myth: Busted!Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Printable View
myth: Busted!Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Definitely a change of approach, just trying to generate a bit of hope I'd imagine - https://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...ll-876536.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by brine3
Certainly arrogant to suggest he'll turn it around and qualify because he's so good, despite only having a couple of good players!
Sounds like he's running out of patience with Rice a bit too, which is fair enough I think.
Quote:
There’s a stage when no matter how talented you are, you have to come to some sort of decision
Dan McDonnell stated today that it would cost 3m to get rid of them. So we are stuck with them
What they need to do is stopping bitching about having no players and recruit Dan Crowley and Patrick Bamford. Bamford is injured so now is the time to meet him and tell him he is in his plans
Yeah I'd say Bamford would need very little encouragement at this stage. The dizzy heights of a Chelsea/England career are clearly unattainable now.
I'm not sure the FAI would sack O'Neill at this point even if it cost them nothing. Let's just pray for a half decent draw in December.
If those figures are correct I assume it means it would cost £3m to pay up their contracts in full. But it will cost €3m to keep them as well.
It will only cost €3.5m to put them on gardening leave and pay someone else half a million to take the qualifying campaign. We are paying them way in excess of the going rate for an international manager.
that's a good point, even if we paid someone 800k, its doableQuote:
Originally Posted by backstothewall
We could structure the next contract to have a reasonably frugal basic wage but with a very generous bonus for qualification. We could put a couple of million euro bonus on the table in the knowledge that if we ever had to we would be in a position to pay it without any difficulty.
O’Neill tells himself how good he is . Maybe he should try that with his players .Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
eh excuse me, he has won two european cups you know! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
Actually there might be cashflow implications, the 3m as things stand is over the next year and a half, but is they are sacked that 3m might have to be paid immediatelyQuote:
Originally Posted by Diggs246
Does he realise that was a very very very long time ago :dead-flower: He should also remember that it all ended badly for Clough in the end . Is it going the same way for O’Neill .Quote:
Originally Posted by Park_Lane
It's also an opportunity to start fighting fire with fire on the Declan Rice front. His new agent, who O'Neill speculated was behind his reconsidering his international future, also represents Robbie Keane.
Perhaps Robbie might have a role in the new team depending on what Rice decides.
Morten Olsen managed Denmark for over 10 years for 400 thousand a year. He also developed a footballing strategy and oversaw the academy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diggs246
O'Neill is a spoofer.
Martin O Neill to Roy Keane ...” They are no good Roy "
Roy to Martin ..” They are no fooking good "
Martin to Roy ....” I’m great Roy "
Roy to Martin ......” You’re fooking great "
Martin to Roy.....” Your doing a great job Roy "
Well that's two lines in the sand... I say, let's see both of these through. I think everyone is placing too much stock in this Nations' League campaign - to a large extent it's an extension of the friendlies we've played this year - an opportunity to bring more players into the squad and give them the chance to prove themselves and get settled on the international scene. In O'Neill's defence, he has had limited opportunities to bring in new players (that's the nature of international football, particularly when you actually qualify for your first tournament) and has used these opportunities pretty much to their fullest to see new players, even though to a certain extent he's been forced to by injuries. So it was always possible that these performances would be disjointed. Some posters have mentioned having a rebuild - THIS WAS THE REBUILD! (for now, anyway).Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
So now we've seen a bunch of players and a few of them have impressed (Robinson, Stevens, O'Dowda) while for others it was probably just important for them to get blooded in, even if they weren't at their best (Doherty, Browne, Egan).
As I noted, we were also missing some of our better experienced players through injury (McCarthy, Coleman, Brady) so when they come back we will hopefully be a better unit with more depth now. So let O'Neill see this rebuild through to the end - if he thinks he can get us through, let him try... if he fails, then let him go.
As regards Rice, I agree that the end of the year is a reasonable deadline - if he hasn't rejoined us by then, it's time for us to move on
Dan Crowley has already signaled his intent, so now it's just a matter of doing the paperwork, then deciding if he's good enough and when he can be blooded in. At this point I don't see any real need to chase Bamford - we now have three new strikers who have shown that they are capable performing at a comparable level in Robinson, Maguire and Hogan - between those three we should see some goals over the next couple of years, which should keep us ticking over until the likes of Connolly, Idah, Parrott, Cassidy, Obafemi, McAuley etc. start to break through. If Bamford wants to come on board, he can let us know (like Robinson did) and we'll see if he fits into our plans at that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diggs246
I agree with all of the first bit, but beware a balanced view like that might not go down well here. :D
As for Bamford, there were some noises a few months back. O'Neill seemed to indicate he heard he was interested, and even said he'd follow it up. I wonder if that ever happened? Doubtful. I'd prefer to have Bamford as an option than Hogan and he gives something a bit different to Maguire and definitely Robinson too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin O'Neill
I think that one can differentiate betweeen a management team who are dysfunctional and a management team who are doing their best without some first choice players, a weakened squad and building for the future.
I don’t like O’Neill’s vision of the future, not just that but he has not shown much evidence that he has a basicc grasp of managing an international squad, selecting a balanced team and preparing that team tactically for the upcoming match.
O'Neill can afford to bluster because he will certainly depart after the next qualifying stage anyway, whether we qualify or not. In the interim he appears to be bunkering down safe in the knowledge that Delaney's donkeys can't afford to sack him. Extremely unlikely at this stage of his career that he is going to change his beliefs so another couple of years of this dross appears on the menu.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Maybe we will win a 'best supporters' award or something Ole, Ole, Ole.
That's very true. It's sounds like forced confidence. It's also at complete odds with his cautious words even when we were in a brilliant position four games into our WC campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
If the FAI made a settlement of 2.2m for the management team. Which would mean a savings over the next year and a half of 800k, which would in turn cover the next managers salary. When you deal with snakes like the FAI 2.2m in the hand is a lot better the 3m in the bush. However all the noise coming from abbotstown is that there is no appetite to sack them.
I see what sammy is trying to say but I disagree, at least to the extent that we are reading too much into the NL campaign. As I see things O'Neill has failed to learn anything from this year long window of opportunity to assess new players. The dogs on the street can see that Stevens brings more balance on the left than McLean. Hendrick's best asset is arriving late, not being positioned high up the pitch. Hourihane was started as a deep lying holding midfielder in Cardiff, Arter the same in Dublin. He is playing players in roles that don't suit their attributes. The team lacks balance and lacks players whose skills complement each other. He publicly lacks confidence in the players. He fails to prepare - Gary Breen said on OTB that he hears from inside the squad they don't work on set pieces at either end - and quite frankly I fail to see any sign that this management team is on top of its brief. If he thinks we're limited then WTF does he not focus on set pieces? They were worth a goal a game to England in the World scup simply due to Harry Maguire FFS.
There have been occasional glimpses of improvement after every setback but nothing approaching what might convince you there is better to come. He still makes things up on the hoof and his reaction to going behind is just to pile on some extra forwards.
Martin O'Neill might have done a great job replacing Stan, but not now. In football you need to be the right man for the right team at the right time.i think it's really hard to argue he's the right man for us at this time.
I didn't realise that at the time of the contract extension, the little detail that O'Neill needed to be fixed before finally signing the papers was an extra Eur700,000 a year, a sweetener for turning down the Stoke job.
do you have a link for that geysir? I don't remember it from when the contract was announced
The only thing that was reported at the time was that the contract remained unsigned for ages and some small detail needed to be sorted out. The info about the salary hike came from Paul Rowan’s article in the sunday times. He has made this claim numerous occasions and the FAI have not denied it. O´Neill must have been on 1.2m before the contract extension.
But what do. you make out of this in the IT from march2018?
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soc...ries-1.3421468
I'm not doubting the increase, just that the reason behind it was turning down the Stoke job.
More than a coincidence though? I haven’t read Rowan’s article this sunday where he mentions it again, but he’s the source that the price hike was a reward/incentive for turning down the stoke job.
You’d wonder if the almost 100% pay rise was agreed upon before O’Brien made it known that he was cutting off his support?
Fair play to Coleman for standing up to Andrews. A couple of days after the match I’d wrote a fairly lengthy post on my phone but it got wiped and I couldn’t summon the strength to retype it all out. One of my points was the likes of Andrews digging out the current team - this was a guy who was arguably part of the worst CM Irish partnership of all time!! The way he goes on you’d think he was a strutting Pirlo in his prime and not a negative pass the ball backwards merchant.
Coleman is another name added to the list who have supported MO’N in recent weeks. I’ve read a lot of nonsense about him losing the dressing room but that is clearly not the case.
I admit it has been **** the last few weeks but journalists/supporters making stuff up is not on. The stuff about Rice was also bang out of line.
I’m undecided on MO’N right now. I was firmly in the anti-Trap campaign towards the end and if results don’t improve then maybe it is time to move on. HOWEVER management changes will not fix the problem, it’s just sticking a plaster over a gaping wound. We need better players and we need better coaches. There is no quick fix. Pep Guardiola wouldn’t turn Keogh and Arter into ball players overnight. I’ll be more optimistic if we can get Rice back into the fold. He would make a massive difference in the pivot position instead of Arter. Fingers crossed.
I disagree with most of that - Rice immediately making things better is the bit I agree with! And yes, a management change is no guarantee of improvement but I don't see O'Neill doing his job any better in the next 12 months, though I accept he may have better players to choose from.
Andrews is perfectly within his rights to criticise if he sees fit. It doesn’t matter if he was any good or not. Personally I think his observations are interesting and useful and have thought so long before he became critical of O’Neill.
Yeah it’d be great to have better players but O’Neill isn’t even close to getting the best out of what he has. He puts them down in public, ignores clear evidence of players’ ability in friendlies, puts round legs in square holes, publicly admits to lack of preparation and his reactive substitutions usually make us worse not better. In my opinion he has really wasted the last 12 months which was a great opportunity to try and learn things.
I don't think that's a fair representation of Andrews at all. I can't be the only one who remembers him and Whelan getting the better of a Pirlo-led midfield in the 2-2 at Croke Park.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
That definitely DID NOT happen.
I thought maybe I was going mad so i went into the old match thread...I gave Andrews a 6. We had posters raving about how good Pirlo was that night.
Is MON perfect? Not by any means. I agree he has made some very dodgy selection choices in recent matches so he is on thin ice but I still think he has enough credit in the bank to get another shot at Denmark/the North next month.
If we get Coleman, Brady, McCarthy and Rice back all in the starting 11 at some point in the future I think we’d see a change in fortune.
Andrews was the Christie of his day - he was never getting more than a 6 no matter how he played. Fact is we were winning that game until a brainfart at the end having been the better team. Italians were raving about Andrews.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
That’s not credit in the bank, that’s a limited, one month only, overdraft extension.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
I think he did a good job replacing Trap, as his first campaign has to be considered a resounding success even if it took a while to get going. Actually the run of results leading up to that campaign wasn't too dissimilar to what we're going through at the moment. Before the gimme against Oman in advance of the first qualifier in Tbilisi, our record was:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
P 6 W 0 D 3 L 3 F 4 A 10
It didn't seem like he was learning too much then either and perhaps the first half of the campaign indicated the same. He eventually got there though, stumbling upon a formation that suited us and it led to some of our best ever results.
I pretty much agree with all of your negatives, the big question for me is whether or not he has enough credit in the bank, as Shakermaker suggests he has, for next month's games at least but really I would extend that to the Euro qualifiers regardless of results (within reason!). Personally I think results are king and will generally outweigh the other negatives and, overall, he's achieved as much as could be reasonably expected, certainly in terms of our final standings in the groups but obviously the Denmark disaster was the first major black mark.
You can point to the disappointing home draws but the fact is we took four points from both Wales and Austria, so they had bigger questions to answer than we did, especially with the quality of players they have by comparison. We can rightly give out about O'Neill constantly bemoaning his lack of top quality players, but the fact is we don't have a Bale, Ramsey, Alaba or Arnautovic. We all know what a difference this kind of quality can make, yet we outperformed both countries and jumped from fourth to second in terms of the original seeding places. Can that really be seen as anything other than an overachievement?
As for Keith Andrews, I've no problem with either side on this. Andrews talks a lot of sense and if he never kicked a ball in his life, he's still entitled to give his opinion. The fact that he has a regular slot on OTB means we're probably hearing more from him than most too. On the flip side though, I can understand why Coleman would find it grating, the negativity isn't helpful to their cause and the fact that Andrews was a key part of a squad that had similar deficiencies was always going to be thrown at him, he even anticipated this himself in one of his OTB previews.
I would take issue with Coleman following O'Neill's lead in isolating our Championship players as a reason for our poor performances. That's not on for me. It's bad enough O'Neill saying it but even worse hearing it from their teammate and so called leader. It's potentially divisive and really not helpful.
I'm hugely supportive of this view.Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker1982
He got us qualified in 2016, and we even got out of the group.
For the 2018 WC, we got to the playoffs ahead of Austria and Wales.
I don't think you could say he was underachieving at that point. There were some poor games and performances for sure, and the playoff itself was a disaster, but the campaign was hardly a failure. Could we really have expected more from that group?
So up to this point, I'd say it has been ugly to watch a lot of the times, but the results have been reasonable. Certainly I think he is over-defensive, but I'll not get into that again.
Right now though, things are looking a bit like Trap's last campaign....wheels coming off a bit. He doesn't look like he is getting the best out of his players, and that doesn't look like changing either.
But the Nations League is too few games, so I'd say he still deserves the Euro qualifiers. Once we know what the groups are, we will have a better idea about what an acceptable campaign would be, considering our players and the other teams in the group.
The other question to be asked though is whether somebody else could achieve that acceptable campaign for less money than the two of them are on.
You’re sellig Keith short, wasn’t he awarded poty one year? Not just a dapper dan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Paul Green was the Christie of his day.
That’s what Owls Fan said!
Anyway, did we not make a play off by virtue of finishing 3rd and also the last 16 by virtue of finishing 3rd? Sure, the rules are the rules but by similar standards we should be heaping more praise on Hand, Jack, Mick and Kerr (though I think Kerr’s best was 4th so maybe scratch that :)).
I’m not being a curmudgeon but outqualifying Scotland and Wales was the big achievement here. Not to be scoffed at but that’s the high point!
Maybe that's why it came to mind so quickly. Anyway, it's a far better comparison I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
A Scotland side you were borderline in awe of for a while (in comparison to ourselves)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
It's unquestionably the best Welsh side ever too, European semi finalists. I think finishing ahead of them with what is generally perceived as one of our worst group of players in decades is a big enough achievement.
Germany and Poland were better than us. Finishing third in that group meets the minimum requirement. Beating Bosnia in the playoff exceeds the minimum requirement. Making the knockouts of the tournament itself is pretty much dreamland. Yes, third place finishes being rewarded was clearly a major advantage for O'Neill over previous managers, but I wasn't comparing him to previous managers. If I was I could argue the point that they generally had much better players anyway.
We also outperformed/outqualified Bosnia, Austria and Sweden along the way too.
The major high points were the wins over Germany & Italy, along with wins in Vienna and Cardiff and obviously beating Bosnia to secure qualification. You could throw in the late equaliser in Gelsenkirchen too. That is not a shabby list by any means over the period of two campaigns.