If you were to graph kennys reign and bring it to a board of performance reviewers how do you think that would look?Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
Printable View
If you were to graph kennys reign and bring it to a board of performance reviewers how do you think that would look?Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
What's this 4th campaign nonsense? Its his second campaign - Kenny's primary remit is to qualify us for Euro 2024, if we qualify then great - if not he will be let go. We've transitioned to a team who could barely score a goal early in his reign, to a now inconsistent side who are capable of big results - the next step is to play well consistently over the course of a campaign and that will mean results like Armenia away which has crippled our Nations League chances will be intolerable. I don't understand the calls now for him to be sacked tbh - particularly off the back of our last 3 performances. We are clearly improving performance wise.
Nations League 2020-21:Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
League B
Seeded 3rd in group of 4. Finished 3rd
2022 FIFA World Cup Qualification:
Group A
Seeded 3rd in group of 5. Finished 3rd
Nations League 2022-23:
League B
Seeded 3rd in group of 4. Finished 3rd (Probably)
Euro 2024 qualifying will be Kenny's fourth campaign in charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Unless you're ignoring the Nations League, which makes no sense.
I'm not ignoring it - Nations League is intertwined with Qualification. Qualification is the goal. That's how he will be judged.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
People are comparing 2 x NL and 2 x Qualifications with 4 x past qualifications by stating that this is his "4th campaign" is not reflective of reality imo. It becomes a lot more important if you are in League C mind you.
Thats why data has become such big business. Drill down into the finer details like games over windows, start of campaigns, second half performances...It would be a graph of multiple confidence intervals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Don't agree with that. Nations League is a campaign in its own right. It's a separate tournament with its own rewards (promotion, which he said was the target at the start of this group).Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Yes, it links into Euro qualifying (sometimes - his first campaign didn't for example), and yes, it's different to how prior managers were judged - but things change, and evaluations need to adjust. Six games (the current Nations League) was a full qualifying campaign in 1992 for example.
To say it's nonsense that Kenny is going into his second campaign now is...well, nonsense.
The campaign to qualify is split into 2 phases - a NL phase and a Qualification phase. Its not nonsense to evaluate each campaign at the end of each - that's how practically every Irish manager has been evaluated and that's how they will continue to be evaluated. The format has changed, the end goal has not. If you are going to stop now and judge manager at the end of every 6 NL games as is being intimated in previous posts citing the start of his 4th campaign then you are missing the point of the main goal.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Would we prefer to win the NL, get promoted to League A, finish 3rd in Qual and lose a playoff:
or
Finish 3rd in the NL and finish 2nd in Qual.
Kenny loses his job in scenario A, not in scenario B.
The NL is a great idea and has breathed a bit of life into international football but the main aim for teams save for those at the very top of the tree is the qualify for the big tournaments and that's how success and failure are judged over qualification campaigns.
No-one's saying you have to stop and evaluate a manager after each six NL games, but it's not necessarily a bad idea either. And I think it's entirely reasonable to take the NL separately when building up a bigger picture.
If you choose to take the NL as an extension of qualifying, then you're effectively giving Kenny around half as much time again as others before evaluating him. That doesn't seem reasonable.
There may be an argument for grouping the two together, but it certainly isn't "nonsense" to consider the two NL campaigns as separate competitions and to say Kenny is starting into his fourth campaign
This ?huge rebuild? is the biggest red herring I?ve ever seen. He?s playing the players available to him. Any other manager would have to play them because there aren?t any others. He?s not getting the best out of them whatsoever. We aren?t hard to beart, we aren?t setting the world on going forward, we pass around the middle and the back to pad the stats, then fire if long you try to score. Same as every other manager we?ve ever had.Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
You?d swear Kenny was Wenger or Pep the way some go on about him. He?s had more than enough time. After tonight it?s time for him to go. Bohs is about his level and they are looking a manager.
Nations League is just a bunch of glorified friendlies... I hardly pay attention to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I don't agree. You only need to look at how many fans of certain countries have really bought into it. Regardless of the escape hatch it offers in terms of qualification it's far better than friendlies to pitch yourselves against opposition of a roughly comparable standard and take stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by brine3
We were brutal in Yerevan. Poor at home to Ukraine - where I maintain our keeper should have done a lot better for the only goal. Good against Scotland where we rode our early luck and then turned in a great display and scored nice goals. Uklraine away was a very good outing. Scotland away was actually a good performance. You can argue it's a results business all day long but you'd want to produce a convincing argument to persuade me that our 0-0 in Denmark was better than the 2-1 defeat in Scotland, for example.
I think breaking Kenny's tenure into 3 blocks as suggested above is the right way of looking at things. I think only now are we seeing the type of squad we envisaged when he first took over which was arguably too early as the players earmarked for his era weren't ready yet. Block 1 was bad but with mitigants. Block 2 was moderate to bad and block 3 is much more encouraging. I think when even Liam Brady is now seeing the positive direction then it should be clear that there really is something good being built. Ken Early wrote about this yesterday.
Failing to win tonight will be disastrous, no debate there.
But assuming we win I have no reservations about Kenny taking the team into the Euros. It'll still be a hit and miss campaign I reckon simply because we have a team of 23 year olds playing in an unforgiving environment. I think by the end of the Euro campaign the squad will be in good shape and I think - as said above - a new manager if needed will have a better squad to work with.
Brian Barry Murphy is the guy I'd be keeping an eye on if Kenny doesn't surive the Euro campaign.
I think also btw this is a really shallow analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
It doesn't allow that we were pretty much out of the hunt right at the start and never remotely challenged for the top spots in any of those campaigns.
It doesn't allow for some of our worst-ever results being racked up (in particular home v Luxembourg and Azerbaijan, away v Armenia)
It doesn't allow for the lucky draw we got in terms of the seeds just below us (an awful Bulgaria, Luxembourg as a fourth seed, Armenia this time)
It doesn't allow for our awful goalscoring record (which you can in part place on having no forwards of course)
It doesn't allow for the decline in our world ranking (from 37th to 45th per Eloratings, having at least picked up from a low of 58th after the Azerbaijan draw)
It doesn't allow for Portugal resting players at home against us because they wanted to focus on the Serbia game three days later.
passinginterest at the start said "I think Kenny still deserves credit for what he's trying to do and the players he's bringing through. But, I've said before, I'm not sure he's going to survive long enough to be the manager who benefits from it" and I think the first part is definitely reasonable and the second part, while obviously conjecture, is probably fair too.
But saying we've met our seeding each time so things are grand glosses over quite a lot.
In my opinion it is nonsense - its contrived IMO to make SK look worse than he is - he has failed in 3 campaigns and is now starting a 4th , instead of what should be a narrative - phase one is over and lets judge him at the end of the qualifying campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
But tonight is his 21st competitive game in charge - that cannot possibly be "phase 1". No Ireland manager has ever had a 21-game "Phase 1"
But it was, and is,a huge rebuild. How can you deny that ? You’re right, any incoming manager would have had to do the same, and yeah, probably pretty much the same players would have been introduced, though maybe not as many as early. Would another manager have done better along the way ? Possibly. It’s arguable either way in my view. But there was always going to be inconsistency and poor performances along the way. Wee have had good performances too, despite what some would have you believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by weldoninhio
And please, can we stop with the “people are going on like he’s Klopp or Guardiola” nonsense. No they aren’t. No one has ever said that, ever. All some have said is that he deserves more time. I still believe that. To resurrect talk of sacking him after the last 3 games in particular is bizarre. Don’t you think those performances have seen a marked improvement ? Ok, calling for his head after Luxembourg or Armenia away was understandable, but it makes little sense when we look like we’re improving, and the team are still clearly playing for him.
id argue the mick mc carthy term 1 got quite a lengthy period of grace given the large re-build that was required.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
culminated in wc qualification
It is tbf - but the question posed was a performance analysis. And my post lays out a factual representation of performances to date. Its very much a PASS mark to date for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
You can of course dig deeper.
That is true and is SK's biggest litmus test going forward - next March. However our performances in some games have been under huge pressure with his job hanging in the balance towards the second half of world cup qualification - I think if you look at all the performances throughout the campaign - if you are to point out the bad on balance you should mention good performances also.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It doesn't allow either for some of our best competitive results in years, we beat Scotland 3-0 - our biggest competitive home win since 2014,our first home win against a higher ranked nation since 2016 and Troy Parrott became our youngest competitive goal scorer since 2006. We also drew with the World No.1 ranked team albeit in a friendly and a host of other good results - comprehensive away wins in Azerbaijan and Luxemburg and good results against Portugal Serbia and Ukraine - all sides ranked higher than us.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It also doesn't allow for the fact that we could have ended up in a 3 team group with Iceland and Albania for the 22-23 NL. I don't understand this point at all tbh. Lets take WCQ as an example Luxembourg were bottom of the 4th seeds but got more points than any other Pot 4 team during the qualification campaign that were in a 5 team group : - more than Bosnia - who failed to beat 5th seed Kazakhstan away, more than the aforementioned Bulgaria who lost 3-1 in Lithuania (5th Seeds) , more than Belarus who lost their last 7 games in a row - including a defeat to 5th seeded Estonia, More than Georgia who also lost to a 5th seed (Kosovo). The Luxemburg result was a disaster - but you could easily make a case that if we were playing any other of the 4th seeds they may not have beaten us.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Both our goal scoring record and Elo ratings have considerably improved in the past 10/11 games. We are surely on an upward trajectory here.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It doesn't allow for the composition of that Portuguese team made up of representatives of each of Europe's top leagues - Eng / Spa / Ita & Ger - they had Pepe / Dalot / Fernades and Ronaldo starting. ( To name but 4)Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It emphasizes the ignored current fixture congestion which disproportionally effects smaller nations with the smaller number of top players and us as an example trying to compete with a so called second string Portuguese team with close on 500 caps and however many champions league medals. It does not allow for the fact that SK has had to repeatedly prepare for 3 games in 6 days during his tenure - something no other Irish manager has had to deal with except for the odd example.
I think he will reap the benefit if we make Germany 2024 - he will have had 2 campaigns then and I don't think his detractors or his defenders can expect anything more.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Never said anything of the sort and I didn't glosss over anything which was the original reason for the post. - there are positive and negatives during his tenure - tonight is vital for him and then he has another chance at the "real" business of qualification with the likelihood of a playoff at the end. If he can't steer us into the top 24 nations from 54 at that stage then it should be onto the next in line.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I meant Phase 1 of this Q campaign - Phase one being the NL and Phase 2 actual qualificationQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Possibly so - but by his 21st competitive game in charge, he'd at least brought us to two play-offs (his 21st game was the 1-1 draw against Turkey). He was unbeaten at home, had only one bad defeat (against Macedonia) and had knocked out Croatia months after they'd reached a World Cup semi.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
That's streets ahead of what Kenny has achieved. Granted Mick had a stronger squad to start with and stronger players coming through (Roy Keane, Irwin, Houghton, and newcomers like Keane, Duff)
You said Euro 2024 will be his second campaign - so you're grouping all the 21 competitive games to date (including tonight) as the first campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
That's excessive. Nobody else has had a 21-game "first campaign". So I don't agree with your dismissal of the suggestion that he's going into his fourth campaign as "nonsense". It's a very valid way of looking at things.
in micks first campaign we finished a whopping 10 pts behind romania and only a single point ahead of lithuania to get 2nd place.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
there were some awful performances on the way and we went out with a bit of a whimper to Belgium in the play offs.
I am a big mick fan and loved most of his first stint in charge but there was a lot of forgiveness given to him for the first couple of years tbh
But the latter is not close to being the former though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Your more detailed post is more reasonable. I would argue against it in places - Luxembourg got so many points in part because they beat us, which was a bloody awful result and can't be used to big them up, and regardless of Portugal starting Ronaldo, etc, the fact that they dropped Jota, Dias, Moutinho and Cancelo (who all started v Serbia) is indicative of how they approached the game - don't lose, don't get injured, which they did. I don't think your point about the three-team Nations League group is relevant - my point is that we really shouldn't have finished lower than our seeding (which you used as a positive) given the dreck that was one seed below us. Mightn't have happened if Slovenia, say, had been that team. I think you're also really stretching it with our "best results in years" - Scotland was a good win, Belgium had their second string, Portugal weren't bothered, Serbia ****ed all over us and how we drew that one I don't know, and you ignore Mick's draws against Switzerland and Denmark or MON reaching the World Cup 2018 play-off. A draw against Serbia is bugger all use if you're going to drop points against Luxembourg/Azerbaijan/Armenia, which generally speaking we didn't do beforehand. And using pressure as an excuse doesn't wash. He made that pressure in the first place.
And I agree in other places - we are improving of late (but that's from a very low starting point)
Absolutely. Was a bit ropey and we got out of jail more than once. But it's still streets ahead of anything Kenny has achieved.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
Think you're being a bit harsh on the Belgium game though. One wrong linesman call (and some bad defending from it of course) was the difference over two legs. Probably our best performances that campaign.
No, I did not say that. I was making the point earlier, repeatedly, that this is the 2nd of 2 qualifying campaigns that SK has undertaken. We are currently on Qualifying campaign No. 2 of which the first phase -, the NL, is now coming to a conclusion and phase 2 - the Qualification group - starts in March - any analysis of this entire qualification campaign should be done as a whole. You may disagree with my analysis that it is nonsense to single out each competition but that's how I feel because the NL and the Quals proper are inextricably linked together. My example re. Promotion to league A / Failure to Q for Euro's which would result in SK losing his job bears that out. You may disagree but please don't put words in my mouth.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The original post was -
You replied "What's this 4th campaign nonsense? Its his second campaign". So if you want to make a big deal about the word "qualifying", do you want to retract your comment given it's not in the original post you were replying to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
I suppose if you always finished where you are seeded, it's a sign that no progress has been made, although there has been a lot of improvement since the Luxembourg debacle. If Ireland needs to qualify, it must finish higher than its seeding. While he has brought a different style of football to Ireland, to be fair every dog and divil is playing the same now, including clubs in the lower English leagues so we would have gone that way anyway I suspect. For some reason, I can't warm to the man yet I liked every other Irish manager but it's a results business and hopefully we'll perform tonight and in the future qualifying games but there is just something that tells me he's always going to be an unlucky manager and his post match conferences will be about what might have been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Their goal in belgium came from a throw in that should have gone to us :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
More reasonable is it? Ah come on now Stu - we can't all be as reasonable as yourself!Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I'm not bigging them up at all - but you make the point we were lucky to draw Luxemborg - I'm just contesting that - Luxemborg beat the 5th seeds in our group twice - a feat achieved by no other 4th seed in qualifying, Luxemborg were a middle of the road 4th seed - we could have gotten easier draws and the results bear out that analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I didn't make any point at all about how Portugal approached the game - you made reference to how they rested players which somehow negates our result against them - I countered with the fact that they still had a team of top level players where we did very well to get a result. Plus I made the additional point that the congested nature of the fixtures in comparison to pervious campaigns disproportionally favors the countries with the bigger squads - allowing Portugal to use a squad - something that SK and other lower ranked countries are not able to do thus making progression even more difficult. Portugal messed up big time by not taking our game seriously anyway which was great.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
So It's relevant to point out that we were lucky to draw Armenia - but its not relevant to point out that we could have gotten an easier draw than we did ?Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I didn't use it as a positive - I merely presented the fact that we finished 3rd as 3rd seeds. That's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
2 things here - I said "some" of our best results in years - our home competitive record has been abysmal lately. I don't think I'm stretching it pointing out the records that were broken nor did I ignore other games.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Mick's draws against Swi and Den were in the midst of the most depressing Q campaign ever undertaken and are specifically the reason IMO why SK has had such a difficult job to begin with!
Is it 6.15 yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
was at both legs. at home we were great for the first 20 mins or so and then very poor for the rest of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
i cant remember us making any chances in the away leg other than our goal. yes, there was a disputed throw in but our defending for both away goals was poor.
don't get me wrong though..... it was a mixture of very inexperienced and very old players in that team. my point is that it was a time of great change after jack had retired and that mick got a good amount of time to implement the changes
Is it not the case that Mick left us in a position whereby, barring an absolutely disastrous Nations League campaign featuring 3 moderate-to-poor sides in Wales, Finland and Bulgaria, we were more or less assured of second seed status for the World Cup?Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
We managed three draws and three defeats.
It does take away from our result though. They were getting through that one with a weakened team with the aim of not losing and not getting injured. And we still didn't have a shot on target for the first 89 minutes. The Belgium game is similarly not as good as made out - we didn't draw against the number one team in the world (as you said); we drew against their second string. Those two results have to be taken in context I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Yes, because you presented as a positive (by putting it as pretty much the only argument in saying Kenny gets a "pass" for you), but really the sides one seed below us were pretty bad - and we still barely finished ahead of them (one point ahead of Bulgaria, goal difference ahead of Luxembourg, and we could still finish behind Armenia)Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Are you retracting your dismissal of Snapshot's "fourth campaign" as nonsense yet, in light of the fact that you clearly mis-read it and imbued your own meaning?
I was using the word qualifying to clarify my position for you. If someone says 4th campaign and I thought that was nonsense and go on to indicate that I think its his 2nd campaign - I think its pretty obvious to all what I meant.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I don't think its a retracting issue tbf.
Context is fine but I think you are being selective with your context - the point remains that those were still good results that's all. I don't think its over simplification to point that out. Point taken about the No. 1 team in the world though. That's probably stretching it a bit. Additional context is smaller nations having to play 3 games in 6 days on multiple occasions. This disproportionally hinders smaller nations IMO - I think that's additional relevant context.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
You made the original point :Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
You made a simple reference that we were lucky to draw Armenia. If we were actually lucky during the NL draw and drawn in Group B2, instead of Israel, we would have ended up with Iceland , Russia ( thrown out ) and Albania. How is that irrelevant? You are suggesting we got this massive slice of luck in the draw? I suggest the 3rd seed that are now promoted to League A ( Israel ) are the lucky ones - not us who drew Scotland, Ukraine and Armenia!Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Second in group and into playoffs for both France 98 and Euro 2000.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
And only one minute away from actually winning the Euro 2000 qualifier group. Goran Straveski.
That's Ireland performing at or above its level. It only felt like a "grace period" at the time because we were coming off the back of the 1988 to 1994 period and our expectations were out of whack.
I don't agree. You made a big deal over the importance of a word the OP didn't use. You're changing the OP's context to call it nonsense. I don't think that's fair. I don't see why the Nations League shouldn't be a separate campaign (even if it just a second way of qualifying for the same thing). I certainly don't see why it's nonsense to suggest that, which is a needlessly strong statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Yes - but you're still missing the point. Armenia (and Luxembourg) were the lowest-ranked of the teams seeded one place below us. They were the ones least likely to be able to overtake us. Bulgaria weren't, but they were in freefall. So when you present as good enough for a "pass" the fact that we finished in line with our seeding, I'm saying that a better lower seed could easily have passed us out, so the achievement isn't that impressive at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
The teams seeded ahead of us weren't great; Finland, Scotland and a Serbia side who blow hot and cold. We didn't finish ahead of any of those, or even come close to them. 9 points behind Finland and 1 ahead of Bulgaria. 8 points behind Serbia and ahead of Luxembourg on goal difference. Currently eight points behind Scotland and 1 ahead of Armenia. That's not a pass for me to be honest. It's concerning. Over three separate campaigns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I didn't change the context of anything - 4th campaign is simply wrong imo - I think its 2. I made a clarification for you to add the word qualifying because for some reason you comprehended my posts into :
Its a simple point of view.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The bit in bold is factually incorrect anyway as I've already pointed out with Luxemburg. They were much more likely to overtake us than Belarus or Bulgaria for a start.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I think a PASS mark is fair overall given the circumstances and player development issues new caps etc. - of course if you are going to point out bits of an argument in isolation and attribute them directly to a Pass mark its not going to make sense. Overall we've had a bit of luck with some draws - not with others - we've had some good performances and some dreadful ones and overall we've not really made much progress but not gone backwards much either and latest performances in general give a cause for optimism for me. Let hope we kick off with 2 wins tonight.
looks like my posts are getting deleted. long live king kenny i guess.
We lost by -1 goals tonight. That was muck, and to hell with the possession stats.
Intrigued now as to how you twist that performance tonight into a pass markQuote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
Armenia, who lost 14-1 on aggregate to Scotland and Ukraine, drew 3-3 with us in the group.
The question marks over Kenny just aren't going away. 21 matches and three dire campaigns in