oh brilliant a really good thread all summed up very well. PLayoffs we will just about make it to finals altho i fear france. we will play it very tight, great to be in playoffs, we wouldve taken it at start. thoughedt group in years was kerrs goup fren
/swiss/isreal but i thnks we'll make it..
i think personally Kerr had a better group of players to choose from - the negativity of some of these posts is unreal - FFS look where we were 2 years ago with the likes of Jonathan douglas been the nucleus of our team in some games - the whole stan era was a joke - and yet 2 years on we sit here and argue that we could of won the group, i do believe teams will not want to meet us in the playoffs - the results against Italy will do our confidence good, personally i'm hoping for greece
Bulgaria were absolutely rubbish and played all their games with the spirit and fight of 11 Berbatovs.
“World Champions” or not, Italy looked way past their best other than in spells and we should have beaten their 10 men.
We used to be upset if we didn’t win home games, now draws are good enough.
The fact is that with the other minnows in the group and Italy and Bulgaria in first gear, we could have won this group. No losses, good news but with a large dollop of luck.
YES, It’s better than under Staunton, but is this the benchmark??
If Trapatoni was Irish he would heavily, heavily criticized and most certainly would NOT have a new lucrative contract UNLESS we qualified for South Africa, AND there would be HUGE pressure on to bring Andy Reid in…Trap is very much the untouchable Don.
Italy did enough, they always do, had we beaten them on Saturday night I think they would have battered Cyprus last night (for the record I think had last nights game meant anything to us, we would have won too)
Bulgaria are a technically very good side they passed the crap out of us on occasions in both Sofia & Dublin, regardless of their supposed lack of passion or Spirit they would beat a lot of sides..
The key result was in Cyprus, becoming a very difficult place for mid ranked teams to win in, we did, just, but that was all that was required.
Rewind 13 months to the begining of this campaign and ask yourself, if you had been offered 2nd place, play-off & an unbeaten record would you have taken it......
Do not agree with this at all. We play a system and stick regimentally to it. This system has gotten us through the qualifying campaign unbeaten and into the playoffs. To continually play this system, even when up against it in certain games (1-0 down in bari) requires almost all of the above.Originally Posted by irishultra
The system I am on about is Trap playing two defensive midfielders to hold the shape of the team together. We don't hunt the ball down crazy and run around like 11 robbie keanes on acid. We keep our shape and say, ok then, if you're good enough, create some chances. Italy created little on sat. I can understand people wanting us to improve the way we play and introduce this lovely expansive game with Andy Reid in the side, Stephen Ireland back playing (maybe with a full head of hair), but it aint gonna happen!
We play to our strengths, that isn't passing and holding onto the ball and throwing 40 stepovers as a display of skill and ambition. Snap out of it!
Last edited by bogwarrior; 15/10/2009 at 8:51 AM.
it is probably a good thing so that he isn't Irish in that light. I mean continuity is so underestimated in football these days.
Look at McCarthy, he was given a couple of unsuccessful campaigns to try and qualify before we got to Japan.
I think Trap has been decent in his time so far and hopefully in time we can kick on and improve, in fairness at least we are now difficult to beat and that is always a good starting point for any team. Next step is getting the winning mentality.
Personally I always thought that Kerr wasn't given long enough but he probably had lost the confidence of the players and FAI.
One day for Staunton on the other hand was too long!!
I can't but judge Trap on the Andy reid situation and what I said above about an expectation to win home games.
Agree re. Staunton, obviously! and also re. Kerr. The more I hear Kerr on commentary etc. the more I realise how up he is on his football and players from all over. He did make some horrid decisions (one in particular v Israel) but the players didn't help (late goal in Tel Aviv, Harte miss v Swiss) and overall I'd say he was treated harshly...compare that to Trap!
Stats for the Group Qualifying I added up:
Minutes Played:
Dunne 900
Given 900
Kilbane 900
Keane 884
O'Shea 860
Whelan 790
McGeady 657
Doyle 641
Hunt S 608
Andrews 504
Duff 440
St Ledger 360
McShane 280
ReidS 180
Folan 173
Finnan 170
Gibson 126
Miller 103
Hunt N 96
Kelly 90
Lawrence 90
Best 61
Rowlands 60
Keogh 27
Goals:
Keane 5
Doyle 2
Dunne 2
Whelan 2
Kilbane 1
Yellows (no reds!):
Whelan 2
Andrews, Best, Folan, Given, McGeady, McShane, Rowlands: 1
Last edited by Metrostars; 16/10/2009 at 5:47 PM.
"Jacques Santini...will be greeted in every dugout of the country by "one-nil, one-nil" - Clive Tyldsley, 89th minute of France-England June 13, 2004.
"Ooooohhhh Nooooooo" Bobby Robson 91st minute.
When did Kilbane score? And where is St. Ledger's goal?
Anyone else think that there's a big analogy between England's 2007 Rugby World Cup campaign and Irish football under Trap vs. under Stan?*
England opened against Sth Africa playing a non-structured natural game and got spanked 36-0 (?). From then on they followed a system, played to their strengths, covered up their weaknesses and relied on pressure to earn set-piece victories which, although not pleasing on the eye, achieved major results through sheer practicality.
Trap took over our team, realised that if we took teams on "honestly" we'd win some, lose some and get lost in the pack, but by imposing structure and discipline, abondoning flair, covering our faults and playing to our strengths and becoming a force from set-pieces...
*a bit unfair on Stan as I think we had to witness the Stan experiment just to see just how far off the pace we really were. I think many more experienced managers would have made similar decuisions to Stan in reaction to the Kerr era criticisms. I personally recommended abandoniong caution & taking teams on home & away.
yes but even closer to greece under otto rehaggel
Hope you're right! How did they do in the 2004 qualification group?yes but even closer to greece under otto rehaggel
Had Kerr qualified us for play offs in either of his campaigns he probably would have got another one. For me that's a fair measure of sucess, we've only ever topped one group for Euro 88 so 2nd is the benchmark. McCarthy finished 2nd in each of his 3 campaigns, Kerr didn't manage it once unfortunately despite being perfectly placed to do so towards the end of each campaign, 1 point from our last 2 games in each.
I think we are screwed!!! Even if you took our 6 draws as 2 legged playoffs, we would have lost 1 and drawn 2. Italy would have won on away goals and Bulgaria and Montenegro would have drawn with us.
Portugal, Greece, Russia and France are all better opposition than everyone we've played, with the exception of the Italians, although we played them for 80 minutes in Bari when they had 10 men and only drew.
Its all well and good hoping that we get through, but be realistic, the chances of us getting there are minute at best. We don't have the players, our system is not suited to a playoff situation, and the manager is too rigid to change this. Whether the first leg is home or away the managers plan will be "don't lose" which is not the way to go, especially if the first leg is at home. If the first leg is at home and we use this tactic, any chance we had is out the window.
He has no plan B, unless you count throwing on a big man against a tired 10 man Italy as plan B. Not every team is gonna have a man sent off, and not every team will sit back as Italy did trying to hold a lead.
Kerr was hamstrung in his first campaign starting with 0 points from 2 games, lest you forget.
and mccarthy's team were 2nd seeds in 98 and 00 and 3rd seeds in 02, so he exceeded expectations once
kerr's team were first seeds for 2004, but with the start he had, what hope had he? if we had won at home to the swiss and drawn away to russia, we would have won the group.... surely you aren't blaming kerr for the results under mccarthy?
admittedly the record for 06 was poor but by that stage we were third seeds.
Finished top of group 6, ahead of Spain and Ukraine, 6 wins (including beating Spain in Zaragoza), zero draws and losses to Spain and Ukraine
more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Eu...ifying#Group_6
Don't remember that! Which game v the Swiss was it?
'And Crouch must score'
Apart from the Andy Keogh at RM for that Italy game,
Trap has stuck to a sound analysis of a player's best position and role in the team.
Possibly Trap has also used the evidence of the games played before he came.
Nevertheless, I doubt if Trap would have dropped Kav after the Cyprus game and used O'Shea at CM in a untried partnership for that last game against the Swiss.
Italy would have qualified from any group. And very probably would have finished first. So we did incredibly well to get into the play offs and remain unbeaten. We have players like Dunne, O'Shea, Given, Whelan, St Ledger, Hunt, Doyle, McGeady, Keane and Lawerence playing well for their clubs. We have a 50% chance of getting through against anyone. Trap gives us the 51/49%
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks