World Cup qualifying group C

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by back of the net

absolutely its been a Mess -

Germany at home was a shambles - expected to lose to them but we looked like a team that had no clue what it was supposed to do

kazahstan away was embarrassing

Austria at a home - sitting back for the lat 25mins ,trying to hold to a lead for dear life as if we were playing spain and not Austria

And what makes it worse this all happened after the EUROS disaster

---

Fair points individually alright. Our current situation isn't a mess though and luckily for us, the destination is more important than the journey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Strange you say that as I always considered the wing back formation as a basic, stop the rot type of formula. Not many teams that I know of used it for very long. Martin O'Neill introduced it at Celtic after they had lost the league by twenty points or so to Rangers the season before. I always assumed it was to make them more solid than anything else, although with wide players like Agathe, Thompson, Petta, etc. it made them more potent as an attacking threat as well. Eventually though, they ended up changing to a more conventional 4-4-2 as I don't think 5-3-2 is really a long term solution. Teams seem to be able to figure it out after a while and there's less room for developing various tactics playing that system, as it's not very flexible. I think Liverpool did something similar years ago also under Roy Evans, around the time Phil Babb would have been playing for them.

---

Exactly, it's a reflexive, defensive formation. Something people constantly criticise Trap for being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Don't think Trap would engage in such innovation or flexibility at this stage of his life, let alone managerial career...

---

Huh? Trap has played 352 many times in the past, in Germany and in Italy. It's nothing to with being inflexible or not being innovative, it's the fact we don't have players with the knowledge of playing that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

I think its BS to say we don't have the players or the mentality to play 4-5-1. I think with the players we have the best setup would be 4-5-1. When Trap started he said it was the little details why we were conceding silly goals from set-pieces and open play. Originally for the first year or 2 we were compact and conceded little. That is no longer the case, probably as much down to players as opposed to his system at the time, as we concede a lot more now than then, still employing the same system. SO Traps point is no longer valid, the reasoning for playing the way we do doesn't hold water because we have conceded far too many goals over the last couple of years.

---

I assume this is aimed at me. I didn't say we don't have the players to play 451, I said our strikers aren't good enough.

Quote:

---

With Hoolahan, Mcgeady, Mclean/long, Keane, Mccarthy and one of Quinn/Hendrick/Whelan we are certainly capable of playing that system, in fact it probably is our best possible goal-scoring formation. Hoolahan loves to put the ball in behind the full back for a fast winger to run on to, as was shown against the Faroes and Georgia. McClean and McGeady or coleman would have the beating of most defenders for pace, certainly the teams we need to beat i.e. Sweden and Austria(bar alaba), the more chances we create the more we score, and the more we score the more chances we would put away as the players would start connecting and reading eachothers play better.

---

Who's going to score these goals though? McGeady doesn't score goals, Long doesn't score many either. Who'd be on the other wing, McClean? Rarely scores. Walters scores goals from set pieces, which aren't formation dependent. Perhaps there's an argument that 433 might put us in a position to win more corners and thus score more goals, but that doesn't really help us against Sweden or any other well-organised side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Fair points individually alright. Our current situation isn't a mess though and luckily for us, the destination is more important than the journey.

---

True, though I think the journey deserves discussion regardless of whether we get to the destination.

There's no way of proving anything in football, so you can only go with your judgment. If we get second (and especially qualify) Trap will be vindicated, but equally that certainly doesn't mean all objective criticism was off the mark. If we come second there's no way of knowing whether we could have come second more convincingly.

There's no real definitive way of proving that if we don't get second it's Trap's fault either.

My personal opinion is that Trap was very culpable for the Austria draw. The selection and approach was awful and flew in the face of hard evidence gathered in Sweden. Trap's formula seems to work in tricky away games and does not seem to work against our peers at home. He hasn't really shown any sign of changing his approach to these games. He retains players that aren't delivering and at times he has overlooked players that have.

What I'm trying to say is that in my considered opinion, regardless of coming second / third / fourth, Trap has failed to get the best out of what we have.

To his credit, he has admitted he overlooked Hoolahan for too long and he has also introduced new talent since the Euros. Any talk that Coleman (as per Keith Duggan in the Irish Times this week) was on fire at Everton last season is revisionist nonsense.

For what it's worth I think Trap has pulled his socks up a bit of late, and I think there is some chance he'll be bold in September. Many say that Wembley was a nothing game, but I think if we can draw at Wembley we can at least draw in Austria.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

Exactly, it's a reflexive, defensive formation. Something people constantly criticise Trap for being.


Huh? Trap has played 352 many times in the past, in Germany and in Italy. It's nothing to with being inflexible or not being innovative, it's the fact we don't have players with the knowledge of playing that way.


I assume this is aimed at me. I didn't say we don't have the players to play 451, I said our strikers aren't good enough.


Who's going to score these goals though? McGeady doesn't score goals, Long doesn't score many either. Who'd be on the other wing, McClean? Rarely scores. Walters scores goals from set pieces, which aren't formation dependent. Perhaps there's an argument that 433 might put us in a position to win more corners and thus score more goals, but that doesn't really help us against Sweden or any other well-organised side.

---

Is there no acceptance, even partial, of the point that IF the formation allowed better quality possession it'd allow more and better goalscoring chances? And don't write off set-piece goals! Austria didn't look that organised when Walters scored a corner from a free header when they left the post unmanned.

I think it's a shame that after 5 years we've not even properly tried 433 / 451 once. Uruguay and Serbia don't count for obvious reasons. Maybe it'd prove the point, but who knows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

I think its BS to say we don't have the players or the mentality to play 4-5-1.

---

maybe an awful lot has changed to the Irish players mentality and technical ability since 2007?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

Technically, English and Irish players are not as good as their continental counter-parts. From years of playing on muddy pitches imho. So 4-4-2 is the best formation. It's put the opposition under pressure and doesn't allow them time on the ball. How often 4-5-1 has been a disaster for teams from these islands? It's a joke and Venables, the assistant last night to McLaren, no doubt was the prime mover in that formation. Don't let him within an ass's roar of the Irish job.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Great post, ye know, it could well be that. We don't get time in muddy pitches to hold the ball up and pass it around as ye lose possession to easily, so told to "boot it up the field, get rid of that fcuken thing and stop messing round". Whereas our continental counterparts play about with it on the ground and hold it up, and are very good in tight areas.

---

I don't disagree with that, I'm not on about good one touch passing or in tight areas.

I think the point is being missed. If you play a 4-5-1 with 2 speedy wingers or overlapping fullbacks or a mixture, and a player who can play balls over the top or behind the full back, you can create space in behind for wingers/fullbacks overlapping to get onto and get the ball into the 6 yard box. Robbie has shown that he is still a poacher in this area, like the coleman to sammon to keane example, like the hoolahan, mcclean link up against georgia. All those goals came from similar passes from hoolahan. Very simple, but very effective with the right players, most importantly 2 speed merchants down the channels.

No one said we can't draw in Austria, its beating sweden thats the problem. We just can't beat decent/slightly above average teams anymore, home or away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Is there no acceptance, even partial, of the point that IF the formation allowed better quality possession it'd allow more and better goalscoring chances?

---

The Norwegian U20 playmaker was interviewed earlier in the week after his side beat England 3-1 at the Euros. It was point out to him that England had 70% of the possession and he replied: "Who ****ing cares? They did nothing with it anyway."

I don't believe the formation is the problem. Robbie has been playing as an advanced midfielder for over a year now anyway. The problem is the personnel. We have bodies in midfield, we just don't have the right bodies. Adjusting to an orthodox 4-5-1 might make us more solid in midfield but it would come at the expense of an effective attacking threat, in my opinion.

There are lots of teams in world football that stack the midfield, achieve parity in possession and lose 3-0. The Premier League is full of them. The one constant feature of the Irish side under Trapattoni, up until the Euros, was that we can take 30% possession and use it more effectively than the opposition, like Norway did. We have a problem going forward that this approach is starting to fail, but the solution is better players, not for a cosmetic adjustment to the line-up.

Quote:

---

And don't write off set-piece goals! Austria didn't look that organised when Walters scored a corner from a free header when they left the post unmanned.

I think it's a shame that after 5 years we've not even properly tried 433 / 451 once. Uruguay and Serbia don't count for obvious reasons. Maybe it'd prove the point, but who knows?

---

I think it's a shame we haven't tried out ways to use the ball more effectively in midfield too. It's depressing watching Ireland play but this current obsession in Britain and Ireland with formations is getting ridiculous. Robbie's role over the last year, where he literally just plays a few yards deeper, goes to show how meaningless an arrangement of numbers is.

(Edit: posted while Charlie D was posting above so I didn't see it).

I don't think it takes any great tactical intelligence or technical advancement to switch from 442 to 433 (or its variants, which include 451 or 4411 as it's all abit marginal).

The back 4 is the back 4, and in both formations it's good to have full-backs that like to get forward.

In 433 you really want a pair of proper wide players, rather than a Cox / Keogh / Walters compromise.

You want one good forward, and not necessarily of any particular type.
Ideally you'll have 2 solid and tidy central midfielders and one guy happier playing more advanced, like Hoolahan.

That's by and large what we have and I don't think any of our players would be flummoxed or technically exposed if asked to play a natural role in that shape. In fact if anything any technical deficiency might be overcome.

Nobody knows whether too great a burden will be placed on other players due to being one forward short. My personal speculation is that we'd be OK.

That said, I think it's also important to have your best players out there and that includes Keane and Long so I'd persist with 442 in the immediate future. Keane can play his Stockholm role if required. He has been asked to do that before and still been ineffective but rarely has our midfield been as competitive as McCarthy and Green were that night.

I think an aspect little appreciated by most here (or certainly not much commented on) was Hoolahan's tacking and actually nicking the ball a lot by staying on his feet. That impressed me and he even looks a better ball winner than Whelan. So Hoolahan is in for me, alongside McCarthy.

I think we need to drop the forward-playing-wide nonsense, except just about maybe Walters. I prefer proper wide players, and that includes McClean and McGeady but I look forward to seeing Pilkington and Brady in due course.

I also think that 451 needs to be in our locker for situations like the end of Austria home game. A midfield 3 of McCarthy, Hoolahan and Green (and just imagine if we had Gibson instead of Green) would probably have done a better job of seeing out that game.

Edit: I agree it's not so much about formations, as players have to be effective and a formation doesn't change that - by itself. For example, bringing on Hoolahan at the expense of a forward and putting Green on Alaba would not have been a formation change first and foremost, it would have been the introduction of players to perform a role suited to their skills and suited to the immediate requirement. I think you understand what I'm saying, and I think it largely tallies with what you're saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

Trap has played 352 many times in the past, in Germany and in Italy. It's nothing to with being inflexible or not being innovative, it's the fact we don't have players with the knowledge of playing that way.

---

On the basis of how they play their club football, would say it wouldn't suit most of them. So make you half right.
But the wider point is, would it be he had every player in Europe to pick from, he'd still go down the same old route.

He has a Plan A and plan B. The sad thing is they're very similar. And that's it.
So much for all those years of experience...

Hoolahan fouled a good bit, and got carded cos of niggling little fouls, that worried me, purely because the more he did it, the more likely it was that Trap would use it as an excuse not to play him.

I'm not saying our players don't have the technical sense to play 451 or whatever - all of them do for their clubs - but I think it has to still involve Keane as a central striker and I think that will limit us, especially as we don't have great creative players in wide positions.

In terms of needing proper wide players for a 433... how many teams actually that with two dedicated wide men? Apart from Bayern, I can't think of any. Usually you're playing one or two strikers who can provide an added goalscoring threat from the flanks. An Andy Keogh, if you like :)

I think saying we are in a mess is a bit too strong. Some of the performances havent been great, but in terms of results the only dissapointing dropped points were home to Austria. If you look at all the European WC groups, every team has dropped dissapointing points except Holland (100% record) and Bosnia (only dropped points with a draw in Greece). You could maybe say Belgium (drew at home to Croatia) and Russia (lost in Portgual) are on par in terms of dropped points but a lot of other contenders have been as sloppy or even worse than us in terms of results. In group A Croatia lost at home to the Scots, ; in B Italy have drawn with Bulgaria and the Czechs, the Czechs lost home to the Danes, and the Danes lost home to Armenia; in our group Austria have drawn in Kazakhstan, Sweden have dropped points home to us and lost in Vienna and Germany dropped points home to Sweden; in D Hungary have dropped points at home to Holland and Romania; in E (the group of life) the Swiss have drawn home to Norway and away in Cyprus, Slovenia and Iceland lost their home matches against each other and Norway have lost to Albania and Iceland; Portugal lost in Moscow and also dropped points home to the North and away to Israel. Greece have only taken a point (home draw) from their two games vs Bosnia and Slovakia have drawn with Licthensten and Lithuania in group G; In H Montenegro have lost home to Ukraine and drawn home to Poland, England have drawn home to Ukraine and drawn in Poland and Montenegro and Ukraine have lost in Moldova and home to Montenegro; in group I even the highly rated Spanish drew at home to Finland and France only took 1 point from two game with Spain.

Yes ideally we would have taken 3 points from the Austria match and even sneaked a draw home to Germany (although I would argue we had more chance of winning in Stockholm than that), but the reality is we are not in a disasterous position at all and calling it a mess at this stage is very much over the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

True, though I think the journey deserves discussion regardless of whether we get to the destination.

There's no way of proving anything in football, so you can only go with your judgment. If we get second (and especially qualify) Trap will be vindicated, but equally that certainly doesn't mean all objective criticism was off the mark. If we come second there's no way of knowing whether we could have come second more convincingly.

There's no real definitive way of proving that if we don't get second it's Trap's fault either.

My personal opinion is that Trap was very culpable for the Austria draw. The selection and approach was awful and flew in the face of hard evidence gathered in Sweden. Trap's formula seems to work in tricky away games and does not seem to work against our peers at home. He hasn't really shown any sign of changing his approach to these games. He retains players that aren't delivering and at times he has overlooked players that have.

What I'm trying to say is that in my considered opinion, regardless of coming second / third / fourth, Trap has failed to get the best out of what we have.

To his credit, he has admitted he overlooked Hoolahan for too long and he has also introduced new talent since the Euros. Any talk that Coleman (as per Keith Duggan in the Irish Times this week) was on fire at Everton last season is revisionist nonsense.

For what it's worth I think Trap has pulled his socks up a bit of late, and I think there is some chance he'll be bold in September. Many say that Wembley was a nothing game, but I think if we can draw at Wembley we can at least draw in Austria.

---

Excellent post, and touches on what is my only (but in some ways all-encompassing) criticism of Trapattoni.

There are still too many unknowns about what we might be capable of, in terms of formation and personnel (although the latter has improved recently).

A manager's first (and only?) job is to ensure that he maximises the potential of the resources at his disposal, in terms of both improving our own performances in general, and in relation to matches against specific opponents. This is particularly important, in my opinion, when the resources are limited and qualification is never guaranteed. Yet, as stuttgart mentioned in a later post, even after 5 years in the job, there are a number of things we still don't know, like some different but pretty common formations. There hasn't been enough experimentation, in my opinion, and that means that he's still trying the same old things in qualifying games too, things which im some cases clearly aren't working.

There's no way to know how we would have perfomed if we played in a different way, and it's kind of pointless to speculate. But Stuttgart mentioned that regardless of our final position, he feels Trapattoni hasn't got the best out of our players. I'd look at it slightly differently and say that he hasn't made the efforts I think he should have to try and work out how to get the best out of our players.

I would say the last two sentences amount to the same thing.
Unless you're a pedant.
:rolleyes:

The second sentence qualifies the first.

Same difference.

FIFA confirm play offs will be seeded: http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/ne...736/index.html
No great shock there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Which is a pretty dumb point and certainly not a logical response to my point, and it puzzles me how AB could think it was worth thanking.

For what it's worth, the 3 teams I cited (Sweden, Denmark and Germany) all played good stuff at the last Euros. We should be pretty envious of Sweden and Denmark's record over the last decade.

---

Because beating muck doesnt make Ireland any great shakes. Remind me when we beat a decent team last, must be over ten years at this stage. I doubt the ole ole crowd were celebrating too much when we beat the mighty Faroes, or maybe they were!:eek:

Holland, Sept. 2001...
:(

When was the last time Ireland beat a team ranked higher than them, as it really 2001?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennocelt

Because beating muck doesnt make Ireland any great shakes. Remind me when we beat a decent team last, must be over ten years at this stage. I doubt the ole ole crowd were celebrating too much when we beat the mighty Faroes, or maybe they were!:eek:

---

I wasn't saying that beating poor teams made us any great shakes. You know that. I was saying that the media hammers us for not pulverising these teams, yet teams with better pedigree than us did no better against these same teams, and sometimes worse. It was a very simple point. If you want to drop in a comment about you thinking we're a poor team, fine, but don't bring a post of mine saying something else entirely into it.

I'm well aware when we last beat a good team. What has the ole ole crowd got to do with anything? Who mentioned them? Take your wumming somewhere else, it's pretty tedious. Join in again when you've something sensible to offer, and not laden with poor efforts at sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spudulika

When was the last time Ireland beat a team ranked higher than them, as it really 2001?

---

i think slovakia were ranked ahead of us when we beat them at home under stan in 2007. beat france over 90 mins in Paris 09

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennocelt

Because beating muck doesnt make Ireland any great shakes. Remind me when we beat a decent team last, must be over ten years at this stage. I doubt the ole ole crowd were celebrating too much when we beat the mighty Faroes, or maybe they were!:eek:

---

the "ole ole crowd" have diserted the team for the last 12 months. i doubt they even knew we were playing the Faroes

Hmm, could of sworn I heard a rendition of it 10 days ago...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbyrne

i think slovakia were ranked ahead of us when we beat them at home under stan in 2007. beat france over 90 mins in Paris 09

---

Actually yer man is right;fair play. We were 51st and Slovakia 37th...
Though probably a hollow victory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Hmm, could of sworn I heard a rendition of it 10 days ago...

---

"ole ole" the song and the "ole ole crowd" are two different things

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Actually yer man is right;fair play. We were 51st and Slovakia 37th...
Though probably a hollow victory.

---

someday, somewhere you might just give us the slightest teeny weeny bit of credit. anything will do, even if its that the colour of the jersey was correct

What are you​ on about...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

What are you​ on about...

---

That's not the question. Most of us know what jbyrne is on about.
The question is, what is the point of your incessant negative/begrudging/sarcastic posts, which have zero constructive content?
Your posts don't even qualify as an opinion.

Clearly they do. Or you wouldn't respond.

And am hardly alone in having negative feelings about Trapp. Unlike some on here, do go to games so am well aware of the 'vibe' of regular fans and it's not always v.polite about our manager or national association.

There's only been six competitive victories over higher ranked opposition, plus the 1-0 win over France in normal time in the Play off
Blogged about it here: http://irish-abroad.appspot.com/Blog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Actually yer man is right;fair play. We were 51st and Slovakia 37th...
Though probably a hollow victory.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

That's not the question. Most of us know what jbyrne is on about.
The question is, what is the point of your incessant negative/begrudging/sarcastic posts, which have zero constructive content?
Your posts don't even qualify as an opinion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Clearly they do. Or you wouldn't respond.

And am hardly alone in having negative feelings about Trapp. Unlike some on here, do go to games so am well aware of the 'vibe' of regular fans and it's not always v.polite about our manager or national association.

---

Carrying on the bold trends in the latest posts here - it would be near-bearable if you kept it to having negative feelings about Trap. But I'd say what tipped geysir over the edge and made him post what he did, and I don't blame him, is your above post about a game long before Trap even appeared on the scene

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

There's only been six competitive victories over higher ranked opposition, plus the 1-0 win over France in normal time in the Play off
Blogged about it here: http://irish-abroad.appspot.com/Blog

---

Hard to believe we'd fallen so low by the time of that Lithuania game. I remember thinking anything but a good win would be unfathomable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EAFC_rdfl

Carrying on the bold trends in the latest posts here - it would be near-bearable if you kept it to having negative feelings about Trap. But I'd say what tipped geysir over the edge and made him post what he did, and I don't blame him, is your above post about a game long before Trap even appeared on the scene

---

Heh, fair point. Touche...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

I wasn't saying that beating poor teams made us any great shakes. You know that. I was saying that the media hammers us for not pulverising these teams, yet teams with better pedigree than us did no better against these same teams, and sometimes worse. It was a very simple point. If you want to drop in a comment about you thinking we're a poor team, fine, but don't bring a post of mine saying something else entirely into it.

I'm well aware when we last beat a good team. What has the ole ole crowd got to do with anything? Who mentioned them? Take your wumming somewhere else, it's pretty tedious. Join in again when you've something sensible to offer, and not laden with poor efforts at sarcasm.

---

Ha ha, yes so the media should get excited about us beating faroes and the like? Other teams tend to win other competitions and give top teams a decent run out - Greece, Denmark, Russia, Ukraine......UNLIKE US since 2001 or whatever. Its the media, yes right.:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennocelt

Ha ha, yes so the media should get excited about us beating faroes and the like? Other teams tend to win other competitions and give top teams a decent run out - Greece, Denmark, Russia, Ukraine......UNLIKE US since 2001 or whatever. Its the media, yes right.:rolleyes:

---

By this logic, there's no point supporting a team, nor giving them any objective credit, unless they are consistently over-achieving far beyond their means or resources.

Yes, we beat top teams like Portugal, Holland, Croatia and Yugoslavia between 1995 and 2001. We also drew with Liechtenstein, Northern Ireland, Lithuania and Iceland, and lost to Macedonia, in that time. The highs were higher than anything we've seen under Trap, but the lows were much more frustrating, particularly given the quality of players available.

Wins over the likes of Macedonia, Cyprus, Georgia, Armenia, Estonia, Kazakhstan and the Faroes aren't going to get anyone overly excited, but they are the kind of results which get you to major tournaments - not just one-off big performances against top sides. Look at Northern Ireland in 2006/7; beat Spain, Denmark and Sweden... but lost to Latvia and Iceland, and thus failed to qualify. You might think that these results should be taken for granted as a minimum requirement, but results in European football do not back up that assertion.

All the teams you named have slipped up against weaker opposition in recent history; Denmark just lost to Armenia; Greece drew in Moldova a while back; Russia drew in Armenia and Azerbaijan, and lost a playoff to Slovenia; Ukraine have drawn with Belarus and Georgia. Ireland would be hammered by the media if we slipped up against any of those teams, and we are given absolutely no credit for winning against similarly-ranked opposition, which we have done consistently under Trapattoni.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supreme feet

By this logic, there's no point supporting a team, nor giving them any objective credit, unless they are consistently over-achieving far beyond their means or resources.

Yes, we beat top teams like Portugal, Holland, Croatia and Yugoslavia between 1995 and 2001. We also drew with Liechtenstein, Northern Ireland, Lithuania and Iceland, and lost to Macedonia, in that time. The highs were higher than anything we've seen under Trap, but the lows were much more frustrating, particularly given the quality of players available.

Wins over the likes of Macedonia, Cyprus, Georgia, Armenia, Estonia, Kazakhstan and the Faroes aren't going to get anyone overly excited, but they are the kind of results which get you to major tournaments - not just one-off big performances against top sides. Look at Northern Ireland in 2006/7; beat Spain, Denmark and Sweden... but lost to Latvia and Iceland, and thus failed to qualify. You might think that these results should be taken for granted as a minimum requirement, but results in European football do not back up that assertion.

All the teams you named have slipped up against weaker opposition in recent history; Denmark just lost to Armenia; Greece drew in Moldova a while back; Russia drew in Armenia and Azerbaijan, and lost a playoff to Slovenia; Ukraine have drawn with Belarus and Georgia. Ireland would be hammered by the media if we slipped up against any of those teams, and we are given absolutely no credit for winning against similarly-ranked opposition, which we have done consistently under Trapattoni.

---

Good points I will give you that:), but I do think we are underachieving. Paying a manager two million a year, why cant we do a Greece or a Denmark or at least get to a q-f of a comp.
One year under Jack we bet Holland, Germany and Italy all who had better squads. and when international football was tougher (IMHO). Why do we always settle for mediocrity? We have a decent bunch of players. All teams do slip up but the good ones also do it in the big competitions.
If we really are THAT bad then just give Roddy Collins the job.

The manager is probably under-achieving (in terms of some of his tactical innovation/flexibility), but the players aren't, in the main*
There is a difference.

*
See Messrs.Gibson, Ireland etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennocelt

I do think we are underachieving.

Why do we always settle for mediocrity? We have a decent bunch of players. All teams do slip up but the good ones also do it in the big competitions.

---

It's a pity you didn't just say this from the start. I and many others would probably agree with you. Far more constructive than petty sarcastic non sequiturs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

It's a pity you didn't just say this from the start. I and many others would probably agree with you. Far more constructive than petty sarcastic non sequiturs.

---

Yeah yeah sure. Original point still stands, beating FIs isnt a big deal in the long term scheme of things