wasn't working yet we depressingly persisted with it until time ran out.

[DannyInvincible]

I was glad to be wrong but I still think, even now, my thinking was right - even if the prediction was wrong. :)

Haha, that's so you; "right" even when you're wrong. :p

[paul_oshea]

Haha, that's so you; "right" even when you're wrong. :p

if its any Solás DI :P, I just re-arranged my flights today to the states for Wednesday after the play-off( initially going Friday the 10th), which cost a bit...and I also had a bet which I lost, so its cost me a lot but I'd take that any day - but it shows that I really believed it and wasn't just being negative for the sake of it.

[KrisLetang]

...and I also had a bet which I lost,

Uh-Oh! Watch Out Paul!!!!

[geysir]

I think it was telling that we played big chunks of the Wales and Serbia games against 10 men, but we never looked like creating anything. Maybe there is/was a case for saying 0-0 at home to Wales wasn't a bad result at that stage of the qualifiers as, but the Serbia game was particularly galling as it seemed as though we were trying to preserve a 1-0 defeat.

I don't mind negative football if the goal is to edge to draw against vastly superior opposition, but I think against 10-man Serbia and Wales we could have tried a little harder to score when we had the man advantage. If we'd drawn that home game vs Serbia we would have ended up topping the group.
That's a strange universe you inhabit. You go back in time, alter one outcome and expect exactly the same outcomes in subsequent games. That Serbia would perform exactly the same v Austria, that their performance would be completely unaffected by their position in the table or results elsewhere.

Had Ireland drawn with Serbia, who the féck knows what would have happened next, except perhaps that Wales (in all probability) would have bottled it, with or without Allen for the 90 mins, in the face of a teak tough, in tune, O’Neill team.

[Charlie Darwin]

geysir rolling out the butterfly effect theory, what a time to be alive.

[geysir]

geysir rolling out the butterfly effect theory, what a time to be alive.
I suppose if you stripped that theory of all its import you might be left with that interpretation.
The butterfly effect theory is something else Charlie, no matter how many times you watch that entertaining Simpson family episode.

[Charlie Darwin]

Who doesn't love a good Simpson Family episode?

[paul_oshea]

CD when did you acquire a sense of humour? IS there some poor unfortunate out looking for his, after you mugged and stole it from him?

[Charlie Darwin]

I've been studying for it at nights instead of going to away matches.

[geysir]

I've been studying for it at nights instead of going to away matches.
Whilst your fandom rep may drop significantly in some haughty circles,
you may gain heart from research that discovered that women are three times more likely to say yes to the guy who has the sense of humour.
And haven't we all heard about the joys of yes?

[Fixer82]

I disagree about the synopsis given here on the Austria game. We conceded a very well worked goal. For most of the rest of the game we dominated and created far more chances. Another ref may have allowed Duffy’s goal to stand.

Against Georgia home and away we were awful. Against Moldova at home we didn’t shut up shop, we just kept laying it on for Long who couldn’t hit a barn door that day.
And also, players were not going to kill themselves
with the Wales game approaching.

My biggest concern by far in the group was how disorganised we were against Georgia away. Maybe the attitude of the players just wasn’t right? But Georgia dominated our midfield that day with considerable ease

[jbyrne]

I disagree about the synopsis given here on the Austria game. We conceded a very well worked goal. For most of the rest of the game we dominated and created far more chances. Another ref may have allowed Duffy’s goal to stand.


to be fair we were very poor in the first half and they could have caught us on the break about 3 times in the 2nd part of the 2nd half.
we just about deserved a draw

[Stuttgart88]

Seriously Fixer? The first 45 mins against Austria was as bad a first half as I've ever seen at home. Ok, some standout shockers (Russia under Trap, Denmark 1985, Austria under Jack, Spain 0-3 before Sheridan scored...) but against an out of form Austria we were brutal. It was as if O'Neill had sedated them, not motivated them. Awful awful stuff. As jbyrne said, they missed at least 2 great chances to go 2 up. A very tidy Randolph save and a ball that flashed across the 6 yard box just eluding a touch spring to mind. Both were in last 10-15 mins too.

[tetsujin1979]

_Nlraz-9C5s

[tetsujin1979]

Bumped and archived

Four Burnley players finished the on the pitch for Ireland - Kevin Long, Stephen Ward, Jeff Hendrick and Robbie Brady. This was the first time one club had four players on the pitch at the same time since Wolves provided four players for the starting XI vs Italy in June 2011