One thing I've noticed about Quinn over the last two games is he doesn't spend a lot of time on the ball, he's always looking for a quick release. It's like he thinks he's always going to be closed down. But against the lesser lights of Oman and Georgia, there was more than one occasion when he had time to look up for a pass, or to take a step or two with the ball before passing.
Not a negative, just something I've noticed.
There is no doubt McCarthy was poor in his new role. The point was in response to you saying that his performance belies his playing experience. He isn't experienced in playing that far forward so I don't see how his experience of playing a completely different role would have helped him. Seeing as we're going with PL analogies, it would be like asking Darren Fletcher to play the Juan Mata role, or close enough. To be fair, his assist for the goal was Mata-esque.Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_peepee
I'm not so sure. He looked to be caught off guard, not ready to pounce for the shot and ended up not moving at all. I don't know if he would have saved it if he was more alert to the possibility of a shot coming in, possibly not, but he didn't give himself the best chance of saving it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Couple of great goals for McGeady but his performance otherwise was poor with miss-hit crosses, losing possession, failing to beat his opponent. Mind you I’ll take the two goals anytime but swallows and summer come to mind.
I'll also take the result as if we were somehow going to become a new team with flair, ability, dashing play, overrunning the opposition, peppering their goal etc etc when history teaches us that we have to scrap for everything away from home, even under Jack's more talented sides. I thought we were relatively comfortable with Forde having to do little other than pick the ball out of the net after a moment's hesitation from Ward gave the Georgian a chance for a speculative shot. That said their goalie wasn't exactly worn out from saves either.
Whelan's moaning about us being happy with a draw was bunkum when evidence shows 4 or 5 men in the box for McGeady's winner which tells us otherwise. True he wasn't changing the system with the Meyler substitution but that doesn't mean we wanted a draw.
I have always said style means nothing to me: results are everything. We got 3 points in a game we were comfortable in without (except for a while after McGeady's first) ever looking like we'd win it. A sickening result for our rivals remember. Also the first goal from a long ball was a beautie.
It is a bit like a continuation of the Trap era with the Hoolahan debate. Fans seem to love him. Managers don't.
What did we learn?
a) MO'N is less polite than Trap to belligerent interviewers.
b) One man up front is not for Robbie.
c) McCarthy doesn't work well ahead of the ball.
d) MO'N doesn't trust Hoolahan away from home.
e) Keane is not the assistant like Tardelli and MO'N looks elsewhere for advice on the touchline.
f) We're 3 points on the way to the Euros.
g) The Panel: Ah, the Panel. The honeymoon lasted 1 minute before MO'N was accused of cowardice. So it begins.
h) MO'N does not have a magic wand (yet).
i) The fans will always believe whoever is not in the team is better than those in the team.
j) We're still in the tournament.
We'll beat the Rock People 4-0 and the Germans will have got rid of their rustiness by the time we arrive.
What was Kilkenny's goalie called? He looked the part.
I'd hazard a guess that McGeady's first goal was the greater pressure goal, he had a bit of time on the ball, dragged it wide and then the one on one with the goalie. McGeady's second goal was an exercise in instinctive sublime artistry in a pressure situation, but no time for him to feel pressure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razors left peg
Balls.ie have joined the best goal debate. I had forgotten about Robbie Keane's v Israel. That was a class finish from a brilliant pass to be fair.
Robbie Keane's opener against Yugoslavia was good too. Really nicely placed first-time finish on the half-volley. Technically quite difficult. Not entirely dissimilar to that Israel goal, which I'd forgotten about as well.
Was right behind the goal for that Doyle goal in Slovakia. Can attest that it was a cracker. :)
He didn't move because everybody could see he had no chance. He looks like he might have been a bit flat-footed but it's irrelevant because no goalkeeper is going to be ready for a speculative 25 yard shot in the top corner. I saw suggestion during the game that he should have dived, if only to avoid criticism, which goes to show how silly the whole thing is. If he'd injured himself diving after a lost cause we'd be cursing his poor decision-making.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Yeah I'm just not sure it was that unstoppable if he was set up right and expecting it. Always expect the unexpected as the ad says! It was an awful strange angle to be beaten from but I accept it dipped pretty dramatically. I just think he concedes too many goals where there are question marks attached and I think this might be another one. Fair enough if yourself and others don't.
If he was nine feet tall it would have possible been savable. Neuer wouldn't have stopped it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Well the crossbar is only 8ft. If he had anticipated the shot then he might have been able to get back quicker to touch it over. He was only a foot or two off his line. It goes way over his head because he stood motionless. In other words, if he was back on his line by the time the ball reached the goals he wouldn't have needed to be 9ft to touch it over.
How many times in football have you seen a goalkeeper claw the ball out of the top corner? It very, very, very rarely happens. You might see it a couple of times a year. I just think it's a ridiculous expectation to have of a goalkeeper. At the same time, I think other areas of Forde's game are deficient.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
How many times in football have you seen a keeper beaten from that position, without it being his fault? It very, very, very, very rarely happens. :)
If Forde was over to the other side of the goal I think it would have been unsavable but he wasnt that far from where it went in.
He seemed to be caught on his heals quite badly. I do think a better keeper would have saved it to be honest, he wouldnt have even had to dive at full stretch
The goal conceded just typified Forde. I don't mind him. He's a capable keeper. A top level keeper may have positioned himself better to capitalise on their superior reflexes in such a case. Nobody considers him top level so where's the surprise?
Ordinarily, I might agree with the criticism of the Forde goal. But there were three out-of-the-ordinary factors to take into account.
Firstly the shot was exceptionally struck and hit from a weird angle. That in itself would be enough to damn Forde, since he should have been more expectant and ready for action. However, he was also unsighted by two to three players and the ball took an slight, but reasonably wicked deflection to give it an extra bit of spin and dip.
All those taken together made it unsaveable imo. Unsaveable for Forde, for Westwood, for Given or Elliot or anyone else we could have played. If you want to make an argument for someone saving it, I'd make an argument for Neuer. Maybe. But he's hardly relevant.
The replay shows he's close to that side, but as CD said, if the ball's in the top corner, struck with lethal speed, it's going to be hard to save. Add in a deflection and an unsighted keeper and it's just a total melt for any keeper.
Honestly, I think people are happy to attach question marks to players performances because they're iffy on the player. It's particularly easy in the case of a keeper, because unless a keeper is pretty much world class, then there will be natural question marks. And that's fine. But in this instance I don't think the player is getting a fair crack. Particularly if we're going to play a fairly egregious case of 'I think Westwood/Given etc would have saved it'.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Sometimes the a powerful, freakishly accurate, deflected shot flies in the net. Sometimes we have to give our players some benefit of the doubt. If Forde - or anyone else - doesn't do it for you fine, but I still can't see many people keeping that one out.
Personally I'd favour having another look at Westwood, if he's playing well but that's just my view on the goal.
Hang on... it deflected? I didn't know that.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Nearly impossible to see but the ball rises a second time after clipping Georgian no.9. Forde completely blameless. Sometimes people score good goals that can't be saved.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean