no if a bank is owed so much money and that cant be repaid it would cause the bank to collapse. Just like Barings....you know that bank roger :D
Printable View
no if a bank is owed so much money and that cant be repaid it would cause the bank to collapse. Just like Barings....you know that bank roger :D
You're probably right that had we beaten all the minnows, we might not have taken many points from the big boys (although I feel that had we kept Sanchez, we might still have pulled it off?).Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Anyhow, what you have to remember is that in a 12 match Group, you can actually afford to lose two, or even three games, so long as its against the also-rans.
Whereas, in a tight Group like ours with four teams all in with a shout, even one defeat against one of the other big teams can screw you, if it's accompanied by a load of (otherwise) creditable draws. In fact, wasn't that what did for the ROI in your last WC Qualifiers?
P.S. The new system of deciding positions on "Head-to-Heads" rather than Goal Difference makes it even more important to pick up points against the big teams, and defeats by the little teams relatively less important.
EG I think I know what you are trying to say but I dont think its correct, if you are in a tight group you need to be guaranteeing the wins against the also-rans, just like ye havent done in this group. IF ye had ye would be through.
In the last WC qualifer, we failed to beat switzerland and Israel ( also rans ) at home, that was our porblem, plus throwing a lead against Israel again.....
in the next campaign our home record must improve , our away record can only improve !Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
As they say, if you owe the Bank £100, you've got a problem, but if you owe the bank £100m, they've got a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
My problem is that it was my girlfriend's Barclaycard I was referring to! :eek:
My opinion would be that thee would be the order that most countries would look at the 3rd seeds, starting with the hardest
Turkey, Denmark, Republic of Ireland, Bulgaria, Northern Ireland, Israel, Switzerland, Finland and Hungary
Turkey, Swizerland, Bulgaria, Israel, ROI, Finland, Denmark, Northern Ireland, Hungary
Really Bulgaria. Israel us Finland and Denmark are nearly inseperable at the moment i would think. I think most of us would agree that Turkey and Switzerland is who everyone wans to avoid, while Hungary is who they all want. Very difficult pot actually
Isnt that what cost Northern Ireland. Really the only reason Northern Ireland havent qualified by now is Iceland, a nothing team.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Quote:
Originally Posted by carloz
i see norn iron as better than us , certainly not on paper but in actuality they are better , agreed no one wants turkey , isreal also quite sticky , delighted to be avoiding some of these teams !
Quote:
Originally Posted by carloz
would not argue with this to be honest see Turkey and Switzerland as teams more would want to avoid
Utter nonsense, I'm afraid, about our being lucky vs Denmark. Sure, they should have had a penalty, but their goal came direct from a throw-in to them which clearly came off a Danish shin last, so these things even themselves out.Quote:
Originally Posted by as_i_say
The fact is, the Danes may just have shaded a (goalless) first half which was ruined by the atrocious conditions, but we completely dominated the second, despite conceding the opener after 50 minutes, and being under pressure for the last five minutes, when the Danes threw everyone up in desperation.
And for once, the stats back this up. NI had 54% Possession to 46%; we had 9 corners to their 4; we conceded 9 fouls to their 13; and we had 12 goal attempts to their seven. Most tellingly, only two of their attempts were on target (the goal and the handball), whereas we had 8 on target. Looking back, Taylor had little to do, whereas Sorenson was probably their best player.
As for Sanchez, sure we'd have loved him to stay, but no reasonable fan begrudges him the opportunity to manage full-time in one of the biggest three Leagues in the world. In fact, we're just grateful to have had him long enough to turn us from being a being a bit of a laughing stock, to being the proudest team and supporters in the world.
And you're right, we almost certainly won't qualify, indeed this campaign could represent a high-water mark for us, before we sink back down again. But so what? Unlike e.g. England or (dare I say it?) ROI, we still have fairly reasonable expectations of our team, which is why we didn't turn on McIlroy when we were awful, on Sanchez when he departed early, or on Worthington when he screwed up in Latvia and Iceland.
As the song says, "We're not Brazil, we're Northern Ireland, but it's all the same to me..." ;)
id say people would favour us over Israel, Switzerland, Turkey etc..
Pot 3 is really tough we are blessed we didnt get put in pot 4...
Hungary should not be in third Pot they have not been a major player in Europe for many moons now.
I do recall they getting to playoff few years back but since then and in last 15-20 years they have done very little I would take them as fourth seed if we could.
No! Our first two games were against Iceland and Spain at home. Reasonable expectations were for four points - three v Iceland and 1 v Spain.Quote:
Originally Posted by carloz
In fact, we got three points, but the way things worked out, that was just as good (arguably better?), since Iceland were never going to threaten the Group, whereas taking three off Spain immediately boosted us and put them under pressure. In fact, it was beating Spain and Sweden and drawing in Denmark which put us top of the Group at the half way stage. Dropping three points at home to Iceland, whilst a blow, didn't hurt us nearly as much as those other three results cost them. Indeed, if we should qualify (v.unlikely, I know), it will be because we will have gained 23 points in a competitive Group. Who we got them against is important only for the "head-to-head"; we will edge out Sweden because we took four points off them. The fact that they took six off Iceland and we took none will be irrelevant.
[Which, as a side issue, may be something which should worry ROI. It's all very well beating the smaller teams consistently, but any continuance of your recent inability to pull off results against the big boys, if only at home, could cost you dear. In fact, these "Qualification Six Pointers" are the International equivalent of "Relegation Six Pointers" in club football]
I think Sweden would be a good draw out of the second seeds. A number of their more prominent internationals will retire and a change of coach is likely before the start of qualifying.
You can't be serious unless you mean you didn't turn on them at the matches (not sure if you had the chance with Sanchez though). I remember reading loads of abuse on OWC towards McIlroy and Sanchez after he left.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
spot on , three points against the big boys at home is the key to qualification.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
2002 3 holland and 1 portugal
2004 0 switzerland and 1 russia
2006 1 switzerland and 0 france
2008 1 germany and 1 Czechs
no prizes for guessing which group we progressed from....
Granted, there was no shortage of opinions on the managers on OWC*, but what counted was the reaction amongst the fans. And the fact is, we never turned on either team or manager during the bad old day of Sammy Mac, nor was there any reaction against Lawrie, either. In fact, Lawrie still visits NI from time to time, where he gets a great reception.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maroon 7
Indeed, it is notable the contrast in the attitude of our respective support to failed managers. Sammy was never really booed or abused, unlike Stan. In fact, NI fans will tell you "Sammy Mac was a crap manager, but he'll always be a legend as a player". Whereas the reaction I'm seeing amongst ROI fans (admittedly possibly unrepresentative) is "Stan might have been a legend as a player, but he was still a crap manager". The change in emphasis may not be coincidental!
* - The "hotheads" on OWC might have made most noise, but the various Polls conducted showed a more equable consensus. And besides, OWC only represents a section of the NI support.
1990 qualification:
Home wins over Spain, Hungary, Malta and Northern Ireland
1988 qualification:
Home wins over Bulgaria and Luxembourg only.
Point taken though.
More pertinently I think 4-5 points in total from the top two seeds is essential to really be in the running.
Stopping your immediate competition from winning - and hence gaining a 3 point advantage - is essential.
If a top seeded team drops points somewhere, which they invaraibly do, improving on their performance in the equivalent game is essential too. That's why Israel away was so frustrating. Everyone was dropping points there so winning there was 2 points that France & Switzerland couldn't have got. Simple, but true.
Aye but qualification wasn't even a reasonable expectation at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
You're not comparing like with like, unless McIlroy was an inarticulate rookie billed in advance as a "world class manager" who had a squad of experienced Premiership footballers at his disposal and who had absolutely no idea of the basics and who did not have the humility to admit that things weren't going well. If we hadn't voiced our disapproval - most of us doing so in a very measured manner - we may still have him in charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen