Hutton is a doubt for Scotland ..... according to Lambert
Hutton is a doubt for Scotland ..... according to Lambert
Ward is a lunch pail guy. He comes in, works hard and keeps his mouth shut...managers appreciate that in all sports I'm guessing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
There is something in general to what you say, however most all their (Whelan and Ward) managers have held them in high regard. Maybe when it comes to Whelan and Ward, all managers suspend rationality, but I doubt it. When manager after manager continue to hold the same player in high regard then maybe one can accept that the players have useful qualities and ability.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Ward starts because of the lack of options not because he's a favoured one, even though Delaney's exclusion is a curious one.
Are we over thinking the Whelan conundrum? Maybe we do see what they see? That he's disciplined, tactically aware, has a good positional sense, an okay passer when he has time and space and keeps things simple and ticking over. The problem I would have is that, rightly or wrongly, I kind of see him as a symbol of our lack of progress. Whelan might never leave us down, in a very obvious sense, but he will never contribute to us kicking on to the next level. Perhaps the same could be said of Stoke City. They're no better now then they were five or six years ago, despite solidifying their top flight status. I'm not blaming Whelan for Stoke not challenging for the top four or anything, just pointing out that he's your man if you want to remain in the same place. Of course, Premier League stability is fine for Stoke City, in fact it's living the dream a little bit, but I think we need to kick on.
Ya I was watching stoke thus evening and looking at crouch and Walters and thinking of whelan also and think that's exactly it they haven't kicked on and as you say if you want that you need to be replacing whelan (and others mentioned )with all round midfielders.
I think Whelan is the safe option. There was a time once when we trusted our better players to just go out and do what they do. At times this was a car crash - the Kilbane / Ireland CM pairing in Cyprus - and at times it worked. Trap didn't see midfield as an area where we could win a game, it was an area where he could minimise the chance of losing one. O'Neill seems to be a bit stuck in this mindset too, as evidenced by his "Hoolahan for home games against fodder" utterances.
I think this can be adapted though and most teams now play at least one deep lying water carrier as a platform for more attacking play. O'Neill fluffed his lines in this regard in Georgia thinking McCarthy had the game to be the attacking midfielder whereas he is clearly better suited to the deeper role. Whelan is seen as a competent, safe water carrier, but the best guys in this role do it better. These guys set the tempo of a game. I suppose Whelan does too, a slow one. He's like a scrum half who feeds his ten slow ball all the time.
Is Whelan really the symbol of our midfield malaise though? I feel he would benefit from better midfielders around him too, but all in, I think he is just too slow and doesn't use the ball well. He works hard, takes up good defensive positions but that's as far as it goes.
He's injured for this game, surely what he can/can't do is irrelevant...
Speaking generally AB.
I know!
But is he even going to be playing in the next year or so...
Good points stutts that first paragraph is spot on that formation with our best players in best positions spectacularly imploded in a couple of games. I think though in the first half against israel and that home game in croke park against Wales it worked well.
If you read or listen to oneill at the gaa awards you will get a good insight to his thinking and why Walters for example was picked, it's like we said at the time he offers defensive solidity and cover especially for someone not used to playing in that position.
Why wouldn't he be? I thought MON said he even has an outside chance of making Scotland?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
He talks about it here actually, as well as having a cut off Dunphy. Sometimes I wonder is it counter productive to get involved with Dunphy though, is the best way of dealing with him by not dealing with him? It's great to see him getting slated and undermined, but is it giving him the publicity he craves at the same time. People will probably be queuing up in anticipation of his retort.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
MON - I haven't taken Eamon seriously in 25 years
We aren't in the premier league of intl football, we're hoverering between two lower divisions, safe mid table in the premier league of intl football would be something.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
I'm not over thinking the Whelan conundrum but I took some issue with a post that has a cheap pop and just puts his good fortune at getting picked down to a piece of favouritism, ignoring the fact that every manager he has worked under, favours what he has to offer their team.
And Stoke fans are (at last) quite content with the type of football their team is playing, Glenn is flavour of the season and it isn't just because he has good players around him there. So Glenn has slotted into a role in a team playing faster paced football to feet.
For our purposes, I can appreciate why O'Neill (in getting that outstanding result) in Georgia didn't want to have 2 holding midfielders who actually don't seem to complement each other, but played McCarthy further up. He played it safe with Glenn and at the same time tried something different/adventurous with McCarthy and McGeady. It probably didn't work out as well as was planned but I don't mind a manager using players out of their pigeonholed roles, to effect an offensive plan. Like when Kerr tried something different against Italy but the players just didn't get it and the mob wanted 442.
We wanted something different (than Trap) from O'Neill, he tried something different it didn't work as planned but it didn't cost us at all.
We should appreciate what was tried and look forward.
I was speaking generally, it's not all about you :)Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
We might not be in the Premier League of international football but we're pretty similar to Stoke in terms of talent. Are these the same fans who used give him a hard time at one point, if I remember correctly? Has he improved that much or just grown on them? If ever a player has remained at the same level it's our Glenn, I feel, so it must be the latter.
Chaps im watching the rte news on pbs....they found a treasure trove of artifacts from the 17th century in one of your old castles built around 1583. I suggest some of you check it out and get back to me and Adam at once. It could hold keys to your soccering past.
Generally he's not the greatest and is reaching the 'crock' stage.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
You know, Crosby, I'm sure some of our tactics under Trap dated back to the 17th century.
He's hardly a crock - his injury record isn't too bad. Whatever about whether you think he deserved them, his appearance record for Ireland over the past few years shows he's more or less always fit.
Aye, but the point is he's been around for years and even if he was our greatest ever player would be surprised if he lasts beyond this campaign?
I'd be surprised if he's still in the team by the end, yeah. I think he will still be in the squad though.
Bah, Dunphy will be trotting out the same negative crap irrespective of whether O'Neill gives him attention or not. I thought the put-down was pretty funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
I read a comment in a Score.ie article that the Scottish FA gave such a low allocation of tickets to the FAI because they are fearful of an increased Irish contingent due to the fact that many people in Scotland would identify as Irish, such as those that carry a tricolour to Celtic games, not to mention the families and communities and people with similar attitudes to McGeady and McCarthy.
Pardon my ignorance on this one. I've been to Glasgow and Edinburgh once each and can't say I'm very well versed on this matter. Can anyone shed a bit of light on whether this is an actual reality? I'm looking at you, Danny!
Loads of Tims would have/did but many more now claim or acknowledge any Scots heritage...
It makes you wonder then if they truly feared that why they would play it at Parkhead rather than somehow get it played at Murrayfield. If of course we assume that Ibrox was likely a no-go.
Murrayfield is a ****hole is why.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Scottish stadia tend to be.
Yeah, but Murrayfield in particular is. They've been struggling with a roundworm infestation for two years, although they reckon it's sorted the last couple of months. Still, can see why Scotland would choose a quality ground over one that could turn out to be a disaster and would probably be 1/4 empty anyway.
Rangers are playing Alloa the day after the qualifier, so Ibrox was unavailable.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Clearly Charlie misunderstood and I indulged. Stupidly.
I was responding to AB.
The accusation that they were fearful of an enlarged Irish contingent is ridiculous given that they then decided to hold it in CP.
As regards, Rangers playing Alloa, almost moot, the SFA would have requested a date change for that game most likely. But they would have been mental to hold an Ireland game in Ibrox. It would have been asking for trouble.
Wasn't Aberdeen originally considered as a venue to host the game (allegedly) due to the greater logistical difficulty of actually getting there from Ireland?Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Nope, my contacts tell me the SFA always wanted to cash in. At the biggest stadium. In Glasgow.
Though probably over-estimated home support and under-estimated the visitors...
Plus there was no way we were going to play at the other ground due to obvious security issues.
Though surprised if used on the Saturday, when they have a supposedly prestige international friendly there a few days later?
I have no idea. People can still fly to Aberdeen ya know Danny. Although it's a pain to drive to. Thankfully when I was there in the past it happened to be sunny.
This seems most likely.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Is McGregor injured/unavailable/just not selected? Gordon and Marshall are more than decent keepers, haven't seen much of Gilks.
Squad is amazing. Too strong. We shouldn't bother.
McGregor is injured I think.
Two more goals for Fletcher yesterday, let's just save ourselves the embarrassment and give them a walkover.
It's strong enough. I think we shade it in a few areas - enough to make it very winnable, but also close enough for the Scots to think the same. Awesome match up :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Looking at the Scotland squad, we should be winning this game