View Full Version : The Damage that Stan us doing to us
NeilMcD
11/09/2006, 12:50 PM
The duff sub Staunton told Devlin to do as he was been sent off.
geysir
11/09/2006, 5:00 PM
Mick Byrne was the runner between the dugout and Stan.
He communicated with Stan and then came back to the dugout with the instructions for the substitutions before they were made.
Duff looked sore, in obvious pain as he came off but hard to tell really because he often has that look on his face.
DeNiro
11/09/2006, 7:36 PM
Listen lads the players have lost faith in Staunton already! It doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do, this idea that they all love him is wrong. It's was obvious from Duff's face what he thought of it. What's the bets that Duff will out of next squad with injury?
OwlsFan
12/09/2006, 6:54 AM
Listen lads the players have lost faith in Staunton already! It doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do, this idea that they all love him is wrong. It's was obvious from Duff's face what he thought of it. What's the bets that Duff will out of next squad with injury?
What are you saying ? A manager can't sub one of his players, who had been inffective throughout the game and who had shipped a knock (which I saw) without losing the dressing room ?
Slight overreaction there I think.
Den Perry
12/09/2006, 5:17 PM
Give him a chance. We put in a decent performance in Germany IMO and that marked a significant improvement over the previous 2 games. I'd be lying if I said he doesn't worry me but if we improve half as much from now until the next game then things will be looking good. If one thing is certain I'm at least happy Kerr is gone as he definitely hadn't a clue.
Worryingly on Saturday however I couldn't see were the goals were going to come from, goals that we will undoubtedly need to have any chance of qualification. In fairness though it was a fairly defensive, uncreative midfield he selected so kick O'Shea and Kilbane out and replace them with McGeady and A Reid against Cyprus (with A Reid and S Reid in the centre) and I reckon we can do a job on them.
However, if he plays Kilbane and O'Shea against Cyprus where we need to win then there will be no doubt in my mind that he doesn't know what he's doing and all qualification hopes are gone and I would be happy to see him go.
if you think tht was a decent performance in Germany i'm afraid you are not a good judge of football
Den Perry
12/09/2006, 5:22 PM
For gods sake guys give the man a break. He's had one competitive game which we didnt expect to get anything out of and was by no means a disaster. The guy deserves at least a campaign before judgement.
If he doesnt get three points in cyprus and follow that with a win at home to the czechs, then start analysing things.
But after two meaningless friendlies and a 1-0 away defeat to one of the top three best teams in the world, come on get a grip, reserve judgement for a while and get behind the team.
Plus i think its unfair for anyone to say the team didnt play with any passion on sat night.
no way is he getting a break...he wanted the job so he has to take the s hit as well...he also prob came out with the most stupid statement ive heard in football when he said that at the end of the campaign the result in germany would be of no significance....and he DID say that
He is a FOOL
Billsthoughts
12/09/2006, 7:29 PM
Agree with all four of the above posts....
Listen lads the players have lost faith in Staunton already! It doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do, this idea that they all love him is wrong. It's was obvious from Duff's face what he thought of it. What's the bets that Duff will out of next squad with injury?
He isn't there to win a popularity contest ... subbing Duff was a very good move imo because ALL of the team will see that no one player is above being dropped / subbed. It is when they see a manager who clearly has favourites that players react badly. Charlton did it with Brady and O'Leary to a lesser extent ... fair play to Staunton I say.
OwlsFan
13/09/2006, 6:13 AM
if you think tht was a decent performance in Germany i'm afraid you are not a good judge of football
I thought it was a decent performance and I believe I am a good judge of football and that was the feeling of all my friends who were at the game with me. To go to the home of the 3rd best team in the world and to lose to a flukey OG and to make them fight all the way was a decent performance. I don't know what you expect from a team made up of some pretty average players - take the game to Germany, cut them apart, play nice one touch football and dominate them ? If so, you're not a good judge of football or footballers' abilities. We competed well. The players gave 100% and if Dunne had got that header on goal in the last few seconds we would be celebrating a 1-1 draw. The Germans created more chances than us but I'd expect that but it was a vast improvement from the Dutch game. When you think our central midfield consisted of Kilbane and O'Shea, I think we did well.
londonirish17
13/09/2006, 9:30 AM
Whether we like it not, he is Ireland's Manager at least for this campaign.
Having no experience (at this level) clearly isn't in his favour.
Was it a financial matter? We'll never know anyway. Personally I've always been in favour for Martin O'Neill but that's not the point. We should give Stan a chance and who knows how things will turn out... Unfortunately though, time is running and what we need are positive results.
I also find it totally unacceptable to attract British players having no ties at all with Ireland.
Billsthoughts
13/09/2006, 11:34 AM
To go to the home of the 3rd best team in the world and to lose to a flukey OG and to make them fight all the way was a decent performance.
they are no more the 3rd best team in the world than they were the second best team in the world after the 2002 WC. or Turkey or South Korea were the top four in the world after same WC. can we stop pedalling this myth as some sort of justification for being happy with being beaten without threatening the opposition goal
I don't know what you expect from a team made up of some pretty average players - take the game to Germany, cut them apart, play nice one touch football and dominate them ? If so, you're not a good judge of football or footballers' abilities. We competed well. The players gave 100% and if Dunne had got that header on goal in the last few seconds we would be celebrating a 1-1 draw.
If ifs and buts were pots and pans youd be a kitchen....
We took the game to them in the first 20 minutes. thats what we should be expecting and thats what most ireland fans do expect. there is no shame in losing a game whilst trying to win it. there is in losing a game were damage limitation seems to be the aim. one nil or ten nil if the result is never in doubt after 20 mins then I would class it as a poor performance regardless of score.
The Germans created more chances than us but I'd expect that but it was a vast improvement from the Dutch game. When you think our central midfield consisted of Kilbane and O'Shea, I think we did well.
If they had created one chance in the game it would have been one more than us. As far as I know we are not obliged to play two extremely bad midfielders. how long has the manager to prepare for this yet he plays the same midfield pairing as his predeccesor in his last game? And using one crap performance ie the Holland game to justify another slightly less poor performance is ridiculous. BOTH games were unacceptably poor. the fact that most of the players were delighted losing one nil and seemed to think they had proved everyone wrong after the holland game is depressing and a true pointer of what standards this group of players sets itself. we may as well be andorra if not gettin hammered by bigger teams seems to be our main aim.
The team were very low on confidence going into the Germany game after what happened against Holland ... expecting attacking flair from a group of players that are at best mediocre is fairly unrealistic. As their confidence returns the performances will get better.
Billsthoughts
14/09/2006, 11:52 AM
you say "what happened agaisnt holland" like it was something outside the players and the managers control....
geysir
14/09/2006, 3:15 PM
There's only one criteria that matters, a manager and team should be judged on results and performances in competitive games only.
When reviewing a record of any past manager it beats me why friendlies are sometimes included.
NeilMcD
14/09/2006, 4:37 PM
Totally agree geysir, all manager should be judged on competitive results only. Where did they finish in the table is the only fair way of judging the manager as it is as objective as you can get.
DeNiro
14/09/2006, 8:18 PM
[QUOTE=OwlsFan;533668]What are you saying ? A manager can't sub one of his players, who had been inffective throughout the game and who had shipped a knock (which I saw) without losing the dressing room ?
You to have the dressing room in the first place in order to lose it. In such a fickle footballing world, where loyalty doesn't exist, it is possible that Newcastle Utd might say why are we bothering to send him if he's not going to be used. If he was injured fair enough but why did he sit away from the rest and not get treatment then?
you say "what happened agaisnt holland" like it was something outside the players and the managers control....
They were up against vastly superior players ... how was that under their control? The Dutch came to Dublin under immense pressure themselves because of what their public perceived as being a poor world cup - that had nothing to do with any of the Irish camp either. As well as that, we had numerous injuries. Does the manager control which players are injured? I don't think so.
My point is that the squad went into the German game extremely low on confidence. You cannot coach confidence into players; players who are low on confidence become more cautious and take fewer risks.
Billsthoughts
14/09/2006, 9:51 PM
didnt we manage to beat them before one nil away from home the last time when we were missing a lot of first team players and they had all them vastly superior players?the attitude was the differance with both games.
that's a fairly obscure reference tbh - how many players started both matches? I think only three. The game was a friendly - that is the main similarity ... however the Dutch didn't come into that game with a point to prove to their public and to their media. They did last month.
I'm not altogether sure what you are suggesting we do anyway? Sack the manager? After one competitive match? We could borrow the idea used on the TV show Have I Got News For You - instead of having a guest presenter, we could have a guest manager. Someone different after every defeat! :rolleyes:
Billsthoughts
15/09/2006, 9:05 PM
em one of the points i am making is that you are using one really bad performance to justify a slightly less crappy performance. which is moronic. all the fundamentals that were there in the holland game were there in the german game. no creativity and no gameplan. another point is that the manager is inexperienced and doesnt seem to know what he is doing. something that a lot of people foresaw when he was appointed. which begs the question why did he get the job? I am just pointing out facts. You are just pointing out excuses.
em one of the points i am making is that you are using one really bad performance to justify a slightly less crappy performance. which is moronic. all the fundamentals that were there in the holland game were there in the german game. no creativity and no gameplan. another point is that the manager is inexperienced and doesnt seem to know what he is doing. something that a lot of people foresaw when he was appointed. which begs the question why did he get the job? I am just pointing out facts. You are just pointing out excuses.
I'm looking at the circumstances going into the Germany game to try and explain why the team played the way they did ... not excuses, just reasons why certain things happened the way they did. It worries me when people believe that we should sack the manager after only one competitive match - and not even any old match ... it was away to Germany!! And so what if people knew he was inexperienced when he was appointed? He is the manager now and we've got to accept that. He won't get the sack this early. What sort of fall-out would there would be if he was sacked? What would the effects be on the players especially the younger, less experienced, ones? They're short on confidence as it is! Changing managers now would improve that, would it? What would the effects be for any would-be replacement manager? If Staunton was the best we could get last time round, who is going to put their name forward for a position where the previous manager was given only one competitive fixture before being sacked? No half-decent manager would risk their reputation with us if that happened. I pointed this out on a different thread but I'll say it here again - it is proven statistically that teams who chop and change managers frequently are never successful. Never. Teams who do the opposite always enjoy relatively more success. I'm not trying to make excuses to justify crap performances - I'm certainly not happy about the way the team played against Germany and against Holland. We were poor in both games. I just think that changing the manager now would only make things a lot lot worse!!
bennocelt
16/09/2006, 11:46 AM
I thought it was a decent performance and I believe I am a good judge of football and that was the feeling of all my friends who were at the game with me. To go to the home of the 3rd best team in the world and to lose to a flukey OG and to make them fight all the way was a decent performance. I don't know what you expect from a team made up of some pretty average players - take the game to Germany, cut them apart, play nice one touch football and dominate them ? If so, you're not a good judge of football or footballers' abilities. We competed well. The players gave 100% and if Dunne had got that header on goal in the last few seconds we would be celebrating a 1-1 draw. The Germans created more chances than us but I'd expect that but it was a vast improvement from the Dutch game. When you think our central midfield consisted of Kilbane and O'Shea, I think we did well.
yeah i agree, i thought the boys did their best, and the germans looked good, esp frings controlling everything from the middle
but dont you think the tactics were a little silly..............4-5-1 would have been better suited, what did our strikers do in the game anyway
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.