Well, with our crop of recent defections, their could be a role for an EPN with the FAI.
Though he'd be better served going to Scotland.
Printable View
Well, with our crop of recent defections, their could be a role for an EPN with the FAI.
Though he'd be better served going to Scotland.
Armstrong didn't really do a huge deal of note though, did he?
I think the 'Elite Player Mentor' thing might be something that in years to come, those concerned will look back on it with a note of embarrassment...
The FAI should hire him to poach back Shane McEleney just to **** with the IFA.
Nothing really of note, except waffle plenty in the Sunday Life.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
That's why we called him 'Agent Gerry'...Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
;)
Begging off the "beggars". Priceless.
It's more, if not all, about the Hypocrisy. Albeit of the most sanctimonious type.
:rolleyes:
Will NB be boycotting this game then?
So thats a former England u21 international in nets (Camp) - A defence consisting of a former Scotland u21 international (McPake), an full Ireland international(Bruce) and & former England u16 international (Dudgeon).
A former England u17 international in midfield (Norwood) & lads born in stoke & Solihull up front.
Wonder will that put an end to their false sense of victimhood on the eligibility issue?
Eh... I doubt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by co. down green
They still need to get someone born in Finchley.
I see EG on OWC claiming it's different in principle because the IFA are calling up "rejects", but when was it ever made clear that, for the entire remainder of their careers, Lee Camp and Alex Bruce would no longer be part of the respective plans of the FA and FAI?Quote:
Originally Posted by co. down green
deCamp?Quote:
Originally Posted by co. down green
Good old EG, he's sorely missed!Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
McPake's a good example, he said the following in a Daily Record interview a week before declaring for the north - "I would hope to be knocking on the international (Scottish)door again although the manager has got his centre-halves and a settled squad, but you never know. I got close before so there's no reason why I can't get close again."
Didn't realise that Camp had de-camped himself from their squad to concentrate on his club football.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Unfortunately, I'm all paid up for this one Danny - I'll wait and see if Bruce pulls out of the squad (which I think he might), before deciding if I attend the game. The ticket was only £8, so I'll take the hit on that if Bruce travels to Portugal.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Very disappointed with O'Neill, to say the least.
I'd say it's O'Neill's job is to pick the best squad from the available players, it's not his job to apply (his subjective or succumb to others' subjective) judgments on some players, over and above what he applies to other players. Once a player is qualified to play, then it should come down to what matters to the manager, namely football ability, attitude etc.
O'Neill is probably desperate for NI to rake up a few victories in this group, realistically they will be doing well to finish a close 5th.
How many times has it happened in the history of international football that it is made clear to players that for the rest of their careers they would no longer be part of the plans of their respective football associations?Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Would you still think that if, say, Manchester United and the players' agents were to arrange a swap deal that brought Terry and Suarez to the club in exchange for Evra and Ferdinand?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Surely the player's attitude is something that the coach makes a subjective judgement on?
If we hit Xmas with one or two points I think there's a good chance he'll walk. On the other hand, I'm feeling surprisingly optimistic. On the basis of September's games we could finish anywhere between sixth and third.Quote:
O'Neill is probably desperate for NI to rake up a few victories in this group, realistically they will be doing well to finish a close 5th
What's your point? My point was that the manager (in international football) applies the same criteria for every available player as to how they would fit into the team. Of course he applies his judgements, otherwise how on earth is a manager to decide anything? His job is to pick the best squad from the available players and blend them into a team that functions. That's where he is judged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
There's a wide variety of opinion over what eligible players are good Northern Irelanders. If you want a team solely built around players born in the NI, then put that in the manager's contract. If you have a hierarchy of what constitutes a good Northern Irelander then put that into his contract,
A player with a NI parent is > one NI born grandparent but < 2 NI born parents. Every eligibility criteria is > than one who chose to play for the FAI over and above the IFA, but a NI born who chose to play for the FAI and then returned to the IFA is > than a player who wasn't born in NI, who had first chosen to play for the FAI.
I understood your point and in reply asked a straightforward if hypothetical question which you've ignored.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
My point is simple enough. O'Neill picking the one eligible player most likely to anger much of the support is a bad decision- I agree with NB above. Bad for O'Neill, as now probably anything less than a win in Porto* will increase the criticism of him from fans, bad for team spirit on and off the pitch and probably bad for Bruce. He'll likely get dragged into a wider NI row that most Hull City stalwarts don't have to cope with during their football careers.
* Not achieved away against a top two seed since WC 1986.
It's amazing what people throw out. The IFA's initiative has led them to finding a perfectly good CB. It doesn't even look like it was used that much.
Ignored because it was irrelevant and absurdly hypothetical. And I'm pleased you could make your point..... finally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
A win in Porto? ;)Quote:
I agree with NB above. Bad for O'Neill, as now probably anything less than a win in Porto* will increase the criticism of him from fans, bad for team spirit on and off the pitch and probably bad for Bruce. He'll likely get dragged into a wider NI row that most Hull City stalwarts don't have to cope with during their football careers.
So to venture (again) into the absurdly hypothetical - namely a win in Porto, would appease the (some or many) fans criticism for calling up Bruce to the squad. That would appease the ideologues who cling to the hierarchal value of the criteria to be a Northern Irelander, - Michael O'Connor is kosher, Bruce bad.
I can understand why O'Neill doesn't buy into that nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
No problem. I'm patient with slow learners.
Enjoy the rest of the campaign.
I can see why NI fans would apply the hierarchy, no matter how churlish it might appear - Bruce said some things which in hindsight appear a bit silly. And I apply a similar hierarchy for Irish players (Stephen Ireland <<<<<<<< any other ROI eligible footballer).
However if Ireland were to come back to the ROI squad I'd swallow it if he proved an asset for the team and on the pitch. NI are short of options, and I can see why O'Neill made the call.
I'm not going to venture on to OWC to answer this (never again), but anyone care to offer a flavour of NI fans general feelings on the Bruce call up?
http://ourweecountry.ipbhost.com/pub...ult/drinks.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
If he comes on in Porto, you'll be left in no doubt as to NI fans general feelings on the issue - I think he'll withdraw from the squad anyway - taken off injured on Tuesday, and missing from the Hull team today.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
I don't get the logic. You happily accept the scraps from the English table but not scraps off us? Either you only accept players that have NI as their first choice or you don't. Bruce probably feels as Northern Irish as Lee Camp but you welcomed him with open arms.
No doubt there is politics involved in their views, but also there is a perverse ethical argument that seems to cover up the hypocrisy of the situation. I agree with both you and Geysir, and God help us, how can O' Neill be expected to be deemed a good manager while working in an environment where idealism is seen to be more important than success on the field.Quote:
Originally Posted by boovidge
Very rarely, if ever, I would imagine. What's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
There's general disappointment, anger and embarrassment, and then there's EG reassuring those concerned that this is different in principle.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
Anybody with any knowledge of Mick O'Neill would have foreseen he'd take a very practical approach to eligibility criteria. He's always said he thinks everyone born in NI should play for NI, but he always said he only wanted players who were committed to do so. If Bruce is committed to NI, fine, but I can see exactly why fans would be disgusted since he's clearly got no allegiance to either Irish side.
How much is much though? Most of the support, or just the diehards? I'm not nitpicking, I'm genuinely interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Personally I'd have more time for Stephen Ireland than somebody who pulls on the green shirt to pad their CV. At least he's not taking an honour from somebody who would really treasure it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
And wouldn't a manager subjecting his squad decisions to the opinions of the fickle mob be rather worrying? Do you think fans ought to have a say in squad selections, GR?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
If Stephen Ireland, for example, only grudgingly played international football then he would be taking the honour from someone more worthy. It doesn't make any difference that he was born in Ireland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
But he's not grudgingly playing. He's said "I don't want to play" and that's it. If he decides to come back, great - it'll be because he's decided that representing his country means something to him.
I respect that more than some careerist like Mark Noble or Jermaine Pennant showing up and playing like a professional with no regard for the honour of wearing the shirt. I'd rather Paul McShane show up and do a worse job but with 100% heart, because you know there's no player for whom it means more to wear the shirt. I know we've had plenty like that in the past and so have Norn Iron, so I can see why it irks the supporters that somebody like Bruce would do it so flagrantly.
It must be even more annoying when it's a player as poor as Alex Bruce.
You are the one who mentioned the lack of some kind of notice that they had no future with the association as if it had some kind of meaning.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Bruce and Camp (and many others in this and other countries) have looked at their lack on involvement with the national teams (ROI and England), have looked at the number and quality of players which are ahead of them in the pecking order, and have come to the conclusion that they had only a very remote chance of a future in the national team. They were fortunate enough to have a back-up option due to citizenship, though Bruce has already burned that bridge in some fans' eyes.
The is clearly different from some of the players who've declared for the ROI who were obviously going to be involved with NI at international level.
In my opinion, the best counter-argument to the claims of poaching would be to find a player who declared for NI after underage training/caps for another association that still considered the player a valuable player at senior level.
Charlie, I am aware of your strong opinion on this subject from other discussions with you! But out of interest, isn't success the objective of all managers and what ultimately we demand of them?Therefore, should picking the best players regardless of background or history be accepted? When the players are out on the ground, don't we support them 100%? I am genuinely interested in your opinion on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I'd guess at this stage of his career and ability, if Bruce did get a NI cap, he would feel honoured by the award :)
I'd have little doubt that O'Neill has talked to the player and sussed him out. I don't know what NI's needs are now at central defense, but O'Neill is a smart enough guy to take on board other views and measure them up to the needs of the team to have some back-up.
Obviously O'Neill doesn't inherit old backward grudges which don't resonate with a man of his intelligence. Like any sound manager, he takes over the job and approaches all available 'talent' with a fresh approach. Similar in a way when Kerr invited Roy Keane back, whatever happened previous was not the concern of Kerr. Bruce is an available player, just like any other available player.
On the basis of certain posters, the point from 2 days ago still stands.
Though to be fair to NB, at least he's being consistent. Unlike his rotund colleague who'll say pretty much anything that suits, not least in person...
;)
And why distinguish Bruce from the likes of Ryan Brobbel, Johnny Gorman, Tony Kane or Michael O'Connor who similarly participated in FAI set-ups before playing for NI without their broad support taking any issue with it? Is it just that Bruce is of a higher profile and happened to play for us at senior level? Is it because he expressly shunned NI when offered the opportunity to play for them in the past? Didn't O'Connor implicitly shun NI when he opted to play for the FAI before returning to the IFA for careerist reasons after concluding that an international future with the FAI would be unlikely? Why is his path deemed acceptable but Bruce's not?Quote:
Originally Posted by boovidge