Isn't, er this the wrong thread?
As numerous posters passim have been quick to point out. S.Stu to thread.
Isn't, er this the wrong thread?
As numerous posters passim have been quick to point out. S.Stu to thread.
Rules must be applied consistently across the board though. We can't have one standard for players we deem crap and another for players we deem more valuable. Anyway, I won't harp on about it; there's a World Cup on... :)
Yeah last word I'll say on it too it that I have absolutely no problem with the rules at all, just that I could understand annoyance in losing a player in SOME casesQuote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I was only stirring / joking when I mentioned him. I think and hope GR got that. There's good stirring and bad stirring. Mine was intended to be good.
Rookie mistake..... this is the internet, stirring can cause 15-20 pages of utter idiocy. Please be more careful in future :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
I agree AB. A disgraceful lack of respect for the well established forum rules. And the internet generally...Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Ha ha Stu. Fair play.
The only stirring our rotund correspondent is really interested in, is what's cooking in the pot as part of many imminent courses, each and every night...Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
interesting how oneill viewed the goal against Australia and playing the offside. He blamed the centre backs for not following van Persie even tho they kept the offside line.i see what he is saying and with offsides often missed it makes sense to an extent but I still don't agree!!
Didn't we concede the same goal against both Serbia and Turkey, with Coleman and Wilson getting left behind the other 3 to play the goalscorer onside? Wilson had just come on as CB against Turkey I think.
I can see both sides of the argument, O'Neil side is if you can't be sure the centre back has to follow van Persie inQuote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
On the other hand if the full-back are doing their job you don't need to.
I think it's better to be safe than sorry, if you try to play offside and get it wrong it's an easy goal often,
if you follow them in when you didn't need to they still have to beat the defence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEXYgacc-dwQuote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Yep about 2.20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEXYgacc-dw
Not sure if it is the same as the CB was trying to block a shot.
Rather disorganed generally but good movement form the turks.
The guy who was central who made the through pass should have been marked.
Nice little quote from Strachan on ITV: Speaking about Rooney, "People talk about playing in the hole, but if the hole's not there you've got to go and play somewhere else." To be fair to Hoolahan, any time he's played there for us he's managed to find a hole.
Ya its an interesting one, if you are asked to play a way for your country completely different to your club then it will cause all sorts of confusion, and we have looked very confused at the back under oneill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
O'neill seemed to get thick towards the end of the piece actually, always thought he was a bit sore and I think he showed it yesterday again.
Are we still talking about football?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I knew somebody was going to read something like that into it, but I expected it would be one of the louts. Not you, tricky :(
The thing about Hoolahan is that he also worked so hard in our half against Portugal to get on the ball and moving up to try and direct the play in front of our midfield.
I was of the opinion that under Trap it would have been futile to have a skilled player like Hoolahan 'in the hole' because we wouldn't be able get the ball to him against better teams.
We have 2 holes to fill, one in front of the back 4 and one in front of CM, a player with the energy and skill of Modric could do both, Hoolahan showed against Portugal he could do both but is shipping water when it's just him and against a quality pressing team.
It was unfortunate in these friendlies that that we didn't see any game with both McCarthy and Hoolahan starting.
What Hoolahan put to bed was the idea that he would be a liability in CM against the (growing list of) better teams.
Do you think a 4-4-2 with Hoolahan and McCarthy would work? Or would you have Robbie dropping in to the hole behind Long in a 4-4-1-1 formation?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Robbie has never convinced me as anything but a pure striker.
I think the biggest lesson of all the recent games is that we are at our most effective using 4231. I think Doyle should be the 1.
Interesting. I'd like to see it. I didn't see Costa Rica game (are there any links to decent highlights of it?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
I agree about Robbie. He ca play in the no.10 role but he is far more effective as an out and out striker.
Which means, if O'Neill is to continue this kind of formation Robbie's days are numbered
If we had to play 442, then why not Hoolahan beside McCarthy, compared to other options, against our 2nd place rivals?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
Players still have to be technically proficient and confident on the ball to make whatever system they play in, work at this level.
Greece made the cautious tactics work when trailblazing at euro 2004 but they also had an outstanding technically proficient playmaker in Karagounis at CM.
They could play it without him but not as good.
We are just desperate to insert some technical ability into the engine room. I would think McCarthy & AN Other, playing in front of the back four
with Hoolahan in the front 3.
We don't have obvious players for the role of the lone frontman, Doyle is still a theory, Long has more ability about him for that role.
Robbie I'd think is a sub, an important sub, a captains sub, still indispensable.
I'd like to see O'Neill try a traditional 4-4-2 with Hoolahan and McCarthy/Gibson and Keane and Doyle up front. Then when we don't have the ball, the formation could change accordingly.
Or is the 4-4-2 just totally outdated?
Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
For now, anyway, I think it is. Which causes us problems since I can't see any of our current strikers scoring enough goals outside two up front, or the attacking midfielders making up the shortfall. Two up front might occupy teams who play with defensively poor attacking fullbacks, but the four across the middle leaves gaps. Even with a player like Karagounis. Sadly, too many of our midfielders play like they're wearing gúnas! Would a 5-3-2 counter the 4-2-3-1 that's in fashion? Going back to MMcC's early games there! Mobile wingbacks closing down wingers and switching between defence and attack, three center halves to mark the striker and pick up midfield runners? Do we have the players for that system?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
Have to say, I'm still unconvinced by Doyle. One friendly goal doesn't undo some chronic poor form an an uncertain club future. I also think he's more one-dimensional and not nearly as much of a goal threat as Long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
I don't think 442 is outdated as such but in order for it to work against a good team you've really got to be competitive in central midfield. I'm not sure we have a pairing that can achieve that when other teams have a man advantage in that area.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
When I say 4231 I'm really talking about two deeper lying midfielders but at least one likely to be further forward in attacking phases, two wide guys, and Hoolahan supporting a centre forward. I personally prefer Doyle for now but on the caveat that he's playing at least regular Championship level. I think that line up allows us to be competitive in midfield, allows us numbers when defending and allows Hoolahan an opportunity to find space when we're attacking. It does mean we'd have to score goals from midfield and set pieces though.
I've loved how 3 at the back had been used to good effect in Brazil though I doubt we'll ever try it, despite O'Neill having used it to good effect in the past.
That was one thing I really could not understand about Trap dropping Stephen Hunt. He was deadly from set pieces. God knows when McClean and McGeady cross the ball it's likely to go anywhereQuote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Very nicely played sir!Quote:
Originally Posted by Eminence Grise
Haven't seen anything from Doyle to suggest he can be the one. He spends too much time hanging out on the wing. He didn't do an awful lot against Costa Rica apart from the goal and I can't see him scoring too many 20 yard headers in future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Well it certainly can't be Walters, as the Portugal game yet again proved. He doesn't link up the play, offers no goal threat, has no pace and is poor in the air. He's a battering ram which might have it's purposes but we have to be aspiring better. Whatever about his alleged poor club form, Doyle has been consistently important for Ireland.
It's just a pity that Stokes still hasn't played up front for Ireland. He can consistently score goals against poor teams; he can do it against Gibraltar and Georgia.
I always fancied us to score when Hunty whipped in his free kicks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
Interesting to know how many goals we scored from Huntys free kicks.
I'd say tets would have the exact figures. Off-hand, from the 2010 campaign I can remember his assist for you against Italy, Dunne's away at Bulgaria and it was his delivery that led to Dunne's goal at home too, via O'Shea. I think there was another that year but I can't remember.Quote:
Originally Posted by the doc
Just a few comments as I watch Nigeria vs. Bosnia. Whatever system we play, it is imperative that we use players who can consistently pass the bloody ball. No more players who are all huff and puff (Green for one) and more Hendrick, Hoolahan, McCarthy and Gibson, for example, in midfield. Robbie might have scored another 20 goals if he got the service that many other strikers get. In terms of our depth, what is striking about many of the smaller countries in the WC, is that we have probably more players playing at the highest level of football than other comparable nations. What we lack is technique if anything.
Didn't Bosnia pass the ball quite well but were ineffective at it and are sitting with 0 points? No point passing the ball for the sake of it. It has to be effective. Hendrick = Championship. Hoolahan = Championship (plus club don't want him). Also I don't think even the Premiership is the highest level of football. I bet Everton will struggle in the Europa League.Quote:
Originally Posted by gastric
Was he not injured and then didn't get back in to the squad as he dropped down a league? No moaning from him though unlike others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
I really don't get your point. All I am saying is to build an effective game, you need to be able to pass. You can mention Bosnia as an example, but what about the other nations who have been successful so far in the WC? All have a good passing game. In regard to Hoolahan and Hendrick, they do have a good passing game and the fact they play in the Championship is fine by me. I mentioned that many Irish players play at a high level, I am not saying the Premiership is the best league in the world, more it is of a higher standard than the Hungarian, Chinese, Middle East or Australian leagues where players of comparable nations in the WC ply their trade.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
four assists under Trapattoni - Dunne VS Bulgaria, St Ledger VS Italy at the Euros, and Cox and Andrews VS Italy in BelgiumQuote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I disagree. Bosnia finished top of their Qualifying group with 8 W 1 D and 1 L, 12 points above Slovakia in third place - the same Slovakia we patted ourselves on the back for drawing with twice when we stumbled over the line to Euro 2012 Qualification.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
They were unlucky to lose to Argentina, when the best player in the world ultimately made the difference between the two teams and they were unlucky to lose to Nigeria; Nigeria's goal was lucky to stand and Dzeko had a perfectly good goal ruled out.
It was a much more valiant exercise than our Euro 2012 campaign when we were just unlucky not to concede double figures against Spain and went down without so much as a whimper against Croatia and Italy.
Aye, I definitely think Bosnia can feel hard done-by in terms of the decisions going against them. They had some other chances too that they should have converted, but thay have nobody to blame there but themselves. Still, as you say, theirs was a much more valiant effort than our own at the Euros two years ago. We were just all-round bad and had to accept our fate - nothing could have redeemed matters because we simply didn't create anything to provide redemption - whereas some of the Bosnians who fell to the ground in disappointment after the final whistle last night had a right to feel somewhat aggrieved with a sense of "close, but no cigar".Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Bosnia's effort was better than ours no doubt but as usual there's so much nonsense in TOWK's post. Barely a whimper against Croatia? We fought tooth and nail but were short of the standard required. If you're going to bang on about refereeing not favouring Bosnia you can say the same for Ireland against Croatia. Jelavic's goal was highly debatable to say the least and we had a stonewall penalty denied. I saw nothing wrong with Nigeria's goal (assuming the issue is the way the Nigerian winger ghosted past a left back that'd have made Stephen Ward look like Denis Irwin? Not even a hint of a foul for me.)
Now, if Robbie Keane had missed the chances that Dzeko missed I can guess the reaction from some here. He took his legit goal well but looked like a park footballer for the rest. Bosnia's excellent midfielders and the 1G and 2G Bosnians (let's not go there...) they had playing for them had their work wasted by Dzeko and the other big lank who missed a straightforward header.
Quit the self loathing. Spain outclassed us, as they have done to many teams. We shot ourselves in the foot with basic errors and, in my opinion, poor selection and substitutions. We put up a good fight against Croatia and Italy but unfortunately fight was about all we had. Had that Bosnia team been in our group in the Euros they might easily have got null points too. We did beat them just before the tournament.
Wouldn't agree with that either. Just prior to his dropping from the squad, he was regularly underperforming for Ireland and making little to no impact. I recall quite clearly Doyle being a barnstormer but, for me, that dried up a couple of years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
A potent Doyle can be a powerful presence, so I wouldn't rule him out but I'm unconvinced.
Just reflecting on past glories, and one of my favourite games ever was against Cameroon when I felt our reaction after Roygate was amazing. While only a draw. we played nice football and Holland's goal was a beauty. The 2002 side had a nice balance to it with possibly only one possible weakness, Harte at left back which Mick never really dealt with. This side played attractive, passing football and only hoofed it forward when Quinner came on, as in the Germany game. I feel we need to look to this side as an example of how we should and could play. No major stars in that team outside of Robbie and Duff and yet they were competitive throughout the tournament. Anyhow I had a look at the team and did we play 442 or 451 as we started with 5 midfielders or did Duff start upfront alongside Robbie which I vaguely remember to be the case? Either way there certainly was a degree of flexibility in the line up, again something we should consider going forward.
If memory serves me correctly Mick did deal with the Ian Harte issue in the Saudi Arabia game after the Saudi right-winger totally gave Harte the run-around in the first half. Mick replaced Harte with Kevin Kilbane, who I believe hadn't established himself as a left-back and was more of a back-up for Duff on the left wing (although I'm open to correction on that) - anyway, the extra attacking edge he brought put the Saudi player on the back foot for the second half and snuffed out the danger he posed.Quote:
Originally Posted by gastric