Printable View
ah for f*cks sake, all the moaning on this thread - its a good plan, it will be good for players to gain experience and, if marketed properly, can reignite national pride in players to play for their country...
to all the naysayers, what harm can it do?
Like, er, international friendlies. Preferably v. better opposition than's being proposed here. I'd wager the Scots & Welsh would feel much the same.....Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
Dunno how people can run this idea down; friendlies are becoming less relevant & with the exception of the odd game here and there, have been against mediocre opposition in the past. This Celtic cup will be a competitive set of games worth so much more than a miserable nothing game against Denmark or somesuch. You can guarantee a "local" derby between the two Ireland will garner much more interest & enthusiasm, on and off the field, than said friendlies.
I totally agree. What's the difference between playing Scotland or Serbia? People go on about playing different styles but the fact is that in international football you play so few times per year and there are so many injuries that it's a crapshoot every time a world cup qualifier comes about. Just look at us - how often do we actually get to field our strongest eleven or even the same eleven three matches in a row?Quote:
Originally Posted by amaccann
This is nothing new. The original Home International series was scrapped because it was viewed as a waste of time. 6,000 fans for Wales v NI games in the 70's. A delusion was built up that a team like Scotland could win the 78 world cup after beating England in home international games (albeit not the last one before they travelled to Argentina).Quote:
Originally Posted by Colbert Report
[QUOTE=amaccann;1025227]Dunno how people can run this idea down; friendlies are becoming less relevant & with the exception of the odd game here and there, have been against mediocre opposition in the past. This Celtic cup will be a competitive set of games worth so much more than a miserable nothing game against Denmark or somesuch. You can guarantee a "local" derby between the two Ireland will garner much more interest & enthusiasm, on and off the field, than said friendlies.[/QUOTE]
I remember didnt a game with Norn iron only muster up 15,000 in Landsdowne Rd a few years ago, held to raise funds for the Omagh fund
The questions though are simple ones:
- How much can be learned for an Ireland team / manager in a friendly against, say, China?
- How much can be learned for an Ireland team / manager in a "competitive" match against Scotland?
As for attendances, well; what's the average attendance for Scottish / NI / Welsh friendlies at the moment? I think Ireland is regarded as a rarity in that we somehow contrive to get near-full houses for our matches, most other nations don't get those kind of numbers imo.
I heard it was about 12,000. Mind you, there'd have been more there if the Scottish Cup Final hadn't been live on TV :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Benno Celt
Brazil's youth team, Colombia and your other exotic opponents might be a bit better, but when the friendly is half-paced how can you tell? As for falling/ remaining asleep during games, I can provide anecdotal evidence of members of Mr Bhoy's party succumbing to slumber during your game in Cardiff last term. The bloke behind me and Lopez conked out shortly after kick-off?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardee Bhoy
Well, I'll concede that we might celebrate any wins or even draws in this tournament more than the other teams. On the other hand, since none of us are much good at qualifying (one finals in the last 20 attempts since 1998), I wouldn't airly dismiss success even in a mickey mouse tournament. Even if Lopez would really prefer sneaking a draw against a bottom seed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lopez
PS If a post-Delaney regime decides to pull out, I wouldn't mind if we invited one of the Scando or Benelux countries instead. Nice away trip, maybe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Technically they may be a bottom seed but the facts do not tell the story. They are only a bottom seed due to being a new country. I would say that if Ireland gets 4 points from the 2 games with Montenegro I will be delighted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD
Do you think we can get any more than that? :D
You never know if Graeme Poll or the guy who reffed the match between Reading and Watford at the weekend is there. You know know what might happen. :)
Were Ukraine, Croatia and Slovakia all bottom seeds when they split from the larger Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD
Montenegro are thus seeded not least because of their size- only about 600,000 people. Although clearly they do have better players and I would guess a stronger league than the similarly-sized Malta or Luxembourg.
Can't recall but probably yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Seeding is done based on results in previous camapigns.
see here for the seedings for 2012 based on current results.
http://lucrurineinteresante.blogspot...cients_11.html
Afair, the Russians and the Czechs took all the credits for the efforts of the USSR and Czechoslovakia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Croatia, Ukraine and Slovakia started out at the bottom or near enough to
the bottom of the FIFA rankings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
im confused, how would a scottish game affect an irish home int?:)
You sir are talking rubbish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Celtic Cup?
Meh.
Here's the qualifying table for Group 4 in Euro 96:
Team Pts Pld W D L GF GA
Croatia 23 10 7 2 1 22 5
Italy 23 10 7 2 1 20 6
Lithuania 16 10 5 1 4 13 12
Ukraine 13 10 4 1 5 11 15
Slovenia 11 10 3 2 5 13 13
Estonia 0 10 0 0 10 3 31
Croatia, Ukraine and Slovenia were all playing in their first tournament since splitting from the larger countries; Lithuania and Estonia in their second.
Contrast with Group 3
Team Pts Pld W D L GF GA
Switzerland 17 8 5 2 1 15 7
Turkey 15 8 4 3 1 16 8
Sweden 9 8 2 3 3 9 10
Hungary 8 8 2 2 4 7 13
Iceland 5 8 1 2 5 3 12
All teams that had been playing in the competitions, under those names, for decades. And thus earning ranking points. If the seedings had been purely according to recent qualifying results, you wouldn't have had three teams with none in one group and no teams with none in another. Quite clearly Ukraine and Croatia weren't seeded in the bottom pool. Incidentally Faroes and San marino were in the same qualifying group in this tournament.
Which part of it's nonsense, Neil?
Due to the fact that the seedings are dont differently now than they were done then. Sure FIFA change the seedings all the time, FIFA rankings did not even exist then and now they are used to decide seedings which is why Montenegro are bottom seeds. They are bottom seeds for one reason and one reason only, because they are new.
You may try to cloud it by saying this did not happen with other countries 12 years ago, but the sytem was different then.
And the far larger (in population terms) Northern Ireland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round