Stephen Kenny

[Razors left peg]

I'm not sure why that's being used as an argument when a more valid question would be "What could a different manager have done against Malta/Luxembourg/Lithuania/Azerbaijan?" And the answer to that has to be "Quite a lot"

Agree Rodgers is almost certainly way outside the FAI's budget though.

I'm going off the most recent games where we've has a full squad available and I believe progress was made.

[pineapple stu]

Fair enough. I think it's very short-sighted to consider that Kenny is now equal to someone like Rodgers (warts and all) because of one match against a sluggish France. The Malta game wasn't that long ago and I don't think we were missing then

[Razors left peg]

Fair enough. I think it's very short-sighted to consider that Kenny is now equal to someone like Rodgers (warts and all) because of one match against a sluggish France. The Malta game wasn't that long ago and I don't think we were missing then
Italy only beat Malta 2 nil in a qualifier last week. My beef about the Malta game was that he didn't play Smallbone, not the result. It's a friendly and we won, but he did play Ferguson so he was ahead of the curve there.

Do I think Rogers would be a step up, probably yeah, but I also think it's impossible to get him and even if we managed it he'd jump ship at the first smell of a Premiership club.

All I'm asking for is for people to stay in reality

[pineapple stu]

My beef with the Malta game is the entire turgid performance tbh. We weren't winning that unless they gifted us something on a plate (which they did). That's not good enough, especially when it's a regular problem. Italy were 2-0 up and cruising after half an hour. Italy of all teams will quite happily sit on that.

I agree we're highly unlikely to be of interest to Rodgers, but your question was "What could a different manager have done differently against France?", and I don't think that's the right question to be asking

[zero]

no chance rodgers would go near us unless we had a huge pay packet which is not likely to happen.

that being said, if we lose to Greece and find ourselves out of the running after 2 games yet again under Kenny's stewardship then it's time to give someone else a go in my opinion. i know there are plenty here that disagree.


you'd like to think the FAI have a shortlist of candidates drawn up that meets their budget, but who knows.

[Razors left peg]

My beef with the Malta game is the entire turgid performance tbh. We weren't winning that unless they gifted us something on a plate (which they did). That's not good enough, especially when it's a regular problem. Italy were 2-0 up and cruising after half an hour. Italy of all teams will quite happily sit on that.

I agree we're highly unlikely to be of interest to Rodgers, but your question was "What could a different manager have done differently against France?", and I don't think that's the right question to be asking

It was a friendly, we've had plenty of friendlies over the years under multiple managers when players wouldn't even turn up

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Pep would be a huge step up too, but he's not getable either. 2.3 million pounds might as well be 200 million pounds for the FAI right now, completely impossible.

And again, what could a different manager have done differently against France?

2.3 million is better than 10 million. We've already quartered it here. Maybe we can introduce a bit of national pride to drag his fee down further. He's already amounted a large amount of money, the less time consuming international job might suit him. Although difficult, this definitely isn't impossible like you're making it out.

I don't know what the French game would have to do with appointing a better manager? People were wondering what options were available should Kenny get sacked, here's a really good option.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

no chance rodgers would go near us unless we had a huge pay packet which is not likely to happen.

that being said, if we lose to Greece and find ourselves out of the running after 2 games yet again under Kenny's stewardship then it's time to give someone else a go in my opinion. i know there are plenty here that disagree.


you'd like to think the FAI have a shortlist of candidates drawn up that meets their budget, but who knows.

You'd have to hope so and it sounds like they have a few in mind. No harm having a chat with Rodgers anyway. Can rule him out if he's looking for mad money, I'd be pushing the budget as far as it can stretch to get him on board though.

[Razors left peg]

2.3 million is better than 10 million. We've already quartered it here. Maybe we can introduce a bit of national pride to drag his fee down further. He's already amounted a large amount of money, the less time consuming international job might suit him. Although difficult, this definitely isn't impossible like you're making it out.

I don't know what the French game would have to do with appointing a better manager? People were wondering what options were available should Kenny get sacked, here's a really good option.

Why wouldn't the French game have something to do with getting a different manager, It's the most recent qualifier we have against a top side. You don't want to give an answer because we did very well and were set up absolutely correct for the game

[pineapple stu]

Why wouldn't the French game have something to do with getting a different manager, It's the most recent qualifier we have against a top side.
It certainly helps his case, but to judge him entirely on that one game (which you seem to be doing) doesn't make sense.


It was a friendly, we've had plenty of friendlies over the years under multiple managers when players wouldn't even turn up
Why did you compare it to a qualifier so?

We've had too many games against smaller countries where we've performed quite badly (you can add Armenia to my list) and very very few where we've performed well. In that regard, it was an extension of a bad run that needs to change.

[seanfhear]

Graham Potter is available now ~ ~ If we can find a rake of money ! !

[Razors left peg]

It certainly helps his case, but to judge him entirely on that one game (which you seem to be doing) doesn't make sense.


Why did you compare it to a qualifier so?

We've had too many games against smaller countries where we've performed quite badly (you can add Armenia to my list) and very very few where we've performed well. In that regard, it was an extension of a bad run that needs to change.

Of course the poor results against weaker teams need to improve. I disagree any team in Nations league were weaker teams though, the are in same group as us precisely because they are similar level to us.

However moving forward we need to see where we are really at. France was a decent start, in a defeat. We need to follow it up in rest of games now. I don't think Greece away is a game we should win, I think it's one we could though and I expect a good performance. People will expect us to beat the Dutch because of their game against France. But again it's not we should win, but we could...

At the end of the group we'll see where we are. In the meantime talk of getting Rogers or any other Premiership manager in their prime on top wages should be kept to the comment section of the RTE Sport Facebook page where it'll fit in with the rest of the idiocy

[JR89]

Graham Potter is available now ~ ~ If we can find a rake of money ! !

Jaysus, we'll have both the lads fighting amongst themselves about who'll be the one to take a 95% pay cut to manage Ireland.

[pineapple stu]

I disagree any team in Nations league were weaker teams though, the are in same group as us precisely because they are similar level to us.
Ah now. Armenia were clearly weaker than us, partly because they were promoted from a lower division which had had no strong teams relegated into it (North Macedonia, Georgia and Estonia), and partly because they're about 250 points lower-rated on Elo.

We can't judge Kenny just on France alone.

[Razors left peg]

We should have been relegated, twice

[pineapple stu]

Certainly could have anyway. I'd be building that into my judgement of Kenny.

[Razors left peg]

I've said plenty of times on here that I don't think Kenny the man to move forward, but I seen enough last week to make me think he's learned from mistakes.

[pineapple stu]

Certainly the France game seemed better managed than previous ones, but that's still no reason to judge him entirely on that one game.

[Razors left peg]

I'm not judging him entirely on that, as I've said multiple times, but I'm saying let's see how we do in next few games and the Rogers stuff is LALA land

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Why wouldn't the French game have something to do with getting a different manager, It's the most recent qualifier we have against a top side. You don't want to give an answer because we did very well and were set up absolutely correct for the game

Is Kenny going to be sacked before the Greece game? No. He'll only be sacked if we lose to Greece because it'll be his 5th failure as Ireland manager. So the France game is irrelevant. Hopefully Rodgers is still available and within reach if Kenny gets the boot.

[Eminence Grise]

Let's hire Rodgers right away! And a select few visionary fans can can form a guard of honour mounted on unicorns when he rocks into Landsdowne Rd for his first game in charge.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Suggesting alternatives for the Ireland job has not gone down well with some Kennyites. Rodgers may be unlikely but his philosophy would be along the same lines as Kenny's except he has shown he's capable of implementing it. He's basically what we hoped Kenny would turn into but have been left very disappointed to date. Let's hope the FAI have a chat word with Rodgers anyway.

[samhaydenjr]

So after all the debate about the Kenny reign, is there actually a case to be made for him potentially being replaced should the next few results not go our way? I was OK with him getting the contract extension as he seemed to be turning things around towards the end of the World Cup campaign - but then came the Armenia games, the insipid performance at home to Ukraine, the Norway defeat and the very laboured victory against Malta and I went back to worrying that this will be another lost campaign, particularly when the draw came out. Now, if the performance against France is repeated throughout the rest of the qualifiers and is translated into results, then we may well be in a strong position going into the play-offs, if we fall short of qualifying from the group. I think a win in Greece followed by a convincing performance against Gibraltar would certainly justify allowing Kenny to see out this contract. But a bad defeat followed by a scraped three points should surely mean that we need to make a change and give a new manager time to prepare for the play-offs. Or should he stay for the full term no matter what?

Of course then there's the entirely plausible scenario of a draw in Greece followed by a victory at the Aviva - what should happen then? Would it depend on the nature of the games - Greece clinging on for a draw plus a big victory against Gibraltar vs us being lucky to come home with a point and then putting in a poor performance in Dublin? Or should he go or stay either way?

[elatedscum]

I’d like to see him get the full campaign. I think my opinion could change if we were ever really uncompetitive in a non-friendly.

The England game is the only one I remember where we were soundly beaten. The loss to Serbia, we were knocking on the door at the end. The same with France. Portugal got a 94th min winner.

I don’t think we’ve lost a competitive game by more than a goal. If I got a sense that the players weren’t playing for him - or that we were all at sea, I’d probably want a change made. But otherwise, I think we’ve had poor luck in a number of scenarios and considering the group of death, I’d like Kenny to be afforded the chance to qualify both via group and via playoff.

[Razors left peg]

Personally I think a draw in Greece is a good result. To finish a minimum of 3rd in this group with a hope of pushing the Dutch 4 points against Greece is a must, but they will think the same against us.

I think the nature of the performance in Greece will be a good barometer on if we really are making progress or was France performance based on the occasion of having world cup finalist in town.

I think historically we've not been good in June, but I do expect us to put in a good performance in Greece and hopefully it'll be enough. The Gibraltar game being just 3 days later will probably be a bit of a damp squib that we'll win but it'll be flat.

But let's be positive and say we are on 4 or 6 points after June. Our Sept games are Paris and home to the Dutch 3 days later. What do we do in Paris? You don't want a hammering so you have to put a good team out but surely we'd have to keep something in reserve for the Dutch game that we'd have to win to qualify.

Barring a total disaster in Greece I think Kenny is going to see out this campaign, but with our squad improving all the time with the likes of Smallbone, Johnston and Ferguson introduced recently and Cannon possibly next, we are on an upward trajectory and less reliant on players that have been poor in the past. Kenny hopefully has learned from his mistakes too so let's see if we really have moved on in summer.

I'm kinda sick of ever game being a referendum on the manager but he has brought it on himself

[John83]

I also don't think a draw in Greece would be a bad result. People put too much stock in individual games - and of course I do it too, as it's hard not to in international football with so few games - but the decisive factor for me is whether we're actually better than Greece over a full campaign. I think it's little better than 50:50 right now. I hope I see more cause for optimism over the coming games. A win in Greece would be a huge boost in that regard. Even a draw with us the better team would be (weakly) positive, just as the good performance and narrow defeat to France was weakly positive.

[Eirambler]

It really is something to see two and a half years of failure being whitewashed based on us apparently being set up correctly for one game - and we lost the game! And I don't even know that we were set up to maximise our chances of a result in the game. It's incredible stuff to read.

A few issues with that...

Firstly, we already knew that we could be set up reasonably well against stronger opposition. We saw that against Portugal in the last group (and we actually got a result against Portugal). So there's nothing new there, losing this time is a step back if anything. It's the games against teams our level and weaker teams that have been the persistent issue, so a borderline commendable performance against France doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know.

Secondly, France never beat anyone anyways decent away from home by more than a goal or two in qualifiers anyway so the result isn't particularly impressive. It was our first home loss in the Euros qualifiers in a long time. It was also a game we badly needed a result from in the context of the group. We should never be happy with a defeat, but in particular we should never be happy with a home defeat. It just shows how low the bar is now being set that many are happy with that result, but the only team that actually had reason to be happy was France.

And thirdly, were we actually that well set up? Out of possession we were nice and compact at the back alright. But what was the game plan on the ball? Pass it around a bit? It looks nice I suppose but we didn't create much from general play. As usual our one big chance came from a header from a corner right at the end. Which seems to be the story of Kenny's time in charge. So if we're relying on that for a goal anyway, why are we bothering tapping it around at the back? As usual we didn't score from that approach, but we did concede from it. It would have made more sense to be a bit more direct and try and get more set pieces, as that was likely to be the only way we would have scored anyway. And it would have reduced the likelihood of us gifting them the chance for the goal.

In all honesty how anyone could think that France game was something worth whitewashing everything that has gone before over is beyond my comprehension. People just seem to be searching for anything at all they can find to defend the management with, even when there's absolutely nothing new there.

Meanwhile a must win game against Greece has been reduced to "a draw would be good", the campaign which Kenny was finally to be judged on results has been reduced to "finishing third would be good" and Kenny's disastrous management of the Nations League campaign and the subsequent impact of that on our group seeding and our playoff prospects has been wilfully forgotten about.

[pineapple stu]

Good post, though I don't agree Greece away is a must-win. I think Austria and Wales in 2017 are about our only away wins of note in the last dozen years; to suggest Greece is a must-win with a poorer squad is harsh. Greece at home could well be described as a must-win though.

And a Norway/Scotland-type defeat in Greece would be a poor result.

[Real ale Madrid]

It really is something to see two and a half years of failure being whitewashed based on us apparently being set up correctly for one game - and we lost the game! And I don't even know that we were set up to maximise our chances of a result in the game. It's incredible stuff to read.

A few issues with that...

Firstly, we already knew that we could be set up reasonably well against stronger opposition. We saw that against Portugal in the last group (and we actually got a result against Portugal). So there's nothing new there, losing this time is a step back if anything. It's the games against teams our level and weaker teams that have been the persistent issue, so a borderline commendable performance against France doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know.

Secondly, France never beat anyone anyways decent away from home by more than a goal or two in qualifiers anyway so the result isn't particularly impressive. It was our first home loss in the Euros qualifiers in a long time. It was also a game we badly needed a result from in the context of the group. We should never be happy with a defeat, but in particular we should never be happy with a home defeat. It just shows how low the bar is now being set that many are happy with that result, but the only team that actually had reason to be happy was France.

And thirdly, were we actually that well set up? Out of possession we were nice and compact at the back alright. But what was the game plan on the ball? Pass it around a bit? It looks nice I suppose but we didn't create much from general play. As usual our one big chance came from a header from a corner right at the end. Which seems to be the story of Kenny's time in charge. So if we're relying on that for a goal anyway, why are we bothering tapping it around at the back? As usual we didn't score from that approach, but we did concede from it. It would have made more sense to be a bit more direct and try and get more set pieces, as that was likely to be the only way we would have scored anyway. And it would have reduced the likelihood of us gifting them the chance for the goal.

In all honesty how anyone could think that France game was something worth whitewashing everything that has gone before over is beyond my comprehension. People just seem to be searching for anything at all they can find to defend the management with, even when there's absolutely nothing new there.

Meanwhile a must win game against Greece has been reduced to "a draw would be good", the campaign which Kenny was finally to be judged on results has been reduced to "finishing third would be good" and Kenny's disastrous management of the Nations League campaign and the subsequent impact of that on our group seeding and our playoff prospects has been wilfully forgotten about.

Yes we played pretty well against France so now I've decided to whitewash everything that has gone on since we qualified for Euro 2016. A one goal defeat in the searing heat of Athens in June is now something all Kennyites aspire to also. What absolute drivel.

[Stuttgart88]

I think it’s very selective to say “it’s our first home Euros defeat since x years ago”, like our home form has been in any way impressive for some time. Euros groups and WC groups are interchangeable. They’re always against European teams and often the same teams. We’ve had one amazingly good home qualifying result since 2010 qualifying, two shockers (Germany and Russia, though we nearly salvaged the latter). We shipped 9 goals in those two games under a manager famous for his defensive organisation. We lost 5-1 to Denmark. Even under Trap I think we only drew at home with Bulgaria and Montenegro and were blessed to beat Georgia 2-1. Stan's was probably the best home campaign in the last 15 or so years - draws with Germany, Czechs and Cyprus, wins over Wales and Slovakia.

Who of the sides we were trying to qualify against have we actually beaten at home? Bulgaria, Russia, Sweden, Austria, Denmark, Wales, Switzerland, Scotland…all no. Bosnia play off was probably the only notable win other than Germany.

And have we beaten any of the lesser sides convincingly?

So, let’s not pretend that losing to France was some kind of outlier.

And Greece hasn’t suddenly been demoted in importance. We all know how these groups work. It used to be draw away, win at home, but that plan stopped working years ago. Now it’s get whatever we can wherever we can. I’d certainly hope to win in Greece but a draw would be ok if we win at home and we at least match Netherlands in our head to heads and their results against Greece. Under Trap we got 18 points in a 6 team group in WC10 qualifyng, 4 wins against seeds 5 and 6 and draws against everyone else. So I’ll judge the Greece result and performance on its own merit and after the group picture becomes clearer.

I think Greece are probably tougher than Georgia who we’ve struggled against. I don’t know the rankings but in terms of club strength and infrastructure I’d say they have more about them. I think it’d be a really good one to win, bad one to lose and a draw is “it depends”.

[SkStu]

It really is something to see two and a half years of failure being whitewashed based on us apparently being set up correctly for one game - and we lost the game! And I don't even know that we were set up to maximise our chances of a result in the game. It's incredible stuff to read.

A few issues with that...

Firstly, we already knew that we could be set up reasonably well against stronger opposition. We saw that against Portugal in the last group (and we actually got a result against Portugal). So there's nothing new there, losing this time is a step back if anything. It's the games against teams our level and weaker teams that have been the persistent issue, so a borderline commendable performance against France doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know.

Secondly, France never beat anyone anyways decent away from home by more than a goal or two in qualifiers anyway so the result isn't particularly impressive. It was our first home loss in the Euros qualifiers in a long time. It was also a game we badly needed a result from in the context of the group. We should never be happy with a defeat, but in particular we should never be happy with a home defeat. It just shows how low the bar is now being set that many are happy with that result, but the only team that actually had reason to be happy was France.

And thirdly, were we actually that well set up? Out of possession we were nice and compact at the back alright. But what was the game plan on the ball? Pass it around a bit? It looks nice I suppose but we didn't create much from general play. As usual our one big chance came from a header from a corner right at the end. Which seems to be the story of Kenny's time in charge. So if we're relying on that for a goal anyway, why are we bothering tapping it around at the back? As usual we didn't score from that approach, but we did concede from it. It would have made more sense to be a bit more direct and try and get more set pieces, as that was likely to be the only way we would have scored anyway. And it would have reduced the likelihood of us gifting them the chance for the goal.

In all honesty how anyone could think that France game was something worth whitewashing everything that has gone before over is beyond my comprehension. People just seem to be searching for anything at all they can find to defend the management with, even when there's absolutely nothing new there.

Meanwhile a must win game against Greece has been reduced to "a draw would be good", the campaign which Kenny was finally to be judged on results has been reduced to "finishing third would be good" and Kenny's disastrous management of the Nations League campaign and the subsequent impact of that on our group seeding and our playoff prospects has been wilfully forgotten about.

On the bit in bold, we were extremely pragmatic and balanced. He played Ogbene for that exact reason and there were many balls that were sent down the line and into the channels for Ogbene to challenge for. Which he did. Winning a lot of free-kicks, corners, throw-ins and relieving pressure on us. It was a job well done all round (except maybe some of the set-pieces themselves).

On the last bit. A draw keeps us alive and, in any event, it would be a fairly decent result (same level as us, away, heat, hostility). Would like to see the performance to try and get the 3 points, obviously, and have us set up to maximize the chances of that. It is one that i am positive he will be looking at as a good chance to take 3 points. Either way, I am sure he'll get the full campaign (potentially if we get into the playoffs too) and then the decision can be made on the whole which makes more sense than trying to write his obituary now.

There was no impact on our seedings - they were unchanged.

[Stuttgart88]

I think Austria and Wales in 2017 are about our only away wins of note in the last dozen yearsBest competitive away wins since Scotland in 1987. At the time that was our best away win ever in qualifying. So those are our three best away wins in our whole history.

[osarusan]

Good post, though I don't agree Greece away is a must-win. I think Austria and Wales in 2017 are about our only away wins of note in the last dozen years; to suggest Greece is a must-win with a poorer squad is harsh. Greece at home could well be described as a must-win though.

And a Norway/Scotland-type defeat in Greece would be a poor result.

I'd guess it means 'must-win' in terms of qualification, not in terms of identifying consistent signs of progress.

And in that sense it's probably fair - if we are to have any chanceof qualifying considering our likely points haul against the combined French and Dutch, then the matches against Greece would be 6 points we 'must' collect.

For me, in terms of identifying signs of progress, it's more a question of whether it's a 'should-win'.

As in, when looking at both squads, is this a game we should be winning or not? Gibraltar home and away are obviously 'should-win' (or 'should-win-easily') matches. Greece (away in particular) I'm not so sure about.

On a few occasions under Kenny we've probably had some better results than what we 'should' have had, bud we've had a good few that are worse too.

[Bungle]

Best competitive away wins since Scotland in 1987. At the time that was our best away win ever in qualifying. So those are our three best away wins in our whole history.

We were robbed of some very big away wins down the years. Seville in 92 was maybe the worst, but the 70s and 80s had a few belters. Wembley in 91 was down to poor finishing to be fair - the English I spoke to after the game all said to a man we were such a superior team - imagine if that team qualified we could have done so well in Sweden.

On Kenny, I think he doesn’t deserve criticism for the French game. He set us up really well and we were unlucky to lose against the second best team in the world. If we play like that for the rest of the campaign we have a chance of qualifying directly.

Being honest I despised Martin O’Neill’s football, even taking into account that his results on paper were good given the quality of players at his disposal. At least, we try to play football and given the talent coming through, that’s very welcome. He made out we couldn’t play ball, when teams like the North at least tried to. It was embarrassing to see minnows coming to Lansdowne Road and having the lions share of possession.

The players seem to like Kenny. Personally, I think he is awful with the media and I struggle to see any level of charisma there, but he must have something about him, because the players are giving their all.

I hope he’s a success but I feel he may fall between the cracks before we have a very decent team in about two years. He will have got a few campaigns so he can’t have any great complaints. A World Cup in Europe is exceptionally hard to qualify from (easier at least for the next one) but UEFA do give a few back doors to teams like us for the Euros. His legacy will be getting us back believing we should play football again and I’d be very happy if he stayed involved with player development. As I said, I hope he’s a great success and leads us to a few tournaments and does a great job, but that’s a gut feeling.

[Razors left peg]

Some people seem to have a very simplistic mindset that if we don't win every game the manager should be sacked.

[Eirambler]

Well, given that the win rate of the current manager is a record low 28%, I don't think those people - whoever they may be - reside on this forum.

[tetsujin1979]

Some people seem to have a very simplistic mindset that if we don't win every game the manager should be sacked.I don't think it's as simple as "he has to win every game". Trapattoni took over in May 2008, and the football, while successful at times, was tough to watch - to say the least. The same applies to O'Neill's and McCarthy's reigns that followed. All three managers broadly followed the same gameplan of making us tough to score against while nicking the odd goal to win. It was almost 12 years since Trapattoni took over when Kenny was given the job (dear God!) and at the beginning of his reign, the fans understood that he needed time to wipe clean the tactics of the previous decade, and introduce new players and formations. That didn't happen straight away, and it was unpleasant at times, but the fanbase was still behind him because there was evidence of the changes that he was making in some of the play of the national side.

I believe that time he was afforded for those changes expired after the Armenia and Ukraine games last summer. The win against Scotland, and the performance away to Ukraine granted him an extension but the reactions of the crowd after the home games against Armenia and Norway tell their own story.

We have no god given right to win every game, no team does. However, the expectation was that, eventually, the team would be competitive against higher ranked opposition and win games against lower ranked teams. His record suggests that we are improving. His team doesn't lose by more than one goal, England apart, so we're always in with a chance of getting something right up until the very end - it took a world class save to deny us a point against France. But we lose by a goal a lot. And we've only really blown one decent team away under his reign. Despite the teams we're facing this year, the performance against France says we will be competitive. But so did the performances against Serbia and Portugal, which came right before we lost to Luxembourg and drew with Azerbaijan.

My own opinion is, and has been for a while, that he'll be manager at least until the end of this campaign. If we've qualified, or are in a play off, then he'll continue. If not, then his successor will reap the benefits of the players he's introduced.

So it's not as simple as "he has to win every game", it's more a case of "if he loses, then he's closer to the end of his time in charge"

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Well, given that the win rate of the current manager is a record low 28%, I don't think those people - whoever they may be - reside on this forum.

The way people are going on, you'd swear that Kenny has had a good record as Ireland manager and anyone criticising his time in charge are some fringe lunatics. Not only is Kenny's win percentage so low, the calabre of teams we've played under him has been quite low. Of the 32 games, only 5 have been against top tier nations first teams and I'm including Serbia in that who some might question. He's picked up 2 points out of 15 against them.

Of the 9 wins we've had under Kenny. Only one was against a team at our level. The rest has been against teams below us and mostly way below us in whatever ranking system you like to use. Also, 5 of the 9 victories have been in friendlies. Given the opposition we've played, having lost 12 times in 32 games is really bad. These are some of the reasons why some want Kenny gone. It's not because our expectations are too high, it's not because we've got some grudge against Kenny, it's because he has completely under performed as Ireland manager. I actually can't think how it could have gone much worse.

So is it lunacy to want a better manager or maybe the lunatics are those who want Kenny to stay?

[Eminence Grise]

at the beginning of his reign, the fans understood that he needed time to wipe clean the tactics of the previous decade, and introduce new players and formations. That didn't happen straight away, and it was unpleasant at times, but the fanbase was still behind him because there was evidence of the changes that he was making in some of the play of the national side.

I believe that time he was afforded for those changes expired after the Armenia and Ukraine games last summer.

That's exactly my feeling on it. I'm not sure if I posted it here ages back or if it was in a conversation with someone, but I've thought for a while that Kenny might wind up being remembered as what-his-name who laid the foundations for the successful manager.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Steve Staunton gave debuts to Stephen Ireland, Kevin Doyle, Joey O'Brien, Shane Long, Anthony Stokes, Joey Lapira, Darron Gibson, Stephen Hunt, Paul McShane, Stephen Kelly, Daryl Murphy, Andy Keogh and a load more, he was building for World Cup 2010 but didn't get the chance. Were people giving him credit for the building the foundations for nearly qualifying for the World Cup and qualifying for the Euros in 2012?

[Razors left peg]

So you did some research and found a list of players to make it look like Staunton deserved similar praise to Kenny for giving debuts.... but you left Joey Lapria in this list, obviously not knowing the context of that and that it was far from a positive for Stan.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

So you did some research and found a list of players to make it look like Staunton deserved similar praise to Kenny for giving debuts.... but you left Joey Lapria in this list, obviously not knowing the context of that and that it was far from a positive for Stan.

:D You're the most serious poster on this board! I threw him in for some light relief.

But should Stan have been given a go at 2010 qualification? Kenny has basically been granted the equivalent now.

[Razors left peg]

Ya did in your hole!

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Ya did in your hole!

Lighten up.

I've said before that Kenny and Staunton's reigns have been similar in a few ways. And both were far from great performers in front of the camera. If it was to end now, I think Kenny's time in charge will be remembered similarly to Staunton's. A few false dawn's but overall 2 poor managers who were out of their depth. Not their fault of course, should never have been appointed. That was down to Delaney.

[Razors left peg]

I don't think it's as simple as "he has to win every game". Trapattoni took over in May 2008, and the football, while successful at times, was tough to watch - to say the least. The same applies to O'Neill's and McCarthy's reigns that followed. All three managers broadly followed the same gameplan of making us tough to score against while nicking the odd goal to win. It was 12 years since Trapattoni took over when Kenny was given the job (dear God!) and at the beginning of his reign, the fans understood that he needed time to wipe clean the tactics of the previous decade, and introduce new players and formations. That didn't happen straight away, and it was unpleasant at times, but the fanbase was still behind him because there was evidence of the changes that he was making in some of the play of the national side.

I believe that time he was afforded for those changes expired after the Armenia and Ukraine games last summer. The win against Scotland, and the performance away to Ukraine granted him an extension but the reactions of the crowd after the home games against Armenia and Norway tell their own story.

We have no god given right to win every game, no team does. However, the expectation was that, eventually, the team would be competitive against higher ranked opposition and win games against lower ranked teams. His record suggests that we are improving. His team doesn't lose by more than one goal, England apart, so we're always in with a chance of getting something right up until the very end - it took a world class save to deny us a point against France. But we lose by a goal a lot. And we've only really blown one decent team away under his reign. Despite the teams we're facing this year, the performance against France says we will be competitive. But so did the performances against Serbia and Portugal, which came right before we lost to Luxembourg and drew with Azerbaijan.

My own opinion is, and has been for a while, that he'll be manager at least until the end of this campaign. If we've qualified, or are in a play off, then he'll continue. If not, then his successor will reap the benefits of the players he's introduced.

So it's not as simple as "he has to win every game", it's more a case of "if he loses, then he's closer to the end of his time in charge"

Yeah in fairness my comment was a bit of a throwaway line that was bit exaggerated. As I've said previously I just sick of every game being a referendum on him but he has brought it on himself.

The match going fans and players are still overwhelming behind him based on the vibe last week so he will see out the campaign at least

[Yard of Pace]

The match going fans and players are still overwhelming behind him based on the vibe last week so he will see out the campaign at least

I don't know how, to be honest. From "You'll never beat the Irish" to "You most probably will beat the Irish, unless you're San Marino or Gibralter". I think it's a dangerously insidiuous attitude that's seeped in.

Also, any mention of Joe Lapira is welcome. He was great.

Finally, people laughing about Potter and Rodgers....neither of them need money and I think Ireland as we are right now is a very interesting project. I read today that Potter wants some time off. He could end up being just the man. Just saying. If Ferguson continues on his trajectory I think plenty of managers could look at us and say "I fancy a go at that". Added bonus there's very little pressure due to the diabolical record of the previous manager.

[Razors left peg]

I don't know how, to be honest. From "You'll never beat the Irish" to "You most probably will beat the Irish, unless you're San Marino or Gibralter". I think it's a dangerously insidiuous attitude that's seeped in.

Also, any mention of Joe Lapira is welcome. He was great.

Finally, people laughing about Potter and Rodgers....neither of them need money and I think Ireland as we are right now is a very interesting project. I read today that Potter wants some time off. He could end up being just the man. Just saying. If Ferguson continues on his trajectory I think plenty of managers could look at us and say "I fancy a go at that". Added bonus there's very little pressure due to the diabolical record of the previous manager.

On your 1st point about not knowing why the match going fans are still behind him, I would say that people forget how bad things were in the few years between Euro 2016 and Kenny taking over. It was horrible football where very weak teams were getting 65% possession against us in the Aviva. It seemed like we were just drifting with players like Ronan Curtis playing on a semi regular basis. Kennys tenure does coincide with the best generation of players coming through in quite a while so I think people are willing to give him more leeway than before so that these players can get up to speed with International football.

I agree that someone could look at it as a good project if Kenny was to get the sack eventually. I think the net should be cast far and wide to see what replacements would be available, but I also dont trust the FAI to not just pick the easy option of Allardyce, Tony Pulis, Roy Hodgeson or someother British has been. We dont have the money of the past to attract a Rogers or Potter, and with all the best will in the world of them saying its a project they might fancy the money would be so low that they would jump ship at the 1st hint of a club job becoming available.

[osarusan]

Don't see people like Potter or Rodgers having any interest in the Irish job. Firstly, it takes quite a while to demonstrate that you're making significant progress (6 competitive wins on the trot could take a year rather than a month) and as well as that, I'm not sure how much international success (with a team in Ireland's league at least) is considered evidence that you can cut the mustard in the EPL (any more evidence that already exists about Potter and Rodgers).

[Jd2793]

potter will be the englands manager after euro 24.

[tetsujin1979]

He'd be England manager right now if he hadn't left Brighton