Slovakia V Republic of Ireland - Tuesday, 12th October 2010 - Euro 2012 Qualifier

[carloz]

Green was by far the worst player on the pitch on Friday night IMO

He actually wasn't. Whealan beside him was worse. A passenger all game, asleep in the box for the first goal, and rightly hauled off. Green was pretty brutal, but he actually looked really good for the first ten minutes. Little did we know just how far down hill he would go after than though

[ifk101]

You are confused and why am I not surprised.

Why am I not surprised with this comment?

An observation that he gives 100% of what he has, is just that, an observation.

Grass is green. A pointless observation.

Opinion was offered on that effort in the context of what we need - my opinion is that we need a better quality midfielder.

Agreed.

It is not rational to assume that a player gives 100% of what he has to offer. We have to see that effort being done on the pitch, then we can quantify the effort.

How? Through mathematics? Or your subjective opinion?

Are you incapable of even understanding what you yourself wrote and what I replied? The sarcasm I was directly referring to was your use of the word 'despicable'.
"Running after Arshavin looking for his jersey at the end is despicable"

It's your understanding that perceives that comment as sarcastic.

[paul_oshea]

street fighter 2 has just popped into my head!!! ROund 2.....:

[geysir]

How? Through mathematics? Or your subjective opinion?

Do you just assume a player on the pitch gives a 100% of what he has to offer?
I tend to watch a game and subjectively observe if a player is below par, on par, or above par.

You are confusing the intent to go on the pitch with 100% desire to do the best (an honest assumption?), with delivering on the pitch a 100% performance according to their ability.

[Noelys Guitar]

Westwood sent back to Coventry aster picking up injury in training. Murphy from Ipswich brought in.

[Dodge]

You are confusing the intent to go on the pitch with 100% desire to do the best (an honest assumption?), with delivering on the pitch a 100% performance according to their ability.

And you're confusing Whelan being stuck in the middle of a Russian triangle as him not trying.

[SwanVsDalton]

Yes , optimism a word i mentioned before the russia game. France and Italy are terrible, NI drew with Italy at home and we saw their world cup, so too France and how they performed during the world cup.

This argument about Italy and France does my head in. They're two of the biggest sides in the world and much more consistent and effective than the Russia side who just ripped us apart. Rather like the same Russia side (non-qualifiers to the WC, lost to Slovakia at home) they blow hot or cold, and didn't play brilliant against us before having poor WC campaigns.

But the idea they made us look good is just laughable. If they were poor, it was at least partly, and I think largely, because we made them look poor. Petty negativity to claim otherwise.

[geysir]

And you're confusing Whelan being stuck in the middle of a Russian triangle as him not trying.

Maybe so but that's would be a different confusion based on a perceived lack of effort by Whelan to get actively involved in the midfield battle.
That 'lack of effort' perception is supported by him not making one tackle in the first half and finally making one interception in the 44th minute as well as making the worst unenforced error of the first half with that careless pass. Green made about about 10 interceptions /tackles in the 1st half. He is let down by a poor touch and very limited passing range.

[SwanVsDalton]

And you're confusing Whelan being stuck in the middle of a Russian triangle as him not trying.

And for me, it didn't help Green was consistently out of position due to his is 'closing down' efforts. Usually he was charging out of centre mid but often five yards behind the ball and nowhere near challenging. Left far more space to be exploited beside Whelan. I'm not sure if it was tactics (though I suspect it was inexperience/being out of depth) but his pressing too far up the pitch meant our usual 'two banks of four' were compromised easier.

Closing down is crucial but just as important is doing it in the right areas at the right time. As Stutts said, remarkable how we now miss Andrews - he's generally very good at this.

[geysir]

Au contraire in the last campaign our CM was characterised by not getting involved, by standing off and holding a deep line. The Bulgaria and Cyprus home games are good examples. The 'Irish standoff'.
And in particular when we go a goal up.

[osarusan]

I'd agree with geysir here. Green gave 100%, and we can't really ask any more of him. The problem is that Green at 100% probably still isn't good enough for Irish international standard, but there's not much he can do about that. He wasn't as bad as Whelan, I think it was because he was involved more that his mistakes were more visible, and he doesn't have the buffer against criticism in the shape of good central midfield performances previously that Whelan has.

If the criticism of Green is that despite his 100% efforts, he's still not good enough, then that criticism needs to be directed elsewhere.

However, despite all that, I'd say that one bad game against a good team where the tactics meant we were always going to find it very very tough in midfield doesn't mean his career is over.

[paul_oshea]

This argument about Italy and France does my head in. They're two of the biggest sides in the world and much more consistent and effective than the Russia side who just ripped us apart. Rather like the same Russia side (non-qualifiers to the WC, lost to Slovakia at home) they blow hot or cold, and didn't play brilliant against us before having poor WC campaigns.

But the idea they made us look good is just laughable. If they were poor, it was at least partly, and I think largely, because we made them look poor. Petty negativity to claim otherwise.

I didnt say the made us look good, i alluded to what geysir said about, the opposition defending deep, happy to sit back and give you time on the ball, makes anyone more comfortable and able pass it better and look like a decent passing team. Thats what happened lads, we were given time, anybody who cant see it whether it does their head in is naive. France were poor that last campaign, struggled through an average group, italy were there for the taking and a better team would have done it, too many has beens. Cyprus were unlucky not to at least draw with them once. It doesn't matter what way you want to dress it up the argument holds through based on how italy and france have been over the last year or so.

[Lionel Ritchie]

Westwood sent back to Coventry aster picking up injury in training. Murphy from Ipswich brought in.

Anyone else curious about this or have any more info? What manner of "facial injury" requires a guy to be sent back and cover to be called upon? Eye injury? Broken jaw? Broken nose? gash requiring multiple stitches?

[ifk101]

Do you just assume a player on the pitch gives a 100% of what he has to offer?
I tend to watch a game and subjectively observe if a player is below par, on par, or above par.

Yes. I rationally assume that a player playing for his country will give 100% of what he has to offer. Circumstances within and outside an individual player's control will dictate if said player's performance is below par, on par, or above par.

[Noelys Guitar]

Anyone else curious about this or have any more info? What manner of "facial injury" requires a guy to be sent back and cover to be called upon? Eye injury? Broken jaw? Broken nose? gash requiring multiple stitches?

Trap posted team sheet with Westwood in/Given out. The old Glasgow Kiss came into play. Shay back in goal.

[Dodge]

And for me, it didn't help Green was consistently out of position due to his is 'closing down' efforts. Usually he was charging out of centre mid but often five yards behind the ball and nowhere near challenging. Left far more space to be exploited beside Whelan

That was my reading of it too. As I said initially, no one could fault Green for effort but thats not enough. Whelan was completely exposed and couldn't cope.

I think its been done to death now though

[Duggie]

lads the stadium tomorrow night is tiny(barely 12,000) so we wont be in a hostile environment. with a couple of thousand irish there hopefully this will help us. thats what im hoping for anyway.....

[SwanVsDalton]

Au contraire in the last campaign our CM was characterised by not getting involved, by standing off and holding a deep line. The Bulgaria and Cyprus home games are good examples. The 'Irish standoff'.
And in particular when we go a goal up.

Indeed, but we do press when the midfielders approach our banks of four, and when we do were usually fairly effective at it (in particular Andrews). Green didn't help matters on Friday by being caught continually on the turn after charging ten yards off the half-way line. In fairness his timing was better in the first half, I seem to recall it being mostly the second when he was caught adrift too far forward.

I didnt say the made us look good, i alluded to what geysir said about, the opposition defending deep, happy to sit back and give you time on the ball, makes anyone more comfortable and able pass it better and look like a decent passing team. Thats what happened lads, we were given time, anybody who cant see it whether it does their head in is naive.

Only in Paris did we really look like a decent passing side. Italian teams always give opposition time on the ball, but generally it's in their own half and so it proved against us as Dunne et al had plenty of time to play incisive long balls on to Doyle's head. It's not exactly pass and move stuff. But regardless is it really about being given time or how poor the opposition are....?

France were poor that last campaign, struggled through an average group, italy were there for the taking and a better team would have done it, too many has beens. Cyprus were unlucky not to at least draw with them once.

Oh. Well in that case it's a hopelessly negative view that ignores the fact Ireland took the game to two sides far superior in quality and gained credible results. These results wern't some lucky gift, we deserved them due to very good performances. Don't you at least partly accept if the opposition played poorly on the night we deserve credit for limiting them?

It doesn't matter what way you want to dress it up the argument holds through based on how italy and france have been over the last year or so.

Or, I guess, how Russia have been over the last year? Guess we should've beat them off the park so since their form hasn't exactly been world class...

I'm not saying we were brilliant or France and Italy were top of their game or even that we shouldn't have beat them - but credit where credit is due. It's is unduly negative, and lazy, to say Ireland are poor when we get beat, but are lucky/the opposition are rubbish when we do well.

[Stuttgart88]

credit where credit is due. It's is unduly negative, and lazy, to say Ireland are poor when we get beat, but are lucky/the opposition are rubbish when we do well.

Well said

[paul_oshea]

Well said

I hope you are not referring to me, just read my posts before the game to see what i said.

I also said the irish fan can be graphed in a period before the games, during the games and then a few days after in terms of how their attitudes and opinions change. I was trying to be clear from the outset.