Irish Tigers and Opposition Irish

Quinn played pretty well, he is a busy player and acts as a kind of play maker, he is comfortable
on the ball and defensively strong, the sort of player we need in out midfield.

He is joint top on assists for Hull, pretty impressive given he has only made 8 starts and 5 as sub.

So defensive string, good passer as creating goals, quite a good combination really?



What more could you ask for?


As I said earlier he is made so stern stuff, he took a few whacks in the game, I was expecting him to be stretcher off
after one ankle bending challenge but he was soon back on his feet.

Must be that ginger beard.

Quinn was excellent throughout. Head up, busy, proactive, always looking to do something positive. Better player than Gibson on that showing.

Brady showed some nice skill but wasted two frees, both from the same position where he delivered a beauty in Glasgow in injury time. Looks a good player, but there are lots of good players his age so needs to step up a gear soon I think.

If McShane had played like that all his career he'd never face the ridicule he gets from some in Ireland. I really warm to him. Commentator said he was 36! A bit harsh.

McShane the last year or so looks in a lot better physical shape than he ever has. He's leaner and faster, I think.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport...eeks-1-7047680

Lenihan should be back in action in four weeks. Hopefully he can get a full pre-season.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Safe-...ail/story.html

Brady failed to impress up front against West Brom but he may get another opportunity to impress with Jelavic and Hernandez out of action for several weeks.

West Ham 3-0 Hull

Brady ill, McShane an unused substitute, 90 minutes for Meyler and a rare 90 minutes for Quinn.

I wonder what the odds are on Hull trying to resign Long before the end of the window? Or is it possible to play for three teams in one season (you know what I mean)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks

I wonder what the odds are on Hull trying to resign Long before the end of the window? Or is it possible to play for three teams in one season (you know what I mean)?

---

The hypocrisy is cringe-inducing. You disparaged another post mockingly in another thread regarding speculation on the potential eligibility of a kid with an Irish second name but switch over to this thread to speculate on Long moving back to Hull and, previously, the potential for a loan move away from St. Mary's for Long.

I'm able to bear your being outspoken and opinionated (or however it may be described) but consistency would be just.

Shane Long is a full Ireland International. This is a football forum for Irish football fans.

I didn't disparage any post mockingly. I made a couple of harmless comments that are only been picked up on because I made them. gastric made a similarly harmless comment about me on Richard Dunne's thread which I actually found humorous and inoffensive. I presume that offended you also? All things being consistent.

Some people might think it's narrow-minded to think someone is Irish or has Irish blood just because they have an Irish surname. There are plenty of people in Northern Ireland and Great Britain with Irish surnames who have no Irish blood and don't identify as Irish. Most of our new recruits at senior (and underage) level don't have Irish surnames and so were not conjectured about, and flew under the radar, on forums like these. This could be down to any number of factors. Likewise, my surname is not Irish yet all my roots are traced to this country.

I think the bottom line is if a player is eligible and is interested, he will become known to the relevant people. I don't think the FAI are scrolling Premier League and Championship team's squad lists to find players with Irish surnames.

I take your point that it is not just about the surname, but it is a good early indicator nonetheless, for fans in particular, but as Aldridge, Townsend etc from way back, prove, it is just a starting point, I don't feel however you can credibly argue that an Irish surname shouldn't be a factor, or indicator or even an early reference point to rule guys in/out in the matter.

Indeed, no harm in using a surname obviously of Irish origin as a starting point for possible enquiry. What's the harm in simply wondering or asking? Nobody's making any assumptions about such name-holders or trying to impose a possibly unwanted Irish identity upon anyone.

I don't think we should just assume that a player will become known to the FAI simply because he might be eligible and/or interested. We can't be certain that all eligible or potentially-interested players will actually formally declare their interest. Maybe they'd fear it would be perceived as arrogant or something like that. There may even be eligible players who've never really considered it as realistic or worth their while for whatever reason, but who might seriously entertain the idea if they thought the FAI were keen to have them. There are plenty of players presently playing in IFA teams who would think like that. For a long time, Sean Caffrey, for example, actually made a point of not initiating any contact with Shane Duffy whilst Shane was still registered with the IFA. This was in spite of Shane having showed an eagerness. No movement was made until Shane actually formally declared his intention to make the switch from the IFA to the FAI.

Off-topic, McShane will likely find himself back in the team after James Chester and the manager's son both joined the injury list at Hull, while Bruce publicly criticised Davies for his defending for the opening goal: http://www.theguardian.com/football/...P=share_btn_tw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks

Shane Long is a full Ireland International. This is a football forum for Irish football fans.

I didn't disparage any post mockingly. I made a couple of harmless comments that are only been picked up on because I made them. gastric made a similarly harmless comment about me on Richard Dunne's thread which I actually found humorous and inoffensive. I presume that offended you also? All things being consistent.

Some people might think it's narrow-minded to think someone is Irish or has Irish blood just because they have an Irish surname. There are plenty of people in Northern Ireland and Great Britain with Irish surnames who have no Irish blood and don't identify as Irish. Most of our new recruits at senior (and underage) level don't have Irish surnames and so were not conjectured about, and flew under the radar, on forums like these. This could be down to any number of factors. Likewise, my surname is not Irish yet all my roots are traced to this country.

I think the bottom line is if a player is eligible and is interested, he will become known to the relevant people. I don't think the FAI are scrolling Premier League and Championship team's squad lists to find players with Irish surnames.

---

I didn't take offence to your post, nor would I allow that to occur. I did cringe though. Same way I cringed when you played the victim card above.

I feel you're being unnecessarily harsh and critical of a willingness by some to discuss the potential eligibility of a player due to an Irish surname. It's clearly an indicator, in spite of the caveats that you have outlined.

And, in the interests of not side-tracking this thread, I'm not commenting further.

I'm not playing the victim card. Your comment simply made me feel uncomfortable as it bore no relevance to Shane Long, Hull or Ireland. It's like you were calling me out on the carpet for my comments on the separate Nolan/O'Hara/Noble thread. I wasn't passing judgement on other people conjecturing the eligibility of players. I think you are being sensitive about my comments. Come on.... they were pretty harmless.

If you don't want to side-track the thread then maybe discuss it on the Nolan/O'Hara/Noble thread or with an amiable private message next time instead of calling me out in a needlessly hostile manner like this?

i.e. (or however it may be described)

Come on. I'm not that dense.

Assist from Brady (good cross from left) 2-1 Hull.

McShane & Meyler not covering themselves in glory for Chelsea's second goal. 0-2 at the KC Stadium.

2-2 now tho!

Hull really struggling now. Hard to see the. Getting many more points this season. Teams below them are starting to play well. John O'Shea's Sunderland are going to find it tough too.

McShane, Quinn and Brady start for Hull. 1-0 up approaching HT at home to Liverpool.

still 1-0 up about 2 min + stops to go.

edit only 2 mins added :)

oops 5 mins added!! :mad:

Over, 1-0. Huge win. Clean sheet for McShane. Given the importance attributed to CBs and clean sheets in this forum maybe that's very telling.

Should see Hull save, Sunderland have a tough run in too, can't see them getting 5 point.
Mind you didn't expect Hull to win this one either, so who knows.
But if they can win this one there is no reason why they can't pick up more points against the big clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Over, 1-0. Huge win. Clean sheet for McShane. Given the importance attributed to CBs and clean sheets in this forum maybe that's very telling.

---

Yes. A record of one goal conceded every game in the PL is substantially better than two goals conceded every game in the FL. McShane is also the reason Hull are in the PL right now, so he is a bit of a folk hero.

I don't begrudge him anything. But there aren't many people jumping to his defense when debatable comments are made about him.

I've always defended him for what it's worth. He's far from flawless but he's an honest and effective player who attracts an unreal degree of ridicule.

As for the stats, they say nothing much of note. Sure you say yourself that Forde ships goals. If we judged players on stats we'd never go near Forde. But we don't, we judge players on their performances, among other qualitative factors.

McShane has his fans on the forum, we're all well aware of his flaws, but we also appreciate what he brings to a team

I must clarify that the McShane haters are far more prominent in other forums and publications than they are here, which is quite refreshing.

Hull Irish may get relegated in two games time allegedly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crosby87

Hull Irish may get relegated in two games time allegedly.

---

What crackpot journalist said that?? ;)

Away to Spurs and then home to Man U, they require a win or two draws minimum. 3/1 and 5/2 on, to go down.

Who's crazier, the journalist who said it, or the person who believed him?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Who's crazier, the journalist who said it, or the person who believed him?

---

We we shall find out in two games time!!

Serious question chaps, something I've always wondered....do teams sometimes want to get relegated? Like is it better to have a terrible year in the prem or a good year in the other one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crosby87

Serious question chaps, something I've always wondered....do teams sometimes want to get relegated? Like is it better to have a terrible year in the prem or a good year in the other one?

---

It is a big drop in TV revenue I believe, although they do get 'parachute' payments I think to ease the blow I believe.

Nobody wants to get relegated, they still have their big wage bill usually.

Prior to Financial Fair Play (both UEFA and domestic only versions) it was often the case that the only profitable football clubs were those "yo yo" clubs like WBA who'd regularly go up and down. Good business strategy for the owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crosby87

Serious question chaps, something I've always wondered....do teams sometimes want to get relegated? Like is it better to have a terrible year in the prem or a good year in the other one?

---

No one wants to get relegated. Take Wednesday for example. 15 years now since they last played Premiership football. No guarantee when a team will ever get back if they don't bounce back the first time. However, I hate this balderdash that it's worth €130 million to a club to get promoted. If that's the case why is it than most teams which are relegated are usually financially crippled? When promoted, a club has to spend a lot on new players (unless you're Burnley and get relegated straight back again) and much higher wage bill etc etc Burnley probably made a nice profit and they didn't cripple themselves as many clubs do to try and stay up. Is it not true that most clubs in the EPL are heavily in debt?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

No one wants to get relegated. Take Wednesday for example. 15 years now since they last played Premiership football. No guarantee when a team will ever get back if they don't bounce back the first time. However, I hate this balderdash that it's worth €130 million to a club to get promoted. If that's the case why is it than most teams which are relegated are usually financially crippled? When promoted, a club has to spend a lot on new players (unless you're Burnley and get relegated straight back again) and much higher wage bill etc etc Burnley probably made a nice profit and they didn't cripple themselves as many clubs do to try and stay up. Is it not true that most clubs in the EPL are heavily in debt?

---

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk...rnley_economy/

Quote:

---

Adam Bull, senior consultant in the Sports Business Group at Deloitte, said the benefits for the football club would be felt for the next five years.
Mr Bull said: “Promotion for Burnley will be worth at least £120m. Around a £60m uplift for their season in the Premier League in 2014/15 - even if they finish bottom - and then, should they get relegated after their first season, around £60m in parachute payments spread over the following four years if they do not return to the top flight in this time.”

---

So £60 million in the first year accord to that report.

Quote:

---

The average annual salary of Premier League footballers has broken through the £2m barrier for the first time, a new survey has revealed.

Premier League players earned an average of £2.3m - or £43,000-a-week - during the 2013-14 season, a huge jump from the average of £1.6m the season before.

---

But how many players is that for? 11? 23? 44? (Burnley has 44 players in it's first team squad).
So that might be 88 million in player salaries, but much less I expect.

Quote:

---

AVERAGE SALARIES IN WORLD LEAGUES
Source: Daily Mail
1. English Premier League: £2.2m
2. Germany: £1.5m
3. Italy: £1.3m
4. Spain: £1.2m
5. France: £1m

6. Russia: 0.9m

7. Brazil 0.6m
8. English Championship: 0.5m

---

It is going to less down the bottom end of the league.

There are no doubt lots of other costs, buying players, other staff, ground maintenance costs.


12 teams had a net spend on players of less than £10m.
7 spend less than £2m including Burnley.

That's the first time anyone used the term "Balderdash" in foot.ie history. Truly remarkable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crosby87

That's the first time anyone used the term "Balderdash" in foot.ie history. Truly remarkable.

---

http://foot.ie/search.php?searchid=2854867

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe_denilson

http://foot.ie/search.php?searchid=2854867

---

Does not work

http://foot.ie/search.php?searchid=2854933


This may not work either as the results may be temporary

But it returned 21 results..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crosby87

That's the first time anyone used the term "Balderdash" in foot.ie history. Truly remarkable.

---

I am in good company. Geyser used it in the John Delaney thread !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tricky_colour

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk...rnley_economy/



So £60 million in the first year accord to that report.

---

The truth would be to look at Burnley's books before they were promoted and at the end of this season. Is there £60 million or £120 million or whatever more resting in their account? I very much doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tricky_colour

Nobody wants to get relegated, they still have their big wage bill usually.

---

I'd say teams have a clause in players' conracts about wage drops in the case of relegation. Somewhere in the range of a 33% reduction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

I'd say teams have a clause in players' conracts about wage drops in the case of relegation. Somewhere in the range of a 33% reduction.

---

Well they certainly should have something like that.
You can only pay players what you can afford, however some clubs attempt to buy success and fail miserably.
I think Leeds was a case of that "Living the dream" and Glasgow Rangers too? Not too sure on my facts as always though!!!