He was held inside the box by a Serbian defender as a cross came in, it was just after the red card. It was probably 60:40 a penalty, by that I mean it was a foul but the sort of foul that refs don't often spot/give.
He was held inside the box by a Serbian defender as a cross came in, it was just after the red card. It was probably 60:40 a penalty, by that I mean it was a foul but the sort of foul that refs don't often spot/give.
Defender with his arms around his shoulders when a cross came in from our left with about 75-80 mins gone. Looked a definite penalty first glance on the TV, replays confirmed it. Fairly obvious penalty, especially given recent clamp-downs defenders grappling in the box.
Indeed, Wes H's career in green has been a crying shame. Which makes me think there's some inside story or injury or something.
Dead Cert Penalty .......Strong Case for Video Replay....... If there was Video replay then the defender would be slower to foul so blatantly at least.......
Nah the mantra was always beat the big teams at home and draw with them away. Georgia was a disaster but others dropped points and if we beat Wales. we'll have just done the mantra backwards!Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
Hopefully O Neill will have seen something in the way we played in the first half.....and continue it .
Lets try to beat Moldova playing in that manner and take it from there .We have to get away from continuous Long Ball Football if for no other reason it is un-watchable............
I haven't read through the thread so no idea if any of this is being repeated, but here's my two cents.
We were the better side for the opening 25 minutes. After that, we never really looked like scoring at any stage. There was some passages of good football, but no end product at all.
Nobody in an Ireland jersey looks like they can accurately kick a football in the direction of their choosing, which was a poor reflection on their status as professional footballers. I was remarking on the horrendous shooting the players were at in the warmup to the fella I was at the game with. 4 of every 5 shots hit were way up into the crowd. That was reflected in some of the paltry attempts from range in the second half in particular.
Hoolahan would do well to retire about now. He offered nothing to us after half an hour. Those who criticise O'Neill for not starting a 35 year old midfielder who isn't getting much game time at club level would do well to watch last nights game back again before calling for him to be the focal point of our midfield.
Again, there was no plan B. When things started to go tits up, the ball gradually started to spend more time in the air without really getting anywhere. Shane Long was brutal again and could be there until next week without ever looking like scoring.
The sooner Seamus Coleman is back, the better. Christie didn't do an awful lot wrong, but he doesn't offer the same threat going forward as Coleman, and that's really badly missed at the minute. Also, the sheer drive Coleman brings to the team is completely lacking at the minute. There doesn't seem to be any real leaders out there.
It's sad that walking away from the ground, I heard more and more people saying "at least it was better than Georgia" as if that's something to be proud of. The minimum that should be expected from Georgia and Serbia is 4 points. Now you're facing a scenario where you need to win both games to end the group to have any minuscule chance of getting to a playoff.
Usually in defeat something like that is expressed as a crumb, not as something to be proud of.Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
There was a great poll question on Twitter this morning: would you give up ten years of your own life to make Wes ten years younger?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
We have a budding Hoolahan at Reading. His name is Liam Kelly. But our manager didn't want to upset the pecking order of senior players ( which is understandable to a point) by bringing in a young upstart. However good managers aren't afraid to make those decisions. We need ball players and Kelly is definitely one we cannot ignoreQuote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
I'd sooner say Chris Forrester is closer to a budding Hoolahan.Quote:
Originally Posted by mark12345
First half - that is Ireland when we are at our best. Combination of trying to play some football with the intensity that unsettles the opposition. Unfortunately the technique of how to cross a ball has not been mastered and it meant we wasted a lot of attacking opportunities.
20 mins to go against 10 men. Why did we panic? Why not play it around them and use the extra man advantage? Wales were 0-0 going into the last 15 and remained patient.
I've already mentioned the stupid fouls by Walters last night but it's still driving me crazy. What was he thinking??
Impressed with Duffy again. The guy wins everything in the air (both boxes) and he is turning into a real leader for us. Meyler did a good job as well. Deserves a place in the team.
The next Robbie Keane, Duffer or Hoolahan needs to be discovered ASAP. Anything coming through to lift the gloom?
Saw a few clips of Dunphy on social media post match. ****
Good point Well Made .Quote:
Originally Posted by mark12345
That young Woodburn Fella has done well for Wales.....
Alan Judge was doing brilliantly until he broke his leg . I hope he gets back to his best soon......Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
Scott Hogan will start up front for the last two games and we need to draft in Kelly and Manning to give the midfield a spark (youth , energy and creativity ) , although for the latter two this is likely to be for the next campaign
THought we were better than against Georgia but our quality in the final third is shocking. Tactics and setup were ineffective.
Wes was neat and tidy - he played well without running the game (Also re posts above - him being on the bench regularly for club is hardly a new phenomenon) - he is far better than brady and whelan. Brady is not a central player at all. We should have had a penno.
There was still way too much lumping it in the box from all angles! How many proper saves did their keeper have to make? I can only recall one or 2 routine saves although he was good at crosses
Fair points all round mostly, thought that was the best we've played since Italy in Lille but again as always a complete lack of ideas in the last third of the pitch and no-one who has a modicum of cop on to drop off a bit in the box for a knock down/ shot.
As mentioned by Dunners there Hogan will hopefully come in for the last 2 games, Maguire also should be in the last 2 squads as an option off the bench, similar style to Long but can actually finish. If Long and/ or Murphy are the answer up top for goals I'd hate to see what the question is and that question has been asked for a good few years now.
Why O'Dowda came on instead of Horgan given McGeady was injured was baffling, he was lost out there positionally and the 3 or 4 balls he tried to stick in went awol or straight into the defender 2 yards in front of him. Meyler outstanding again as he has been whenever he's stepped in. Difference between himself and Whelan is Myler has no problem showing for the ball, doing little give and goes and spreading it back and forth across 10-20 yards to keep things moving/ ticking over in possession. Wes was Wes as always, soon as he went off instead of knocking it about the midfield we went back 15 yards into our half and the centre halves were spreading it.
For all the negativity over the last week and the performances in 3 out of the last 4 games we're still night and day compared to the Traps tenure so a bit of perspective needed amongst the kneejerkery. Yes it's disappointing and frustrating and all that and there'll always be things to criticise, that's football. The most frustrating thing for me is once a year/ 18 months we put in a shift like last night or v Italy and then revert back to type most of the time but at least we gave it a go last night, the majority of Traps time we'd all be sitting there and there wouldn't even be that or an ounce of hope of getting something.
Thought Serbia put in a great away shift, cynical when needed when our only real clear cut chance came up, take him down and take the red, then the usual cynical time wasting and clinical in front of goal.
We've an aging squad but tbf we do have a fair couple of lads in their early to mid 20s who are pushing for their start/ a squad place and for the next campaign they'll hopefully push on in the euro qualifiers/ nations cup/ friendlies next year & the older heads taking up a squad place will be phased out. Still in a with a shout of making the playoff and we never make it easy for ourselves so we'll see what happens next month. The futures not as bleak as most are making out in my opinion albeit Russia is most likely out the window now.
When is O'Neill's contract up? Four straight competitive games with poor performances and dropped points speaks for itself. Obviously O'Neill's position should be evaluated at the end of the campaign, and if - a big if - they were able to get 4-6 points from those, I think the FAI will stick with him, but a big part of me thinks we should get ahead of the inevitable and look elsewhere now, as opposed to 18 months from now when we may very well be in the same position.
I wouldn't have a problem with Forrester in the team. He's quite impressive as a creative midfielder. Kelly and Forrester to start against Moldova would be fine with me
So do I. Judge is a fine player and could go a long way to softening the blow of Hoolahan's impending retirement
I agree but only in an arctic winter night/day scenario! I can barely notice any difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by colonelwest
- Harry Arter poor with and without possession for a third competitive game, which proves the folly of pining our hopes on players who aren't good enough to play for England.
- David Meyler was an improvement on Whelan and Arter and the only reason Arter got the not ahead of him despite Meyler being the better of the two in Vienna is because of hype and a media drive. It also makes a complete mockery of what Arter said recently about it “being harder” for granny rule players to get established in the IRL setup.
- Wes Hoolahan was probably our best player when he was on the pitch, and despite all the myths about him being a luxury who “loses the ball in dangerous positions”, he didn't give away the ball once; in fact he won the ball several times.
- Hoolahan showed every one of his 35 years, leading and organising the midfield and doing what Whelan failed thoroughly to do in Tbilisi, even as captain.
- Meyler on the other hand, despite being MOTM, gave away the ball carelessly several times, and almost gave it away cheaply in the first half with a comically lackadaisical pass that fortunately wasn't intercepted like it should've been; this, again, shows the folly of the mythic Hoolahan criticism.
- McClean is a sending off waiting to happen, completely lacking in the composure needed for games of this magnitude.
- Brady was poor again but improved marginally, solely due to the presence of being able to interchange with Hoolahan.
- I noticed on several other websites a few fans persisting with the folly of criticising Randolph, which is laughable in the extreme; he was almost entirely faultless, again, over the two games.
- Walters was given the luxury of deciding if he was fit to play. He wasn't, but he completed 90 minutes over 72 hours as anyone could've predicted he would as soon as the gravity of the nature of his injury was disclosed. Nothing learned from the Euros debacle. But blame must lie at the feet of MON despite the selfishness of the player.
- Murphy should've won a penalty, got a man sent off and won a free kick in an excellent position, and tested the goalkeeper. He should've been on from the start but this would've required dropping Walters, which is unthinkable, even when he is clearly unfit.
- Long almost scored with a ferocious effort from outside the box and tested Stojkovic with another rare shot on target. He had no support at all, which was theoretically to come from Walters, and had to continuously resort to running the channels and into crossing positions.
- CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE
- I was struck by how the only time we ever seemed to get more than one player in the box was at set pieces.
- I was struck by how, from minute one, there was pockets of empty space left in front of our box, the space Meyler was supposed to be patrolling, the space Whelan continuously fails to protect when he plays; Serbia got joy time and time again but MON failed to do anything about it.
- It was asinine how we ended up with no central midfielders against Georgia and with Hourihane as the closest thing to a central midfielder against Serbia. Against Georgia we ended up with McGeady, McClean, Brady, Walters, Long and Murphy on the pitch. O'Neill is clueless when it comes to adapting our shape and reorganising; it's fly by seat of pants stuff, real square pegs in round holes – which Walters sums up.
- Christie is limited but game going forward. He had no support from an unfit Walters when defending, same as Coleman in Dublin against Georgia; but anyone could tell you Walters should play up front if at all. Christie did well to track back and stop a dangerous Serbia counter at point, when it would have been easy to go down.
- Ward seems to think he's an auxiliary CB at times, tucking in and leaving us laughably exposed down his side.
- Clark and Duffy were fine and are an adequate base to build on. If only O'Shea was a couple years younger, though, we badly miss his vocal presence and organisational skills.
- The introduction of O'Dowda, who can't get off the bench for Bristol City, again, shows the folly of relying on granny rule players. He was ineffective apart from one decent cross.
- Sean Maguire should've been integrated with the friendlies over 6 months ago. It's not like we could've possibly played any worse in those games if he was given a few minutes to show what he could do
- It's laughable to see some fans use Woodburn as a reason for lads like Rice to be fast-tracked. A player who has about 270 minutes of senior football behind him and was brought off at half time in his last start because of a game changing mistake.
- Hogan has finally given up on playing for England and thrown his lot in with us after one odd league goal in 20 games. We've been down this road before with Folan, Best and Cox. I would be pleasantly surprised if he is a success for us, but lads like Martin, Rhodes and McCormack have scored goals at Championship level with greater frequency over a longer period of time and have completely flattered to deceive at Intl level.
- Why do we only come out and play when all seems lost? The Georgia game was the most frustrating since the 2-2 Austria game in Dublin. It's like we subconsciously play for a draw even when in front.
O'Neill's teams at their worst are just as bad, but we are a bit more likely to get a more attacking performance out of them.
What bothers me is that the planning seems to be that the default tactic is defensive, long ball drudgery. It seems like only after a bad performance under such tactics will we set up to be attacking and pass the ball round a bit.
We haven't come within a million miles of plumbing the depths of Paul Green (unattached) coming on Vs Spain in Gdansk; needing 2 scabby last minute goals to beat Kazakhstan or the absolute drubbing 6-1 at home to Germany levels of despair. Anyone saying otherwise most definitely either has a short memory or is pulling a Maude Flanders!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
As someone who heads every home game, most aways and was in Tbilisi for the game, yes that was horrific, but it was still nowhere near as bad as the dark days of the last while of Traps reign.
Can someone else point out the mistake in this please?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
A couple more points.
IRL need to be a bit more streetwise. The Georgians and Serbians were constantly wasting time, winding opposition players up and maintaining a dialogue with the referee throughout the game. The referee was probably (I like to think) going to send off Maksimovic anyway but it looked like he made his mind up after Walters performed his duties as captain and interjected. Until Walters did that it looked like nobody was going to pressure the referee. As for the penalty shout, it was a stonewall penalty but if Murphy had the common sense to go down it would've made the decision for the referee.
Harry was one of our better players last night?Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
Georgia was his third competitive game after the two Austria games. His only good performances have come in friendlies against Holland and Uruguay. If you read all my bullet points you'll see I'm aware that he didn't play last night; Hourihane's introduction off the bench in his stead was rather telling I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
he shouldn't have to go down to get the penalty. was clear live and even clearer when I saw the highlights at home after. the ref was in the perfect place to see it too and chickened out. sometimes hitting the deck actually looks suspicious and counts against the player being fouledQuote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
It's cruel because I think we would've gone on to get a second if the penalty was given (and we scored it).Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
he gave decisions against our forwards in and around their penalty area for far less offences. I know that the threshold for fouling to give away a penalty is far higher than that for a free but that's simply wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
He gave the Serbs a lot of leeway. Ivanovic was lucky not to get booked for a couple of flashpoints with McClean and Brady, especially the latter.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
It's pinning not pining. Am I right Nigel...?!Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
Needs to play for Peterborough first surely lads, hasn't had a sniff of a start this season so far and maybe one brief outing from the bench. They brought Doughty in from QPR in the middle and have made dream start & he has gone from club captain, first pick & MVP to having work to do under this new manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by mark12345
Moldova - currently bottom on 2 points and with a goal difference of -16 - will finish bottom even if they beat Austria, as three points against Austria wouldn't be enough to take them ahead of Georgia, who have 5 points and a goal difference of -4, unless Moldova beat Austria by lots of goals - possibly even by double digits - and/or Georgia suffer very heavy losses in their final two games. A result against us on top of a result against Austria might help Moldova overtake Georgia, of course, but if they get a draw or a win against us, it could prove a fatal blow to any slim hopes we have of finishing second (unless Wales draw with or lose to Georgia), so it won't matter, and even if we did finish second after Moldova beat us (and they finished fifth ahead of Georgia), the four points we picked up against Georgia would be discarded in the runners-up ranking table, which would leave us on 12 points for that (rather than 13 points if Moldova were to finish bottom and we beat Wales), although I think we would be left on 13 points in the runners-up table and would enjoy a slightly superior goal difference to what we'd otherwise have if Moldova were to draw with us and finish fifth and we then went on to beat Wales and finish second. Am I right in thinking that?Quote:
Originally Posted by elroy
Bizarrely, it seems then that there could be a possible permutation where drawing with Moldova rather than beating them could ultimately be more beneficial for us in terms of the ranking of runners-up, but I'd say the chances of everything coming together in that potential scenario and working out in our favour are extremely unlikely - virtually nil - as it'd also rely upon Moldova stuffing Austria (to bring Moldova on to 6 points and enhancing their goal difference by enough to surpass Georgia's goal difference), Wales drawing with Georgia (in order to keep Wales within touching distance of us with us still to play them for the win) and Georgia losing very heavily to Serbia (to keep Georgia on 6 points and have them end up with a lower goal difference than Moldova). Wales beating Georgia would push Wales out of our reach, whilst Georgia beating Wales would render it impossible for Moldova to finish ahead of them. All things considered, I wouldn't exactly be advising O'Neill to set the team up to play for a draw against Moldova as even contemplating the possibility of Moldova stuffing Austria would be very, very fanciful; delusionally optimistic perhaps. Relying on it to happen would be sheer lunacy.
B&H are in Greece's group - group H - and you're relying on Greece slipping up and failing to overtake B&H then. I suppose it's theoretically possible that B&H could lose to Belgium and draw or lose against Estonia with Greece beating Gibraltar and drawing or even losing against Cyprus, which would mean Greece would finish second in that group and be ranked in the runners-up table with either 10 or 11 points. Not sure how likely that is though...Quote:
Best options seem to be Bosnia, Slovakia or Greece group.
If we win our next two games and Bosnia do not win both their games, then we will definitely not be worst second place. One of their games is home to Belgium.
Greece - who, as I say, have Cyprus to play away and Gibraltar at home in their final game - will likely overtake B&H if B&H lose to Belgium and unexpectedly slip up in Estonia too. Greece would be on 13 points in the runners-up rankings if they finish second after beating Cyprus and Gibraltar and - unless (I think) we beat Wales by at least three goals more than the number of goals by which Greece beat Cyprus - they will almost certainly have a higher goal difference than us as they'd currently be on +3 whilst we'd be on +1 in the runners-up ranking.
Here is group H as it stands:
http://i68.tinypic.com/flit52.png
It's somewhat unfair that group H play their final round of games a day after us, so B&H/Greece will have a much better idea than we will of what they need to do going into their final games in terms of how many goals they might need to score or whatever. Foreknowledge such as that can obviously make a huge difference in terms of how a team goes out to play from the first whistle; be it deciding to keep it tight or going for an all-guns-blazing approach.
As for Slovakia's group - group F - I don't really see it happening. Here's group F at the minute:
http://i68.tinypic.com/1zlcfau.png
I think Slovakia will manage at least a point in Scotland (Slovakia beat Scotland 3-0 last October) and a win at home to Malta then should secure second place for them; they'd then have at least 13 points (or 15 if they beat Scotland again) in the runners-up table then and, if necessary, their goal difference (which would remain at +6 if they draw with Scotland) should be enough to take them into the play-offs.
If Scotland or Slovenia could somehow manage to get into second place in group F through either of them winning only one of their respective remaining two games, I think that would work for us too as they'd likely end up on no more than 12 points in the runners-up table. Whether that's realistic or not is the question, but it could theoretically work, for example, if Scotland beat Slovakia in Glasgow by quite a few goals (or by enough goals to ensure the Scots overtake Slovakia's superior goal difference whilst also remembering that Slovakia will probably beat Malta by a few) and then draw with Slovenia in the final game with Slovenia already having lost away to England in their previous or penultimate game.
Actually, I'm also just realising now it's possible that if Scotland beat Slovakia by two goals or less, Slovenia lose to England, Slovakia then beat Malta whilst Scotland and Slovenia draw with one another, Slovakia will finish second in group F with 18 points. That would translate to 12 points in the runners-up table, which would work for us as we'd be on 13 if we beat Wales. I'd say that might actually be our best chance of making the play-offs if we finish second. So, we're kinda relying on Scotland and England to do us favours there. I'll happily support England for 90 minutes if it means us getting closer to Russia! Could Scotland have it in them to beat Slovakia though?
Looking elsewhere, there may be potential for us in group E:
http://i63.tinypic.com/9fv0a8.png
If Montenegro draw with Denmark at home and lose to Poland away, they'd finish group E on 17 points. If Denmark, having drawn with Montenegro, go on to draw with or lose to Romania in their final game, they'd finish on either 17 or 18 points. These tallies would translate into either 11 or 12 points in the runners-up table. It's worth nothing though that Denmark's game against Romania is in Copenhagen, so you'd fancy Denmark to win it as Romania probably aren't the team they were a few years ago. Although you never know; Denmark's trip to Romania earlier in the group ended in a 0-0 draw, so there's definitely a bit of hope for us in this group too.
All in all, there are a few potential avenues open for us in theory then. The chances of things coming together for us are still clearly very slim, but perhaps the situation isn't as utterly hopeless and gloomy as originally suspected. Assuming we beat Moldova, we really just need to then try to beat Wales by as many goals as we possibly can in order to give us the greatest chance of qualifying for the play-offs, especially in case other teams (pretty much all of whom will have a superior goal difference to us right now) happen to finish with 13 points too in the runners-up table. I think there are results that could go our way in theory in other groups too, but, having scanned through them quickly, the chances of those coming together for us seem so unlikely that I'm not sure they're worth a huge deal of consideration.
(I'm pretty sure my above formulations are accurate, but they remain open to correction as it's always possible I've overlooked a result or missed a possible outcome here or there. If anyone spots an error, be sure to point it out. Cheers!)
Sterling work Danny, excellent
I said after the Serbia game in Beograd, they were there for the taking, and that they would get better. I also said it would come back to bite us. That game was the only game we seemed able to score at will, we've been impotent since then really and Oneill doesn't have the prescribed Sidenafil to do anything about it. Had we beaten them when they were all out of sorts, we'd now be a point behind them and sitting comfortably for at least 2nd. We were still able play ball then and they were awful bad defensively in that game. We've not looked anywhere near that level since, but we have looked like we can just sit and let teams attack us again and again and again. If we'd done the business at the start we wouldn't have to worry about how the ship has stalled before reaching port.
Its all over now, regardless of beating wales, which we wont do anyway. We are completely rudderless and no cohesion or idea what to do when we have the ball or when we don't have the ball. I'm beginning to think this negativity and continuous down playing of our ability and capability is O'Neills tactics to get us believing we are always the underdog and never quite good enough, reverse psychology that is used to then rally us, as its only motivational tool. And he has always played that card. YOu don't come out saying premiership players etc and we don't have the players and then make out a Georgian team with players in the European leagues are all that good - they are good but not that good and it doesn't hold water with his argument. He has created this mindset amongst the players that has bread a bit of fear and they don't know what to do in most situations. It worked once or twice for a big game but has stifled us in the long run and makes us panic and fear when its not going exactly how we need it to go to perform this way.
i think the most likely scenario that would help us here would be for bosnia to lose or draw at home to belgium - which you would expect and greece to draw in cyprus (a taller order, but cyprus aren't bad and technically could still finish 2nd themselves...) and then both win their final games. if greece don't beat cyprus, the would only have max 11 contributing points to 2nd spot (currently they have 10; their last game v gibraltar won't count towards the 2nd place standings).Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
bosnia currently on 8, so a draw/loss to belgium and a win in estonia (or vice versa) gives them max 12 points.
those games happen on 7 oct, so after we play moldova. prior to the kick off in wales we should know what we need to know to qualify i think.
If it kind of has a "work in progress" feel to it, that's kinda because it is; I was working it out and realising new possibilities as I was going along. Still am actually! Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
Just going back to group H, I'm realising that the following is quite possible (and I see zero has mentioned it as I've been composing this post): Belgium beat B&H and B&H beat Estonia whilst Greece draw with Cyprus (that game is in Cyprus, importantly) and then Greece beat Gibraltar. That'd leave both B&H and Greece on 17 points in that group and whoever had the superior goal difference between them would finish second. In the runners-up table, that'd convert to a tally of 11 points, which'd be grand for us if we're to manage 13 points.
Just trying to work out if there's any chance that 11 points for us could ever be enough to keep us out of the worst runner-up spot in the runners-up table; seems it might be possible actually... Further to the scenario outlined immediately above, if we won against Moldova, whilst Wales lost to or drew with Georgia, and we then drew in Wales, that'd secure second position for us in group D with 17 points (as Wales would finish on either 15 or 16 points). That would, of course, translate into 11 points in the runners-up table. Our runners-up table goal difference total would not improve with those results, however, and would remain at +1, due to the fact we'd have drawn with Wales and our goals against Moldova would be discarded, so that could prove detrimental if we were ranked against another runner-up on 11 points.
It wouldn't necessarily be fatal though; B&H's current goal difference in the runners-up table is +2. In their group, it's actually +11 (compared to Greece's +6), but +9 of B&H's goals were scored against sixth-placed Gibraltar, so are discarded. If B&H were to lose by a few goals to Belgium and then beat Estonia by the slimmest of margins (and finish second in group H, meaning Greece would have to get no more than 4 points in their final two games and also fail to score enough goals to better B&H's group-table goal difference total), it might actually take B&H's goal difference total below +1 in the runners-up table. As one of Greece's games is at home to Gibraltar though, Greece could score highly in this, so there'd be an obvious worry these potential goals could take them ahead of B&H into second in group H if the two sides were to finish equal on points under the aforementioned circumstances.
I think, for B&H, a 3-0 loss to Belgium and a 1-0 win against Estonia would do the trick for us in bringing B&H's runners-up table goal difference to 0. It'd be unlikely to be of use to us at +1 as they've already scored more goals than us (which is the next differentiator in the runners-up table), unless our draw against Wales in this scenario is a very high-scoring one. If Greece drew against Cyprus and also failed to score over 3 goals against Gibraltar in Athens, I'm pretty sure Greece would finish behind B&H on goal difference (with both teams on 17 points) in their group. Or if Greece lost to Cyprus, that'd make it impossible for them to overtake B&H.
If Greece, on the other hand, were to finish second in group H on 17 points (giving them 11 in the runners-up table), it's highly likely the eventual Greek goal difference total (which would already be +3 if they were ranked in the table of second-placed teams), would also be superior to ours (+1) if both of us were to be ranked on 11 points.
Likewise, if a group E team was to finish with 11 points in the runners-up table and we also had 11 points, I think it's highly likely their goal difference would still be superior, especially if it's Denmark, as, although both Montenegro and Denmark have the same goal difference (+11) in their group right now, Denmark would have more goals than Montenegro in the runners-up table as Denmark scored more of their goals against teams other than Kazakhstan and both teams' goals against Kazakhstan would obviously be discarded; Montenegro would lose +8 goals whilst Denmark would lose only +5 goals due to the discarding of Kazakhstan results.
If Montenegro were, however, to somehow finish second, say, after losing to Poland in Warsaw by 3 goals or more after having drawn with Denmark in Podgorica, which would prevent Denmark from passing them (it would also require Denmark losing to Romania in Copenhagen by as many goals as the margin by which Montenegro lost to Poland), I'm pretty certain 11 points and our goal difference of +1 would be enough for us in the runners-up table in order to take us to the play-offs. That possible outcome would be extremely unlikely though, surely.
Just looking at the remaining groups in a bit more detail...
In group C, if NI lost to both Germany and Norway and, in the process, had a goal differential of -6 over those two games, that would keep them on 13 points in the runners-up table and leave them on a goal difference (+1) that we'd surpass if we beat Wales by a goal (bringing us to +2). Obviously, the fewer goals NI would concede, the greater number we'd need to score against Wales. It's not impossible they could lose their final two games by heavy margins, but, on current form, I'd expect them to pick up at least a point against Norway, even if it's in Oslo.
In group A, Sweden should beat Luxembourg in Stockholm (even in spite of the latter's recent heroics in holding France to a draw in Toulouse) to secure second place on at least 19 group points and a runners-up table spot on at least 13 points with a healthy enough goal difference to take them into the play-offs (it's +3 at the minute in the runners-up table). A stuffing in Amsterdam by an admitedly relatively poor Netherlands in the final game might dent their goal difference a bit, so something to look out for there perhaps...
http://i66.tinypic.com/2w6f6l4.png
We also can't be sure who will finish bottom of that group just yet. If Sweden finish second as expected, ideally Belarus would finish bottom (which I do think is more likely when I look at the the respective remaining fixtures of Belarus and Luxembourg whilst also taking into account current goal difference totals) as more of Sweden's goals will be discarded that way. Sweden have +8 against Belarus but +1 against Luxembourg (although they do still have another game against Luxembourg obviously, but it's unlikely they'll beat them by more than 7 goals).
If Sweden were to somehow slip up against Luxembourg, say, with a draw, and then went on to draw against the Netherlands, that would leave Sweden finishing second with 18 points (or 12 in the runners-up table, which would be inferior to our hopeful 13). Maybe some hope there; the possibility of a draw between the Netherlands and Sweden in Amsterdam is quite likely, but we'd also be praying for further heroics away from home from Luxembourg.
If Sweden were to slip up with a draw against Luxembourg and then went on to lose against the Netherlands, the Netherlands would probably also need a win against Belarus to take them into second as it's likely the Netherlands' goal difference would still be inferior if both finished on 17 points. A win for the Netherlands against Belarus would take them on to 19 points in the group, which would translate to 13 in the runners-up table, but their goal difference (which'd presently be +2 if they were in the runners-up table) would also have improved on account of their victory over Sweden, so might put them beyond our reach.
Just looking at group I, if Iceland secure a victory over Kosovo in their final game, they should secure second spot in the group, although if Turkey manage to beat Iceland before that, it'd keep Iceland on 13 runners-up points (as the Kosovo result will be discarded) and it could do crucial/helpful damage to their goal difference, so something definitely to keep an eye on there too.
http://i63.tinypic.com/2zzn7yt.png
There is a possibility of either Iceland or Turkey finishing second in group I on 18 points, which would leave them with 12 in the runners-up table. If Iceland slipped up against Kosovo - a draw would do - and they also drew against Turkey with Turkey beating Finland, Turkey would finish with 18 points ahead of Iceland, also on 18 points, due to a superior goal difference. Another possibility; Turkey could beat Iceland and draw with Finland. If Iceland then also drew with Kosovo, that'd put Turkey in second with 18 points ahead of Iceland's 17. Obviously, if Iceland beat Turkey, they're out of our reach as that'd give them 16 points in the runners-up table.
It'll be impossible to catch the the group B runner-up, whether it's Portugal (currently on 15 points in the runners-up table) or group-leaders Switzerland (who'd currently be on 18 if they were ranked), so no point looking at that group at all.
http://i67.tinypic.com/4gp75j.png
Same for group G really; Italy already have 13 runners-up points with a goal difference of +3. If they manage even a point against Macedonia at home or Albania away in their final games (and it's pretty much certain they will), it'll mathematically put them beyond our reach in the runners-up table.
Pretty sure that's all eight groups covered between this post and post #154.
http://afalsefirstxi.blogspot.ie/201...rbed-cold.html
Usual analysis on Tuesday's disappointment for those of you interested. Long way back now......