The Next Ireland Manager

[EalingGreen]

NI finished on 7 points. The 75 mins reference is arbitrarily chosen to put generated potential results in the best light.
If games finished on 75 mins, the points tally would have been 12.
70 mins = 11 points.
80 mins = 7 points.
(Need for games to finish on 55 mins to knock off home and away defeats to Azerbaijan.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_%E2%80%93_UEFA_G roup_F

Of course it's arbitrary. But it reflects the fact that we were competitive in most of our games to a greater degree than the final results would indicate. More pertinently, it reflected the fact that the "basics" were in place, it was just the "extras" which needed attention (subs, game management, fitness etc).

The proof being that in the following campaign, we finished top of our qualifying group with just one defeat in 10 games (away to Romania early on), making us the only 5th seed ever to win a group.



Anyhow, don’t see Michael O’Neill as offering more than Chris Hughton/ Martin O’Neill/ Mick McCarthy tbh.I like CH, both as a Spurs player and a thoroughly decent person. I like Martin O'Neill for his wit and as an NI legend. And I like Big Mick because, well, who couldn't like the man!

But while I'm not sure which of the four I'd choose to go out for a drink with(!), if choosing an international manager, it would be Michael every time.

Opinions, eh? ;)

[seanfhear]

Of course it's arbitrary. But it reflects the fact that we were competitive in most of our games to a greater degree than the final results would indicate. More pertinently, it reflected the fact that the "basics" were in place, it was just the "extras" which needed attention (subs, game management, fitness etc).

The proof being that in the following campaign, we finished top of our qualifying group with just one defeat in 10 games (away to Romania early on), making us the only 5th seed ever to win a group.

I like CH, both as a Spurs player and a thoroughly decent person. I like Martin O'Neill for his wit and as an NI legend. And I like Big Mick because, well, who couldn't like the man!

But while I'm not sure which of the four I'd choose to go out for a drink with(!), if choosing an international manager, it would be Michael every time.

Opinions, eh? ;)Over his entire period with Northern Ireland Michael O’Neill did a great job with them. Shamrock Rovers gave him a great opportunity which he did well from that. That was a great combination in the Republic of Ireland. Perhaps Michael O’Neill could repeat such a great combination with the Republic of Ireland football team.

[ifk101]

Over his entire period with Northern Ireland Michael O’Neill did a great job with them.

7 points out of a possible 30 in his first qualification campaign. Sackable there and then from our perspective, no?



I like CH, both as a Spurs player and a thoroughly decent person. I like Martin O'Neill for his wit and as an NI legend. And I like Big Mick because, well, who couldn't like the man!
But while I'm not sure which of the four I'd choose to go out for a drink with(!), if choosing an international manager, it would be Michael every time.
Opinions, eh? ;)

I’m sure they’re all great company. Managerially, they’re all of the same ilk however and not what we need.

[EalingGreen]

Over his entire period with Northern Ireland Michael O’Neill did a great job with them. Shamrock Rovers gave him a great opportunity which he did well from that. That was a great combination in the Republic of Ireland. Perhaps Michael O’Neill could repeat such a great combination with the Republic of Ireland football team.
I have no doubt he could do an excellent job for ROI.

But unless it was with a really "big" country, I really don't see him wanting to manage any international team, at least in the foreseeable future.

Remember, he turned down Scotland, who are a bigger team than NI and potentially bigger than ROI, even though they really wanted him, and his family still lives there.

And he had a "job for life" with the IFA, not just as manager, but also as Head of Development.

Meanwhile, he also turned down, or didn't pursue, other decent club jobs before settling on Stoke, since he knew that the owners would give him the time needed to turn round a failing club and fulfil their potential to be a top flight club.

So that if all goes well (never guaranteed, of course), he'll take them to the PL, to qualify him for a crack at the big time. That would probably take him through until he's nearly 60 (he was 52 in July).

At that stage, he might decide to revert to international management, but if I had to guess, I'd say he's more likely to pursue the "upstairs job" he's talked about, and studied for, in the past.

But who knows, eh? :cool:

[EalingGreen]

7 points out of a possible 30 in his first qualification campaign. Sackable there and then from our perspective, no?

I can see how it must have appeared that way with Michael from the outside looking in, certainly.

But trust me, from "Blazers", to Players, to Supporters, we all saw a different story.

And he quickly proved us correct.

As for SK, I wouldn't write him off solely on the basis of his results to date. Rather the question must be whether he's making the necessary progress with the players behind the scenes, so that they can turn things round.

I'm in no position to judge that, but while I originally thought him a good appointment, I'm now beginning to wonder whether he might not have been more of a pragmatist to start with (emphasise), rather than the purist he clearly is from Day One.

For that way, not only would a few decent results keep the critics off his back, but it would allow a better environment to introduce the youngsters gradually, rather than all in a rush into a losing team.


I’m sure they’re all great company. Managerially, they’re all of the same ilk however and not what we need.

We'll have to agree to differ on that last bit then :cool:.

[seanfhear]

I have no doubt he could do an excellent job for ROI.

But unless it was with a really "big" country, I really don't see him wanting to manage any international team, at least in the foreseeable future.

Remember, he turned down Scotland, who are a bigger team than NI and potentially bigger than ROI, even though they really wanted him, and his family still lives there.

And he had a "job for life" with the IFA, not just as manager, but also as Head of Development.

Meanwhile, he also turned down, or didn't pursue, other decent club jobs before settling on Stoke, since he knew that the owners would give him the time needed to turn round a failing club and fulfil their potential to be a top flight club.

So that if all goes well (never guaranteed, of course), he'll take them to the PL, to qualify him for a crack at the big time. That would probably take him through until he's nearly 60 (he was 52 in July).

At that stage, he might decide to revert to international management, but if I had to guess, I'd say he's more likely to pursue the "upstairs job" he's talked about, and studied for, in the past.

But who knows, eh? :cool:
We’ll keep a light on for him just in case. After all it was in the Republic of Ireland he made his managerial breakthrough. He is only a young fella yet.

[ifk101]

As for SK, I wouldn't write him off solely on the basis of his results to date.
Fan of Kenny’s approach/ direction/ philosophy. Not a fan of the Lux/ Azer results.


We'll have to agree to differ on that last bit then :cool:.
Read fan of the Kenny approach/ direction/ philosophy.

[Jolly Red Giant]

I will start by stating that I am a big fan of Chris Hughton - in my view he is a very under-rated manager.

I believe Kenny should have been sacked last week when he said that the plan was never to try and qualify for the world cup - he should have said that the Irish team will go out and try and win every game left in the qualification group.

Already Kenny's supporters in the media are attempting a hatchet job on Hughton - comparing Kenny to Graham Potter. They went on about the great job that Potter did in Sweden (Potter has very good spin doctors) without ever mentioning the fact that the club chairman was convicted of fraud and went to jail for syphoning off huge sums of money from local government and social projects and pumping the money under the table into the club. They then went on to talk about the great job that Potter has done at Brighton without mentioning that the summer Hughton was sacked Brighton broke their transfer record four times - within 12 months there was only one player left in the first team who played for Hughton - Lewis Dunk. Now Potter has done well at Brighton - and the decision to sack Hughton appears to have been the correct one - but the current Brighton squad is nothing like the limited squad Hughton had to work with after he got them promoted.

Those who claim that Ireland's problems are not structural and defensive are wrong - most of the goals conceded during Kenny's tenure were the result of structural defensive problems. Hughton would correct his.

There is also a mistaken impression that Hughton is a conservative, defensively minded coach who is outdated in his approach. Hughton attempts to maximise the players at his disposal. His teams at Newcastle, Birmingham and Brighton in championship played expansive attacking football - because he had the players capable of doing it. His job in the PL (apart from at Newcastle) was to keep his club in the PL and he utilised the players at his disposal to do just that. A small or newly promoted club can get eaten alive if they try to play attacking football without having a squad capable of doing so - look at Norwich so far this season (played 5 - lost 5 - GF 2 - GA 14).

In my view Hughton would enjoy working with the new young players coming into the squad - they would suit the type of attacking game he actually would like to play. It all depends on how these players develop but I could see the likes of Knight, Idah, Parrott Omobamidele, O'Shea, Collins, etc all improving under Hughton.

Last point - Hughton has never been interested in milking football for money - he has taken jobs because he believed that he could improve the club. His mistake at Forest was not what he did on the pitch i- it was taking the job in the first place in the belief that the owners would invest the savings from culling the bloated squad of over-paid journeymen in bringing in new players - the current situation that Forest find themselves in was a disaster waiting to happen and I will be surprised if anyone can pull them out of the tail-spin they are in. If the Ireland job becomes available Hughton will be a prime candidate - if offered the job he will take it if he believes he can be successful - and in my opinion he would be a far more successful manager than the current guy at the helm.

[ifk101]

Kerr time as Ireland manager is criticised for being overly cautious/ conservative. CH was his no.2.

Googling CH’s managerial style throws this link up
http://www.wearebrighton.com/newsopinion/the-worrying-signs-that-history-is-repeating-itself-for-chris-hughton/

Some snippets from the above link.


“One of the biggest bugbears that Brighton supporters seem to have with Hughton is his negative approach to games, which is best summed up by the recent record-breaking 12 hours and 15 minutes that we managed to go without a goal. Connor tells us that Norwich fans had similar complaints.”

“Under Hughton, they displayed respect to almost every opponent they faced. Equally, they weren’t competent enough defensively to emphasise that side of the game and game management was non-existent. In a heavy defeat to Aston Villa in his reign, Hughton described the need to ‘consolidate’ at 3-1 down to ensure they didn’t lose by a more significant margin. They lost 4-1.”

“Echoes there of the recent 5-0 home defeat to Bournemouth there in which Hughton said afterwards that he feared it could have been even worse. In comments that will also sound familiar to Brighton supporters used to seeing Glenn Murray often stationed without a blue and white shirt anywhere near him and Dale Stephens always look for a sideways pass, Connor added, “We had wingers with no licence to attack, midfielders who were conservative and focused on defensive positioning and a centre forward left isolated.”

“Whilst the Albion’s form all round at the minute is a real cause for concern, it wasn’t so long ago that the main gripe of Brighton supporters centred mainly on what was happening when he we hit the road. Hughton would always set out the Albion out to defend it’s way to a point no matter who the opponents were with very little ambition shown when away from home to actually try and win games. That’s reflected in the fact that we’ve won just five away games in the Premier League out of 37 since winning promotion. Hughton’s overall record away from home as a top flight manager makes for equally depressing reading – only 12 wins from 81.

....

Connor says that Norwich’s wretched form on the road was one of the contributing factors to the calls for Hughton to go. “The away home was a massive reason; it was almost as though attacking phases of play were redundant, which was bizarre considering the squad he inherited was one which, by design, was encouraged to attack and score goals. It was conservative at home, away it was uninspiring and drab. Performances were devoid of energy or excitement and away wins were a collector’s item. It was almost like that side constructed by Paul Lambert went from being allowed all the sweets to being rationed onto apples.”

.......

“We played 4-4-1-1, with restrained wingers operating with a defensive focus in front of full backs not given a licence to attack and express themselves. Tactically, Norwich were always predictable and easy to play against. You only need to cast your eyes on the goals conceded column to witness that the defensive regime being implemented by Hughton and his staff wasn’t having the desired impact. I’d argue it was more of a lack of change, both tactically and stylistically, that cost Hughton ultimately.”


What does Hughton say of himself?


“I’m the type of coach who very much wants to work off a solid base. I wouldn’t call it a defensive strategy – it’s setting up a team to be compact while also having strong attacking aspects from the way the team is set up.”
https://www.coachesvoice.com/chris-hughton-brighton-newcastle-tottenham/

Doesn't that sound familiar?

Nothing personal against Chris Hughton, he comes across as a gent. But we’ve been here before.

[Jolly Red Giant]

Kerr time as Ireland manager is criticised for being overly cautious/ conservative. CH was his no.2.

Stephen Kenny's record - P 16 - W 1 - D 7 - L 8 - GF 11 - GA 17

Brian Kerr's first 16 games - P 16 - W 9 - D 5 - L 2 - GF 20 - GA 12

Kerr's record as ireland manager is far better than he is given credit for and it was bullsh*t for the media to claim he was a conservative coach (if he was he would never have achieved the results he did with the Faroes)


Googling CH’s managerial style throws this link up


Some snippets from the above link.
In Hughton's first full season in charge at Brighton they scored 72 goals - the highest number in the division along with Burnley and Brentford. The following season when they got promoted Brighton scored 74 goals - bettered only by Newcastle and Brentford. Birmingham under Hughton scored 78 goals. His Newcastle team that won the Championship scored 90 goals and gained 102 points. The following season (before Ashley acted the eejit) in 16 games Newcastle scored 24 goals - and that was after Ashley sold their top scorer Any Carroll to Liverpool - not the record of a defensive / conservative /cautious manager.

Hughton's time at Norwich was dogged by Delia Smith dabbling in decisions and a grossly overpaid CEO who gutted the squad after Hughton took over. Despite that he got Norwich to 11th and Wes Holohan was an integral part of Hughton's first teams at the same time that Trappatoni was refusing to pick him. The following season the CEO engaged in a further gutting of the squad (including selling the top scorer) and brought in a bunch of donkeys for Hughton to work with. Norwich sacked him while they were five points above the relegation zone with five games to play. It gave Sunderland a massive incentive and they went on a run to get out of relegation. Hughton is and always has been adamant that he would have kept Norwich up - and I believe he would.

Brighton fans acknowledge that Hughton's team in the Championship played flowing and attacking football. These days they also recognise that without Hughton they would not have survived in the PL. There was a clear frustration building up in the last 2/3 months before he was sacked - and that was hardly surprising given that the team struggled - but with a bottom 3 budget and a limited squad Hughton avoided relegation. His sacking was a major surprise - because it is extremely difficult to keep a club like Brighton in the PL after promotion. Furthermore, Hughton was responsible for bringing in Alzate, Bissouma, Burn and MacAllister - all of whom are not an integral part of Potter's squad. Th reality is that Hughton's goose was cooked at Brighton when Dan Ashworth was appointed Technical Director - Ashworth blocked the signing of at least 3 players that Hughton wanted in the January transfer window and, as a result of aprevious relationship with Potter, played a major role in getting Hughton sacked and Potter appointed. (Hughton had a productive day long meeting with the owner two days before he was sacked - and after the owner promised him significant funds for transfers).

And by the way - Hughton has more than 4 1/2 years of PL experience - the average tenure of a PL manager is something like 15 months - and few get to manage two teams in the PL - Hughton has managed three teams (and never been relegated despite consistently working with a bottom three budget). Southampton who finished just above Brighton in Hughton's last season had eleven players earning more than the highest paid player at Brighton.



What does Hughton say of himself?


Doesn't that sound familiar?
And pray tell - whay is wrong with the quote - I would suggest it is very sensible to develop a solid base to the team to ensure that you can take the best advantage of attacking opportunities. Unfortunately, under Kenny, Ireland have forgotten how to defend.


Nothing personal against Chris Hughton, he comes across as a gent. But we’ve been here before.
Hughton has never been manager of Ireland - so that would be a new experience - and he is an absolute gent (and I'm speaking from personal experience) - he is also a top notch football manager - far superior to Stephen Kenny and he would significantly improve the current Irish squad.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Fair play Jolly Red Giant. The Kenny defenders in the media are getting very tiresome. After the abject failure of Kenny's term so far, the defenders turned to the lack of options available as a reason to keep Kenny on. Now that a viable alternative becomes available, they try to run him down. Kenny is not fit to lace Hughton's boots. Hughton has done well in numerous championship and premier league clubs in England. Kenny was laughed out of Dunfermline. And he's making us a laughing stock as well. You wouldn't think it reading and listening to some of his media pals. It's actually really bad form talking up the spoofer Kenny while running down a former international with a very solid record built over many years.

[osarusan]

Managerially, they’re all of the same ilk however and not what we need.
It may not be anything innate in Hughton's footballing philosophy, but if you tell him he's hired on condition that he brings loads of young lads through and gets them to play a passing game, would he not be able to do at least as good a job as Kenny? Anyway, given the financial state of the FAI, I think Hughton is likely out of our league.

In terms of not being what we need...what is that, and where can we find him (earlier/cheaper than anybody else)?

[Bielsa´s irish]

I wonder how diferent a Hughton team could be. Dont agree we dont have the playera thats bs

[Bielsa´s irish]

Most teams are starting over

[third policeman]

Most teams are starting over

There would be some rational principle underpinning selection (form, experience, ability and potential), not just a preference for players he had previously coached. There’d be a coherent tactical plan for games, not just naive application of a so-called philosophy and a largely inflexible formation, unsuited to the talent available. There would be a realisation that results matter and falling down the rankings whilst we “learn” to play the Kenny way is leading us to oblivion. And there would be honesty, humility and intelligibility from a coach who knows what he is doing and is not on a deranged and disastrous ego trip and in total denial about the shambles he has created.
I’d take that as a step forward.

[tetsujin1979]

off topic posts moved to Brian Kerr thread

[Jolly Red Giant]

It may not be anything innate in Hughton's footballing philosophy, but if you tell him he's hired on condition that he brings loads of young lads through and gets them to play a passing game, would he not be able to do at least as good a job as Kenny? Anyway, given the financial state of the FAI, I think Hughton is likely out of our league.

In terms of not being what we need...what is that, and where can we find him (earlier/cheaper than anybody else)?
Money has never been a motivator for Hughton as a manager (or as a player) - unlike say Sam Allardyce - if the FAI offer him the job and if Hughton wants it, the money will not be an obstacle

There has been a lot of bullsh*t about Hughton not being willing to play a passing game and not being willing to play young players - I have addressed the passing game stuff above. Some people point to Aaron Connolly, Ben White and Steven Alzate in his last season at Brighton. Connolly was injured for four months and then went to Luton in League one where he couldn't get into their first team. White was on loan at League One Peterborough and Potter sent him out on loan to Leeds the following season. Alzate was playing in League Two with Swindon and then broke his back and was out for the last six months of the season. Yet according to the Potter fan club Hughton should have put these three kids into a team fighting relegation (despite the fact that two of them were injured for the second half of the season).


I wonder how diferent a Hughton team could be. Dont agree we dont have the playera thats bs

The first thing Hughton would have done is NOT to play Seamus Coleman at CB - the handful of times he has played there during his career have been a disaster and Coleman bears most of the responsibility for the goal conceded in the game. I suspect the second thing he would do is move Omobamidele to a defensive midfield role - in my view he will be Damien Rice but with vision and passing ability. The next thing is to stop playing McClean at left-wing back - if a wing-back is needed then you pick someone who actually plays that position and in the current circumstances that could possibly be Ryan Manning. I also think that he would sort out Molumby's head - Molumby was a very promising player while Hughton was at Brighton - but he has completely fallen off the rails in the past two years and now Brighton are intent on dumping him - he might also sort out Connolly's head (although that might be a lost cause at this stage).

[Bielsa´s irish]

I guess if Hughton was the mánager he would play something similar to this if everyone is available

.,.,................. Randolph......................

Coleman. Duffy. Egan. Stevens

Molumby. Mccarthy.Hendrick Knight

Robinson Shane Long

[Bielsa´s irish]

Problem with him is you cant get results bring younsters and change system all of the sudden.

[Bielsa´s irish]

I. Would have started the qualies with the same team vs Slovakia bar a few changes. i dont agree we didnt have the players thats prime class bull****. He hadnt played the team at máximun of his resources. We got robbed by refs both games away though

[CraftyToePoke]

Paul Cook is one name I'd be happy enough with from that list. Not doing too well with Ipswich right now

Paul Cook meltdown post Doncaster : https://streamable.com/68hz64

Seriously, this is your pick ? & this is him after a 6.0 home win, it makes MON & O'Donoghue look like flirty foreplay. Picture this character in the pressure cooker of the Irish job :) :)

Unbelievable.

[osarusan]

Seriously, this is your pick ?
He's not 'my pick'. There are other managers I'd have ahead of him, for sure. But of a list of League 1 managers who might cost no more than Kenny is on and who might be interested in taking the job, I'd still take him.

Do I think he is anything more than an average manager? No.

But right now, we have somebody who is less than an average manager, so Cook still represents a clear improvement in my eyes.

What is it about Kenny's results or credentials that you (or others) think means he's a better man for the job than Cook?

[osarusan]

It's obvious that I believe Kenny brings far less to the table than some other posters on here think, and therefore, the standard of manager I see as an improvement is lower than what others see.

Whatever about Cook, when I see posters mulling over somebody like Hughton, I just can't get my head around that. We have to be realistic here. For the money on offer, and considering the standard of players available, Hughton is at the upper end of the scale in terms of who we could maybe tempt into the job.

I think some posters are being wildly unrealistic about the kind of manager we can hope to attract.

[pineapple stu]

Stephen Kenny has 80% support, per a poll today (https://www.otbsports.com/soccer/kenny-poll-survey-1258466).

I think that's actually a badly written article, as when I heard it this morning, there were other options for "Not sure" and "Don't care/don't follow football" - so 20% saying he should be sacked is not the same as 80% saying they support what he's doing.

But even if it's 50% supporting him, 20% wanting him sacked, and 30% for the other two options, it's still a decent - and slightly surprising - stat.

A poll on TheJournal.ie after the Serbia game had 58% saying they were happy with his performance, 28% unhappy, and 14% unsure.

[Stuttgart88]

Might be lower than 80% after the Will Keane selection! Very alarmed at this. Scully surely worth a look. Elbouzedi doing well in Sweden. Even Hogan should be higher in the pecking order surely? Or Georgie Kelly.

[Eirambler]

No prizes for guessing Cian Fahey's view anyway (whoever he is) judging by the spin on that article. Elements of the Irish media are as bad or worse than Kenny himself at this stage with their nonsensical cheerleading for him.

[tetsujin1979]

Stephen Kenny has 80% support, per a poll today (https://www.otbsports.com/soccer/kenny-poll-survey-1258466).

I think that's actually a badly written article, as when I heard it this morning, there were other options for "Not sure" and "Don't care/don't follow football" - so 20% saying he should be sacked is not the same as 80% saying they support what he's doing.

But even if it's 50% supporting him, 20% wanting him sacked, and 30% for the other two options, it's still a decent - and slightly surprising - stat.

A poll on TheJournal.ie after the Serbia game had 58% saying they were happy with his performance, 28% unhappy, and 14% unsure.
I've posted this elsewhere, but I really don't understand how they can claim 80% of the population support Kenny, when 35% of the responses to the poll are "I don't follow football", see 3:15 below
wZbCqbhQNLE

[pineapple stu]

Probably because either (a) they don't understand maths or (b) they reckon their readers won't understand maths.

If 35% said they don't follow football, 20% said they don't support him, that leaves 45% between supporting him and not knowing (which I think was an option as well)

Hadn't realised the % for "Don't follow football" was anywhere near as high as 35% though.

[Eirambler]

Maybe they assumed that the "don't follow football" crowd all support Kenny, as realistically that is about the only justification there is for continuing to support him at this point.

[osarusan]

48% - Kenny should be given a chance for 2024.
12% - get a new manager for 2024
35% - Don't pay any attention to football
5% - Don't know

There's a clear potential for overlap between the last two options - it's actually a pretty poorly written question in my opinion.

But if you exclude the 40% who have no opinion (for the last two reasons), and take the 60% of those who do have an opinion, then 48 is 80% of 60. So that's how they've arrived at the figure they have.

Or, if you decide that 'don't know' means people who do follow Irish football but still don't know how they feel about this particular question, then it's 65% who do have an opinion, including 5% whose opinion is that they don't know, and 48 is 73.8% of 65.

Excluding respondents who say they have no idea what you're asking questions on (and calculating stats from the remainder) is fairly standard, but using the term 'The Irish public' is quite misleading then. It should be 'The Irish football public' or something like that.

[JR89]

Where did they even conduct this poll. Assuming they just approached random people on the street rather at a game if don't follow football was an answer.

[pineapple stu]

I think that's a typical way of doing surveys, though they have demographic (age/gender) targets to meet. It's all fairly well established in statistical mathematics; 1000 people is enough of a sample to get a good representation. It's what they use for political party popularity polls as far as I know.

[paul_oshea]

And when have they worked? No one takes them seriously on the UK.

[osarusan]

Where did they even conduct this poll. Assuming they just approached random people on the street rather at a game if don't follow football was an answer.

Random sampling, adjusted for age, gender, and so on, to ensure it's a valid representation of the population at large.

Or maybe the football fan population at large, but given the 35% who reported paying no attention to this, that's unlikely.

[paul_oshea]

They probably went to a rural gaa town and stood outside the bank and Lidl and asked everyone and the majority said " oh I wouldn't cross the road to see that sh1te" , "sorry that isn't an option" , which answer does that fit into? Ah right do that one so

[pineapple stu]

It seems a reputable polling service, in which case no, that's not how it would have worked.

[Bielsa´s irish]

one thing that really really amazed me about you irish till this day is that you have those local games that you enjoy like gaelic football and hurling and other than I cant understand even that lousy game called rugby that we (working class lefty party people) hate until death for all of what rugby symbolize worldwide (rich upper class people worldwide etc) even though all those different games, the most important job in your whole nation is the national team football coach, even more important than your president and the prime minister that I think you have there.

I can say that any irishman wants to be that guy who leads the irish football nation

[Razors left peg]

Rich Upper Class people are allowed to like sports too!!!

[paul_oshea]

Thanks

[Fixer82]

Rich Upper Class people are allowed to like sports too!!!

Not in Argentina apparently

[Bielsa´s irish]

Not in Argentina apparently
Their main sport is to dig out the wealth out of the working class héroes. Football unite everyone though