Printable View
Took all of 2 paragraphs in his review of the game in the Star yesterday to mention Roy Keane. Can't think of the exact quote but it was something along the lines of "Ireland would never have lost a 2 goal lead had Roy Keane been playing and should not have done it without it him anyway". He must have not watched the previous game against Israel, with Roy in the team, when we lost a 1 goal lead against them.
Amsterdam, Basle.
What a load of crap. Unless Roy could have stopped Israel from coming into our half we would have lost those 2 goals. A fair tackle and a penalty. How would Keane have stopped that? Go **** yourself Eamon.
have you got his e-mail address btw?
I think it's eamon.dunphy@thestar.ie or eamondunphy@thestar.ie (no dot in the second one)
I think if you read the rest of the article though it seems to be pretty fair and balanced. I think he does have a point about Keane but its not worth making as Keane was suspended. But To think that Israel only scored cause of those 2 freak incidents is naive. Israel were let back into the game due to the irish midfield stepping back and in turn the defecne stepping back. In addition the wind cause some sloppy passing in teh defence and central midfield positions and the whole area was panicky and unsettled. From this Israel grew and got their lucky goals. I do think Keane would have settled teh game down. He would have calmed them down and as Kerr said we suffered from 20 mins of madness.
He said the same on RTE after the game having been led to the comment by Laughing Bill. Perhaps we mightn't have lost the lead. Perhaps we mightn't have had the lead. Perhaps we might have lost the game - who knows.
A bizarre game. He criticised bring on Doherty and then said it had been effect. Ah well, let's hope all is well this Wednesday.
my signature says it all :o
What a stupid comment to make. How does he know that? Ireland was 2-0 against Holland when Keane was playing and we drew 2-2 he didnt stop anything there.
Sometimes Dumphy should read what he writes.
Dunphy is a spoon with a big spoon head...as much of the dick as Dudu Awat...Those that get a kick out of ****ing lots of people off are the scum of the earth. If fact the fool isn't even worth discussing.
Humpty Dunphy is a clown. Always has been, always will be. He's called more matches wrong than any other pundit on the box that I can think of, and he changes his opinion on things more often than the rest of us change our socks. After Kerr's first match in charge Dunphy claimed he was the best Irish coach in twenty years, in fact the only proper coach in twenty years. Now he's just waiting for him to fail, so he can say, "Ah, but he only came from the League of Ireland". On the Roy Keane subject Humpty just gets funnier and funnier. Anyone else recall before the game in Israel when he was giving it loads as usual about how Keane would set the tempo for Ireland, etc,etc. When it was pointed out by Liam Brady after the match that Keane had been as guilty as anyone else of slowing the game down, Eamo's response was "he's only one man!" Priceless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD
Crap! Dunphy can't write a fair/balanced article to save his life. The man's all over the place. He's a joke - he's just trying to stand out from the rest, to be different.
Well, what a difference 3 days make!!
In his newspaper column on Monday, Dunphy said that the two dropped points against Israel would cost us automatic qualification. By Thursday however, he had changed his tune after the win in Torshavn, by declaring that the destiny of the group was in our own hands. Oh how fickle, journalists can be.
Before anyone starts booking tickets to Germany, let's put things in perspective. A win in the Faroe Islands was expected, and achieved. But it merely covers up the cracks in the side. This team can't be trusted to defend a 2-0 lead at home to Israel. It can't be trusted to defend a lead for 10 minutes against Russia, it can't be trusted to defend an advantage in Switzerland, the manager doesn't know how to play an attacking game, or treat weaker teams with the respect they deserve, i.e. none. The team minus R. Keane, is leaderless. The guy is in his thirties and will retire next year. Where are the leaders in waiting? We don't score enough goals. Without Robbie Keane, we seriously struggle to score goals. The team has no confidence, admittedly not helped when the coach constantly talks up the opposition, there is no character in the side for dealing with pressure from the opposition. We just roll over. It happened in Switzerland in the last campaign. While in Basle last year, the team fell apart when put under pressure, and conceded an equalizer inside ten minutes. The team couldn't hold on for 90 minutes in Israel under limited pressure from the home side. Israel apply 10 minutes of sporadic pressure at Lansdowne, and we throw a 2 goal cushion in the process. Any side can beat the Faroe Islands, half the NL sides could too.
In the first 25 minutes at home to Israel, we showed how we can destroy teams if we put our minds to it. Often we don't do that though, and if we can't put Israel away when 2-0 up at home, then we have no chance at home to France and the Swiss, who will come out to play some football, knowing that this Irish defence colllapses under any sort of persistent pressure. The end result will be us watching the World Cup at home, Kerr out of a job, and the team going back to the drawing board, while winning meaningless home friendlies.
No they did not. Israeil got into the game after 15-20 minutes and not once did they have a "spell" of pressure. The only team that has had a spell of pressure against us in this group has been Switzerland. Jesus, even the Faroes had more shots than Israel did in 2 games I'd say. OK, Kerr made the wrong substitution probably but the most nervous I got (and I'm pretty sure the most nervous the rest of us got other than the peno of course) was when the Israeli walked through our defence. That was before the substitution was made.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Did you read the article.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glapots
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tinrib
I think that comment he said was right. It could have ended up 5 or 6 to milan in the 1st half. Just because one of the most bizarre and strange 6 minutes of football was played does not mean he was right to say it. Anybody that saw the first hafl would think liverpool were out of it. Sure some of those great liverpool supporters even left the ground in Istanbul.
The France game is the one game I can hardly remember. I usually tape games but didn't tape this one.
It's not just Kerr or McCarthy though. Many managers take off a forward and bring on a 5th midfielder to try and kill the game. All it usually means is extra pressure because the ball keeps coming back. Worst example I can remember was McCarthy against Portugal. 1-0 up and we take off a forward and the Portuguese camp in our half and equalise. He then changes it back to 4-4-2 (horse and stable door spring to mind). I remember Fergie doing this a few times as well and many other European managers.Quote:
Originally Posted by totalfootball
As for France and our "attacking options", I still believe the choice of Finnan wide right is a negative tactic which will also be adopted at home with Reid dropping to the bench. If we want to try and beat the French we must play Reid. If we want to secure a draw and hope maybe somehow perhaps squeek a win, Kerr will play Finnan.
But was bringing on Doherty a mistake in this particular instance ? The Route 1 worked and he created 3/4 chances which weren't taken. From a purest football (whatever that might be) point of view, it wouldn't be approved of but it was effective and with Robbie still on we would have scored.Quote:
Originally Posted by totalfootball
But ifs and buts.....
Yes, Mick was stubborn to a fault (eg persisting with Harte in Japan/Korea when most people could see he was struggling). I think Mick's strengths were motivation and passion. Tactically he got it wrong a lot of the times but his record was good for Ireland so he was the veritable curate's egg: good in parts.
Kerr is more clinical and I can't see him being a great motivator but he has also got it wrong a few times tactically as well but as you say, if he learns from his mistakes, then that's for the best. Playing Elliott against the Faroes was good because if he'd been stubborn he wouldn't have played him - standing over his decision against Israel of not bringing him on.
But could it be said that he should have learned from the Swiss match? Or the first Israel match? Why should we believe that he has (or will) learn from the second Israel game? (Just throwin' it out there)Quote:
Originally Posted by totalfootball