Ref was woeful the whole game. Lets hope we don't get a 'homer' on tuesday.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
Ref was woeful the whole game. Lets hope we don't get a 'homer' on tuesday.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
We'd definitely be ahead of Slovakia on GD, they're +2 with Russia, Armenia, and Macedonia left. We're +5 with a game with Andorra to come.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Also, looking at the results, not scoring against Slovakia last night isn't a shock. Especially given they've only conceded in two games so far. That's a fairly impressive stat (except for the 3 goals in Armenia obviously).
True. Plus it has to be remembered Slovakia were missing come of their best players against both us (the 1-1) and Armenia. Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if they drop points against Armenia on Tuesday. They might defend well but they find it very hard to score as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaFox
Remember, a 3 way tie means only results between the teams are counted, so probably it's points scored are considered first, then we are in 3rd place.
I ... "would be a bit disappointed with that".
holidaysong is correct. We can be separated by points, but it's not our 21 overall points that have any bearing. Our 21 overall points and overall goal difference aren't even tertiary criteria in dictating who finishes where when two or more teams finish on the same number of points. Essentially what finishing on an even number of overall points does is create a mini-league of two or three teams depending on how many finished on the same number of overall points. All results against those teams dictate the standing within that mini table. If we finish even on overall points with Slovakia alone, we'll finish ahead of them, but if we finish even with Slovakia and Russia on overall points after drawing with Russia, we'll be bottom of that trio.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
I posted up the tie-breaking criteria here. That was taking from the Wiki wording which I've double-checked is in the competition's regulations.
This will demonstrate what I mean. It's a version of Wikipedia's Euro 2012 qualifying page from before yesterday's set of games. Although the Group B table is updated as it is currently because it's an embedded template, the tie-breaker table is as it was when ourselves, Russia and Slovakia were all sitting on 13 overall points. From it, you can see that we were sitting third out of the three despite having a superior goal difference to Slovakia in the overall table.
Code:Team Pld W D L GF GA GD AG Pts
Slov. 2 1 1 0 2 1 +1 1 4
Russia 2 1 0 1 3 3 0 3 3
Ireland 2 0 1 1 3 4 −1 1 1
Goal difference isn't the primary deciding criterion. Points won in just those head-to-head games is.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Just to post up the tie-breaking criteria again because there appears to be some confusion as to where we would finish if Russia, Slovakia and ourselves all finish the group on 21 points after us having drawn in Moscow. We'd finish third in that scenario. Here are the tie-breaking criteria that would apply in such a scenario:
They can be found in article 7.04 of the Regulations of the UEFA European Football Championship 2010-12.Quote:
If two or more teams are equal on points on completion of the group matches, the following criteria are applied to determine the rankings.
- Higher number of points obtained in the group matches played among the teams in question
- Superior goal difference from the group matches played among the teams in question
- Higher number of goals scored in the group matches played among the teams in question
- Higher number of goals scored away from home in the group matches played among the teams in question
- If, after applying criteria 1) to 4) to several teams, two or more teams still have an equal ranking, the criteria 1) to 4) will be reapplied to determine the ranking of these teams. If this procedure does not lead to a decision, criteria 6) and 7) will apply
- Results of all group matches:
- Superior goal difference
- Higher number of goals scored
- Higher number of goals scored away from home
- Fair play conduct
- Drawing of lots
Let's wait oul 6 o'clock on Tuesday before we worry about this.
See, I think the possible permutations are crucial to how we should approach the game in Moscow. I don't think settling for a mere clean sheet or a draw at any point will be enough for us as it relinquishes responsibility and control over our own fate. Surely depending on results going against Slovakia and Russia isn't an option. Plus, there's then the highly likely scenario of us all finishing with 21 overall points and us being ranked third. That would be a devastating pill to swallow. For those reasons, I think going for three points in Moscow is the only option we have now. Is that a "knee-jerk" or "gung-ho" attitude? I don't really think it is. The game really is that crucial. I see it as a "cup final" all-or-nothing type of affair now. Of course, the other benefit of actually going all out for the win in Moscow is that a victory would pretty much secure top spot in the group for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
I think my primary fear is that Trap will set out for a 0-0. It is possible we could still qualify with such a result, but I think it's an unacceptable risk to take.
You say he is a confidence player. Well it won't help his confidence if his teammates don't pass to him - which they don't, unless it's an absolute last resort. Just watching the game back, and Doyle, Ward, Whelan and St. Ledger all chose not to pass to McGeady during the first half, when it seemed that it would have been the sensible option. On a couple of occasions, McGeady was in clear space, yet, they chose not to involve him. This suggests to me a clear and obvious lack of belief in McGeady's ability on the part of his teammates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Jesus Danny, I wrote in one sentence what took you 3 pages
That suggests to me that we did not have the semblance of a passing game, even when a player is free in space.Quote:
Originally Posted by freewheel30
Some of this took place during the first 15 minutes, when we were keeping it on the floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
So we were keeping it on the floor for a few minutes and had a semi-passing game going.
ok so we are ****ed then if we don't win on Tuesday.
Why? nicking a point over Moscow isn't even that big a deal because because knowing our luck Slovakia-Russia will be a draw (Slovakia beat Armenia & Macedonia 1-0 with 95th minute goals in both games) so we all end up on 21 points resulting us finishing 3rd.
Exactly. I never ever think of permutations for Ireland games as I always believe our first priority should be to win the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
If we fail to win on Tuesday we should them consider the permutations. No point concerning ourselves with the triviality of it beforehand.
I'm also hungover and hungry so I don't have the concentration levels to consider anything other than a fried egg and tea.
In my opinion, based on this one crucial scenario, I feel the argument of going 'gung ho' for a win isn't worth it. A draw is quite valuable. Obviously not as good as a win, but it can't be dismissed entirely.
Usually he'd get into good positions, skillfully round his marker, position to prepare to unleash either a cross or a shot and then 90% of the time produce the end product of the crowd having their head in their hands. He does actually have very good control, it was just off last night. Positionally he was forced back to cover Wards ineptness all night so didn't see the ball very much in attacking areas. I'd still start him against Russia if Trap devises a plan to sort out the LB area, if he plays the same gameplan again the Russians will target Ward all night long and McGeady will be forced backwards again to bail him out. Theres just no point playing McGeady if thats his primary job, there are better defensive wide players out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by freewheel30
The lesson there is:
Ireland without Kilbane is not an Ireland we want to see. :(
mcgeady behind a lone front man is something i'd be interested to see if trap insists on playing two CMs with no creativity in future.
is it fair to say that in the 10 minutes Hunt was on the pitch we had more chances and looked a better team than in the previous 80?
yes. but the team in general played with more urgency and slovakia were sitting back, happy with the point. i would start hunt on tuesday though.
So if he had came on with 20 minutes to go would we have shown a similar improvement?
How about 30? 40? 50?...90?
Lets face it the first 80 minutes will not get a result in Moscow, no doubt about that.
I don't think Cox was given enough credit either. He had a similar impact to Hunt, and was always trying to get involved.
agree, thought cox made a big difference when he came on. far more effective than doyle who i thought had his worst game for us friday. something not right with doyle, must be his knee, any word on this?Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaFox
Did anyone notice when Doyle turned around to go off, Robbie clapped and offered him his hand. Doyle pretty much blanked him. I've always thought the chemistry between those two could be better.
I though Doyle had a thankless task. He was always on the end of desperate passes in positions where he could add no value. A forward like Doyle needs his midfielders to carry the ball and be on the end of give-and-go passes. Instead, Doyle only ever got the ball in the "channel" and was offered no support from an advancing midfielder.
On another note, that game was crying out for Coleman at full back to add some pace and enthusiasm.
We've got to find a way to add more invention and fluency while retaining our defensive capability. I'm not a footy coach so don't know the answer, but having two mobile, confident full backs would seem to be a start.
For Russia I'd pick Kelly or Foley and move JOSH into the centre with Dunne. O'Dea has done well but I'm not sure he's what we need on Tuesday.
We were already putting pressure on Slovakia before Hunt came on, he was not responsible for Slovakia dropping deeper in those last minutes. Hunt was guilty of some sloppy play near the sideline but delivered an inch perfect cross which we should have converted.Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
But sure, Hunt should have replaced a clearly exhausted McGeady who was getting more sloppy near the the hour mark.
That cross was Hunt's only meaningful contribution.
O'Shea to go in the middle with Foley right back? Not sure I fully trust O'Dea just yet.
Swear I wasn't copying you Stutts...
I think he'll go with O'Dea at CB. I don't think O'Shea is aggressive enough for the Trap as a centre back. St Ledger is a massive loss.
Are our FB allowed to even cross the half way line? We could have Carlos & Cafu in the team & the Trap would probably tell them to play safe.
Just saw oshea is a doubt on sky sports news.
John O'Shea is now a major injury doubt according to SSN
^ Beat me to it
Bit late for a postmortem on this, so won't say too much, as having read mosts of the posts already i think its pretty much all been said.
I'd agree mostly with what was being said by murfinator and geysir though. Ward made two great blocks in the first half, but apart from that he was very poor, I thought he was effecting mcgeady getting forward and generally being more assertive going forward. He pulls in way too far from the touchline, defends like ian harte and doesn't offer anything going forward -for ireland anyway. Whatever about spatial awareness lacking in hunt, ward doesn't seem to possess any awareness. He floats about and pulls to far into the CB, leaving oceans of space out on the wing for a any decent winger to exploit, luckily for us it appeared slovakia didn't know how to do this or hadn't someone capable. When you are at a game you notice certain things that you don't see on TV as the camera generally only catches up once the ball is played into a certain area. Watching Ward worried me greatly and for some timely interceptions by mcgeady we could have easily conceded down that side. I said previously that ward was attributed to 5/6 goals against Wolves last season, and I believe against a more attacking or penetrative team we would have conceded through him on friday.
Huntie was not the messiah that created the impetus for us on friday, as was pointed out a couple of times he left ward out on his own when he should have been offering a channel pass or outlet for but he wasn't. He hit one sublime cross but he didn't offer much, granted he was only given a few minutes to do this, but I don't like the way Irish fans always have to find either a scapegoat or a pseudo-hero to pin point blame or reason for particular failings/mass improvements of a team or a manager. Mcgeady made some very timely interceptions in the second half and helped nullify potential fatal consequences when balls were played in over or behind Ward. That said I do think he should have been taken off early as seeing him off the ball he look wrecked.
Back to keane, I said in a different thread that he has easily missed as many(double i reckon) important chances as he has scored for us. Its extremely frustrating as most of the time they seem easier than more difficult ones he would get against lesser opposition - but that in itself might be saying something. However what he offered us, which wouldn't have been as clear for those on tele, was insightful and intelligent running, in behind the Slovakian defence and down into channels as was demonstrated perfectly when dunne played him in i think and he put across to cox, who should clearly have laid if off to andrews for a near definite goal. Keane was doing this all night, but no one was picking him out, or even trying to pick him out. He must have got very frustrated but he was the only alternative to the high ball hoofs to doyle, who was also clearly getting frustrated as it was food and drink to the physically superior and imposing slovak CBs. Keanes problem is that unlike good/great keepers who might not be called about for 80 mins, will pull off a great reflex save, if he is not constantly in the game, when these rare opportunities occur if he has been out of play for a while, he seems rusty/nervous/unsure/whatever and just cant finish them. We still need him though especially when all we seem to do is hoof it forward.
Finally, the longer term servants/respected members on here, were saying how we had progressed, Trap has made us very solid defensively etc etc even up until a month ago, they were also getting caught up a couple of years ago with the hysteria against france and italy games mainly, haven't seemed to realise that what Trap has done is basically negate any attacking capabilities from the team to make us defensively very solid, which is what most have come around to seeing. I actually think we look less like scoring now than we did then, and yes we do concede less, buts its an almost exponential curve really. Under stan or mc, we looked just as likely scoring as we did conceding most of the time. Trap has changed the way we play, stopped our full backs attacking, makes our midfielders sit back, and do nothing just hold a line. gets our best forward option to track back and gets our wingers to defend. ANY team would concede a lot less playing like this. I mean Kerr has managed it at the faroes, but yet they are more attack minded. It is SIMPLE to make a team hard to beat if you knock out any attacking ability going forward. You reap what you sow, and what trap has done has completely negated our attack, but made us very difficult to score against. Its not science, just pretty simple and clear.
I would love more than anything for us to qualify, but I would not like to see us like Greece did in Euro 2004 and bore everyone to death at the Euros and getting to say a semi final. Many people i spoke to after the game were of the opinion, if we lost 3-2 but played some decent football, they would have been more content with that.
OH ya on Dunnes chance and keanes, ledge definitely put dunne off, but i don't think its an excuse to completely miss the target. Again when the cameras went off dunne he look at ledge as if to say what were you doing.
On keanes chance, mypost is in the clouds again, unless put of by skrtels shoulder blade, keane completely mis-timed his jump. Even so, he could and should have still got that header on target. What i didn't figure out though was, the linesman appeared to give it as off-side, but that didn't come through on the TV afterwards?!?!
Either way, the way we play those chances HAVE to be taken if we are expected to win any tight games or games against relatively same or higher standing teams.
Great post Paul, but for the record I have identified that the challenge is to add invention to the defensive solidity we have. For me, using our full backs to better attacking effect would seem like a logical start. I also feel that if Keane was in the game more he'd have taken that chance. None of our better players ever get a proper feel for the ball as the supply is so erratic. Good goalkeeping analogy.
Trap's methods are a means to an end - an end that justifies any method in my mind. Despite such a flat, sterile performance, only a couple of brain farts from our most experienced players cost us the 3 points, so that's why I'm backing off slating Trap.
I'm not necessarily slating him though, I'm just saying what he has done since he came in, and what he has achieved. You are asking him to change his way by keeping us compact and defensive minded but yet having attacking full backs. That is not how he works. So thats not going to change, how many times did you hear people shouting at oshea/ward, "run","overlap", "go ahead" on Friday? I'm sure instinctively thats what they wanted to do, but have been warned not to.
Our midfield was crowded out. On occasion it was effectively 5 against 2. Slovakia played with two low lying midfielders so our long ball tactics to Doyle with no midfield support was pointless to the extreme. Ward was caught out of position but there was an unbalance to the midfield that drew him in. If you want to consistently score goals in football you need to pull the opposition's defensive line out of position and get in behind them. It's near impossible to do so with how we play. I don't think our players failed us on the night, our tactics did.
I like that last line, but you still cant defend a 50+ striker from missing that chance, or a seasoned CB completely mis-directing - or just not directing at all - a simple header. But thats something I've been trying to say for a long time now with regards to Trap, you put it sharp and concise :)
The thing is though, I don't think they are going to change whilst Trap is in charge. Unless some of the senior players like cunningham and giles were saying should do what they want/think the team need to do as they are undroppable.
It'd be nice to see us able to adapt to the 5 man midfield alright. That said, the tactic of doing eff all but waiting for the inevitable great chance very nearly paid off.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Paul, when people criticised our perceived lack of tactical response to going down against Georgia they overlooked the fact that our full backs changed their roles. The same happened in Bari. I think Trap knows it's in our locker - but he only appears to endorse it if we're down. Also, I think Ward looked to get forward but lacked the confidence to do anything other than giove it to McGeady. O'Shea didn't look like a natural full back at all.
The game was crying out for Seamus Coleman at RB, but then we might have lost.
Good post Paul, but how long would it have been if you did decide to say much?Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea