Ireland V Germany(A) 11th October & Kazakhstan(H) 15th October 2013 - World Cup '14 Q

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

16/10/2013, 11:25 PM
Fixer82

I'm really surprised with the criticism of Noel King.

For the first time in 5 years we had a manager that we could understand in interviews.
He brought back players that deserved to be in the squad: Gibson, Stokes, Reid.

His team created more chances against Germany than in the previous two games put together.
His team passed the ball on the ground instead of hoofing it.

We battered a team that we barely scraped past under Trap.
We should have scored more than three but I think we would have struggled to beat them under Trap last night.
Plus, their goal was an unstoppable screamer.

And he did all this in the space of two weeks.
He's been much more pro-active in the role than Don Givens ever was.

I think he's done well. He seemed to be up for a row with Tony O'Donoghue to be fair but I think he was probably sick of getting unwarranted stick from Dunphy et al over what was a tough interim job to step in to.

Dunphy has gone way overboard saying his criticism has never been personal. Ask Niall Quinn, Jack Charlton, Trap, Rod Liddle, even Roy Keane. He's gotten extremely personal when criticising them all. Hypocrisy
16/10/2013, 11:33 PM
Charlie Darwin

I think the people criticising King for laying into O'Donoghue/RTE are overlooking the fact that we all would have done the same were we in that position. The panel have been screaming out for somebody to put them in their place for years now. The players who have criticised them - McGeady, Hunt, McShane - have generally been those who've borne the brunt of their criticism but each can be accused of underperforming in the green shirt. King outperformed Trapattoni in both of his fixtures and had basically a free shot, considering he's not in the frame for the job, and he said exactly what he thinks. I couldn't give a flying **** about whether Tony or Gilesy's feelings were hurt as a by-product of getting what was coming to them. People in the media who are paid to criticise are often the most precious when the criticism is turned back upon them.
16/10/2013, 11:43 PM
ArdeeBhoy

It's all an irrelevant circus.

Even Ronnie Whelan & RMK have more credibility than the main protagonists. Or kids arguing in a playground...
17/10/2013, 12:40 AM
Emmet7

Interesting piece this from Cathal Dervan on Dunphy and his many axes to grind

http://www.irishcentral.com/story/sp...227995341.html
17/10/2013, 12:50 AM
osarusan

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emmet7

Interesting piece this from Cathal Dervan on Dunphy and his many axes to grind

http://www.irishcentral.com/story/sp...227995341.html

Cathal Dervan is probably the worst journalist in the history of the whole world.

Even thinking about the abomination that was The Title makes me shiver.
17/10/2013, 1:03 AM
Charlie Darwin

Quote:

Originally Posted by osarusan

Cathal Dervan is probably the worst journalist in the history of the whole world.

Even thinking about the abomination that was The Title makes me shiver.

Hey now. Irish Central is a very reputable website. Just look at all the millions they've invested in web design.
17/10/2013, 9:36 AM
ArdeeBhoy

They have previous.

http://balls.ie/football/apparently-...-eamon-dunphy/
17/10/2013, 10:06 AM
tetsujin1979

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

For that reason I rated Stokes' performance. He's got something different, something innate and spontaneous. Good point about the yard versus the mile.

One thing I thought about Stokes on Tuesday night was that every time he got the ball, he looked like he might do something. He did run out of ideas when he got into the penalty area, and rarely tried to beat his man, but eventually he released McGeady to cross for the own goal with a backheel on the byline. By comparison, everytime Doyle got the ball, he never looked like he would do anything. I was genuinely shocked he stayed on the pitch for 90 minutes, although the early enforced substitution to Gibson probably played a part in that.
17/10/2013, 11:25 AM
paul_oshea

Quote:

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

One thing I thought about Stokes on Tuesday night was that every time he got the ball, he looked like he might do something. He did run out of ideas when he got into the penalty area, and rarely tried to beat his man, but eventually he released McGeady to cross for the own goal with a backheel on the byline. By comparison, everytime Doyle got the ball, he never looked like he would do anything. I was genuinely shocked he stayed on the pitch for 90 minutes, although the early enforced substitution to Gibson probably played a part in that.

Maybe kinger remembered how poor long was in the sweden game and blamed him for not getting us further in this campaign, and so he picked Doyle ahead of him :D

I too was impressed with Stokes, but I wondered how much was down to hunger and deisre to make a point so he was always looking to get on the ball. He didn't do a great deal with it to be honest and is lacking that quick turn of pace. What i really liked about him is he is very good turning inside or coming off the player, but he hasnt hte pace to actually get away so unless he shoots straight away or is very near the goal I don't see much end product with this without the pace.

I do wonder how Long didn't get anytime. But i'm coming round to Stutts hypothesis, that Long is best on the wing on the counter for us and holding the ball up on the break. I'm not sure he has anything else.
17/10/2013, 11:53 AM
Emmet7

Doyle needs to learn to play the ball on the ground in any new system. I think most people are agreed the days of hoofing the ball up to Doyle or Long and hoping Keane gets on the end of that ball are over and good riddance.

We saw in the last year or two of Traps reign how techically poor our players are with the ball on the ground. They need to learn how to play with the ball on the ground. The Belgians are the model to follow. Went from no hopers to world beaters in 10 years by changing the entire philosophy of their game from u8 all the way up to senior.

Let's hope the long ball to target man approach is done and dusted. If people like Doyle can't control, pass, and hold possession, he shouldn't be in the team. The same goes for everyone else. Having said that they should be given gametime to learn a new way of playing.
17/10/2013, 11:56 AM
Stuttgart88

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Stutts hypothesis, that Long is best on the wing on the counter for us and holding the ball up on the break. I'm not sure he has anything else.

I don't think that though!
17/10/2013, 11:59 AM
shakermaker1982

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

The formation won't be 4-4-2 under any circumstances. There's a reason Ruud Dokter is involved in the selection process. He is to make it absolutely clear that there is a system common to all the teams through the age grades - 4-2-3-1 for the unininiated - and the new manager will be expected to follow that blueprint. King tried to pretend before the match that he wasn't set on a particular system yet, but anybody who's paid attention to the underage teams since Wim Koevermans came on board would have seen right through it. 4-4-2 just isn't fit for purpose in modern football and I suspect that's the key reason why Martin O'Neill hasn't been chosen.

I'd be very surprised if any manager worth his salt would be dictated to about what formation to play. It would help if the managers they approach buy into that formation/philosophy from the start but a manager needs the tactical nous and flexibility to adapt to the circumstances in front of him. Take each game (opposition) on it's own merits. 4-4-2 did not suit Ireland with the Trap in charge because we had Glenn Whelan and Green/Andrews in the engine room. They didn't have the mobility or skill to cope against teams who had numerical superiority. A prime Roy Keane and Kinsella on the other hand might have fared better, that is why the formation you play does depend on the players at your disposal.
17/10/2013, 1:18 PM
DeLorean

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

4-4-2 just isn't fit for purpose in modern football and I suspect that's the key reason why Martin O'Neill hasn't been chosen.

Why would MON necessarily play 4-4-2? He played 5-3-2 (3-5-2) for a long time at Celtic.
17/10/2013, 3:49 PM
Fixer82

The game on Friday reminded me of home game V Andorra for 2002 qualification. About 3 minutes in. They took the lead, we were all over them - same result

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xj-oLckKX0
17/10/2013, 3:54 PM
paul_oshea

Did you do that to depress us even more?

Its even more annoying to listen to it when living over in this(England) country.
17/10/2013, 4:03 PM
Fixer82

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Did you do that to depress us even more?

Its even more annoying to listen to it when living over in this(England) country.

?????
17/10/2013, 4:08 PM
Charlie Darwin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixer82

The game on Friday reminded me of home game V Andorra for 2002 qualification. About 3 minutes in. They took the lead, we were all over them - same result

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xj-oLckKX0

The skills on Gary Doherty. Why don't I remember that?
17/10/2013, 4:12 PM
paul_oshea

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fixer82

?????

After that game we had something to look forward to.
17/10/2013, 4:25 PM
legendz

It's laughable Dunphy calling for the return of Mick McCarthy. If McCarthy does return, Dunphy will be among the first to start slinging mud at him.
17/10/2013, 4:33 PM
Fixer82

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

After that game we had something to look forward to.

Ah right I get ya.

But to put it in context, nobody was giving out yards about Mick and his tactics that night and it was a pretty similar game to the Ireland Kazakhstan on Friday

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page