Republic of Ireland V Oman 3rd September 2014 & Georgia 7th September 2014

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton

Slight deflection but big result, it gave it all that dip and spin. Was off the back of Ward or O'Shea (can't remember who was directly in front of the shot) but they discussed it quite a bit on Sky at HT, which I was watching in RTE-less Belfast.

---

I thought the shot deflected off the back of a Georgian, what else could explain the movement of the ferociously hit ball except a deflection of sorts.
Forde correctly positioned off his line had no chance and I doubt there's a player on the planet now who could have saved it.
A goalie would need the elastic agility of a Peter Bonetti to adjust and have a chance to make the save and they don't exist nowadays. Henry in 2006 scored past Given in his prime with (imo) a similar but much more saveable shot.

edit, I see that Joe has already made a similar point in his reply.

Indeed, it was the Georgian striker. Had thought it was a defender but they still wern't close enough to the shot to even get a touch on it (boom boom).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

Agreed. Thunderous dipping shot, damn all he could do about it.

---

Nonsense, if he has been standing on a bar stool by the left hand post he would probably have saved it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

It is a bit like a continuation of the Trap era with the Hoolahan debate. Fans seem to love him. Managers don't.

---

There must be something to it. Fans don't have to worry a hoot about the responsibilities a manager does; they have the luxury to be idealistic (or reckless and irresponsible).

Was there really a deflection? My instinct in real time was that it had to have been but in the replays it looked like a clean hit. I just thought Forde didn't take a step sideways because he thought at the moment it was struck that it was going over. If he had anticipated the top spin he'd have taken a simple step to his left and tipped it over.

That's how I saw it, no deflection. Happy to be corrected though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

There must be something to it. Fans don't have to worry a hoot about the responsibilities a manager does; they have the luxury to be idealistic (or reckless and irresponsible).

---

I think O'Neill does rate Hoolahan. O'Neill himself said afterwards that he had overrated the opposition which explains the cautious selection. I'd be surprised if Hoolahan doesn't start several of the remaining non-Gibraltar games. He was brilliant against Italy showing he can press high up the pitch more effectively than anyone else. He put to bed the notion that he's a luxury player only of use in possession.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Was there really a deflection? My instinct in real time was that it had to have been but in the replays it looked like a clean hit. I just thought Forde didn't take a step sideways because he thought at the moment it was struck that it was going over. If he had anticipated the top spin he'd have taken a simple step to his left and tipped it over.

That's how I saw it, no deflection. Happy to be corrected though.

---

I thought there was. It definitely appears to just take a little nick off the back of the Georgian striker and the Sky guys certainly analysed it enough. It also helps explain the fairly crazy dip.

Judge for yourselves:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAXiJCGqNdE

Deflection and Forde is blameless. No deflection and I'd be critical, but objectively so.

Speaking of deflections, we were lucky a Georgian shot in the first half came off the inside of O'Shea's leg yet still managed to go further wide. Almost every time I've ever seen an inside leg deflection it's trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

Judge for yourselves:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAXiJCGqNdE

---

Ah, ok. So it hot the 9 in the back (edit: upper left arm?) which is what put the top spin on it? Not conclusive but quite likely.

Forde's post-goal reaction was one of surprise. I can relate to that. Keepers react almost instantaneously to a shot, in terms of judging angles etc. It did look like Forde set himself as if there was no danger and then all of a sudden there was.

No. 9 didn't flinch though, which I'd expect if he'd been hit, but it was probably a graze more than anything else.

Yeah I'm the exact same as Stutts on this. If there is a deflection it changes everything. To be fair it would explain the crazy dip so ye're probably right. It takes a hell of a lot away from the goal itself also if it is the case. God knows where it would have ended up without the nick, even if it is a slight one.

I'd say #9 did flinch. He looks like somebody who, if he wasn't grazed by the ball, was very close to it. With the power in that shot, all it would take is a skim to go off course like that.

Strange that we now expect an unparalleled (in the universe) standard of goalkeeping from an old timer and an away performance against an east european nation far surpassing anything that we have managed before, since the break up of the USSR. MON and Keano should put in for raise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Yeah I'm the exact same as Stutts on this. If there is a deflection it changes everything. To be fair it would explain the crazy dip so ye're probably right. It takes a hell of a lot away from the goal itself also if it is the case. God knows where it would have ended up without the nick, even if it is a slight one.

---

And it completely changes the impending lucky manager accusations! David Kelly and the Indo sports department have probably already compiled a list of reasons why O'Neill is a lucky manager, discrediting our 100pc record after 7 games.

Caught the World Champions on a wet night, Poland's players didn't like their away strip, our critical 6th goal against Gibraltar was offside, Marshall's blatant upending of Shane Long in the penalty box drew an unsportsmanlike appeal for a penalty from Robbie Brady...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

And it completely changes the impending lucky manager accusations! David Kelly and the Indo sports department have probably already compiled a list of reasons why O'Neill is a lucky manager, discrediting our 100pc record after 7 games.

---

He's also cowardly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Strange that we now expect an unparalleled (in the universe) standard of goalkeeping from an old timer and an away performance against an east european nation far surpassing anything that we have managed before, since the break up of the USSR. MON and Keano should put in for raise.

---

I am with you in spirit but our record in ex-USSR is decent. Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Armenia, Georgia, even Mother Russia herself. No worries there. Hungary and our last outing in Bulgaria were decent destinations, and Albania wasn't a disaster.

Our record in ex-Jug of Saliva is much less impressive.

There's Eastern Europe and Yugoslav Eastern Europe!

Is it really that critical to have thought Forde should have saved that shot without having seen the deflection? I think we have reasonable expectations of Forde.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Is it really that critical to have thought Forde should have saved that shot without having seen the deflection? I think we have reasonable expectations of Forde.

---

Just to say, I'm not calling for Forde's head as a result of that goal going in; it's because I feel Westwood is the better keeper, and that if we're to use the ball better from the last line of defence (or first line of offence) then Westwood is the man, while also being the better keeper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Yeah I'm the exact same as Stutts on this. If there is a deflection it changes everything. To be fair it would explain the crazy dip so ye're probably right. It takes a hell of a lot away from the goal itself also if it is the case. God knows where it would have ended up without the nick, even if it is a slight one.

---

I have it down loaded in HD and watching on VLC player, they used to have a good frame advance and slow motion
on it but that seem to have been removed. I can't see a deflection (does not appear to hit anyone) but it does look
like there was one, seems to be sliced one way and then move back the other, maybe the effects of wind and spin.
Pretty unsavable really as it is only at reachable height when it crosses the goal line.
I think maybe he should be on the goal line and closer to his left had post.

Having seen fordes position and being right behind the goal for their goal it looked like he curled it - no deflection. when watched after on the the telly it looked more like he got his boot under it on the lips, looks can be deceiving though - forde was too slow and his positional awareness was all over the shop so he was never going to be able adjust himself quick enough he hasn't that agility or ability.

Of course, McGeady has previous in turns like that: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1h...-rangers_sport

Ward at fault for the goal ... O'Shea was covering one side and then Ward back off and gave him room to shoot ..... i would not start him again .... move Wilson to the left back and bring in Keogh or Delaney

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swinfordfc

Ward at fault for the goal ... O'Shea was covering one side and then Ward back off and gave him room to shoot ..... i would not start him again .... move Wilson to the left back and bring in Keogh or Delaney

---

I would dispute who was at fault for that goal anyone.

There is little dispute about Wilson's massive blunder earlier which nearly lead to an easy goal.

You can excuse the Ward/OShea goal because it required an extra ordinary shot, there is little to mitigate Wilsons error.

I thought Ward did a decent job, brought the ball forward will and we looked less chaotic when he was bringing the ball forward.l

I don't think it took a deflection, but it is very difficult to say for sure as it moved pretty wildly through the air.

OK, geometry's not my strong-point and I'm not sure I have sufficient knowledge of the requisite terminology, but... I've paused the video (admittedly, poor quality footage) and have caught it as the ball is about to pass over the head of Gelashvili. The ball is blurry, but the motion blur is actually helpful here. It is crucial to working out the ball's trajectory. Two distinct white blobs can be seen in close proximity to one another; they indicate two separate positions in the air through which the ball passed as it flew towards the goal. I've appropriately connected them up and continued the connecting red line back to Okriashvili's foot, the point of origin. Three connecting "co-ordinates" or points of reference ensure greater accuracy than just two. The ball didn't start to dip until it had passed in front of the black Adidas sponsorship board in the background and it would appear from the rough path the ball was taking at this exact moment indicated by the red line that it would not even have skimmed off Gelashvili's back or head.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...ps4257b155.png

To be honest, I think I could have been more generous and drawn the line at a greater angle from the ground out of Okriashvili's foot; that would mean the ball would have passed over Gelashvili's head at a slightly greater height than illustrated by the line I've actually drawn.

By the way, who did that Pythagoras fella play for?

Interesting angle there Danny. Still think there might have been a slight nick on it, and it would only have to be a mere skim for it to cause chaos to a shot struck that well.

There's was a mystery about a US president getting shot in the 60s that you could look into next if you've got a spare five minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

I don't think it took a deflection, but it is very difficult to say for sure as it moved pretty wildly through the air.

OK, geometry's not my strong-point and I'm not sure I have sufficient knowledge of the requisite terminology, but... I've paused the video (admittedly, poor quality footage) and have caught it as the ball is about to pass over the head of Gelashvili. The ball is blurry, but the motion blur is actually helpful here. It is crucial to working out the ball's trajectory. Two distinct white blobs can be seen in close proximity to one another; they indicate two separate positions in the air through which the ball passed as it flew towards the goal. I've appropriately connected them up and continued the connecting red line back to Okriashvili's foot, the point of origin. Three connecting "co-ordinates" or points of reference ensure greater accuracy than just two. The ball didn't start to dip until it had passed in front of the black Adidas sponsorship board in the background and it would appear from the rough path the ball was taking at this exact moment indicated by the red line that it would not even have skimmed off Gelashvili's back or head.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/c...ps4257b155.png

To be honest, I think I could have been more generous and drawn the line at a greater angle from the ground out of Okriashvili's foot; that would mean the ball would have passed over Gelashvili's head at a slightly greater height than illustrated by the line I've actually drawn.

By the way, who did that Pythagoras fella play for?

---

I have figured out how to use slow motion on the VLC player, I also downloaded
a HD version of the game. If it did hit him anywhere it hit him on the top of the
head but it is hard to say, he certainly didn't claim it as his.
I have a frame of the ball just before his head and just after.


http://i57.tinypic.com/2ch95ag.jpg

http://i59.tinypic.com/23ib97a.jpg

Can you get it on/over his head? :o

http://i58.tinypic.com/a9sjrq.jpg





http://i57.tinypic.com/2ch95ag.jpghttp://i61.tinypic.com/30w2wsl.jpg

You're getting there. Just a little closer now... :confused:

Never has such in depth analysis gone into a golazo. Applaud it and move on. Do any of you enjoy watching good football? :)
Wilson's fault anyway. Too close to his man on a long ball. Can think of 4 times in the match he did that. Wouldn't see it in the AUL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Can you get it on/over his head? :o

---

Don't thinks so, the images I posted are two consecutive frames I think,
however I might be able to get more images from different views.
I got the HD version form here
http://forum.rojadirecta.es/forumdis...ull-matches%29

Wait, you're discussing mathematics now? This is a football forum, just draw an optically wobbly (possibly, but not certainly, deflected) line under the matter and get yourselves a drink. Then you can discuss whether the line you've drawn is actually not 100% straight, or if it's just the beer talking.

Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.

That goal was Ward's fault, as usual...

Which other goals were Ward's fault? Kazakhstan was his fault for giving away the free kick (then the entire defence screwed up) but overall his deficiencies have more been letting players in behind him and, usually, cleaning up in a haphazard fashion. He's more of a player who makes you nervous than a player who actually costs you goals.

Odd things was bother Ward and O'Shea backed off the guy, O'Shea first, which might excuse Ward somewhat,
but he continue backing off until he lined up to shoot. I think even watching it live I was thinking, don't back
off there, because I smelt danger. I think maybe they were thinking about not leaving huge gaps in front of goal
and getting more central and not expecting a shot from there. However they were very wrong, sloppy defending.
I am generally OK with Stephen Ward though, he has a decent all round game, other options there are more
one dimensional. He started out as striker I think and hence is not so defensively minded, not a natural in that
position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tricky_colour

Odd things was bother Ward and O'Shea backed off the guy, O'Shea first, which might excuse Ward somewhat,
but he continue backing off until he lined up to shoot. I think even watching it live I was thinking, don't back
off there, because I smelt danger. I think maybe they were thinking about not leaving huge gaps in front of goal
and getting more central and not expecting a shot from there. However they were very wrong, sloppy defending.
I am generally OK with Stephen Ward though, he has a decent all round game, other options there are more
one dimensional. He started out as striker I think and hence is not so defensively minded, not a natural in that
position.

---

Is this an attempt at a poem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeathDrog

Is this an attempt at a poem?

---

It is a poem, granted I have not found a publisher yet.

Still haggling over fees.

Fair play Tricky & DI... if Forde showed that kind of decication he would have saved it, deflection or no deflection :p

O'Shea says it was deflected.

I'm not that critical of Ward in this situation. In hindsight every goal is someone's fault. Every goal is preventable in theory.

Overall I was very disappointed with our performance, we held possession but lacked any incision or decisiveness or want. We were very lucky to get out of there with a win. The players were so laboured in their approach, whenever we broke it was held up and played back most of the time. We should be using the pace of the players we possess to fix this, you don't have to go all out attack but there is a counter-balance.

Seamie Coleman is nowhere near the player for us that he is for Everton. Thats not to say he wont be but he doesnt offer the same attacking threat and he is a little more shakey in the defensive duties, his crosses were hit and miss, some very good some poor. I think O'Shea looked the most competent back for us the last day without doing an awful lot.

People are saying Wilson was poor, he did make a couple of mistakes but he made 4 defensive headers in the first half that got us the ball back as he placed them, he also took the ball well on the ground a few times and kept us trying to play football out from the back - but a Defender who can play the ball is all well and good but if he can't defend then he really isn't worth much. It seems we have some defenders who can play a bit of ball but can't do their main job well. I still think Wilson is decent though. He doesnt give me the same jitters as say Ward or Forde.

Stutts and I agreed upon Wards best position during the oman game, its halfway between the 18 yard box and the halfway line, right out on the touchline. He looked ok the last day because they were so poor going forward, and he offered something for us in attack as he shirked his defensive duties. He should have got closer for the goal, I think he is ok for these games but against Germany(or even poland and scotland) he is going to get found out again as usual. His positional sense is so poor, he gets pulled in and time and again ball after ball is hit over his head - any winger worth their salt in speed would have beaten him time and again sunday.

Forde is really awful, he doenst inspire any confidence and I got the feeling, as others did with me watching that the Defense don't fully trust him. I know O'shea says it was deflected but even if it was I dont think it made a huge difference in where it was going only in the dip, forde was just out as though expecting a cross or a ball across the 18 yard box, he was completely caught unaware and doesnt have the ability or speed to correct himself. A better keeper would have certainly got to it, maybe not saved it but Forde was way out of position - again this isnt clear on the tele as you cant see the position he picked up. He was all over the shop.

I think the whole shakeyness could point to the keeper also. We never looked as shakey with Shay in the backline giving orders and organising his defenders. Its an interesting theory that the confidence stems from 1 right the way through. For 2 years we have looked very poor vulnerable and nervy at the back.

I think O'Neill gave them too much respect and was a bit weak/over cautious. I was very disappointed with the approach especially in the last 20 when we were not creating anything, nothing. He brought off keane and didnt bring on hoolahan, we really need some incisive, through ball passing. We were playing the ball around the houses over and back, yet he thought to leave hoolahan the one man who can play that game, and keane the best person to make the runs and receive the passes, or just short interchanges with HOolahan. These lads were very poor, and O'Neill gave their midfield specifically too much respect. We could have been 2 or so up by the 70th with the right approach.

Midfield was ok, Mcgeady obviously had a great game his crosses were 25% better than normal as well. I don't think anyone stood out really, quinn did decent lots of running. McCarthy never got into it. Whelan was Whelan giving a masterclass in passing the ball backwards. I dont remember when i was last so bored watching them.

We lacked this Sunday http://balls.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/york.gif