No. It's all averages. I'm crap at explaining things like this so just read the guardian link. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
And that's all I tried to do. :D I think the rankings are accurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Printable View
No. It's all averages. I'm crap at explaining things like this so just read the guardian link. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
And that's all I tried to do. :D I think the rankings are accurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
The rankings were the main reason as quoted by John Delaney at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Aw shucks. After slagging me off when I was here, now you're missing me when I've hardly gone....:oQuote:
Originally Posted by as_i_say
To be honest, we all know these rankings are pretty cack, but after so long when NI was a laughing stock, I hardly think anyone can really blame us if we take a bit of pride, even in something so inconsequential.
As it happens, I feel we could have another couple of months of basking in the warm, glowing ranks of the Top Thirty, since we've still got the final six months of dross under McIlroy to drop off our 4 year record (McIlroy resigned in Nov/Dec? 2003), plus our next game is in August, at home to Liechtenstein.
As for our future prospects where it really counts (on the pitch), I can't quite make up my mind about Nigel. Obviously losing Sanchez cannot be a good thing. But it might not necessarily be a bad thing, either. I say that because for all that Sanchez was respected by his players, that's not the same as saying he was liked by them, and it might just be that hearing a new voice after 3 1/2 years might refresh them. Plus Nigel should have one or two players with whom Lawrie fell out (notably George McCartney) available to him.
And if Nigel's managerial record is hardly Mourinho-like either, it's not that bad either; in fact, you could say it looks better than Lawrie's did when he took over. I just hope he's got the sense not to change too much, but treat the remaining six games as a series of "one-offs" and trust in the confidence the players ought to have gained over the last couple of years.
Thereafter, we'll just have to take what comes. Personally, I think we'll finish third, behind Sweden by 5 or 6 points, and behind Spain by a point or two, with Denmark in fourth a point or two behind us. And if in doing so, we can just squeeze into the next Seeding Pot for the WC2010 Draw, then this will have been an almighty four years since the ignominy of Sammy McIlroy, not scoring for an eternity, and plunging down the Rankings to 124 in the world!
Onwards and Upwards! :cool:
I thought you were one of the guys who wanted to see a "united" Ireland team?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuff Paddy
I must have been mistaken.:confused:
For god's sake, don't feed them !!
I don't. Dunno how the others feel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Same as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
F*ck Irelands Call
EG what seeds will you guys be for the world cup do you reckon?
Surprising as it may seem on ourweecountry.com they spend most of their time discussing our team and not theirs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuff Paddy
Whats up u bum bum tpaddy ...sure we have nothing else to talk about at the moment anyway
At the moment we're 29th of 52 European teams, which would likely leave us 5th seeds (we were seeded 6th for the present Euro Qualifiers :().Quote:
Originally Posted by bwagner
That said, if we can grind out decent results in the second half of our Euro 2008 Qualifiers and a couple of teams ahead of us underperform, depending on how the World Cup Groups are divided (how many pots etc), we might just sneak into the 4th Seeds. If so, I imagine we'd be in the company of ROI?
I would guess that jumping two Seeds in the course of one campaign is pretty unusual. But if we don't make it this time, seeing as our WCQ2006 results were not especially good (the Sanchez factor hadn't taken full effect), once we get into WCQ2010 games and the WCQ2006 results drop off, it may not take exceptional results to go alongside our Euro2008 results for us to clinch 4th seeding?
i dont believe it!i knoew it doesnt matter but the scots are 14th,thats crazy,they are ****!
They're so **** they've only lost 2 qualifiers, one of which was against the World Champions, they've beaten the World Cup runners up, won every other game they're played since September and currently sit third in their group.Quote:
Originally Posted by peterc1992
Man, I wish we were that ****!!
In fairness they are pretty sh*t. They've grinded out a few decent results but they won't finish any higher than fourth in that group whereby any decent team would be dissappointed with anything below third.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
While France and Italy are top teams, Ukraine are pretty rubbish (they were terrible in the world cup where having a combination of an easy draw and a lot of luck they somehow managed to get to the Quarter Finals where the Italians p*ssed all over them without Ukraine being impressive in any of their previous games).
Solvent abuse can kill instantly.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
There's no way I'd swap our group for the one Scotland are in and have a better chance of emerging from than we have.
"Grinded out a few decent results"? They actually beat France when all we could manage in the last campaign was a "moral victory" i.e. no victory at all but we'll take the point sure -and a whingey defeat at home against them.
In this campaign -the defeat by Italy which had them disconsolate would've been passed off as "part of a learning curve" by some in and around our team who'd have reminded us we're "building for 2010".
Some of their team would get into ours on crutches and I only wish we'd fired Stan and taken McLeish when he was available.
Scotland would beat Ireland at the moment. That's pretty much all I have to say in response to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
And as for Ukraine being rubbish if they were in our group they'd likely be leading it on the basis of the performances of those teams in the group.
TBH I think we have a better chance of qualifying than the sweaty socks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
You all assume I think Ireland are good just because Scotland are sh*te. Over 2 legs they might beat us but it would be close. Flick a coin.
We have far better players though with a fully fit team. Darren Fletcher and Barry Ferguson? Give me strength. Kenny Miller and Kris Boyd? Pure dung. Wouldn't get a game in the Premiership.
I'd say both teams are sh*te but they are punching above their weight at the moment while we are suffering from years of mismanagement. Overtime things will level off. We have consistently been better than them over the years and people still continue to moan even when we still have a very good chance of qualifying (which Scotland don't) while the Scots look content to finish in 4th place in their group which let's face it we wouldn't be.
That statement alone is the sign of a man on too much medication. Name their players who would walk into our team? Their best player Shaun Maloney is an average Premiership player at best no better than Stephen Reid for example. Duff(on form or off), Given, Keane, Finnan, Dunne, Doyle, S Reid and A Reid would all walk into their team if they were Scottish. Any statement otherwise is nonsense. Even McGeady would walk into their team and he doesn't get a lookin for us (thank God as he's poor like the majority of SPL players). Stop jumping on the bandwagon because they had one or two good results. They will finish fourth in that group.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
Once again you mix a bit of fact and good sense with OTT comments. Scotland are not happy with fourth. I know lots of Tartan Army guys who will be ****ed off if they dont qualify. You seem to think football is about names on a team sheet. Football is about work ethic and teams gelling as well as ability. To win a World Cup you need all of that plus luck but to qualify you dont.
Scotland are sh*t. They won't finish higher than 4th. As for Lionel claiming they have a better chance of qualifying than us the poor chap is deluded and anyone that thinks otherwise is likeminded. If he thinks they have a better chance to qualify he should stick a few quid down in labrokes. They are 8/1 to our 3/1.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD
For the record neither will qualify IMO but we have a far better chance than them (they have none).
As for Cymro claiming Ukraine would top our group he either:
a. Has never seen them play
b. Knows none of their players
c. Has never seen Germany play
d. Has never seen the Czechs play
The Germans are a far better team than the Ukraine (and possibly than France and Italy at present) while the Czechs are slightly better.
We will finish 3rd and Scotland will finish 4th.
If I had to be honest, that would be my assessment.
A realistic assessment unlike some of the pro Scotland rubbish spouted on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Torn-Ado
What bandwagon? I already said I wouldn't swap groups with them. You already mentioned some of the players who'd grace our team ...I'll add Naysmith and probably O'Connor with him (notwithstanding he's a petulent little fcuker).Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
If we were in Scotlands group - being hopelessly mismanaged as we are -then we'd be dead in the water by now. That's not slighting our players -who I'm on record here as saying are a better crop than Mick McCarthy had available to him in his first couple of years. For that matter if we were in Northern Irelands group -with them, Spain, Denmark and Sweden ...frankly I shudder to think of it.
What years? They'd qualified for three world cups before we qualified for anything. They qualified for Euro 96 when we ****ed it away because we indulged the drinking clubs in our squad and Jacks derogation of responsibility and they qualified for France 98 when we were losing to Macedonia and drawing at home to Iceland. Hows that consistently better?Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
By the way ...our "very good chance of qualifying" that you refer to is based on two unimpressive wins against San Marino. Take them out of the equation and you get a far more realistic view of where we are in this group.
Scots content to finish fourth? You're having a laugh. If they finish fourth there'll be mumblings about Smiths treachery and McLeish fecking it up on them. If we finish fourth -it'll arguably be a commendable recovery.
I'm afraid you're wrong on all four counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
1. I've seen Ukraine fairly recently when they played Scotland-it was on the BBC. Nothing really special, but they'd be right up there in our group, don't worry about that.
2. Know none of their players? Aside from having one of the world's best strikers and having solid, Premiership standard performers in other positions-most of them play regular Champions' League footy too-and having seen them play us three to four times fairly recently plus the aforementioned game v Scotland, yeah, you're right. I know nothing about them. How silly of me to claim that I do. :rolleyes:
3. I've seen them play alright. I saw them when we played them last (we won 1-0) and in three major tournaments since then. Their record is fairly mediocre outside of qualifying for these things, apart from WC 2006 where home support carried them through to 3rd place. I remember seeing them struggle really badly for 90 minutes against Latvia in Euro 2004, and going out of the group stage in that competition.
4. A lot's been said about the current Welsh team. I'd say it's the worst for about a decade and we still really should have beaten the Czechs home and away. Ukraine would likely do them if they played tomorrow.
Or the pro Ireland rubbish?Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
If you lose to Slovakia, you'll likely finish fourth, with your toughest games ahead of you.
Scotland may yet finish fourth in their group, but would still be a better side than Ireland, even if they did.
Go ahead and try to argue that those players wouldn't get into the Irish side. I could do with a laugh. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Possibly the two strikers may not but I'd say they'd push your current two. To be fair Doyle and Keane are just about your best players apart from Given and if you had injuries to either of those two I think they'd get in your side.
As for the midfielders, if Fletcher was Irish you'd be writing me an essay on how good he is right now.
I'd say it's the opposite myself. Mick McCarthy like Jack Charlton got you places you had no right to be (and I don't mean that disrespectfully). Kerr found your level which is pushing to qualify for tournaments but occasionally coming up short.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
On the other hand, Scotland have had a German f*ckwit in charge for 4 years. That man is worse than Sven I swear. We beat Vogts' Scotland 4-0 and they were probably League One standard that day in terms of defending. Las I saw them they were far far better, most likely down to having a manager who could communicate to the players.
You may be going through a similar thing with Staunton, but that is hardly 'years of mismanagement'. The man hasn't even had a campaign yet.
And to be fair if you haven't seen one of Bobby Gould's teams I don't feel you can fully appreciate the true meaning of the phrase 'mismanagement'.:D
Scotland used to qualify regularly for every tournament going. In terms of history, they're ahead of Ireland.Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Cymro if you seriously consider yourself a football fan and you are genuinely stating that Darren Fletcher is better than anything we have in central midfield then give up and support hockey or something. Darren Fletcher is the midfield version of John O'Shea at United but without getting as many games or goals. He is absolute pants. The rest of your essay can be ignored on the basis of this ridiculous statement above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
As for Barry Ferguson, a failed Blackburn Rovers joke of a player getting into the Ireland team instead of a younger more highly rated current Blackburn Rovers player Stephen Reid, this says it all to me. Barry Ferguson looks good against Inverness Caledonian Thistle, stick him up against some real players and his lack of quality has always been glaring to see.
As for Scotland qualifying for lots of tournaments pre the Crimean War, yeah great they also have a great record in those tournaments. In every one we've been in we've done far better than their best performance in any they've been in. Oh yeah and we've qualified for 3 world cups out of the last 5 while they've qualified for only 2 so in recent years I'd say we have a way better record but argue that all you like. As for Mick McCarthy and Jack Charlton getting us places we had no right to be, more absolute garbage, Under Charlton we had a 1-11 at various stages of his time in charge, the majority of which would have walked into the English team at the time (a team that got to the semi-finals of the world cup). Don't talk such rubbish.
As for the Ukraine players playing in the Champions League. What you neglected to mention is that the vast majority of them play for Dinamo Kiev who's record in the past few years has been dismal to say the least. To say they are better than Czechs even on current form is more rubbish but don't let the facts obscure a good point.
As for Bertie Vogts being a f**kwit? Didn't he win the European Championship as a manager? Yeah Stan is a better manager than him. Were you on smack typing this post up?
I'm not all pro Ireland either, I think at present we are pretty average, but Scotland are sh*te and I doubt they would finish higher than fourth in our group either. The Slovaks and Czechs would have them particularly away where their record is muck.
Anyway I love all these reactionist types that after a win or two they claim the team is brilliant ignoring all their previous recent history. How easily you forget in the last qualifying campaign less than two years ago with the same players Scotland were absolute pants. Belarus at home anyone? But as I said don't bother trying to remember that far back. Take only the last 2 or 3 games that's all that counts (didn't they get hammerred 2-0 by both Ukraine and Italy recently and struggle to a lucky 2-1 win at home against Georgia - a team worse than Wales?).
If it counts for anything (and it doesn't before you all say it! ;)), I think Cymro's analysis is spot on and (no offence) Young Irish is both underrating Scotland and overrating the ROI, at least over the last couple of years.
If you look at recent results on the pitch during that time, Scotland have performed very well in what is by far the toughest of all Euro Qualifying Groups*, including victories against top-ranked teams. Whereas ROI have been average at best (narrow wins over Wales and Slovakia) or very poor (San Marino, Cyprus).
As I see it, these respective performances have been achieved despite the fact that on paper, the ROI squad should be at least as good as Scotland's, if not rather better. The difference may be accounted for quite simply by sound management by Smith/McLeish, as compared to uninspired management by Kerr, followed by dreadful management by Stan (imo).
Which is why, to return to the topic of the thread, whether any of us thinks Scotland should be World ranked 14th, 24th or 34th, they deserve to have risen above other teams who have underperformed in recent years, including ROI (imo)
* - There is an argument to be made for saying that Scotland just being squeezed into finishing fourth in their Group would be as credible (or better, even) than, say, the ROI finishing 3rd in theirs, when you take into account the respective strength of opposition.
Whatever about ability, Scotland have a few things going for them that we have been struggling with:
- Physical match for their opponents: in midfield in particular they don't get overrun.
- Moral stature:their players are mature and committed
- Sense of reality: I think few in the Scotland camp go back to their clubs after playing for their country content & smug in their highly paid safety zone
- Sense of priority: for many of the Scottish players qualifying for a tournament would be the highlight of their careers. Our English based players probably think finishing 4th in the Premiership / qualifying for UEFA Cup / avoiding relegation is the objective of their season. Or maybe getting an autobiography published.
Inject above factors to the players we can choose from and the last 4 years may have been different for us.
So to be clear you'd like us to ignore their more recent history AND their more distant history? So which bit of their history would you like us to believe?Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Since you're obsessed with people getting their facts right here's a couple for you.
Fact 1. They qualified for several tournaments before we ever did
Fact 2. They qualified for as many tournaments as we did in the 90's
This bit's worth it's own quote though
Check out the big brain on Youngirish. 3 is a "way better" number than 2. Good to see you're lickspittle-toned posting on here isn't keeping you from watching The Numberjacks.Quote:
Oh yeah and we've qualified for 3 world cups out of the last 5 while they've qualified for only 2 so in recent years I'd say we have a way better record but argue that all you like. Don't talk such rubbish.
Hang on a second ...I got one of my facts wrong!!!
Scotland qualified for more tournaments than us in the 90's.
Because 3 is bigger and way better than 2. Sheesh ...thank feck for the Numberjacks
i watch scotland all the time , they are far from sh1te , they're not great i'll give you that but they punch their weight and if you are below par on the day ( see france) they'll punish you. i think young irish has a point about barry ferguson though.
whatever about the world rankings you can only beat the team you're up against. if we go to eastern europe in september and bring back 4-6 points then we can ignore all comparisons with scotland and N. Ireland. Until then we have done nothing to compare with these two teams who have put serious teams like france and spain to the sword in this campaign.
Agreed! Well said that man.Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerMilla
No it doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
I'd say two second round appearances and a quarter final appearance are way better than 2 first round exits (one to Costa Rica). Yeah but as I said believe what you want it's the taking part that counts after all (South Korea are as good as Italy btw because they've qualified for the same number of World Cups recently) but try to stay on the methadone. Also stop bringing up ancient stats about qualifying for ancient tournaments. Who cares? I thought I addressed this in my previous post but I'll sum it up, Hughie Gallacher doesn't play for Scotland anymore you sausage. As for EalingGreen disagreeing and stating Scotland are better than the Republic. How surprising is that? He probably still thinks David Healy is better than Henry because he scored more goals against Liechenstein so I tend to treat everything that he says about ROI or NI for that matter with an ocean of salt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
As for bringing 4-6 points back from Eastern Europe Scotland would be lucky to get 1 in the same fixtures so I don't see how that's relevant.
Btw lads for all the sh*te spouted on here we are still better odds to qualify for the Euros than both Northen Ireland and Scotland (far better) in every bookies going and don't take this the wrong way but I think they know a bit more about football than Lionel Ritchie, Cymro and EalingGreen.
We've been over this before, but on recent away form (last year, last 2 years, last 3 years....last 20 years) you'd give the Scots a better chance in Slovakia & Czech Republic than us. It's a lot less than 20 years since they beat a half decent side away. Norway, Slovenia...
Aaaggghh, the ****ing Israeli equaliser!
I'd fancy us in a head to head against Scotland though, home or away.
You're being nonsensical now Youngirish. You include a twelve year (90-02) span of results pertaining to us in various competitions we were in and then demand others not use "ancient stats".Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
In the same twelve year timespan the scots qualified for the final stages of two tournaments we didn't make it to -which you don't want to discuss at all. Never mind how they got on in the finals -nor us for that matter - better teams than both Ireland and Scotland have gone home in the group stages of a finals having blazed their way through regional qualification.
I'll partially agree with stutt that in a one off head to head with all our best players available -we probably should beat Scotland -but with Sergeant CooCoo-Bananas running the show -I'd put the farm on the crossdressers.
Stutts in addition to me and a few others you are one of the few remote outposts of sanity on these boards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
A beacon of light in the darkness of irrationality.
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Did you actually read what he said?
3 is definitely better than 2 at jumping. My daughter, an avid Numberjacks fan, says so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
You mean there are others on your level?! :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Or are you trying to be humble?
I assumed he was basically agreeing with me that even with our rubbish manager we should beat them, hence backing up my original claim that they are sh*te considering we are hardly brazil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
There are others yes who adhere to my teachings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
either of them home or away , they still hurtQuote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88