World Ranking

[Lionel Ritchie]

young irish , your posts are well out of order , if someone doesnt agree with you all you can do is make childish insults. Any point you thought you had has been negated by the comments above.

I wouldn't worry about it RM. I've a little fellah who similarly repeats himself over and over when he's knackered.


I'm retiring you can't win with some of these muppets even when they agree with you?????????
...Anyway tbh I can't be bothered as I said I'm wasting my time reading such trash, it hurts my head to scowl through it.
Diddums. Retiring probably is for the best then. Say night-night to the Tombliboos, Makka Pakka, Igglepiggle and Upsy Daisy before you toddle off now.

[Paddy Garcia]

Shouldn't you be off doing the lotto because you know what numbers are going to come out tonight? At least that's what you'll tell people tomorrow in the pub but alas you never got round to buying a ticket.

Either that or trying to predict the Ireland team in 3012 when the planet is ruled by apes.

How old are you?

[Cymro]

SkStu if you actually read Cyrmo's posts (if you can read the big words) its obvious he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about so now when he's being pulled up on foolish statements he starts making things up to back his silly claims (apparently I said we had the best team in the world in the Charlton era and McShane was better than anything Scotalnd had - not true I highlighted his potential and some Scotland players that he mentioned complete lack of potential). Now after slagging McShane and getting some feedback from other posters that he's actually quite good it becomes glaringly obvious he remarked on him without knowing anything about him and is backtracking trying to cover his tracks.



I think I've been wrong on one thing in this debate which was the Defoe thing. I'll hold my hands up to that but the rest is all valid, and if you actually read over your own posts, you might see how I came to the conclusions I did.

There's absolutely no need to resort to saying that I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. If I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, how come you haven't really answered a lot of my points?

[SkStu]

less of the big words Cymro, im struggling to follow your post...

YoungIrish, reading over your posts again it appears to me that you've managed to argue all sides of the debate whilst excelling at insult, deflection and hyperbole. Thats whats embarassing. Everything else in my post is simply my opinion on the matter and is not an attempt to address you directly.

[Lionel Ritchie]

I think I've been wrong on one thing in this debate which was the Defoe thing. I'll hold my hands up to that but the rest is all valid, and if you actually read over your own posts, you might see how I came to the conclusions I did.

There's absolutely no need to resort to saying that I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. If I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, how come you haven't really answered a lot of my points?

While I think it was an act of idiocy, sabotage or madness to do so ...Sven took a 17 year old he'd no intention of playing to the world cup last summer instead of Defoe. I don't say that to put the boy down ...I remember at the time saying I'd have retired from International football in protest if I were him ...but I think it says something about the esteem or lack of it in which he's held. But that's England for you.

[EalingGreen]

No it doesn't.
As for EalingGreen disagreeing and stating Scotland are better than the Republic. How surprising is that? He probably still thinks David Healy is better than Henry because he scored more goals against Liechenstein so I tend to treat everything that he says about ROI or NI for that matter with an ocean of salt.


I happen to think Scotland have been consistently better than ROI over the last couple of years not because I'm "biased", but because of their respective results over that period.

As for what I say about ROI or NI - well, people can make up their own minds.

As for what you say about ROI or NI, here's a sampler from February:

"You [Ealing Green] are so biased you no longer inhabit reality as far as football is concerned. Sweden the end of March will give you a reality check if Liechenstein don't manage to do it beforehand"

In case you've forgotten:
Liechtenstein 1 v 4 NI
NI 2 v 1 Sweden

David Healy scored 5 goals in those two games, to take his tally to 9 goals in 6 Euro2008 matches - the highest scorer in the Tournament to date.

As for Healy and Henry, obviously there's no comparison between the two as players - as evidenced by Barcelona paying £18 million for Henry just now. It is interesting, however, that whilst Henry has scored 39 goals in 92 matches for France (= 1 goal every 2.4 games), Healy has notched 29 in 56 for a much inferior team (= 1 goal every 1.9 games).

At that rate, I wonder how many he'd score for a truly crap team like ROI? ;)

[youngirish]

I happen to think Scotland have been consistently better than ROI over the last couple of years not because I'm "biased", but because of their respective results over that period.

As for what I say about ROI or NI - well, people can make up their own minds.

As for what you say about ROI or NI, here's a sampler from February:

"You [Ealing Green] are so biased you no longer inhabit reality as far as football is concerned. Sweden the end of March will give you a reality check if Liechenstein don't manage to do it beforehand"

In case you've forgotten:
Liechtenstein 1 v 4 NI
NI 2 v 1 Sweden

David Healy scored 5 goals in those two games, to take his tally to 9 goals in 6 Euro2008 matches - the highest scorer in the Tournament to date.

As for Healy and Henry, obviously there's no comparison between the two as players - as evidenced by Barcelona paying £18 million for Henry just now. It is interesting, however, that whilst Henry has scored 39 goals in 92 matches for France (= 1 goal every 2.4 games), Healy has notched 29 in 56 for a much inferior team (= 1 goal every 1.9 games).

At that rate, I wonder how many he'd score for a truly crap team like ROI? ;)

Who cares about his International scoring record? His goal record for Northern Ireland is good precisely because they are sh*t and not in spite of it. Everything creative they do ends with him on the end of it (you'd hardly be expecting Lafferty would get you a goal, doesn't McCann a young ROI midfielder have a better scoring record than him at Burnley yet isn't even near our squad?).
Your comparisions to Henry are totally irrelevant comparing a player who has spent his whole career in the lower divisions (never particularly over impressing at any time I may add) against the best striker in the world. It makes a nonense of your own argument to even compare their International records and adds weight to mine.

As for us being crap I don't think we are geat but I'm confident we'd hammer you with or without Stan. Let's be honest Wales a year or so ago hammered you at home after all didn't they though you forget to mention such things. Also Iceland beat you 3-0 fairly recently at home didn't they? Btw I've noticed you aren't half as cocky now than you were a couple of months ago when the North were (amazingly) sitting at the top of their group. You'll be less so after the away trips to Spain and Sweden.

[Lionel Ritchie]

Oh Christ ...nap time must be over



Your comparisions to Henry are totally irrelevant . Please don't make me go back and find the place where you, yes You, yes YOU -brought up Henry ...not EG.



Btw I've noticed you aren't half as cocky now than you were a couple of months ago when the North were (amazingly) sitting at the top of their group. You'll be less so after the away trips to Spain and Sweden.

Made a few cocky predictions yourself before NI's last couple of games. How'd that go for you? ;)

But sure keep saying they'll lose ...by the same logic that says even a stopped clock is right twice a day you'll call it sooner or later.

[youngirish]

Oh Christ ...nap time must be over

Please don't make me go back and find the place where you, yes You, yes YOU -brought up Henry ...not EG.



Made a few cocky predictions yourself before NI's last couple of games. How'd that go for you? ;)

But sure keep saying they'll lose ...by the same logic that says even a stopped clock is right twice a day you'll call it sooner or later.

You trying to be clever again and failing miserably as usual? I was joking when I said that Healy could be compared to Henry but sure enough EalingGreen attempted to do just that. Go back and read the post again you appear to have forgotten the jist of it pretty quickly as you do with most facts relating to football as you only seem able to remember the last 2-3 results of teams when making estimations of how good they actually are. If you're looking for something to slag on these boards try the remark that Garry O'Connor would get into the Ireland team ahead of Doyle or Keane. Have you ever watched Garry O'Connor play football or do you just like to come on these boards and make silly, ill informed statements? No need to answer that.

I made a couple of predictions one of which was that Sweden would beat NI which was incorrect but hardly cocky and that NI would be brought crashing back down to reality soon enough which considering qualifying was still ongoing when I last checked and the last few results haven't been too kind to them (aren't they now third while they were first in their group when I made the prediction) hasn't been proven wrong yet and won't be either. Stick to the music.

[EalingGreen]

Who cares about his International scoring record? His goal record for Northern Ireland is good precisely because they are sh*t and not in spite of it. Everything creative they do ends with him on the end of it (you'd hardly be expecting Lafferty would get you a goal, doesn't McCann a young ROI midfielder have a better scoring record than him at Burnley yet isn't even near our squad?).
Your comparisions to Henry are totally irrelevant comparing a player who has spent his whole career in the lower divisions (never particularly over impressing at any time I may add) against the best striker in the world. It makes a nonense of your own argument to even compare their International records and adds weight to mine.

As for us being crap I don't think we are geat but I'm confident we'd hammer you with or without Stan. Let's be honest Wales a year or so ago hammered you at home after all didn't they though you forget to mention such things. Also Iceland beat you 3-0 fairly recently at home didn't they? Btw I've noticed you aren't half as cocky now than you were a couple of months ago when the North were (amazingly) sitting at the top of their group. You'll be less so after the away trips to Spain and Sweden.

As Gspain has pointed out, it would appear YOU care about Healy's international record, seeing as YOU brought him into this thread, following my having the temerity merely to agree with Cymro when he posted that he thought Scotland were currently a better side than ROI.
Then again, you seem to have a problem with anyone who disagrees with your opinions, especially one from "the North".

As for the comparison between Healy and Henry, again it was YOU who brough Henry into the thread. But whilst we're on that subject, I shall repeat for the nth. time that Henry is an incomparably better player than Healy will ever even know. However, since this is the "International" section of the Board, and the Thread dealing with "World Rankings", I think it fair to respond to YOUR citing and comparison of the two by pointing out that Healy's International record for a poor team is quite simply better than Henry's International record in an outstanding team.

Then again, I don't suppose you will allow the facts to get in the way of your prejudices now, since you don't ever appear to have done so before.

But when it comes to your prejudices, thank you for predicting that NI will get beaten by Spain and Sweden. I fully expect that to happen, too; however, seeing as your past predictions for NI have been so consistently fcuked up (in our favour, that is), perhaps your Our Wee Country's Lucky Mascot? ;)

And as for our being top of the group, well, in common with the bulk of my fellow fans, I know to keep that in perspective. You see, when the Draw was made, my own target was to finish fourth in the Group - i.e. behind Spain, Sweden and Denmark (all Top20 ranked teams), but ahead of the rest which, seeing as we were seeded Sixth (of seven) in our Group would have represented solid progress.

Now, after a very promising start, I am hoping (though not demanding) that we finish Third, which would be an excellent achievement (imo). In truth, I can't really see us finishing Second, even though it is still just about feasible, but whilst there's still a chance, I'll still be praying for that miracle. We will not finish top of the Group, nor were we EVER going to.

And in any case, looking to the longer term, if as a result of these qualifiers, we can increase our Seeding from 6th to 4th (as seems likely), then this will have been a tremendously worthwhile campaign - even before the glories of beating Spain and Sweden etc.

Will your campaign (i.e. ROI) have been as enjoyable? I'd be surprised if it turns out that way, even if I'd be pleased for you if it did.

Anyhow, to bring this subject right back on-topic, my prediction is that come the end of the Euro Qualifiers in November, NI will still be above the ROI in the FIFA Rankings (with Scotland above the pair of us).

Care to disagree?

P.S. Even if you can't/won't recognise it, some others may appreciate the effect of "Killyleagh Kryptonite" on our normally mild-mannered hero, SuperHealy:

http://www.uefa.com/competitions/euro/standings/round=2241/group=2635.html
(I can't post the direct links, but if you click on the "Video" link to the right of the individual match results for NI v Spain, Ni v Latvia, Liechtenstein v NI and NI v Sweden, you'll see what happens after the wee man slips into a phone box and emerges in his Green and White Superhero costume...:cool:)

[Lionel Ritchie]

I was joking when I said that Healy could be compared to Henry but sure enough EalingGreen attempted to do just that. Go back and read the post again you appear to have forgotten the jist of it pretty quickly .

Ah ...so when you're talking out your hole -you're joking:rolleyes: It all makes sense now.

Look did you or did you not bring up Henry? Did you or did you not then claim a comparison with Henry is irrelevant?

Go back and read your own friggin posts for fecksake.



I made a couple of predictions one of which that Sweden would beat NI which was incorrect but hardly cocky and that NI would be brought crashing back down to reality soon enough which considering qualifying was still ongoing when I last checked and the last few results haven't been too kind to them (aren't they now third while they were first in their group when I made the prediction) hasn't been proven wrong yet and won't be either. Stick to the music.
:o You do know they weren't playing in any of those games that caused the drop from 1st to 3rd yeah? You do don't you?

[EalingGreen]

I made a couple of predictions one of which was that Sweden would beat NI which was incorrect but hardly cocky and that NI would be brought crashing back down to reality soon enough which considering qualifying was still ongoing when I last checked and the last few results haven't been too kind to them (aren't they now third while they were first in their group when I made the prediction) hasn't been proven wrong yet and won't be either. Stick to the music.

Yes, and your other prediction was that Liechtenstein would also "put us in our place". But well though our gallant opponents played, they couldn't manage it. Curious that you should avoid recalling that one, eh?

As for our falling from 1st to 3rd in our Group, that is simply because the other teams in our Group had recent matches whilst we didn't. If we win our game in hand at home to Liechtenstein in August (and I'm taking nothing for granted), we will go back to 2nd in the Group, a point above Spain (on the same number of matches) and six points above Denmark in 4th. (having played one game more than them).

But who knows, with our track record, we'll lose to Liechtenstein.

Then beat Spain. or Sweden. Again.

Still, it's more fun that way! ;)

Onwards and Upwards!

[youngirish]

Then again, you seem to have a problem with anyone who disagrees with your opinions, especially one from "the North".

Will your campaign (i.e. ROI) have been as enjoyable? I'd be surprised if it turns out that way, even if I'd be pleased for you if it did.


I have no problem with the North insofar the fact I don't really care about your team or your country. It's you that has a problem with the ROI, which can easily be proven by a quick run over any of your posts on this board where you rarely (if ever) have anything positive to say about us. Alternatively if anyone is still in doubt take a glance at ourweecountry.com where you'll be seen to be in better company with some of the complete bigots that frequent that board. This is why I often dismiss your clearly tainted opinions (remind me again from your 4 hundered odd posts when you have ever said anything positive about us?).

As for you being pleased if we did well. Come on don't be so hypocritical and relax with the complete lies. It would eat you up inside if we went on to qualify for Euro 2008 and Darren Gibson passed to Tony O'Kane for him to flick it on for Michael O'Connor to score the winner in the final.

Find the post and show me where I claim Liechenstein would beat you? More made up rubbish. I think my words were Sweden would beat you if Liechenstein don't manage to do so first which is hardly a claim that they would definitely beat you (it was more of a joke actually), however I did think the Swedes would beat the North and they still will in the return fixture not that they are any great shakes either at present (and yes before you state the obvious they are probably better than us).

[EalingGreen]

I have no problem with the North insofar the fact I don't really care about your team or your country. It's you that has a problem with the ROI, which can easily be proven by a quick run over any of your posts on this board where you rarely (if ever) have anything positive to say about. Alternatively if anyone is still in doubt take a glance at ourweecountry.com where you'll be seen to be in better company with some of the complete bigots that frequent that board. This is why I often dismiss your clearly tainted opinions (remind me again from your 4 hundered odd posts when you have ever said anything positive about us?).

As for you being pleased if we did well. Come on don't be so hypocritical and relax with the complete lies. It would eat you up inside if we went on to qualify for Euro 2008 and Darren Gibson passed to Tony O'Kane for him to flick it on for Michael O'Connor to score the winner in the final.

Find the post and show me where I claim Liechenstein would beat you? More made up rubbish. I think my words were Sweden would beat you if Liechenstein don't manage to do so first which is hardly a claim that they would definitely beat you (it was more of a joke actually), however I did think the Swedes would beat the North and they still will in the return fixture not that they are any great shakes either at present (and yes before you state the obvious they are probably better than us).

My reaction to the ROI is quite straightforward. I'm not a fan (obviously), but neither do I wish the team or their supporters any harm, either. And if I reserve the supporter's traditional right to snigger when they or any other neigbouring team fcuk up (e.g England or Scotland), it is done in the full knowledge that I'll have to take it myself, in full measure, when (not if) the pendulum swings the other way.
Indeed, away from the rivalry which this reflects, I have on a number of occasions paid to watch the ROI play, both in Dublin and abroad. As a bit of a football nut, I have enjoyed these occasions, none more so than at Italia 90, when I cheered with the rest of my fellow Irishmen and women when David O'Leary scored that penalty. Of course, I was sad that my own team hadn't made what would have been their third consecutive World Cup Finals, but that didn't prevent me from being happy for those around me.
Then again, you'll probably accuse me of lying about that, as well. Que Sera Sera (as was sung at the time).

As for Our Wee Country, I am not that Board, nor is it me, so I'd prefer if you judged me on what I post, not others. In return, I will try to respond to what you post.

Speaking of which, when you contemplate the ROI qualifying for Euro2008/Gibson/Kane/O'Connor etc, is that another of your famous predictions? Because if it is, the state of my digestive system will be the least of my worries; I'll be able to afford a stomach transplant from my winnings from Paddy Power. Do you think I should combine it in a double to increase my odds? I quite fancy Shergar to win next year's Derby, possibly with Lord Lucan as jockey...

As for Liechtenstein's hopes re NI, what you posted was:
"You [Ealing Green] are so biased you no longer inhabit reality as far as football is concerned. Sweden the end of March will give you a reality check if Liechenstein don't manage to do it beforehand"
I'll give you one thing, though. Even if our winning in Liechtenstein was the definition of "reality", beating Sweden was "unreal"!

As for Sweden "probably" being better than ROI, I guess that I am "probably" older than you, as well. ;)

Anyhow, as Lionel R pointed out earlier, isn't it time for your nap now? :)

[youngirish]

Ah ...so when you're talking out your hole -you're joking:rolleyes: It all makes sense now.

You again? I think anyone with a basic grasp of reality would see that a comparison of Henry (widely recognised as the best striker in the world) and David Healy (a part time Leeds player who now reside in League 1) was a joke. Obviously you don't fall into the category above so I'll send you a special message next time accompanying my posts to explain terms like 'irony' and 'sarcasm'.


My reaction to the ROI is quite straightforward. I'm not a fan (obviously), but neither do I wish the team or their supporters any harm, either. And if I reserve the supporter's traditional right to snigger when they or any other neigbouring team fcuk up (e.g England or Scotland), it is done in the full knowledge that I'll have to take it myself, in full measure, when (not if) the pendulum swings the other way.
Indeed, away from the rivalry which this reflects, I have on a number of occasions paid to watch the ROI play, both in Dublin and abroad. As a bit of a football nut, I have enjoyed these occasions, none more so than at Italia 90, when I cheered with the rest of my fellow Irishmen and women when David O'Leary scored that penalty. Of course, I was sad that my own team hadn't made what would have been their third consecutive World Cup Finals, but that didn't prevent me from being happy for those around me.
Then again, you'll probably accuse me of lying about that, as well. Que Sera Sera (as was sung at the time).

As for Our Wee Country, I am not that Board, nor is it me, so I'd prefer if you judged me on what I post, not others. In return, I will try to respond to what you post.

Speaking of which, when you contemplate the ROI qualifying for Euro2008/Gibson/Kane/O'Connor etc, is that another of your famous predictions? Because if it is, the state of my digestive system will be the least of my worries; I'll be able to afford a stomach transplant from my winnings from Paddy Power. Do you think I should combine it in a double to increase my odds? I quite fancy Shergar to win next year's Derby, possibly with Lord Lucan as jockey...

As for Liechtenstein's hopes re NI, what you posted was:
"You [Ealing Green] are so biased you no longer inhabit reality as far as football is concerned. Sweden the end of March will give you a reality check if Liechenstein don't manage to do it beforehand"
I'll give you one thing, though. Even if our winning in Liechtenstein was the definition of "reality", beating Sweden was "unreal"!

As for Sweden "probably" being better than ROI, I guess that I am "probably" older than you, as well. ;)

Anyhow, as Gspain pointed out earlier, isn't it time for your nap now? :)
Older possibly but definitely not wiser. Didn't you agree at the time with my prediction that Sweden would beat NI from my recollections? As for some of your own you tipped both Slovakia and Wales as far as I remember to get something from their Croke Park games didn't you?

You also regularly post sh*te about the Republic on ourweecountry.com whatever you state here. A recent thread you started was titled 'Stan's Comedy Tour to the US' which was basically an outlet to pass derogatory comments about our team.

Anyway I'm tired proving you wrong (see points above) and must retire because unlike some on here (you in particular) I really do have things to do in work. I'll be back to laugh at you come November when the groups are in their completed form.

Who's Gspain? Your imaginary friend?

[EalingGreen]

Didn't you agree at the time with my prediction that Sweden would beat NI from my recollections? As for some of your own you tipped both Slovakia and Wales as far as I remember to get something from their Croke Park games didn't you?

You also regularly post sh*te about the Republic on ourweecountry.com whatever you state here. A recent thread you started was titled 'Stan's Comedy Tour to the US' which was basically an outlet to pass derogatory comments about our team.

Anyway I'm tired proving you wrong (see points above) and must retire because unlike some on here (you in particular) I really do have things to do in work. I'll be back to laugh at you come November when the groups are in their completed form.

Who's Gspain? Your imaginary friend?

Re predictions, you were the one who confidently predicted "Sweden would give us a 'reality check' if not Liechtenstein" and you were wrong on both counts. Had you asked me, my cautious prediction would have been a narrow victory in Vaduz and a possible draw v Sweden, though none of the six possible permutations would have surprised me. Then again, I don't go round telling everyone what will happen even to my own football team, never mind someone elses.

As for ROI v Wales and Slovakia, if you check my posts I said that although it could go either way, I thought ROI were just favoured to win at home, and would do well to get a draw away. So far so good.
As regards Slovakia, I can't remember exactly what I posted (if anything), but whilst I felt them a better team than Wales, I doubt if I ever said they'd win or even draw in Dublin. (Check my posts if you like - if we don't hear from you on this, I'll assume my recall is correct)

As for my posts re. the ROI on OWC, feel free to quote specific examples of what I've written, I'm quite happy to answer for them. As for the ROI's recent US Tour, I didn't make one single derogatory comment on that thread. Instead, I opened it merely to query why none of the (NI-born) players with disputed "eligibility" had been included. Was it injury/unavailability/coincidence (seems it was, btw), or was there concern amongst the FAI as to their status? Considering just how many withdrawals there had been of senior players, I thought it strange they didn't bring along Kane/O'Connor/Gibson etc.
As for the title - "Stan's Comedy Tour to the US", that was an allusion to the fact that (afaik) Stan Laurel first came to prominence in the USA following a Comedy Tour of the States, where he also met Oliver Hardy. And Staunton is nicknamed "Stan" after Laurel, after all.
But if it makes you happy, I'll apologise both to you and him for the grievous offence caused by this reference. After all, it's not as if ROI fans are ever less than 100% positive about your esteemed manager, is it? :rolleyes:

P.S. I posted "GSpain", rather than "Lionel Ritchie" by mistake (corrected before I noticed your taking me up on it). Enjoy your little "victory" over that one, I'm sure it will give you a warm glow all the way to Novemeber, when I hope we both get what we wish for. And deserve. ;)

[Cymro]

Let's be honest Wales a year or so ago hammered you at home after all didn't they though you forget to mention such things. Also Iceland beat you 3-0 fairly recently at home didn't they? Btw I've noticed you aren't half as cocky now than you were a couple of months ago when the North were (amazingly) sitting at the top of their group. You'll be less so after the away trips to Spain and Sweden.

We didn't really hammer them, all three of our last meetings have been fairly close. Ironically the one we won was arguably a worse performance than in Cardiff where we had 70% of the ball but because we conceded two silly goals couldn't win it.

The last meeting we had even though we were minus a lot of good players NI edged the best of it (not that much of it was that great) in a 0-0 draw.

[EalingGreen]

We didn't really hammer them, all three of our last meetings have been fairly close. Ironically the one we won was arguably a worse performance than in Cardiff where we had 70% of the ball but because we conceded two silly goals couldn't win it.

The last meeting we had even though we were minus a lot of good players NI edged the best of it (not that much of it was that great) in a 0-0 draw.

Agree that all three meetings were close, Cymro. Indeed, the only point I'd disagree with is your summary of the Cardiff game. It may be true that you had 70% of possession, but that was only because that ludicrous Italian referee sent off two of our players to your one in the first half. Not only that, but our two players were our two best: David Healy and Michael Hughes.
I thought that our backs-to-the-wall performance made for a thrilling game, and had the ref given the most blatant of penalties late on, when Tony Capaldi was clearly fouled inside the box, we probably would have won it. Had we done so, it would have been at least as deserved as your 3-2 win in Belfast (imo).

Either way, two out of three of these encounters produced cracking matches which perhaps augurs well for the Celtic Cup, if it ever gets off the ground.

[livehead1]

In case you've forgotten:
Liechtenstein 1 v 4 NI
NI 2 v 1 Sweden

David Healy scored 5 goals in those two games, to take his tally to 9 goals in 6 Euro2008 matches - the highest scorer in the Tournament to date.

As for Healy and Henry, obviously there's no comparison between the two as players - as evidenced by Barcelona paying £18 million for Henry just now. It is interesting, however, that whilst Henry has scored 39 goals in 92 matches for France (= 1 goal every 2.4 games), Healy has notched 29 in 56 for a much inferior team (= 1 goal every 1.9 games).

At that rate, I wonder how many he'd score for a truly crap team like ROI? ;)

two fantastic results for a side with limited resources, and i say that with the greatest respect.

however the difference between healy and henry is that healy is a pile of wa*k who has never scored in the premiership whilst henry is a world superstar who holds the all time scoring record for one of the top sides in europe. that aside, i see your point!

[Qwerty]

The success of NI recently is interesting, I saw the NI v Spain game last year, actually I watched it twice. My take on this is NI have clearly improved, they are a very modest team with some very weak links but they do retain possession well, they have been lucky and the teams that lost to them like Spain and England did so becuase they thought it would be an easy game and that they could get a result without moving out of 1st gear, so really NI are benefiting from their years of wretchedness.

I don't understand Healy but he keeps knocking them in, he can do no wrong.

I don't think they will qualify but at least they have got some good results, much better than ours by any measure.

[Stuttgart88]

they have been lucky
I'm not for a second suggesting the win was all down to luck, but in the Spain game I recall Raul(?) missing a sitter from only a few feet out followed almost immediately by the Spanish defence inexplicably all missing a routine long kick by Taylor allowing Healy to score the winner (expertly).

Fine margins and all that. We could have squeezed a win home or away to France for example. Reid hitting the post, Morrison fouled in the box, Barthez' elbowing O'Brien, O'Shea's shot...

The fact is that regardless of which way the marginal outcomes go, NI is now frequently competitive against very good sides, something which we can be but we're equally capable of utter garbage.

Let's see how we acquit ourselves in September & October.

[Cymro]

Agree that all three meetings were close, Cymro. Indeed, the only point I'd disagree with is your summary of the Cardiff game. It may be true that you had 70% of possession, but that was only because that ludicrous Italian referee sent off two of our players to your one in the first half. Not only that, but our two players were our two best: David Healy and Michael Hughes.
I thought that our backs-to-the-wall performance made for a thrilling game, and had the ref given the most blatant of penalties late on, when Tony Capaldi was clearly fouled inside the box, we probably would have won it. Had we done so, it would have been at least as deserved as your 3-2 win in Belfast (imo).

Either way, two out of three of these encounters produced cracking matches which perhaps augurs well for the Celtic Cup, if it ever gets off the ground.

Don't forget we were down to ten men because he sent off Savage. Whenever I discuss this game with NI fans they always conveniently forget that. :D

That ref was a muppet though.

I don't remember the late penalty appeal for Capaldi, so can't really comment. We were dire that day (in terms of finishing our chances) though, truly awful, so you probably did deserve the win. Just. ;)

[EalingGreen]

The success of NI recently is interesting, I saw the NI v Spain game last year, actually I watched it twice. My take on this is NI have clearly improved, they are a very modest team with some very weak links but they do retain possession well, they have been lucky and the teams that lost to them like Spain and England did so becuase they thought it would be an easy game and that they could get a result without moving out of 1st gear, so really NI are benefiting from their years of wretchedness.

I don't understand Healy but he keeps knocking them in, he can do no wrong.

I don't think they will qualify but at least they have got some good results, much better than ours by any measure.

Always interesting to hear an objective view and I wouldn't disagree with your summary. Certainly, we are a modest team (with much to be modest about, I should add!).

That said, our recent relative success has been no fluke. Essentially, there have been three key elements. The first is (was) Sanchez. From the very start, he looked at the players available to him, settled on a playing style that would suit them best, and required his players to conform to it. Anyone who wasn't prepared to go along with this was out on his ear - regardless of ability or reputation.
But all those who went along with it benefited enormously from the consistency and support which Sanchez and his system gave them, so that even mediocre players (to start with) improved significantly during his 3 1/2 years.
Consequently, we became first a team that was now hard to beat and subsequently, a team that was confident enough to go out and win games. It is notable that in our two most recent big wins (Spain and Sweden), we went behind both times, but never lost our nerve.

The second factor was Healy. Now I'll be the first to admit that there's a lot he can't do, so that he relies more than most on his teammates. Indeed, it is this need to have the team built round him which probably explains why he's not playing in the Premiership.
But if you give him a chance, he's as good a finisher as there is in the whole of the English game (and I don't say that lightly).
Sanchez quickly cottoned onto that, and so built a team the whole point of which is to get the ball to Healy at every opportunity.
Subsequently, Healy has never let us down, scoring 21 goals in 27 caps under Sanchez. And the amazing thing is, these goals aren't just against pushover teams, or in friendlies; neither are they all of a type. As his hattrick v Spain demonstrated, he does tap-ins, set-pieces, one-on-ones, long range or close in, penalties, even the odd header.

And the third factor is the Green and White Army. I know there's a lot of ****** talked about "12th Man" and feel-good factor etc, but too many of our opponents have remarked on the difficulties of coming to play on a dark Wednesday night at Windsor for it to be a total myth. And don't our boys know it, too!

Of course, who knows how we'll do under the new manager. But even if we fail to reach recent highs, I doubt if we'll fall back down into our previous lows, if for no other reason in that the players whose confidence had previously deserted them under McIlroy now know that they're decent enough (if never world-beaters) and further, there are a few talented youngsters emerging who know no fear.

Consequently, I feel we've a reasonable chance of finishing third in our Euro2008 Group and being seeded Fourth for the draw for WC2010. Which, considering we were seeded 6th (and ranked 124 in the world) when Sanchez took over, is highly respectable (imo).

[EalingGreen]

As someone said, these Rankings may be a joke, but don't we all enjoy a laugh now and again...

http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/ranking/lastranking/gender=m/fullranking.html

[RogerMilla]

as i've said before these rankings are far from a joke , NI are ahead of us as they are doing far better than us comparably. England are perennial qualifiers and deserve to be where they are. I havent given up hope of qualification for the Euro tournament but would certainly hope that we are third seeds for the South Africa Qualifiers.

[youngirish]

As someone said, these Rankings may be a joke, but don't we all enjoy a laugh now and again...

http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/ranking/lastranking/gender=m/fullranking.html

They are a joke. Your constant regurgitating off them every few weeks when no meaningful games have been played in months just shows how desperate you are for that little bit of success that your national team has failed to deliver for over two decades. I didn't see you listing them a few months ago when we were ahead of you (funnily enough just after the last set of qualifiers when they possibly did matter a bit).

I'll bring them up again in a couple of months after your next few away games.

Fulham to be relegated.

[eirebhoy]

They are a joke.
Why is that? Just because friendlies are included? Friendlies are worth 40% of qualifiers and most teams do actually want to win these games. I think 40% is fair enough.

[youngirish]

Why is that? Just because friendlies are included? Friendlies are worth 40% of qualifiers and most teams do actually want to win these games. I think 40% is fair enough.

No a number of reasons all of which I mentioned earlier in this thread.

1. Friendlies are included which is a nonsense even if they only were weighted at 4% nevermind 40%. Look at the teams we put out in America. A large number of our starting 11 wouldn't have even been in our squads for competitive games. Brian Kerr was the God of freindlies but couldn't win a competitive game to save his life.
2. They are pointlessly updated far too regularly making them more of a joke than they already are.
3. Teams that have a couple of good wins are boosted to ridiculous rankings irrespective of how bad they have been beforehand or are likely to be again.
4. Northern Ireland are in the top 30.

Number 4 alone should be enough of an indicator.

[eirebhoy]

Fair points actually. I just think people are too quick to write them off because of the old FIFA rankings which were rubbish.

[gustavo]

No a number of reasons all of which I mentioned earlier in this thread.

1. Friendlies are included which is a nonsense even if they only were weighted at 4% nevermind 40%. Look at the teams we put out in America. A large number of our starting 11 wouldn't have even been in our squads for competitive games. Brian Kerr was the God of freindlies but couldn't win a competitive game to save his life.
2. They are pointlessly updated far too regularly making them more of a joke than they already are.
3. Teams that have a couple fo good wins are boosted to ridiculous rankings irrespective of how bad they have been beforehand or are likely to be again.
4. Northern Ireland are in the top 30.

Number 4 alone should be enough of an indicator.

Northern Ireland are there because they have beaten teams that were a lot higher up than them in the last 2 years so it makes sense that a rise in the rankings was in order for them

[youngirish]

Northern Ireland are there because they have beaten teams that were a lot higher up than them in the last 2 years so it makes sense that a rise in the rankings was in order for them

They have also lost to the likes of Wales, Austria and Iceland (both very heavily) who are way down in the rankings in the same time period so why are they so high? The rankings are a nonsense.

Why are Brazil and Argentina higher than France and Italy? Both far better teams if the World Cup is anything to go by though to be honest I can now see the logic in giving the same weighting to games in the Copa America against pretty laclustre teams than quarter final results in the World Cup.

[RogerMilla]

the rankings are exactly what they are , an indicator of how a team is doing relative to other teams, just because you arent happy where your team or another team is doesnt make them a nonsense. There are no prizes for being first which is how it should be.

[Dodge]

Jesus, its simple maths. Don't call it nonsense just because you're too thick to undertand it

[youngirish]

the rankings are exactly what they are , an indicator of how a team is doing relative to other teams, just because you arent happy where your team or another team is doesnt make them a nonsense. There are no prizes for being first which is how it should be.
Doesn't bother me in the slightest where Ireland are. I didn't care when we were 12th a few years ago under Kerr (again for no reason) and I don't care now. They are sh*te and they don't properly take into account where teams are relative to other teams around them for the exact reasons I mentioned above which was my initial point.

Just because EalingGreen soils his pants with excitement everytime they come out and NI are above the ROI team (though remains very quiet when the reverse is true) this doesn't make them any more valid.

As for Dodge I'd say I understand it far more than you can comprehend considering I did my degree in maths when you probably haven't grasped basic arithmetic yet. Taking this into account I'll take my interpretation of the rankings over yours then thank you very much if you don't have a problem with that. To try to state that it's just a matter of simple maths when weights of 40% are taken into account for friendlies shows you don't really understand either simple maths or the rankings. Where did they get that magic 40% from? Do teams try only 40% as hard in friendlies? Do all teams then only try that 40%? Should it be the same calculation if you beat France and win the World Cup final as if you beat them 1-0 at home on a rainy night in a Euro qualifier if they've already qualified for said finals. Stay off the glue.

[RogerMilla]

If you dont like EG's discussions of them then you can opt out rather than calling for him to be banned like you did before you edited your post. I for one am confident that we will rise in the rankings and even more confident that NI will slide and will be delighted to discuss that with EG when the time comes.

[youngirish]

the rankings are exactly what they are , an indicator of how a team is doing relative to other teams, just because you arent happy where your team or another team is doesnt make them a nonsense. There are no prizes for being first which is how it should be.

Thinking about it I don't want him banned I get a laugh at the sh*te he spouts about David Healy and NI.

[eirebhoy]

Why are Brazil and Argentina higher than France and Italy? Both far better teams if the World Cup is anything to go by though to be honest I can now see the logic in giving the same weighting to games in the Copa America against pretty laclustre teams than quarter final results in the World Cup.
Maybe you're missing the fact that you don't get many points for beating poor teams.

[Steve Bruce]

Thinking about it I don't want him banned I get a laugh at the sh*te he spouts about David Healy and NI.

Would you like so salt and vinegar for that massive chip:confused::rolleyes:

[osarusan]

3. Teams that have a couple of good wins are boosted to ridiculous rankings irrespective of how bad they have been beforehand or are likely to be again.


So you think part of the ranking criteria should be a guess on how a team are likely to do in the future?

[youngirish]

Would you like so salt and vinegar for that massive chip:confused::rolleyes:
Yes thats right, I've a chip on my shoulder because I think David Healy, a NI footballer, is crap. You didn't really think that one through now did you? Admit it.


So you think part of the ranking criteria should be a guess on how a team are likely to do in the future?
Where did I make this extraordinary claim? I simply stated teams jump up and down in the rankings far too quickly based on only a small set of results. The rankings are pure drivel. If you think otherwise great, seek some help.

[osarusan]

Where did I make this extraordinary claim? I simply stated teams jump up and down in the rankings far too quickly based on only a small set of results.

Here.

3. Teams that have a couple of good wins are boosted to ridiculous rankings irrespective of how bad they have been beforehand or are likely to be again.

Teams jump up and down too quickly based on only their very recent results, not taking into account poor results in the farther past, and also without taking into account how crap they're likely to be in the future.

To me that reads like you think we should consider a teams' potential future crapness when deciding a ranking.

[youngirish]

Here.


Teams jump up and down too quickly based on only their very recent results, not taking into account poor results in the farther past, and also without taking into account how crap they're likely to be in the future.

To me that reads like you think we should consider a teams' potential future crapness when deciding a ranking.
To me it reads that the rankings are too reactive and teams gain too many positions based on a small set of results and that's what it was meant to mean when written.

Answer me this why are NI higher than us when we have had a consistently better record in qualifiers for years (including by far in the last set of qualifiers)? Why because they beat Spain and a poor Swedish team at home (that we thrashed 3-0 before the World Cup if I remember). Two results that hardly should catapult them into the top 30 when you take into account the other results I've mentioned in recent years (losses to Austria, Poland, Wales and Iceland all average to poor teams). The rankings should only be updated annually at most though bi-anually would be preferrable. As anyone who knows anything about football would agree any rubbish team can string a couple of good results together (it happens all the time in club football) but over the course of a dozen or so games teams usually find their level. To be shifting teams up and down dozens of places based on a single good or bad result is absolute nonsense.

Take the rankings for what they are and stop falling into the trap. Typical media headline grabbing nonsense from FIFA. It just makes some good business sense to spurt out some nice new stats every now and then. Keeps the Yanks happy (another team consistently placed unrealistically high).

[cavan_fan]

I'm a bit confused by this. From what I can see or a win in a qualifier against a team ranked 40th this year you get
3 points (for a win)
*2.5 (cos it's a qualifier)
* 100 (they multiply everything by 100)
* 1(cos we're European)
* 200-40/100 = 1.6

Now I make this over 1100+ points for one game but Brazil have only 1500 points in total. What am I missing

[eirebhoy]

It's averaged over 4 years. So:

Points from matches in last 12 months
+
Points from matches 12-24 months ago x 0.5
+
Points from matches 24-36 months ago x 0.3
+
Points from matches 36-48 months ago x 0.2

Divided by the number of games played.

I think...

[Lionel Ritchie]

EalingGreen is a WUM anyway and is only concerned with polluting our boards with pro Northern Ireland Unionist dribble. Or am I too thick to see that also?

Is anyone moderating this bullsh1t?:rolleyes:

[youngirish]

Is anyone moderating this bullsh1t?:rolleyes:

You again? Don't you ever have an opinion on anything or do you just hang around the forums scanning for anything that's said that isn't PC enough for you? Who are you Mary Whitehouse? You know about as much about football.

[Lionel Ritchie]

You again? Don't you ever have an opinion on anything or do you just hang around the forums scannign for anything that's said that isn't PC enough for you? Who are you Mary Whitehouse? You know about as much about football.

:D Take all the rope you need YI.


Friendlies are included which is a nonsense even if they only were weighted at 4% nevermind 40%. ...so you don't value friendlies -that's fair enough. But then when talking about our results relative to NIs you say...


...because they beat Spain and a poor Swedish team at home (that we thrashed 3-0 before the World Cup if I remember). I'm sure I don't need to point out to anyone, scarcely even yourself, that we beat Sweden in one of those friendlies you don't value much -except when you'd like our friendly wins to trump NIs competetive wins.


As for Dodge I'd say I understand it far more than you can comprehend considering I did my degree in maths when you probably haven't grasped basic arithmetic yet. Christ is that what they're calling the Drumcondra test these days?

[youngirish]

...so you don't value friendlies -that's fair enough. But then when talking about our results relative to NIs you say...

I'm sure I don't need to point out to anyone, scarcely even yourself, that we beat Sweden in one of those friendlies you don't value much -except when you'd like our friendly wins to trump NIs competetive wins.

I don't think they should be included in the rankings as I stated earlier but getting hammered 3-0 in a friendly when (and this is the important bit for you Mary) playing your best team a month before a major Championship is not a good sign. If you think it is then fair play, see a doctor.

Anyway since friendlies are included in the rankings I thought I'd point that result out. That logic ok for you?

[Lionel Ritchie]

I don't value them as I stated but getting hammered 3-0 in a friendly when (and this is the important bit for you Mary) playing your best team a month before a major Championship is not a good sign.

Anyway since friendlies are included in the rankings I thought I'd point that out. That logic ok for you?

No it's not. You're still essentially saying Sweden are easy meat.

Barring the clown who clatttered Trigger just before the 2002 finals I can scarcely think of a hard challenge in any friendly in the run up to a finals.

That Swedish team never shifted out of second and why would they? Playing for the jersey or the place in the starting eleven? I'd say hardly. Most teams that've qualified will be bedded down by then and will be doing more tinkering with tactics than personnel.

[EalingGreen]

I don't think they should be included in the rankings as I stated earlier but getting hammered 3-0 in a friendly when (and this is the important bit for you Mary) playing your best team a month before a major Championship is not a good sign. If you think it is then fair play, see a doctor.

Anyway since friendlies are included in the rankings I thought I'd point that result out. That logic ok for you?

I'm not sure whether you consider friendlies important or not - maybe only when ROI win a friendly, perhaps?

Anyhow, you presumably take competitive matches seriously. In which case, since Sweden's defeat in Dublin they have played seven* competitive matches. They won five of those (including against Spain) and were 2-2 away to Denmark in the sixth, a man up and with an injury-time penalty still to take, when the referee abandoned the match (subsequently awarded to them anyhow, as it happens).

Since they are notorious for not taking friendlies seriously, I would guess that it is their form in competitive matches, and regular qualification for Tournaments etc which accounts for their consistently high showing in the FIFA Rankings:
http://www.fifa.com/associations/association=swe/ranking/gender=m/index.html

Unless, of course, you think that this, too, is unfair...


* - I'll not mention who their only defeat was to in the seventh game, for fear that you'll call for me to be banned. Again. ;)