Printable View
Not a bad article on O'Neill urging that the FAI broaden their horizons and look at other options. Kelly's summary of O'Neill's career is good I feel, his comments on his time at Sunderland mirror my own, and I hope if appointed, he adopts a more flexible approach to tactics than Trap did.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-29582194.html
Kelly's article seems to start out saying O'Neill isn't the only option available, then gives reasons why he's the best option, and then mentions some names right at the very end, but doesn't mention why they are options.
In fairness I think that's a decent article. He also forgot to mention that, as Geysir pointed out, a swift appointment would deprive us of months of speculation and debate on foot.ie. This should be a serious consideration. I know for a fact that at least 6 of us are season ticket holders.
I think MON, Keane and Mick all have positives and negatives but I'd be happy with any of them. I think Cuper would be riskier.
Despite MON having some ticks in the debit column I think on balance he can bring a lot to the job. I see no harm in acting decisively and I think it'll be useful for him to have 2 games up close to form an early opinion of what the task ahead is like.
Just one point about MON: the UEFA 2003 campaign was indeed a great success, but it only came about because Celtic had a horror show against Basel in the CL qualifier!
Has any Men's international team ever been managed by a female? The Irish are always breaking boundaries, why not hire a chick?
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/i...sEKXZu9PG4ZYOT
If we wanted to break boundaries we could start by not calling them "chick"
And we must not forget that the UEFA Cup was such a mickey-mouse competition, UEFA had to rebrand it as the Europa League. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
I wouldn't mind, at least when it was called the UEFA Cup it could still be confused for the decent competition it once was... the Europa League branding only serves to highlight it's inferiority compared to the Champions League.
Which Irish players have played under O'Neill?
I can think of O'Shea, McClean, Westwood, Dunne, Ireland... Any others?
McGeady!
And Ciaran Clark.
Meyler?
Yes.
And Roy O'Donovan...
Didn't Ireland move to Villa after O'Neill left?Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Wasn't it the transfer that broke O'Neill's will to stay at Villa?
It was around the same time, think O'Neill wanted more funds for further transfers and Lerner wouldn't sanction itQuote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I was at a friendly at Dalymount Park, one of O'Neill's last games, and I'm convinced Ireland was there, and was booed by a section of the crowd when his named was announced
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
As promised, the list of players to get their first cap under Trapattoni:Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Liam Lawrence
Kevin Foley
Darren O'Dea
Glenn Whelan
Damien Delaney
Keiren Westwood
Wes Hoolahan
Leon Best
Caleb Folan
Keith Andrews
Noel Hunt
Eddie Nolan
David Forde
Ciaran Clarke
Marc Wilson
Seamus Coleman
James McCarthy
James McClean
Conor Sammon
Jon Walters
Darren Randolph
Paul Green
Sean St Ledger
Jeff Hendrick
Robert Brady
Simon Cox
Greg Cunningham
Keith Fahey
Cilian Sheridan
Keith Treacy
Stephen Ward
David Meyler
Alex Pearce
Richard Keogh
Stephen Quinn
Paddy Madden
Anthony Pilkington
37 in total
I'm not 100% on some of them, so I'm open to correction
Note: St Ledger and Lawrence both made the subs bench under Staunton, but neither made their first appearance until Trapattoni was in charge
Already have my mortgage on him ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
There is of course an obvious difference between club and national management, the players available for selection
is at best about 50 as opposed to about 5,000+, so the technical and man management side of things matters most,
you can't transfer list players you have fallen out with and buy in a replacement. A manager who was good at wheeling
and dealing in the transfer market might come undone.
Not too sure how that applies to the candidates in question, O'Neil has never managed by national level, but I imagine
he is pretty good man manager, he is an intelligent man, and pretty diplomatic I expect don't recall him falling out with players.
I'd say big Mick was pretty good on the management side, with most players, there is one notable exception though ;)
Not too sure about the rest, some will be more abrasive than others I guess.
It certainly seems there were quite a few players who are not overly keen (no pun intended lol ;) ) on playing for us.
If you look back at Jack Charlton, was he not pretty relaxed in approach? So much so that he didn't know half the players names??
I think if it is more enjoyable experience for the players you get the best out of them, however the more driven players
who are often the best might not appreciate to lax regime, not sure if we have too many of them though.
Yes why not, boundaries are there to be broken are they not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosby87
http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...es-2206130.jpg
You might not know her in the states, but it's Lauren Harries from UK Celebrity Big Brother, she is quite used
to handling men because she used to be one, she has handled quite a few since then by all accounts!! :)
Seems Hector Cuper is the latest name thrown into the ring.
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/socc...tion-1.1529736
Am I wrong or was he mentioned before we gave the job the trap?
Anyway he has bee relatively successful with Inter, valencia and majorca but not so much with parma and georgia
Cuper mentioned in this article from The Irish Times. Out of interest does Dennis O'Brien have any say in the appointment or does he just fund it?
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/socc...tion-1.1529736
Hector Cuper would be even more negative than Trap. Favourite formation is 4-4-2 with 2 defensive midfielders.
Remember the staunton era, when we could confidently beat the likes of slovakia at home? And go over there and score two goals. Long time since then.
Trappatoni shored up the defence but limited our goalscoring. IF only we could have the scoring we had before that with his defensive record. Proved that the negativitiy outweighed the positivity i.e. nullified our scoring ability and wasnt good enough to stop shipping goals.
Yeah great times. Comfortably beating Slovakia 1-0 at home. And getting a 2-2 draw away is so much more impressive than a 1-1 draw away under Trap, with Keane missing a penalty also.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
And a bore draw at home 0-0!
It was tongue in cheek, but for all the goals we conceded under Staunton, we always looked more likely to score than we did under trap.
Dick Advocaat?
http://www.examiner.ie/sport/oneill-...ey-243301.html
Guus Hiddink?
Well, there's no obligation upon an international manager to select players who won't work with him. He can always select someone else as a replacement.Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
DA or someone who denied he was him was at the Sweden game...Quote:
Originally Posted by Deckydee
As for all Trap's many faults, at least we never got humped by Cyprus, under Stan. Our worst performance ever. Probably.
In Staunton's campaign (even though he was gone for final match):Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
PLD 12 GF 17 GA 14
Trap's 1st camapign: (including playoff)
PLD 12 GF 13 GA 10
Trap's 2nd campaign: (including playoff)
PLD 12 GF 20 GA 8
Trap's 3rd campaign: (unfinished)
PLD 8 GF 13 GA 13
Looks to me like we were every bit as likely to score under Trap, especially taking into consideration we had San Marino in our group under Stan. We had nowhere near that level of opposition under Trap at any stage really. I would even put Andorra and the Faroes at a much higher level to them. In Trap's first campaign the weakest team was Georgia who are always relatively competitive.
Of course, you did say that we "looked" more likely to score... but looking likely doesn't count for all that much really.
Well ye can't compare because its over 2 campaigns. San marino, andorra, faroes are all bottom seeds, faroes are probably the strongest but still easy to get 3 past them.
For one campaign against the other though I see:
GF 17 for Stan. GF 13 for Trap. You can only compare like for like in the context of what it is. 1 campaign, and while we were awful in that campaign, we scored 4 more goals.
Whats very intersting about this campaign is that, we could still have ended up with maybe 17 GF, yet nowhere near qualifying, similar if not more to the previous campaigns with less games. It drives the point home even more now about the previous 2 campaigns.
You could just as easily compare it to traps 2nd campaing (20 goals) or his 3rd and most disappointing where we scored 1.625 goals per game versus Stauntons 1.416.
So what does that tell you?
Pretty much nothing.......
I'm not sure comparisons between the two are worthwhile. Both had to go.
The most telling statistic of all is Trap's home record. The worst in 40 years.
I think you're being very selective Paul in fairness. Even comparing Trap's first to Stan's first, you can't just disregard the quality of San Marino compared to Georgia. We got 7 of our 17 goals against San Marino... that's 41% of our goals in just 16% of our matches in the group.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Also, we only got one goal in four games against the best sides in the group, Czech Rep & Germany under Stan. One of those games was at home to an already qualified Germany, and one of them was a must win game in Prague.
In Trap's first campaign we scored five goals in four games against the best two teams in the group, Italy & Bulgaria... granted Bulgaria wouldn't have been anywhere near as good as the Germans or Czechs.
Traditionally we don't do well in dead rubber games.
Is it worth having a new manager in for the last game against Kazakhstan?
Financially? possibly a good few thousand more bums on seats, a better chance of a moral boost win, a taste of whats to come? rather than a bore draw.
Or would a prospective manger want to wait until next February, want to start with a clean sheet, having no connection with this campaign?
Completely agree with your general point but not sure why that is the most telling stat of all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
You can only compare it to the first campaign because they were both coming into the job fresh for full campaigns.Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior
We also never played Georgia at away, we played them at "home" twice. THe same scoreline as we got against San Marino away. But you are right San Marino are nothing compared to Georgia.
Because it proves that he had to go!Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Out of curiosity though, was Stan's points haul (17?) much worse than Trap's in any campaign?
Thats what i was getitng at with my interesting bit.
I'm begining to wonder was the points haul very similar? The difference being for stan that we looked awful at times, and we were up against a clinical Czech team who finished on 29 points and a German team who finished behind them.
I'm begining to think how simple our arguments were all along though we made them more complicated. That group is very similar to this group, and we got well beaten in both.
Czech Republic 12 9 2 1 27 5 +22 29
Germany 12 8 3 1 35 7 +28 27
Republic of Ireland 12 4 5 3 17 14 +3 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
We're only allowed compare first campaigns (Paul's rules :)).
Stan had an average of (1.41 pts per game if you include Wales game when he was actually gone... otherwise it's 1.45 per game)
-We got 18 points from 10 matches in Trap's first campaign... two games less than Stans with no San Marino. (1.8 pts per game)
Oh to hell with it...
-We got 21 points from 10 games in Trap's second campaign... again two games less. (2.1 pts per game)
-We have 11 pts from 8 games in this campaign... (1.38 pts per game)
The latter is the real telling stat and why he had to go, not his home record even if they are slightly connected.
What's Philippe Troussier up to these days?