Darron Gibson

[Noelys Guitar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHqL7dNujNc&feature=related

[DannyInvincible]

Then, just as that progress was being demonstrated (eg Football For All), but before the old "bonfire" could be dismantled completely, along come the FAI and throw a match into the middle of it, resulting in the present combustion.

Nothing of the sort. The FAI offer northern-born Irish nationals the opportunity to play for Ireland because northern-born Irish nationals have, quite clearly, over the years, made it known to the FAI that they, by and large, support them, associate with their team and would prefer to play for them if talented enough. The FAI hasn't incited anything here. It has reacted to a socio-cultural reality in NI society and attempts to fill a vacuum for northern-born Irish nationals, if you will. I think it would be poor form if they ignored northern-born Irish nationals, but that's just me.


I totally abhor the effect that this is having on the sport I love. Worse still, I deeply resent being characterised as being the bigot in all this (not by you, btw), for expressing my opposition to the consequential situation, whereby the ROI may become the (de facto) "Nationalist" football team in Ireland, and the NI team will be pushed ever closer towards being the (de facto) "Unionist" football team in Ireland.

No "effect" has yet been documented, in spite of the practice going on since the late 1990s, so let's not get too carried away. For what it's worth, I would argue that the Irish state is and always has been a 'de jure' nationalist entity, whilst Northern Ireland is and always has been a 'de jure' unionist entity, simply by virtue of their respective existences, but, again, that's just me.


For if that happens, it will make it less likely that we will witness eg the total unadulterated joy from last Friday evening in Maribor, when Stephen Craigan, Chris Baird and Warren Feeney rushed over as one after the final whistle, to salute the Green and White Army for being their 12th man.

Awk, but if you get your way then I won't get to experience my unadulterated joy of witnessing northern-born Irish nationals line out for Ireland. :( *Strop*


Those three were in a mini-group who were going nearly as mental as the fans at the final whistle. Both Craigan and Feeney are known for being Rangers fans, so we may assume which background they're from; ditto Chris Baird, since he is a former GAA player from Rasharkin.

I thought such "profiling" was a big no-no for you upstanding NI fans.


All three are equally committed when playing for NI, but only one received a phone call from Brian Kerr asking him to play for ROI.

So? Far from that being indicative of some widespread and predatory FAI policy, this is an example of one solitary instance where Brian Kerr (the man to whom you're now referring to bolster your argument and a self-confessed hypocrite on this issue) seemingly took it upon himself to breach the gentleman's agreement agreed between the FAI and IFA in 1999. Who knows whether or not it was sanctioned by the FAI? What about all those from Catholic/nationalist backgrounds in NI teams who never got a phone-call? Where was Niall McGinn's call? He played GAA at minor level for Tyrone and even played in the League of Ireland with Derry City. That's assuming Kerr did, in fact, make an approach to Baird without Baird having made any step towards volunteering to play for us and what you're saying can be backed up. Have you a source?

I know for a fact, for example, that Sean McCaffrey refused for quite some time to make contact with Shane Duffy as it was against FAI policy to make the first approach to northern-borns, despite having received e-mails from users of this site alerting him to the lad's unequivocal interest in playing for us. I was, along with others, unaware of this policy at the time, so whilst it was rather frustrating for everyone here following the matter to watch the whole thing drag on and play out as it did, the onus was left with Duffy to contact the FAI. I imagine the policy was never made known to Duffy as he seemed to be left to his own devices, unsure of whether he was wanted or not and, thus, would have been timid to make a phone-call as it would have him appear rather presumptuous about jumping straight into the team.


Seeing as how much this Eligibility row has inflamed tensions in NI football, and considering the atmosphere in flashpoints like Rasharkin generally, it would take any future Chris Baird to have balls of steel to turn out for NI in preference to ROI, even if he wanted to. (I certainly wouldn't blame him for choosing the ROI).

Complete speculation. CAS has changed nothing of substance so there's no reason why things should change on the ground, as it were. Besides, who brewed the counter-productive and knowingly-futile media storm in the first place? I think you'll find it was the rather imprudent IFA. If nationalist community leaders in nationalist areas were disappointed with young nationalists declaring for NI in the past, they'll remain just as disappointed with young nationalists declaring for NI in the future. It's none of their business anyway as it's entirely the individual's choice, but such "pressure", as you allege to exist in nationalist communities, never stopped Paddy McCourt or Niall McGinn playing for NI. Presumably they had a special ability to better withstand the fierce pressure exerted upon them by dictatorial Derry politicians. Poor Gibson was weak enough to succumb, unfortunately. :rolleyes:

Lets look at this from another perspective. Could you imagine the communal outrage if a young Protestant lad from the unionist tradition expressed his intention to represent us simply in order to better his career or play in a World Cup or whatever? (Ahem, not even daring to insinuate that our chances of making a World Cup in the near future might be slightly higher than your own chances, of course. ;)) Alan Kernaghan was singled out for the worst of abuse directed towards our team when we visited Windsor Park in 1993, for example, specifically because the assumption was that he was some sort of traitor or turn-coat, which was, of course, a crime worse than being a mere "Beggar". I'm not suggesting the stands in Windsor Park are full of the same level of vitriol nowadays, but I do imagine such a scenario as I've mentioned above - whilst it may be unlikely to realise itself - would stir up quite a storm, so let's not single out the nationalist community as being uniquely guilty of having cultural influence over its younger members, or whatever it is you're trying to insinuate or accuse it of.


As someone pointed out the other day, when Nationalist politicians champion the right of NI-born players to represent the ROI, they invariably point towards the Good Friday Agreement etc.

Yet the whole point of the GFA was that it should help find a way for the two communities in NI to live together.

Yes, by acknowledging and fully accepting one another's differences and unique identities, right? The best way to ensure a young nationalist footballer won't begrudge living at one with the unionist community in NI is for that community to acknowledge that , if he wishes to play international football, he shouldn't be forced into opting to play for NI; an entity he may well view as being inherently and institutionally unionist or British in nature.

Like yourself, Owen Polley has a habit of bringing nationalist politicians into this debate too. Why they're remotely relevant, maybe you could enlighten us. Are you sure there's no political agenda here? Hmm...

(I'll try deal with any outstanding matters from that other beast on the whole Gibson-"scumbag" thing in time, although, I'm sorry to say, you're still not understanding my point.)

[The Fly]

Anyway, I received no message back from 'Marty', but was simply refused access to the forum and received an email explaining to me that I could reclaim exactly £3.08 from the OWC admin.


You should reclaim the money, and donate it to your local 'Football-For-All' program. ;)

[DannyInvincible]

I have never asserted or (intentionally) used the term "scumbag" for DG.
Nor did I say you did.
If it pleases you, I will rephrase to make it crystal clear what I was attempting to say, as follows:
"Anyhow, although Gibson is not a 'scumbag', do you recognise this description of him from a certain other website the other day?"

You can rephrase it now all you like, but I'm sure you'll agree that it no longer bears any meaning or sense seeing as you've removed the continuity of purpose that stemmed from your initial insinuation. If that above had been how you'd originally written it, your overall post would have read rather disjointedly given the absence of any obvious link between my issue four years ago and my recent anecdote. It's pretty much a half-baked admission from you that there is indeed no relationship or necessary contradiction between my description of Gibson on here the other day and my taking issue with Gibson being dubbed a "scumbag" under what I felt were sectarian pretences four years ago.


I have also amended the post on OWC to a verbatim reproduction of your original observation on DG from here, without further comment by me.

*Tips hat*

(Although I see you've maintained the now-irrelevant quote in which I originally challenged the "scumbag" label...)


I was NOT putting/attempting to put words in your mouth. I will accept that you felt the "scumbag" remark could be interpreted as being ascribed to you; then again, it could just as easily be interpreted otherwise.

I fear you're still not grasping the distinction. It's a matter of semantic interpretation. You're taking "scumbag" used in the context with which I took issue to mean merely something along the lines of a "bad egg" or a "contrary hoor", whilst I took "scumbag" in that context to mean something different; something with sectarian baggage in tow. No doubt, one of us is incorrect in our assertion of what we believe to have been the original intent behind its usage and seeing as we can only speculate, you have your good faith and misunderstanding of my points whilst I have my suspicions based on context. There's little we can do beyond that as the truth of the matter is not discernible.


I suspect you are being sensitive about this because having defended DG on a point of principle etc, it doesn't look so good for your case if he appears to be a bit of an arsehole* in practice.

He could well be a complete arsehole - I don't know him personally - but it's irrelevant to the "scumbag" argument and it still wouldn't prevent me taking issue with the notion that he might be a "scumbag" specifically because he's a northern-born Catholic/nationalist who is playing for "the Darkside".

I'm being mildly sensitive about this because I felt you were accusing me of hypocrisy/contradicting myself on a forum in which I was unable to defend myself; not because things didn't look so good for my case, as you put it. And I'm just making use of the inevitable boredom that comes with the last few days of a long, unemployable and shamefully non-constructive Summer. :p If people can't decipher the distinction between what I took issue with four years ago and an anecdotal description of Gibson I put forth the other night, there's little I can do if I can't be there to clarify myself. I felt the best I could do would be to try clear it up here with you, but that doesn't seem to be working either really.


Now that this Eligibility dispute is finally settled, the eventual outcome has had an incendiary effect in NI football, with eg Coaches finding that under-age teams are being strained along IFA/FAI lines (or Unionist/Nationalist, even Prod/Taig, if you prefer). I personally find this absolutely deplorable, and an entirely predictable consequence of the FAI pushing a policy which even Brian Kerr now describes as "unfair, seedy and predatory".

For the nth time, the FAI aren't pushing any policy. They've merely spoken up for and acted in response to the right of northern-born Irish nationals who freely volunteer their services to play for them.

As for Brian Kerr, perhaps his criticism of the FAI was coloured by what many perceive to be a significant chip he has on his shoulder. He even had to admit he was being a complete hypocrite in the piece he wrote on the matter. I wouldn't attach too much value to his opinion on this.

Your main point though; I see what you're saying. Of course, the situation isn't optimal for the IFA as a self-interested party and its apparent ambition to build a team for all, as if the FAI would object to the inclusion of certain individuals in their sides based on race, creed or colour. :rolleyes: The current reality, however, is an unfortunate by-product for the IFA of what I feel to be of primary importance; that being the right of all Irish nationals, no matter where they were born, to represent Ireland if they so wish. Whilst we'll eternally disagree on this, you must at least be able to understand why I hold such a sentiment and why I feel this is important. Likewise, I understand where your interests lie and don't really expect you to give up on them without a fight, although I do, at times, think you allow yourself to be guided by dogma in the face of logic and, ultimately, you still seek to try and tell individuals what they should and shouldn't be able to too. The illiberal stance is on your side of the fence no matter how NI fans like Owen Polley or 'fhtb' wish to spin it with their absurd and twisted "Football Apartheid in Ireland"/"Protect Northern Ireland players' identity rights" spiel.


In the OWC context, this has led to a situation whereby everytime a 7 year old score a hat-trick in a Primary school kickaround, there is specualtion as to whether he is fully committed to the IFA, or might lean towards the FAI etc.

I see what you're doing there. Very emotive... Well done.

Anyway, speculation surrounds most things in life. The choice still rests with the individual, at the end of the day.


Worse, it has provoked the more extreme posters on both sides of the debate (NOT you or "Predator" btw) to post some pretty incendiary remarks, leading to edits/deletions/warnings by the Mods. (I myself fell foul of this unwittingly)

People looking to be offended by anything that doesn't match their view of the world from their living room window, I'd imagine.


If nothing else, some of the players referred to may have relatives etc who will read it, and the Press has been long-known to browse the site for juicy bits of dirt to dish. As a result, a policy has had to be implemented banning any speculation of the "Is he a Prod or RC" variety.

No doubt, like yourself, I don't like to pigeon-hole individuals and jumping to conclusions and assumptions about people is something of which I try to steer clear, but I'm afraid I don't see what is so necessarily despicable or abhorrent about such a practice, as controversial and distasteful as that might sound. Cue 'fhtb' riding in on his high-horse, but is what you're condemning really that far removed from, say, the speculation that surrounds trying to garner whether or not a Dutch guy with a name like Barry Maguire has an Irish father and whether or not he'd be willing to play for us? I don't think there's anything strictly reproachable about that. People will always speculate over things in which they have an interest, especially football fans who will look out to see what future squads might potentially look like. It's just innocent enthusiasm; nothing malevolent about it, nor would any poster here, I trust, feel any acrimony towards a Catholic player from a nationalist background deciding to play for NI. Sure, as you point out, the OWC mods have even had to implement and enforce a ban on "speculation" because the reality is that people will always speculate, even the righteous fans of NI!

If anything, I think the peace process has made us excessively sensitised to the issue of religion in NI society - the FAI calls up a northern-born Catholic and is dubbed sectarian, for example :confused: ; Protestants are always welcome too - but there's no point in treating it as a taboo or as something that doesn't exist and denying the reality that, by and large, those from Catholic or nationalist backgrounds will identify with the FAI team - acknowledging exceptions such as Baird, McGinn and McCourt, of course, along with the many others down the years who had no problem whatsoever in lining out for NI, for whatever their reasons were, selfish or loyal - whilst those from Protestant or unionist backgrounds will generally and almost exclusively identify with the IFA team. It's not so much sectarian profiling as just plain recognition of a fact of life. Chances are, if a guy has played GAA in his youth, he considers himself Irish and might well be very much open to the idea of playing for Ireland. If that's an offensive view to hold - and I certainly don't mean any offence by it as it's more observational than normative really - I'd be happy to hear why; maybe I'm missing something...

[DannyInvincible]

The two "need not" be contradictory; however, that does not preclude the possibility that they may be contradictory.

OK; the two are not contradictory. ;)


Anyhow, whether you accept it or not, you know fine well the point I was trying to make i.e. at one point DG asserted that his switch was personal (an argument with a coach), at another he said it was a matter of principle ("always wanted to play for ROI").
If it really was the latter, why did he ever agree to play for NI in the first place? After all, there had been several other Derry youngsters who'd played for the ROI before him and seeing as he was on MU's books, he would certainly have been of interest to them.
Unless, of course, he was content to use the IFA to further his career, in tandem with MU etc, until circumstances forced him to reveal his true intentions and he left us in the lurch (but only after having occupied a place in our team that other kids would die for).
Either way, it stinks (imo) both in what it says about the individual concerned, but also the way it politicises football in NI, at a time when many good people, of all backgrounds, are working so damned hard to keep politics out of the game.

I can only guess he played with NI in the first place out of convenience or because he was reared through the IFA system and it was seen as the "thing to do" or whatever. He never played with Derry City, after all, like most of the other Derry youngsters who lined out for FAI teams over the years. If he had have, maybe signing the relevant forms or whatever is required exactly would have been more convenient as he would have been dealing with the FAI as his club's association anyway.

I'm not sure if "furthering one's career" has a huge deal of meaning for a 16-year-old. Nevertheless, he switched to us at 16 or 17, so it's not like he was hanging around for years sucking as much blood out of the IFA as his ambition could get.

And Darron Gibson didn't politicise football in NI. The overtly political nature of NI/Irish society along with the concept of international football (between political entities, yes) makes its politicisation a natural inevitability. Darron Gibson wasn't even the one who brewed the politicised media storm. I'm pretty sure the IFA were the ones who shot themselves in the foot there by drawing attention to the whole thing through stubbornly objecting to his wish to represent his country.


A member amongst several thousand of a football website used an offensive term in a thread containing hundreds of posts over the course of 100 pages+

OK, the Mods might have cracked down on it etc,

I don't think they did though. That's the point. In fact, it was a nasty sentiment I felt defined the thread. Likewise, when Shane Duffy suffered that horrendous injury earlier in the year, I couldn't help but notice that virtually all the get-well wishes on OWC were qualified.


but you only need eg go onto any Spurs website, type in "Sol Campbell" (or even a mere "Judas") and see what you get - I guarantee that "scumbag" is positively mild by comparison with the rest of what's there.

"Scumbag" is only as mild as the context you wish to spin and confer upon it.


Therefore I suggest you stop obsessing with the symptoms and start addressing the disease, which is that with football in NI always having wrestled with problems deriving from general society, at a time when both society and NI football were making encouraging progress to treat the disease, the action of the FAI in insisting on implementing their fortuitously-acquired right to pick NI-born players has only served to pour poison back into the wound.

Shame on them and all who would defend them.

Clearly our diagnoses differ. Shame on me, then. :frown:

By the way, there's nothing accidental about the FAI's right to select northern-born Irish nationals. It's not a loophole. They're operating properly and fully above board. And, for what it's worth, they have my fullest support in treating northern-born Irish nationals as equals.


P.S. As I type this, the 1 o'clock headlines are concentrating on that ****headed "Pastor" out in the US who wants to burn Korans. Under US Law, his Constitutional Right to Freedom of Speech and Conscience permits him to do so, but does anyone other than a complete bigot/moron feel he should enforce that right?

Of course not. On the other hand, if he goes ahead with it - last I heard, he'd called it off though - it would be a very illiberal and imprudent act on the part of the state(s) to move beyond the current plea-stage by censoring him. Domestic rights-wise, at least. Even that farce has two sides to its coin.


P.P.S. Before you get off on one, that last P.S. (above) is NOT to be read as calling you "a complete bigot/moron"...

No worries. No such insinuation perceived.

By the way, I see your latest post on that Gibson thread is still completely missing my point and you are continuing to imply that I've dug some sort of hole for myself:


...whilst DI defends Gibson for his conduct/character on this site [OWC], he is rather less complimentary about him on another [Foot.ie].

Therefore at best, this new observation by DI tends to confirm what a few on here thiink about Gibson, at worst, it gives us a good old giggle.

At least I might be entertaining someone... :rolleyes:

Maybe I'm wasting my time, but I'll try explain this one last time, and apologies to others if they feel I'm going overboard with this or de-railing the thread somewhat.

First of all, it's not a new observation. It's something I've known for about six or seven years now, or since whenever it was Gibson first went on trial with United and my English teacher rolled his eyes at the prospect with half a sense of relief. I merely decided to divulge it on a public forum the other day in light of what 'Kingdom' was saying and it doesn't contradict anything I've ever said about Gibson in the past. 'Kingdom' was questioning Gibson's general attitude and whether it was conducive to him making an impact in the Ireland team. There are posts on this forum where I've accused Gibson of not doing enough and going into hiding during games; essentially being lazy and lacking in drive. I question his attitude in the context of him not pulling his weight and lacking on-field discipline to bother following instructions from an authority above him.

On the other hand, on OWC, I was defending Gibson's right to play for Ireland (his "conduct" being making the switch) along with defending him against being dubbed a "scumbag" for what I felt were reasons beyond his simple desire to play for an international team other than Northern Ireland. If I felt the tone behind the slur, in fact, related only to this idea that Gibson might be contrary and moody, then maybe I wouldn't have such a problem with it, but I felt such language was being specially reserved for him specifically because he was from a Catholic/nationalist background and the team he wished to represent happened to be abhorrent "Darkside". More precisely, I was defending him from what I saw to be an assault on his identity rather than a transparent assault on his character. They are two different debates. I can't dictate what you wish to write about me on an external forum, but I do hope you can at least now acknowledge the distinction as I don't plan on explaining it again.

[geysir]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHqL7dNujNc&feature=related

http://members.chello.nl/s.wijnen3/Klu%20Klux%20Klan.jpg

[Predator]

Gibson only makes the bench today, with John O'Shea seemingly playing in midfield with Scholes, Fletcher, Nani and Giggs.

[Crosby87]

Gibson must have wood splints in his arse. He's going to develop gout from sitting down all the time.

[rebelmusic]

Says a lot of fergie's opinion of him if he's willing to play Josh centrally instead of him. Really should have pushed for a loan move!

[Charlie Darwin]

He probably wanted a more defensively-minded body in there with Arteta, Fellaini and Cahill all operating in that space in front of the defence.

[Predator]

Says a lot of fergie's opinion of him if he's willing to play Josh centrally instead of him. Really should have pushed for a loan move!Possibly. At the same time, perhaps Ferguson saw the aerial threat of Everton being dangerous enough to warrant playing O'Shea over Gibson, to act as a 'buffer' and to bolster the aerial prowess of United's midfield and defence.

It could also have been a case of Ferguson wanting to play G.Neville at right back, while also keeping O'Shea in the side.

[The Fly]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/8994314.stm


Gibson is to start tonight, in United's champions league clash against Rangers.

It's live on Sky Sports 2 at 7.45 pm. Good luck Gibbo!

[tommy_c12000]

Great news! Feels like its almost my 100th time saying that this is a yet another big opportunity for him. Hopefully he'll take it!

[Charlie Darwin]

It'll be interesting to see how he does alongside Fletcher - I'm not sure how many times they've started together, in a 4-man midfield at least. Fletcher can tend to dominate the play so he'll need to be demanding the ball more than he usually does.

[shakermaker1982]

He nearly scored there, great shot just whistled past the post. Playing ok. Neat and tidy.

[rebelmusic]

Some nice probing passes, i wish he imposed himself more midfield though.

[rebelmusic]

Good game from Gibson I thought. Was much stronger than Fletcher and rarely did anything wrong with the ball. Attempted 5 or 6 long rangers, one volley would have been candidate for goal of the season if it went in. Was decent enough tracking back.
The only major thing I noticed is that Gibson never makes runs in the box, he's always hanging back in that shooting position for a stray clearance. Might be doing this under instruction.
All in all, some lovely passes, and didn't give the ball away at all tonight. If he gets a start at the weekend it will be very encouraging.

[ofjames]

I agree, I thought he was united's best player on the night.

He was their only goal threat and I thought he was much more assertive in terms of taking possession of the ball

[geysir]

He looks more at home playing for United than for us.
Which I suppose is not an earth shattering observation.

[osarusan]

Good in the first half, but I thought he faded in the second a bit. a lot of players failed to impose themselves in the second half though.

He has tremendous technique when striking a ball. That volley that was about 2 foot wide of the post at crossbar height was such a difficult shot to get even as close as he did.

[Sullivinho]

There were encouraging signs from Darron tonight. He looked more assured and involved than I've seen previously. Very nice technique on his passing and shooting.

But will the bench have time to miss him..

[Predator]

Gibson did play well. It would have been great if one of his dramatic shots had gone in. However, let's remember that it was a game against Rangers and let's not hype it up too much. I just hope he can build on it and give Ferguson more reason to pick him.

[shakermaker1982]

I tell you what the guy can certainly strike a football.

United's best player for the first 70 minutes and he was their only attacking threat on the night. Poor match though.

[The Fly]

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/glimpse-of-gibsons-vanity-wont-impress-stubborn-trapattoni-2332653.html


Glimpse of Gibson's vanity won't impress Trapattoni
By James Lawton

Trust Old Trap to offer some career advice to the still relatively obscure Darron Gibson on an issue that is increasingly touching the professional lives of some of the biggest names in the game. Do they want to play, immerse themselves in the heart and the rhythm of a team, or are they as happy to grow rich without the steady beat of performance that can only come from regular competitive action?

On the face of it, Giovanni Trapattoni was merely suggesting that Gibson would be a far more valuable member of the Republic of Ireland squad if he spent less time watching the veteran Paul Scholes and the likes of Darren Fletcher and Michael Carrick from the Manchester United bench or reserve team -- and more developing his talent on the field with the first team of another club, the only place that really counts in the mind of the coach. Gibson was indignant. He made his breakthrough in an Irish shirt at roughly the time he was beginning to score spectacular goals for United, and naturally the young man wanted it all, the glory and prestige and the huge wages that came with performing at the Theatre of Dreams and also a regular place in the team that Trapattoni took so close to the World Cup finals.

Increasingly, though, the likes of Gibson are required to understand that vital decisions have to be made at an early stage of their professional development. If you operate at a certain level where your raw talent does not command automatic acknowledgement, there is a question mark against that ability to have it all.

Wayne Rooney has invited huge pressure on himself by assuming that his status as one of the world's most gifted players was quite separate from the need to operate his private life with a degree of control and discretion, at least if he wanted to avoid the kind of public examination under which he was put between two notable European Championship qualifying performances for England. His club-mate Gibson's challenge, though, is much more grounded in the game he seeks to play at the highest level. Rooney, short of a meltdown in nerve and commitment, is the first name on the team sheets of his United and England managers, Alex Ferguson and Fabio Capello. Gibson is never likely to enjoy such treatment. His challenge is to impress -- game in, game out -- a man like Trapattoni that he is getting stronger, more aware of every situation that can challenge a young pro. The bench is not a place to proceed with such an education, nor the training ground. Real progress requires the real thing.

The key Trapattoni quote was: "I said that when younger players play more games or play always in the first or second leagues, it improves their personality, only this. There is no other problem. Gibson can stay in Manchester. It's not my problem. I will continue to call him up but I can't have eight players in my team who aren't playing for their clubs."

Of course he can have as few as two, especially if their names are Shay Given and Robbie Keane. But even here, with players of such established performance levels, there will soon enough be a question of sharpness, a worry about the effects of prolonged exclusion from the serious action. Given may prefer the opulence of Manchester City to the margins of the Premier League with, say, Fulham; he may draw some satisfaction from contemplating the virtues of a rich old age; but if his young City rival Joe Hart continues to project his talent and confidence, for how long will he be content in the twilight zone?

Gibson's current resolve to fight it out at Old Trafford will surely be ultimately complicated by the limited chances he has to inflict his competitive 'personality' on the knowing Trapattoni. Given and Keane have had ample opportunity to do so, but Gibson has had a few opportunities to blossom under most optimum conditions. So far this season he has to yet to appear in the United first team, a situation that is in sharp comparison to one of his rivals for a place in the Irish midfield, Glenn Whelan. While Gibson sat out the action the weekend before last, the Stoke City player was immersed in the greatest challenge facing any Premier League player -- he was attempting to make an impact on Chelsea, something he did with a driving performance and one shot which rattled the crossbar. Stoke was the club that was put to Gibson as a possible route to more regular first-team football and he was aghast at the suggestion that he could learn more in a team not noted for its sophistication than the one that includes men like Scholes and Ryan Giggs.

Trapattoni's point, of course, is that it is not merely a question of learning; it is doing, making the mistakes, but marching on with a greater certainty about what you have do when the pressure is greatest. That applied to Stoke cruelly at times when Chelsea were besieging their goal, but Whelan was notable for the relish and strength he brought to the battle.

Rightly or wrongly, Gibson creates the suspicion that he may be looking at his life and his football from the perspective of someone who believes the big tests have already been passed. He certainly offers an airy rejection of any suggestion that he would be better off in the Potteries learning how to win tackles rather than staying at United and winning games. But if this was a vanity, it was unlikely to impress Trapattoni. The old coach is plainly immovable on the most basic of points. Just as fighters must fight, football players must play football. Gibson wondered whether the old man was "having a laugh". If he is wise, he will not waste further time on such speculation. It would be as futile as spending too much time on the bench, wherever that happens to be.

[geysir]

Last season Darron decided not to go out on loan and it was a decision which was vindicated. This season he has made the same decision. Way too much is being read between the lines and with repetition being accepted as fact.
It might be the right decision to stay or it may prove to have little benefit to Darron's career.

[Stuttgart88]

Everyone said John O'Shea should move on. Year after year after year.

There's a real culture that has developed (post Rooney perhaps) of assuming that a footballer's peak is in his early 20s. And anyway, it's a long and brutal season in England. United could well do with him 3 or 4 months from now.

[Crosby87]

The only thing I have against Trap's quotes are that I do not see why a guy who is not playing regularly for his club can't Necessarily contribute for the Intl squad. Is it written in stone that you cannot have a good game unless you are playing regularly for the club team? James McCarthy plays regularly and he does not even get a call up. Aiden has always played and he has never scored. So to me it is apples and oranges. If I were manager I would put the team out there that I thought gives us the best chance to win regardless to current club life. Maybe that is what Trap thinks he does. And maybe he is right. But I personally do not believe we always have the best lineup in that we could have.

[dr_peepee]

Everyone said John O'Shea should move on. Year after year after year.

There's a real culture that has developed (post Rooney perhaps) of assuming that a footballer's peak is in his early 20s. And anyway, it's a long and brutal season in England. United could well do with him 3 or 4 months from now.


Everyone said John O'Shea should move on. Year after year after year.

There's a real culture that has developed (post Rooney perhaps) of assuming that a footballer's peak is in his early 20s. And anyway, it's a long and brutal season in England. United could well do with him 3 or 4 months from now.

I dunno stutts.. Firstly, i don't think it's comparing apples with apples when it comes to O'Shea and Gibson. O'Shea was deceptively clocking up apprearances.

Secondly though, it's not about the expectation of peaking early. It's more about depriving himself of an adequate "learning curve" to facilitate that peak. Fletcher could arguably be the exception to what I'm citing but again they bring differnt very things to the table.

I think to be the type of player Gibson has the attributes to be he needs games at this stage of his career. I can't think of a midfeild comparison off the top of my head (did Alonso leave Barca for Sociedad??) but the likes of Gary Cahill and Ryan Shawcross have reaped the benifit of a one step back to take two steps forward mentallity

[geysir]

Crucial to any learning obviously is game time on the pitch. He thinks he is/or can be good enough to get game time.
He looked good enough against Rangers to earn himself a few more opportunities.
But sporadic appearances just won't do it, even if it is Man U.

[Predator]

Bit in the Independent today. A bit sensationalist and overly harsh on Gibson in my opinion.

United midfielder fails audition to play starring role at Theatre of Dreams (http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/united-midfielder-fails-audition-to-play-starring-role-at-theatre-of-dreams-2341278.html)

Darron Gibson this week had the perfect opportunity to justify his angry, even derisive reaction to suggestions from Giovanni Trapattoni that, for him, Old Trafford might prove not to be a theatre of dreams but of disillusionment.
Along with nearly an entire team of young Manchester United wannabes, he had the chance to prove that he is doing more than marking time in the shadow of the club's big-name players.
Gibson did earn attention, with his trademarked speculative shooting, as United floundered against the steeply banked defence of Rangers in the opening Champions League action, but he was only deluding himself if he thought this represented significant progress in his attempt to win a more permanent place near the important action.
distinction
The truth was that even if Trapattoni subsequently attempted to dilute his remarks, the essence of them was far from convincingly rejected when United failed to create a single opening of anything like creative distinction against a team who came to Old Trafford so fearfully, they neglected to muster a semblance of attack.
Gibson fired his long shots and, in truth, they were the nearest United came to a breakthrough, especially one that whipped narrowly the wrong side of a post, but his manager Alex Ferguson later bleakly conceded his disappointment at the lack of real control and penetration displayed throughout his young team.
Gibson did what he was expected to do. But ultimately he did it without success and -- frankly -- convincing evidence that there was much more to his game than a strong shooting foot and a more than average streak of optimism.
What Trapattoni didn't begin to retract was the core of his argument: that Gibson needs more regular involvement at the top of the game -- he was getting his first start of the season on Tuesday night -- and that without it his graduation as a top player has to be in doubt. Gibson is not some raw apprentice now.
He will be 23 next month, an age when most football talents have been significantly formed. Against Rangers, Gibson displayed plenty of that optimism of youth, but not so much of that knowing instinct of a budding Roy Keane.
True, this is to the set bar extremely high, but then what does Gibson truly expect of himself when he turns up his nose at the possibility of developing his career in a place like Stoke City.
Gibson mocked the idea that he could learn more in the Potteries than in Manchester, but the reality in his current situation is that a real education is beginning to look elusive. Trapattoni's most bracing comment on this came with his declaration: "What I told him was that for him the action is not finished when he does not have the ball."
The majority of the time, it was against Rangers. Most depressing for Ferguson was that in the absence of stalwart midfield masters Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs United were guileless both on and off the ball.
Javier Hernandez was almost as invisible as an insipid, care-worn Wayne Rooney. Ferguson said that if he had one selection regret it was that he hadn't played Dimitar Berbatov, whose early season form has been promising to bring some sharp re-consideration of the view that he was becoming one of Ferguson's rare transfer follies.
"He would have that sharpness that might have been the difference with Rangers putting so many bodies behind the ball," said Ferguson. "We just didn't have enough of the right movement to break down Rangers. We knew what they would do, but we just couldn't come up with anything to break them down."
Of course, Gibson's responsibility might easily be over-stated, at least in terms of the club if not himself. The far more experienced Darren Fletcher, Ji Sung Park and, before his sickeningly random injury, Antonio Valencia, were equally unsuccessful in their attempts to coherently break down the Rangers cover.
This, however, was a rare opportunity for Gibson to prove that he has credentials to take him beyond such players as Fletcher, Park and Michael Carrick and get to the head of the queue that still forms, when it truly matters, behind Scholes and Giggs.
Trapattoni, whatever the degree of his intention, had certainly presented the challenge clearly enough to the not-so-young man from Derry.
It was to show that when the chance came he could prove that he was ready to take it, not just as an occasional performer at the centre of the big stage, but someone integral to the club's needs.
It is a challenge that mounting evidence suggests would be more accessible at a place like Stoke City. This is the reality rather than the dream and, sooner or later, may be forced on Gibson with or without a choice.

[rebelmusic]

Independant seem to really have it in for Gibson at the moment, they should leave him well alone and let's see if he starts this weekend. Also on the O'Shea/Gibson comparison - when O'Shea was his age didn't Fergie come out and say the future of Man Utd was John O'Shea or something like this? We all know O'Shea's biggest problem with Utd was that his versatility got the better of him until he started to consolidate the right back position.

[Charlie Darwin]

It's a remarkably aggressive article.


but he was only deluding himself if he thought this represented significant progress in his attempt to win a more permanent place near the important action.What on earth has he done to suggest he thinks he made significant progress? Was it his obvious frustration at his own failure to hit the target or his despondent look as he left the field? A real delusion merchant, that Gibson.

Anybody who watched the game will know that he didn't impose himself enough on the ball and I'm sure he's well aware of it too. What I'm concerned about is the entire focus of United's play seemed to be towards making room for Gibson to have a crack. His game's not going to develop if he's not given responsibility to vary things (or perhaps he has and he just hasn't taken it).

[rebelmusic]

I think when the players realised Rooney was having a really bad one, it was the final outlet to score, giving it for Gibson. And some of the passes were terrible too, like Gigg's corner which would have been a real chance if he laid it off properly.
I really don't think Gibson played bad, if he had slotted one of those home the media would have been singing his name

[Stuttgart88]

The Indo is aggressively anti-Irish (international) football at the moment. I haven't read it this week but I bet the U-17 girls are probably deluding themselves and should be ashamed for not putting 6 past Ghana.

It's a good job the FAI aren't responsible for them. Oh wait...

[Stuttgart88]

I dunno stutts.. Firstly, i don't think it's comparing apples with apples when it comes to O'Shea and Gibson. O'Shea was deceptively clocking up apprearances.

Secondly though, it's not about the expectation of peaking early. It's more about depriving himself of an adequate "learning curve" to facilitate that peak. Fletcher could arguably be the exception to what I'm citing but again they bring differnt very things to the table.

I think to be the type of player Gibson has the attributes to be he needs games at this stage of his career. I can't think of a midfeild comparison off the top of my head (did Alonso leave Barca for Sociedad??) but the likes of Gary Cahill and Ryan Shawcross have reaped the benifit of a one step back to take two steps forward mentallityYeah, fair point.

Jack Wilshire benefitted from a stint at Bolton. Maybe Gibson sees himself as more established than JW and would look upon a loan move less favourably. wrt a permanent move, it'd take a lot of fortitude on DG's behalf to seek a move away from MUFC to develop his career.

[Predator]

Crucial to any learning obviously is game time on the pitch. He thinks he is/or can be good enough to get game time.
He looked good enough against Rangers to earn himself a few more opportunities.
But sporadic appearances just won't do it, even if it is Man U.I was going to write a post about Gibson's options for the future, but I think geysir's post sums it up succinctly.
Basically, he needs to be playing more often in order to improve and to be considered a serious contender for our midfield.

[elroy]

Manchester United are considering a move for Tottenham's Tom Huddlestone in the January transfer window. Red Devils manager Sir Alex Ferguson is thought to be a big fan of the £16m-rated midfielder.
Full story: caughtoffside.com

16m for Huddlestone is nothing short of madness but if interest is true, it aint good news for our Darron.

[tetsujin1979]

I'd be shocked if United did spend £16m on a single player considering the state of their finances. Besides hasn't Ferguson repeatedly stated that there's no value in the transfer market now?

[Charlie Darwin]

Manchester United are considering a move for Tottenham's Tom Huddlestone in the January transfer window. Red Devils manager Sir Alex Ferguson is thought to be a big fan of the £16m-rated midfielder.
Full story: caughtoffside.com

16m for Huddlestone is nothing short of madness but if interest is true, it aint good news for our Darron.
So he's replacing Carrick with Fat Carrick? I really can't see it happening.

[Colbert Report]

Have faith lads, Alex Ferguson is no muppet

[carloz]

So he's replacing Carrick with Fat Carrick? I really can't see it happening.

Ferguson is not an idiot. To buy Huddlestone would be idiotic. Wont happen. People need to keep in mind Gibsons age. Fletcher is 3 years older. 3 years ago many united fans were dismissing Fletcher and it took him quite a while to settle. IMO Gibson looks better at this age than Fletcher. Few central midfielders have made their stamp at top teams before the age of 24, with the exception of obviously talented players like Fabreags, keane and Gerrard

[Charlie Darwin]

I'm shocked Fletcher is only 26. It seems like he's been around forever.

[Colbert Report]

Need I remind you that Alex Ferguson just bought a player he'd never even seen play for seven million pounds? Sixteen million is nothing to him for a player like Tom Huddlestone.

[Predator]

Need I remind you that Alex Ferguson just bought a player he'd never even seen play for seven million pounds? Sixteen million is nothing to him for a player like Tom Huddlestone.People have been saying he's losing his marbles for years, but I think this might just be the evidence needed to back the claim up.

[elroy]

Starting tonight for United. This is the type of game where you would like to see him impose himself on the game.

[shakermaker1982]

What a goal from Gibson!

[geysir]

Robbie had better watch his back now and perk his game up a bit after that Gibson goal :)

[Philly]

http://www.101greatgoals.com/videodisplay/darron-gibson-scunthorpe-6956331/


Absolute beauty of a goal!

[Razors left peg]

how did he play overall? just seen the goals

[Charlie Darwin]

He was OK. Was in an advanced midfield role but Scunthorpe bossed the game for long periods. He turned his back on the shooter for the first goal.