We could have won the WC....
A month ago, it was unthinkable that Ireland could have won the WC. However, given the way the tournament has panned out, isn't it possible that we could have won the WC?
Leaving aside the issue of R*y Keane, who would have made us a much better team, the games we played were games we could have won.
[color=red]Proposition 1. What we should have done? :[/color]
v Cameroon: After a bad first half, we completely dominated the game and discovered that Cameroon were not as good nor to be feared as we thought. We should have beaten them.
v Germany: A mistake by Ian Harte, the initiative handed to us by Germany, a really never say die attitude by Ireland, again a game we should won.
v S. Arabia: we beat them and topped the group.
[color=navy]Second round :[/color]
v Paraguay : Does anyone believe we would not beat Paraguay?
v US : Again, does anyone believe we would not beat the US?
[color=navy]Semi-Final :[/color]
Spain/Germany or S.Korea : We should have beaten both Spain and Germany, I think we would beat S. Korea. I feel we would have a good chance. In a once off game against "major" teams, we have a great record. The same goes for the Final.
[color=red]Proposition 2. The results we did get :[/color]
First Round: Second in the group.
Second Round: Do we all agree we lost it against Spain, rather than they won it?
Quarter Final : S. Korea. I believe we would win this game.
Semi Final: Germany or US. I think we have evidence to prove we could have beaten either side.
Final : One from Brazil/England or Senegal/Turkey. I have to say I would think it would be very possible to beat Senegal/Turkey, a tough game against Brazil, and a difficult game phsycologically against England. Again though, in a once off game, I think we can beat any of those teams.
I realise this sounds all very nice sitting at my desk, typing this out, but I do think it is very plausible.
We got as far as Paraguay, Denmark, Sweden, Mexico, Belgium, Japan and Italy.
The US, Turkey, South Korea and Senegal have gone farther than us.
So did we under-achieve at this tournament?
I feel the evidence is there that we did not achieve as much as we should have, and I also feel that we had a real chance of winning. There is too much of a self-congratulory air around the place, and the mistakes that have been made seem to be forgotten about. Surely we have moved beyond the point where we must celebrate what happened at the 2002 WC as a major achievement?
Anybody who disagrees with me, I'd be delighted to hear the flaws and failings in my hypothesis, but with some reason and debate please, not simply calling me names or saying I'm a begrudger.
I'm disappointed that we are out but cannot help feel more disappointed with what might have been.
So, I'll await the abuse with interest.....;)
If's, maybe's and could's
Theres an awful lot of could haves and should haves in there. The fact is if we were to have won the World Cup absolutely everything would have had to go right for us, with no bad breaks whatsoever. This is reality, things never go completely right for anyone, and as it stands we already got our fair share of breaks (2 injury time equalisers for example). You can't expect everything to fall exactly the way you want it. Its easy to win the hindsight World Cup, reality is completely different.
