yeah, more expansive quotes from Dunne here
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-35031411.html
yeah, more expansive quotes from Dunne here
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-35031411.html
Here's Johnny Giles' take (apologies if already posted):
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-35030595.html
MARTIN O’Neill thought that Ireland were magnificent to come away from Belgrade with a point. I didn’t. In fact, I would say the opposite.
Against the worst international goalkeeper I have ever seen and a Serbian team which was very poor, Ireland only played when they had to.
I would almost say that, in the context of this game, Jeff Hendrick’s early goal was the worst thing that could have happened.
The team mindset after the goal went into reverse and I can only put that down to O’Neill.
The players dropped off and handed possession over to Serbia, a team which in my eyes was decent going forward but awful in most other aspects of the game.
They were there to be beaten and that was never more clearly illustrated than in the passage of play late in the game when Ireland were on the front foot and searching desperately for an equaliser.
They got the goal and that was all about heart and commitment. As I’ve always said, that’s the default position for the vast majority of lads who pull on the green shirt.
So why was the approach which secured an equaliser not valid throughout the game and where was the good football Ireland played in France?
I cannot accept the excuse that the pitch made it difficult to play simply because Serbia managed to pass the ball when they were on the front foot, despite the mudbath.
Fortunately, the Serbs were awful at the back when Ireland applied even the slightest pressure and that’s what I saw in the very first minutes of the game.
But Ireland slipped into a pattern we have seen all too often under O’Neill, ceded ground to Serbia and lost two goals. It could have been more.
I have always felt that the inconsistencies in O’Neill’s approach to managing Ireland have cost the team and that he almost stumbled upon a formula that works in France.
It did take more than two years for him to reach the point where he felt able to pick the same players for consecutive games but better late than never was my attitude.
Inconsistent selection policy leads to inconsistent performance and there is no argument against the proposition that Ireland have had very distinct highs and lows since he took over the job.
This game against Serbia was a chance to bring the momentum from France into the World Cup qualifying campaign, but I saw very few of the good things that made Euro 2016 a qualified success for O’Neill and Ireland.
Put it this way, this was more like the way the team played against Belgium than they the way they played against Italy.
I saw very little evidence of lessons learned. Ireland continually gave the ball to Serbia after Hendrick scored and had they had a couple more players like Dusan Tadic and Filip Kostic, it could have been a very bad night indeed.
With Austria winning in Georgia, Ireland would have been playing catch-up from the very start and that is never good.
As it was, Serbia did manage to build up a head of steam which threatened to overwhelm Ireland at times and I do give great credit to the players for digging their way out of a bad position late in the game to get the equaliser.
Even then, though, I thought the chance was there to go and win the game, but Ireland ended up hanging on for their lives and could have lost the game in the last few minutes but for heroics from Seamus Coleman.
The manager sets the tone and that is true for a good team and a bad team. O’Neill sets the tone for Ireland.
France killed the myth that Ireland doesn’t have footballers who can get the ball down and play good, controlled, positive football.
Ireland do have players who can play but from what I saw in Belgrade, they weren’t encouraged to do just that.
O’Neill said after the game that this point could prove vital when the final sums are done in Group D.
That’s a more than glass half full approach. You could just as easily say that the two points dropped will be crucial in the end.
This was a lucky point which should have been three.
Comparisons will only get you so far. Wales after all lost to Bosnia away (2-0) and could only draw 0-0 at home to them in the qualifiers. I don't think they're world beaters because they did well in the Euros as did Iceland. Didn't they lose to England ? They don't score a lot of goals. They have some average Championship players in their side (I know we have some as well). I'd say there is a toss of a coin between us. Unlike trips to Belgrade and other continental capitals, I don't think we'll go with an inferiority complex despite the performance against Scotland. Just as our performance against Italy and the first half against France is history, so too is the Welsh performance at the Euros. They are a team that stuttered to beat Andorra in qualifying. We can beat them and they can beat us. I wouldn't bet on either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
I agree with both Giles and Dunne to certain degree, I said after the Italy game, it was a second string side, who seemed to lack any real conviction, but we still played decent foobtall albeit we had a lot of time on the ball we normally wouldn't get. I said after France however I felt that we tired and had we not tired and some stupid individual mistakes, which for certain members are becoming more consistent, bar an inability or unwillingness to change things from management we could have really given France a good game of it over 90 mins rather than 50 mins. But I also agree with Dunne it that in wasn't that great of a Euros, and as usual people blew things out of proportion. That's said I still know we showed enough ability to play better than we did for 60-70 minutes against Serbia the last day.
Address the ball retention - or if we insist on hoofing then lets actually practice it in training and find some good plays for it. Lets use it to our advantage. IF there is a wall of red in front then there must be space in behind that we can exploit.
Owls I agree with most of what you have said, but they have shown an abillity to more often than not play football, play a good passing game and also to soak up pressure and counter with some precise and intricate passing. We can't do that. So they have a clear advantage over us.
I think we were a mile away from the quarters actually. France completely outplayed us, particularly once they realised we weren't great and dispensed with Kanté (holding mid) and brought on Coman.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
And that's after we were arguably lucky enough to get through to the knock-outs in the first place, with Italy resting nine players against us.
In the Euros, Belgium thumped us 3-0; Wales beat Belgium 3-1.
We squeaked through as the fifth-best of the third-placed teams; Wales topped their group.
Wales have a young improving team; we have an ageing team.
We started the campaign with one of the worst performances I've ever seen from an Irish team, in which we were lucky to get a point when certainly all three were available. Wales started it with a comprehensive win. Granted, we were away to the third seeds and they were home to the bottom seeds, but still. I think we'd all be thrilled with a 4-0 win over Moldova later on.
It's far too simplistic to say Bale is the only difference between the teams, and downright incorrect to say we'd be better than them if, say, Bale was injured/suspended.
Though one "advantage" we do have is that we at least know their players well, and won't be that daunted by them.
its all doom and gloom really. we should just give it all upQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
England battered Wales at the Euro's yet went home in the 2nd round. Wales went on to reach the semi finals. It was also a dog **** group when compared to the group we found ourselves in. Comparing the Belgian team we ended up playing at a tournament vs the team Wales played doesn't really tell you that much. Belgium were under pressure to deliver big time after their performance against Italy in the opening game.
It was also nowhere near the opening 2004 qualifying game vs Russia in terms of ineptitude!!
We got a point away from home in a tricky opener. Most people would have taken that a minute before kick off.
We'll have to agree to disagree then OF. I dont think that we are aiming realistically for first place. We have never finished first in a qualifying campaign and i dont see any reason to suggest we should be setting those targets this time. We have to aim for second place and a playoff game to qualify in all reality. Wales and Austria are better than us. Serbia are about the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
Now, to be clear, im not saying we need to throw the baby out with the bath water and completely overhaul the starting 11 as well as the entire squad - what im saying is that it would be a low risk strategy to bring in 5-7 of our younger, more promising players and still maintain our core 11-15 players. This doesnt impact our ability to aim for 2nd in any way - and it really, in my opinion, wouldnt materially impact our ability to aim for first if that was the target you feel should be set.
I guess i am frustrated at seeing the same old same old from Irish managers from campaign to campaign. We have young players performing very well at Championship and League 1 level and they need to be blooded sooner rather than later. Why wait until we can't qualify? As many say it is very difficult to bring in and blood new players part way through a campaign even when qualification is not possible.
I dont know if MON, Keano and Delaney sit down before a campaign and set minimum targets (if they dont they should) but those targets should include a goal to bring in any promising young players. You think we are selecting the best squad of players, i think there are 5-7 players who are dead wood and it would make no difference to our goals if we were to replace them and do some planning for the future. I dont think what i am saying is off the wall in that regard.
Sorry about the multi-quoting but you made so many points, and I think they're very selective in what you're choosing to deem relevant and choosing to omit.
We lost by a goal, one of which resulted from a wrong decision when we should have had a corner. McClean had a brilliant opportunity to set up Murphy for an equaliser after we went behind (and before we went down to ten men, I think?). France were much, much better in the second half but we weren't miles away at all. You know what they always say about one goal leads! Plus we could have easily gone two ahead in that first half the way it developed. If we had somebody like Bale he could easily have made the difference, which was what you were disputing initially. We weren't that far away even without him, despite being comprehensively outplayed in the second half when fatigue was a massive factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
We didn't deserve to beat France or anything, don't get me wrong, but we could have with a break or two (or maybe even a level playing field with regards the gaps between our last group game compared to theirs).
We were arguably unlucky not to beat Sweden. We should have had a penalty at 0-0 against Belgium, all ifs and buts. We got through because we got enough points to get through, however they came about. Italy were still a good side, and arguably better than anything Wales played in their group, bar maybe England, who they deservedly lost to.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Before the Euros, Bosnia beat Wales 2-0, we beat Bosnia 2-0. We beat Germany, they drew with Israel. We could do this forever!Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
We were the second best of the third placed teams actually, if we were fifth best we'd have been knocked out. Anyway, Portugal only qualified as third best of the third placed teams so hardly an exact science, as we clearly weren't better than the eventual champions. I would also suggest we had a significantly tougher group but obviously Wales had to play Belgium eventually as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The age profile of our team could change fairly dramatically as the campaign progresses. I could see the likes of Duffy becoming ever present and maybe Clark working his way back in. McCarthy will probably replace Whelan full time. Those changes alone would reduce the average age significantly. We'll see how it develops but we may have predominantly players in their prime or younger as it goes on I think, along with two or three warhorses.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Incomparable really. I'd still take our start over theirs. We might not beat Moldova 4-0, but we will beat them. I reckon Wales would be pretty satisfied with a draw in Serbia if it was offered now.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Most of what you have said above is far more simplistic I think. I agree with you overall though outside of debating some of the points. The difference Bale makes to Wales is immeasurable though... would they have even qualified for the Euros without him?... highly doubtful. They've actually been quite blessed that despite all his injuries it hasn't impacted on them over the past couple of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I don't think we have any obvious advantages. I agree that they are better than us right now, no doubt about it really in my mind. But all to play for!Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Let's keep this simple.
We are not comparable to, or maybe better then, Wales without Bale. The easiest way to see this is to watch the two teams play football.
To argue this case is pure fantasy.
That doesn't mean, as jbyrne has somehow concluded, that I reckon we should all pack it in. But a bit of realism wouldn't be any harm.
This Irish team does not have a Ronnie Whelan or Liam Brady, a Johnny Giles or Roy Keane that is a world class midfielder who can control the tempo of a game. It's crazy to think of the world class midfielders that we used to have, but like with Scotland in the past, we probably punched well above our weight in producing top players.
We do have a very decent midfield in my opinion though. Hendrick has it in his locker to be a very good player, Arter is a good premiership player who could be very good in the next few years and McCarthy for all his faults is certainly a decent player. Wes is Wes and while he isn't world class, he certainly has the ability to be a standout player against Serbia, Austria or Wales. If Brady plays in midfield, he is potentially top class.
I agree with Giles. There is a mindset in this Irish team that means that while we are never beaten against any team, we are never comfortable either - how many of the Irish team really believe that they could go to Austria or Wales and win. 1 or 2 at a push I reckon - Brady and Hendrick would be those two. Most would take the solid draw and feel that we could beat them in Dublin. In contrast, our three rivals would see the group for what it is - 4 teams of even enough ability who would be poor 2nd seed to average 3rd seed standard in most normal situations. In saying that, I do feel the Serbs have a number of top players, Austria have Alaba and Bale is one of the best players in the world.
This group is there for the taking. Look at Sweden. They have France, Holland and even Bulgaria to contend with. There are other groups with 3-4 very good teams. This is by no means the poorest group, but it is far far from being the hardest.
The mindset can't be to get a playoff. It has to be to go into every game believing that you can win every game. I would be concerned that MON's attitude will shoot us in the foot throughout the campaign. I could see us remaining unbeaten and finishing 2nd or 3rd in the group.
Anyhow, for what it's worth;
Ireland 1 Georgia 0 (Ireland scrape it with a bit of luck. Georgia control the tempo of the game with some lovely football and bemoan lacking a bit of nous which cost them against Austria).
Moldova 1 Ireland 3 (Ireland dominant in this game with a very good performance)
Austria 1 Ireland 1 (Ireland score early on, but sit back and concede. We leave fortunate with the draw).
Republic of Ireland 1 Wales 1 (a good entertaining draw).
Republic of Ireland 2 Austria 1 (Ireland produce their best performance of the campaign).
Georgia 0 Ireland 0 (Georgia finally pick up points against a poor Ireland).
Rep of Ireland 1 Serbia 1 (Serbia run the show and good Irish luck prevents them from winning comfortably. Ireland escape with a draw).
Rep of Ireland 3 Moldova 0 (routine victory for Ireland)
Wales 1 Ireland 1 (another derby draw)
By my reckoning, we will get our usual gold standard Irish 18 points!!Depending on how the group pans out, that would probably get us into the playoff. I have this nasty feeling that Georgia could be an Armenia over the course of it, hopefully we won't be the ones to suffer.
"Most people who have taken that a minute before kick off. "
Shaker, thats possibly a fair argument, and normally realistic against opposition we are familiar against, but we didn't really know what Seriba were like. We should be able adapt our play, our tactics, our fromation and our players depending on how the game unfolds in front of us. The game is evolvable and transpires to be during the course of a match, we should also evolve to use it to achieve our best possible outcome. In this sense playing a bit of pall pressuring their back four and keeper and going for the win, not settlings on a 1-0 hope we miraculously pull through.
Lots on here have said I'd have taken that before kick off. I dont understand why that is used as a defence in the discussion. It means nothing, its about context.
They clearly play better football, but do you think they would have qualified for the Euros without him? I think it's a slightly relevant question seeing as we did qualify without him!Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I agree this isn't a bad group at all. Wales have Bale, but they're still the top seeds everyone wanted. Austria had a poor Euros, and Serbia seem to be a basketcase of a team (even according to Serbians I know)
But there's no way on earth we're going to go through the group unbeaten.
Wales qualified over a year ago. It's two years since Bale was dragging Wales to a win on a God-awful pitch in Andorra.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
I think their team has come on in leaps and bounds since then. They're playing decent football, they've a young team with quality players and a very solid defence, and while I can acknowledge that they quite possibly wouldn't have qualified without Bale - you'd imagine play-offs at best - that was 12 months ago. I think the Euros has done them the power of good, and we're still playing dire defensive ****e that means we could well take a tanking some game.
Okay, so you think Wales have improved an awful lot since qualifying. Fair enough, I don't really see that despite watching most of their games over that time. Other players upped their game a little in France but I'd put that down to tournament football more than anything. He scored two and set up one the other night, and his shot led to the corner from which the other goal was scored. It's more of the same I think. He's involved in practically everything good that they do in an attacking sense. It would be interesting to see them over a few games without him actually.
Agree with this. The game script should determine what you are happy with, not any pre-game retrospective. We didnt perform against a poor Serbian team until we went behind and then showed what we could do. It was really disappointing - a lost opportunity to make a statement of intent to the rest of the group.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
In reality, it applies to tournament performances too. If you sh!t the bed and lose a winnable game in the 2nd round then there is scant comfort received in saying "ah well, we would have taken a second round appearance". It should be no defence or distraction of a terrible performance either. Its the 90 minutes that matter.
It's not a defence, the performance was dreadful, everybody accepts that.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I agree Bale is an exceptional player at the heart of a lot they do. To score 7 of Wales' 11 goals in the last qualifying says a lot.
But they've a very solid defence, which Bale isn't really a part of. And I think it's fair to say we've had more than our share of luck in recent games - Monday night an obvious example, but even the Germany game at home we were appalling for the first half, and if Germany hadn't been so lax in front of goal, the game would have been over by half-time.
It worries me that our luck has to change soon.
And of the four he didn't score, he assisted two and was directly involved in another. I'm not saying that to labour the point though, but basically Wales would have only scored one goal without him. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
You're right to be worried about our luck changing, but I'd be more hopeful that our performances might improve to the point that we're not as reliant on luck. Probably wishful thinking though.