This is a major u-turn in the space of 24 hours, but **** it. If that **** MacKenzie wants him sacked, I'm joining the #KennyIn camp. No way we give Murdoch's tan handpuppet a head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Printable View
This is a major u-turn in the space of 24 hours, but **** it. If that **** MacKenzie wants him sacked, I'm joining the #KennyIn camp. No way we give Murdoch's tan handpuppet a head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Great remark!! There was an irish player Ossie and Pele plus Caine Max V.S and Stallone!!Quote:
Originally Posted by youngirish
Here in Southamerica is very usual, politics remarks and videos, or clips to "motivate" in the end it is always 11vs11.
Here with this we have 2 scenarios
1) The english new CEO is angry because of this leaked situation about politics and football is not morally and ethical correct etc
2)They are using this situation to get rid of S.K because they didnt choose him
I think showing a motivational video is more common than you might think. I know when UCD played Slovan Bratislava in the Europa League for example, it's exactly what the manager did. (When we played Dudelange, he used all the social media comments as motivation instead). You wouldn't do it for every league game of course, but for a big game, I don't see the issue. Ultimately these are guys who've gone through the various coaching badges and I would say it's an idea recommended there too.
(I agree with you that Bielsa is talking ****e though)
Since the story broke last night, it has devolved from anti-English political message to a three minute video featuring clips from previous games, and some details from the Easter rising.
It sounds like it was only one member of staff, who is English-born, that was offended by it. No player has made a statement yet.
The bigger story is why it was leaked in the first page, and to the Daily Mail, of all papers.
I see the second most read football article on the Guardian today is a report on this. Headline refers to the "anti-English" nature of the video. https://www.theguardian.com/football...-english-video
This episode is painful in many ways and doesn't help anyone in the FAI or the team.
1) It's a shame with everything going on in the world that we have created a sh*tstorm which serves to augment any negative opinions held in England about us as a people;
2) There must be a lot of people involved in pushing this story. It has taken over a week for this to go from the dressing room to the boardroom;
3) A video about Anglo-Irish relations would be inherently anti-English. That is the inevitable result of colonialism. I would be interested to understand how it has been interpreted as anti-English by some genius somewhere- presenting a set of historic facts would be sufficient to rouse most Irishmen and it would have to take a fairly aggressive narrative or tone on that fact set for the message to move the video towards being offensive.
It sounds like it may have been a naive decision rather than a malicious one. From a motivation perspective, I wouldn't do it personally, but I don't have an inherent issue with something like this being used in a team-talk (assuming it wasn't excessively political). But there are a few questions:
- Would political stuff really motivate players?
- Do the players need motivation for a match vs England?
- Did Kenny not think, "Humm this could backfire if we lose"?
- Would it not have been better to show technical videos showing weaknesses within the English team and how we might exploit them (e.g. poor defence out wide etc, keeper's off form in terms of saving long shots)?
- If this is Kenny's motivational strategy how would it work against non-UK teams? It's a bit one dimensional. What could he show for other opponents? Henry's handball if we play France? A video of Cascarino getting attacked on the pitch in Bursa if we play Turkey?
If it was a very political video then I think it may have been unwise.
Have we created a ****storm?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olé Olé
Or have the English media created it?
Look at yer man MacKenzie on Twitter for example - that's him creating it.
Why doesn't the Guardian mention what RTÉ reports - that of a 3-minute video, there was 2˝ minutes of goals from previous Ireland v England games, and 30 seconds of "historical context". That's not, as you say, "a video about Anglo-Irish relations". It's a world apart. It could be 30 seconds of "Ireland unfree shall never be at peace" - harmless stuff which would just get a bit of a gee-up going.
I agree with you though that history can't really be offensive. It is stuff that actually happened.
Why not? Every extra bit helps surely?Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
You'd never get anything done if you spent the whole time wondering about what someone was going to be offended by.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
Why can't you show both? But I can well imagine you finish prep off with something light - one final team-bonding session before heading for the dressing room. Rebel songs on the bus to Stuttgart, or a shout of "We'll do them for yiz today" That's not the time for heavy tactical analysis (which will be recapped in the dressing room)Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
The Henry handball would be a great one to show before a game against France I think. As I put in the WC qualifying thread (and the topic has seeped into two threads, but best keep it here I think), when UCD played Dudelange in the Europa League, there was print-outs of the various negative social media against UCD in the lead-up to the match. Before the Slovan game, there was a motivational video featuring the players' best contributions during the season (to show them they had earned the right to play against Slovan and shouldn't be overawed by them). This sort of stuff can take many forms. Against the old enemy, then the goals from previous matches sounds perfect, and 30 seconds of "800 years, etc" sounds a fairly harmless addition at the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
If the English are that offended by history, they probably shouldn't have made it.
(All subject of course to what was actually on the video)
The English started it ! Why didn’t they just stay in England ?
Much ado about nothing ~ ~ who ever leaked this should be sacked ~ ~ Is it just a ploy to undermine Kenny ?Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
My favourite take on this is from those giving Kenny abuse for doing this 'motivational video' for a meaningless/bounce game against England are the same ones shouting loudest at the 3 -0 defeat and performance.
I thought the performance v England (and most of our performances under Kenny to be fair) was woeful but this is a non-story. I expect it will all blow over by the weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by lofty9
Seems to me 99% of people either have no issue with the video or think it was a bit amateurish at worst.
I have no inherent objections to such things being used as a motivator, as long is there is no straying over into territory we might call "inciting hatred". If pitched right I'm sure they can be useful. It's just it was a friendly in an empty stadium against the England B-team. For that reason I would think a bit much, even, at the risk of sounding harsh, a little pathetic, to be referencing such things ahead of such a match. If it was a do-or-die qualifier or a tournament match, that would be something else.
We're kind of unable to say more of use without knowing exactly what that 30 seconds is, I see all sorts of claims flying around (I'm seeing 1916 referenced a lot, but no concrete details). But if it is, as some think, some reference to England's historical record in Ireland, well, the truth can hurt. Stuff happened. If the English are displeased about it being brought up, well, imagine how the Irish felt at the time.
I mean, we've all experienced/heard stories about crazy things being said in dressing rooms as motivation. It should stay there. For it to be leaked like this is disquieting. "Lost the dressing room" talk isn't far away, and that's a death knell.
Why exactly is this a shame and how exactly is it anything to do with us ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olé Olé
It's needless. Who does it serve?Quote:
Originally Posted by DCWA
I agree with all your points. I am just a little disappointed that the FAI couldn't deal with it in-house instead of creating the story by issuing a statement and RTE being able to run with it. It's low-hanging fruit for the British media and even the Irish media.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Well it seems it was the Daily Mail who broke the story, presumably because someone leaked it to them. Once that had happened, the FAI couldn't keep it in-house. (And I'm assuming it wasn't someone in the FAI who leaked it of course)
The issue isn't necessarily that someone is going to be offended by it. It's more that it was a potentially naive and ultimately ineffective approach. Stephen Kenny lacks significant high level experience in management, he has looked out of his depth, the idea of showing a political video was risky (other members of the management team apparently tried to dissuade him). Doherty alluded to the players lacking motivation in a post match interview, so the video doesn't seem to have worked. The whole incident looks like it is re-enforcing the idea of an amateurish management approach, making bad decision after bad decision.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
For me the tactical stuff, the strengths and weaknesses of our own team, the analysis of the style of play of opposition should come first. If that has all been done and the players are fully attuned to the tactical side, and then, and only then, the manager wants to show what sounds like a Mike Bassett-esque tub-thumping video then OK.Quote:
Why can't you show both? But I can well imagine you finish prep off with something light - one final team-bonding session before heading for the dressing room.
Agree, as perhaps can be gleaned from my signature. I think a brief mention of this is ok, as it points out a few things (1) we more than matched a world class team away from home relatively recently, (2) we were good enough to have qualified for the world cup, (3) dubious behaviour *on the pitch* by a French player prevented us from reaching the world cup (4) it's not a point about wider political history.Quote:
The Henry handball would be a great one to show before a game against France I think.
But one problem with this approach is it is only possible versus a handful of teams against whom we have experienced similar issues. What other teams could you do something similar for? Maybe Wales over the Coleman tackle? It doesn't work for that many opponents as there isn't too much on-field history.
I think that's a bit different to this England video. The UCD approach is essentially, "These people don't think you're good enough, prove them wrong". UCD weren't deconstructing Luxembourgish history to motivate the players.Quote:
When UCD played Dudelange in the Europa League, there was print-outs of the various negative social media against UCD in the lead-up to the match.
Again that is different, it's positive self-based motivation. It doesn't reference anything about the opposition (or political/historical stuff about Slovakia). Arguably it's tactical as well, showing what the players did well, what tactics were most effective etc. I think it would be a sensible and rational approach for any coach to do this.Quote:
Before the Slovan game, there was a motivational video featuring the players' best contributions during the season (to show them they had earned the right to play against Slovan and shouldn't be overawed by them).
Kenny showing the video was unwise and counter-productive, but I reckon probably inoffensive.
What's more alarming is the jingoistic, old-school anti-Englishness which is evident on this thread, even from some posters who I thought would know better. I'd really thought we'd gone beyond that. Very depressing.
Maybe. One thing did occur to me - these sort of stories don't come out from happy squads.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanfhear
I think you're reading an awful lot into a 30-second video we don't know the contents of to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
On Prime Time, Aiden Fitzmaurice says only one senior member of FAI staff objected. (He kind of stutters when he talks about the players - I can't tell if he's saying there were any issues there)
If one person is offended (and if it was only staff and players at the meeting, and if players wouldn't have known what was on the video to object in advance, and if one English-born staff member left the set-up straight afterwards, it does look like you could add 2+2), does that mean it was offensive? Or could that one person be just a bit too highly-strung?
I agree. But I don't see that that isn't what happened?Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
Again, I agree. 30 seconds sounds brief enough to me though?Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
But that's exactly my point. You ask what other videos you'd show for other games - Coleman's tackle, Henry's handball, etc. My point is there's lots of variations on the same theme, as per the UCD example. You pick and choose which one suits the case best. A bit of "800 years" for a game against England sounds perfectly harmless. For different games you have different approaches.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
This would tie in with the new 'project player' bull$h1t the rugby team has now.
It's essentially wearing green that makes you 'Irish', nothing else.
Maybe the IRFU players could do with a history lesson too. Might make them appreciate the importance of the jersey.
The informer needs to be taken out of the group for sure. Would love to know who it was.
Where is the anti-English sentiment? There may be an acknowledgement of history alright (the Brits don't have a great track record) but I don't know if I've seen anyone here being Anti-English. Context is always important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Straightstory
Only idiots are anti any race of people. But you can have a problem with a country's establishment without being racist.
The British establishment have consistently been very poor in dealing with Ireland.
A simple solution would be to release the video and let people assess for themselves. If its a non-story the Daily Mail will look (again) for what they are.
We don't know who snitched but one account is that it wasn't a player but one of the FAI staff,
who leaked it out to an English paper, who then go on to manufacture an outrage at an irish manager's understanding and expresssion of an aspect of anglo irish history.
The rest is click bait.
After the ceremony at Cannes when La Palme d'Or was awarded to Ken Loach for TWTSTB, a panel member Samuel Jackson (no less) was questioned by an english journo about was he aware of the innacurate content and anti english bias in the film. He replied to the effect that 'you english are all the same, your ancestors went around the world on a mission of rape, pillage, plunder and enslavement and now you're outraged by and want to control how that historical experience is given account to'.
People would probably give out about the amateur production values or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
People who want to give out will always find something to give out about.
That is very true but it changes the story and angle of attack. Remove the faux outrage about the English, make the source look daft in the process. May not help the case for SK's reign but its a start. It wont stop people calling it out of depth, misguided, desperate, etc. It could could be spun as the coaching team wanting to grow the sense of value to wearing the shirt even if up against it and and may be defeated short term but there are long term possibilities - the idea at the centre of Irish history and hence representing Ireland today in honour blah blah. So well intended, not anti-English its just that that is who the old battles tended to be with. Or maybe the whole thing should just be starved and let die!! (to be resurrected after every negavtive result if SK continues or will be the 'Im the gaffer' moment if he doesnt).Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I think it wouldn't be a good idea. It just fuels the story.
I love how they only leaked it after the England game. If it bothered them that much, they’d have done it straight away.
It’s just petty **** stirring, trying to get the man sacked. Pathetic. Same as when Roy Keane said something mean to poor old Harry Arter, who couldn’t be arsed to train or turn up. Don’t run to the papers or your mates, if you’ve got a problem, deal with it direct.
The Guardian story someone linked to earlier saidQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
"Kenny left a number of his squad uncomfortable by the contents of the video...Indeed, it is believed some players objected to what they were shown."
So it seems to be a bit more than one member of the coaching team.
30+ seconds on the Henry incident before we play France is ok; 30+ seconds on historical/political Anglo-Irish relations seems a bit less sensible it feels tangential.Quote:
Again, I agree. 30 seconds sounds brief enough to me though?
These are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT themes. As I've said Henry/Coleman reference bad incidents in recent FOOTBALL MATCHES to motivate. The UCD example references using DISPARAGING COMMENTS about the football team from media/social media as motivation. The vs Slovan example was using THE TEAMS PAST GOOD PERFORMANCE to positively motivate the players.Quote:
But that's exactly my point. You ask what other videos you'd show for other games - Coleman's tackle, Henry's handball, etc. My point is there's lots of variations on the same theme, as per the UCD example.
I hadn't head about that one, I knew he defended Colin Farrell after an English journalist tried to claim him as British. Can't find the original clip, but he mentions it here in an interview with Ryan TubridyQuote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Moving beyond the video incident, a question for all the advocates of Kenny. At what point would you begin to question the tenability of his position?
How bad would the results / performances need to get before you would consider him to be unviable as our manager? Or are you of the opinion that results and performances don't matter? If that is the case and its more about "building for 2024" (or even 2044) how do you measure if that long term project is succeeding?
I would say if we were winless (and goalless) at the end of March that I would probably think he is the wrong choice for the project, while maintaining that the project is worth pursuing. And that's conditional on us not having another COVID disaster in terms of squad selection.
After the next campaign he should be judged like every other manager - any talk before that is premature. He is going to get 8-10 qualifiers and 3 or 4 friendlies in the summer. After that the FAI should take a look and assess. Not before. I suspect if we finish 2nd or 3rd in a group he will get the 2024 campaign any lower than that and he will get the heave.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
What sacres me, is we have only played one good team and lets be honest we were easily beaten. What happens if we meet a spain or a Croatia? My view is he still entitled to the WC campaign. He needs to learn very fast that international football is unforgiving
I see many journalists are stating that using a motivational video before a game is amateurish and smacks of desperation, and is a sign that a manager is out of his depth. For them and other commentators I have seen on twitter, a proper manager would have a video that concentrated on a tactical analysis on the opposition; system of play, strengths, weakness etc. The proper top level manager would have his players so prepared and focused, that there would be no need for a motivational ploy that would created a little bit of resentment towards the opposition.
I make two points on this. Have the people with these views ever been involved in a significant game even at a low level, so that they can dismiss past history/event with the other side as irrelevant in motivating players.
The fact that Kenny has not managed in England seems to be an undercurrent in this story as well. Perhaps those who feel strongly that this fact disqualifies him should be more upfront. (btw I am talking about Irish journalists and commentators here, have not really looked at what the offended English have had to saw)
There is great story about Jack Charlton showing the players a video of Bulgaria playing before a fixture against them at the team hotel. After a while some of those in the room started pointing out there very few people at the game. It turns out that the tape the FAI sourced was of the Bulgarian u-21 team. Jack once this was pointed out to him, said that the senior team will have the same style of play anyway, and ordered to switch off the video and ended the team meeting. Tony Cascarino's book has that story, I think.
We have absolutely no reason to think that Kenny hadn't done just that in the coaching in the days before. A 3 minute motivational video in the moments before a game is not the time for tactical prep.Quote:
Originally Posted by wonder88
One member of the coaching team objected in advance (source - the Indo/Prime Time).Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
If the Guardian is going off the leak, I wouldn't be entirely comfortable taking it as 100% truth. How many is some and how objectionable did they find it? If 24 of the 26 players found it great and two objected, does that not say more about the 2 objectors than the video?
Both are factual historical incidents. Both could help motivate a squad. Nobody's asking the Irish players to go out and shoot the Sasanaigh to gain revenge for the Famine FFS. It's a 30-second slot to get a bit of a derby feel going.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
First off, STOP ****ING SHOUTING! You're not Donald Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo
Secondly, that they are different themes is my exact point. There's more than one way to skin a cat here. You choose which is the most suitable. A bit of "800 years" for a match against England - why not? The Irish team going to Stuttgart were listening to rebel songs. No outrage then.
What scares is me is that Ireland are s**t and a large minority of fans don't seem to realise this and think it's all the managers fault we are not getting results and not their unrealistic expectations. The current squad is the weakest squad we've had since the Charlton era. Our two best plyers are arguably Doherty & Coleman who play in the same position. There may be some promise in the U21s coming through, but it'll take time for alot of them to come through and there's no guarantee they'll be good enoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Diggs246
I really don't see what a change of manager would achieve and who exactly do people think would want the job? The days of the FAI/Denis O'Brien paying stupid money for a big name manager are over