Ireland vs England friendly

According to today's Irish Indep: "IRELAND'S new manager may kick off his reign at Anfield with a prestige friendly against England. England head coach Sven Goran Eriksson is understood to be keen to face Ireland on March 1 and the Liverpool venue has been put on stand-by by the English FA to host an international on that date."

What's to gain from that? Whilst there's lots to lose. With a new manager (hopefully), a number of retirements and questions about a number of positions do we really want to risk it against England? The article goes on to say that Don Givens has been put on stand-by in case there's no one in place by then. So things get worse and we could even go into the game with a stand-in manager. It would be awful to lose, personally I'd rather not risk it. It's like turkey's voting for christmas.

I think it would be a good idea and a good test for us and the new coach. I think the players will be up for it and a good performance regardless of the result would be a good start for the new manager.
I don't think our team is as bad as people make out. I think we'd give England a good game.

I think its a terrible idea - why put that 4 games unbeaten record at risk?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hither green

What's to gain from that? Whilst there's lots to lose. With a new manager (hopefully), a number of retirements and questions about a number of positions do we really want to risk it against England?

---

Risk what exactly?? :confused:
There's nothing to lose - so what if they beat us in a friendly. They're 1 of the top 10 teams in the world so good oposition for a freindly.

I don't get what you're saying.

It's not like playing Holland or France, it's England for God's sake, they're the worst team to lose to. I'd rather play them when we're in a better position.

As good a time to play them as any . Might as well face good teams in friendlys.

Its only a friendly. I think they'd be good opposition for us - good first test for our new manager.
Not much of a difference if we loose to them or Holland or France.

ahhhhhhh its a bugbear of mine but its lose not loose finmla ! yes i know its anally retentive on a big scale!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlma

Not much of a difference if we loose to them or Holland or France.

---

Sorry can't agree with that at all at all. Like your sig tho!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gustavo

ahhhhhhh its a bugbear of mine but its lose not loose finmla ! yes i know its anally retentive on a big scale!

---

Ahhhhhhh! It's a bugbear of mine, but it's "it's" not "its".:p

Nothing anally retentive about correct spelling.

you got me there :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fergalr

I think its a terrible idea - why put that 4 games unbeaten record at risk?

---

I think that's a cowardly approach. I think we need to get that "Give it a lash" spirit back into the team & fans. I think with the players we have and on the right day we can beat England. Look at what Northern Ireland did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colster

I think that's a cowardly approach. I think we need to get that "Give it a lash" spirit back into the team & fans.

---

I’m all for a positive approach and would quite happily have played them a year ago, or maybe in a years time, just not at the moment. We’re going through a transitional period, and you’d expect our results to reflect that. I don’t mind “giving it a lash” and perhaps getting stuffed against Brazil or Holland, just not against England. Yes we might win but I’d still rather not risk losing.

Anyway win or lose I’ve no desire to help their world cup preparations thanks.

strange attitude there . you would rather see us get thrashed by brazil than take on england and risk chance of same.

No, I'd be willing to play Brazil, or whoever, even if there was a risk of getting stuffed. Just not England.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hither green

I’m all for a positive approach and would quite happily have played them a year ago, or maybe in a years time, just not at the moment. We’re going through a transitional period, and you’d expect our results to reflect that.

---

I think that's pretty much how I feel. I really want to see some new faces integrated into the set up as early as possible with meaningful roles given to the likes of Doyle, McGeady, Ireland etc. in the friendly programme. I'm not saying we need to can half of the team that played Switzerland but we need to use the friendly programme to blood a few new faces at least.

If in March this'd be our first game of the "new era" & in all likelihood, with only a caretaker manager in charge. Too early for me. I know it'd be a good test but I'm too proud to face England while in a transitional phase.

fair enough lads i'm probably in the minority that treats england as just another game.

Perhaps Roy could come out of retirement for the match. :D

play em, sort the men from the boys. If you can't get up for this game then you might as well pack it in.

We did beat Holland Pre Euro 2004 and it wouldn't surprise me if we pulled off a smiliar shock.

i think it's best if we didn't play them. we'd beat them and expose all their weaknesses and that would give them the chance to patch over their problems before the world cup, which would help them do better.

it's best that they continue to think that they are world beaters now that they have won against argentina...