Except that the FIFA Rankings for September 2010 don't go back 25 years, only four.Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Indeed, they don't go back eg to the late 60's/early 70's, when the ROI team went 6 years (to the day) without winning a single home game, competitive or friendly (including a 20 game run where they didn't win home or away).
In fact, why stop at 35 or 40 years? If you were to go right back to 1921, when the "splitters" broke away, I suspect you'd find that our complete record compares quite respectably with yours.
Who knows? The example of West & East Germany suggests it is hardly a foregone conclusion.
Anyhow, whatever the ranking if my team were subsumed into a UI team, it would still be lower than if we were subsumed into a UK team, and I most certainly don't want that, either.
No, unlike you, I'm sufficiently happy with my own team not to want to see it disappear.
It's something to do with our achieving meaningful victory against half-decent teams every now and then...
Small countries don't need expensive vanity project stadiums. Equally, larger countries with deranged FA CEOs and a big stadium aren't necessarily any better governed. Our existing-upgraded stadium will be fine for all appropriate tournaments, thanks.
That's if the funding for the upgrade is forthcoming.
I'm confident that it will be. Briefly, the threats to it (whether from government cutbacks generally or IFA in-fighting specifically) are outweighed by the opportunities (bigger crowds/ more income/ political credit etc.). A cost-benefit analysis, basically.
I never said anything about "the last 20 years".
Following the publication of the most recent FIFA Rankings, which only cover the most recent four years, Geysir used this self-same Rankings Thread to insinuate that ROI are clearly superior to NI.
I pointed out that the Rankings themselves clearly disprove that.
Since then neither he, you, nor anyone else has been able to dispute that, since it is clearly, er, indisputable.
P.S. If you really do want a "stroll down Memory Lane", why not review our respective records over the last 40 years, rather than 20? You see, all being well I'll celebrate the 40th Anniversary of watching my team in a few months time. In fact, my first game saw NI knock five past Cyprus*, including a hat-trick by some bloke called George Best. Who could imagine either team scoring five in a game between Cypriot and Irish opponents these days, eh?
Still, "Long Runs the Fox", as the saying goes.
* - Oh, and it was the whole of Cyprus, too, btw
In my long experience, most England fans know little about the ROI team and even less about the NI team, so why would I seek their opinion on either?
Christ, half of them don't seem to know much about their own team, if their insanely optimistic hopes when going into major tournament finals are anything to go by...
No, if I want to know how teams are doing, I look at their results, since they count for considerably more than opinions, informed or otherwise.
No doubt that certain aspects of the Rankings are highly contentious, including the respective weightings between Confederations, plus the relative importance given to Friendly and Competitive matches etc.
Nonetheless, when they comparing teams in the same Confederation, over a four year period, they are reliable enough (imo).
So that's your infallible guide then, is it? Funny, that.
I am tempted to go by how many ranking teams have been beaten in competitive games over, say, the last 8 or 9 years, but somehow I suspect that that would be no less transparent than your barometer.
No, I'll just stick to wins, draws and defeats we've had, both friendly and competitive, against a range of opponents over a suitable period.
Oh wait, I must mean the FIFA Rankings...
Last edited by EalingGreen; 17/09/2010 at 2:54 PM.
Except that each tournament runs over two seasons, not four. The league club rankings don't aggregate last term's positions with 2008-09. Although if they did Spurs wouldn't have made the Champions League, so maybe they're not so bad after all...
"Consistent" and "reliable" is it? If an EPL team were to draw every game this season, they'd certainly be both. Mind you, 38 points would also likely see them relegated.
As I see it, the ROI under Trapp are certainly hard to beat, so they can't be called a "bad" team. Then again, they can't seem to win their "big" games, so they can't be called a "good" team, either. I'd say they're pretty average.
By contrast, NI have a very good home record, so cannot be deemed a "bad" team. That said, our away record is so ****-poor that we can't claim to be a good team, but put the two together and they add up to "pretty average", too.
Which is only what the Rankings reflect.
Either way, you cannot completely rule out the hopes of either team of qualifying for a major tournament, but in each case it has still got to be "odds against".
Which is only what the last few Qualifiers reflect, too.
And as regards the 2012 Euros, I would agree that the ROI have a marginally better chance of getting to Polkraine than NI, but that is only because they have a noticeably easier Group than ours.
As against that, I think they'll still struggle, unless Trapp and the players manage to shed the idea that some (many?) of the fans seem to have i.e. that they're better than they actually are.
The fact that DA asked the Belgian FA for certain opposition does not negate my point that Associations invariably arrange Friendlies for financial reasons, since I qualified it by adding that this "rule of thumb" may occasionally be overridden by the manager on "footballing" grounds.
An illustration closer to home is that of the FAI organising so many home friendlies, on the basis that with a large stadium debt to repay, home friendlies in front of decent crowds paying high ticket prices undoubtedly bring in more money than appearance fees for away friendlies. (The same applies eg to Brazil and Argentina, only in reverse).
"Hypothetical", yep, "speculative" certainly and as for "idle" - most definitely.
None of those makes it untrue, mind.
What was that you were saying about "idle speculation"?
It is hardly "unfair" to decline to characterise an away friendly in Albania as "glamourous" - I was there for Christssake!
Neither does the fact that their team won make it any less "unglamourous", either. Rather, it just reflected the fact that they were poor, but we were awful.
Which experience has told me can always happen with NI, especially in away friendlies etc.
But experience also tells me that conversely (perversely?), we can also be thrilling, often when least expected, which is why I also went out to Maribor a fortnight ago.
And if you put the two together, it averages out to, well, average. However, unlike certain other teams who arrive at Average "by tram", our progress is better characterised as a "roller-coaster" ride.
And no-one ever queued up for 3 hours at Alton Towers or Disney World for a bloody tram ride!
Onwards and Upwards!
OK, that's simply pedantry. My query was genuine and the implication was that you might have been somewhat hyper-sensitive. The reason I asked, is because you picked up on what geysir said (that NI have returned to the first page of the rankings) and made it out to be a 'sneer'.
No, picking up on the vaguest of references to your team and making an issue out of it makes you hyper-sensitive, in my opinion.
I don't know about every other reference he makes to the IFA team, but in this instance, I don't believe the implication was that Ireland are vastly superior. The statement was fairly clear and simple. It even had a bit of humour in it, I believe ('brand Ireland').
Good stuff.
I always thought that the improvement in Northern Ireland's status was due to a re-drawing of the results counted and the weighting given to them in the aftermath of the 2006 World Cup? Hence Lawrie leaving as it was in his contract that he was due £2,500 for every World Ranking place that he improved NI?
I think it might be a bit simpler than that, 2NZ.
NI's competitive record before, during and after Sanchez's tenure:
EC 04: P8, W0 D3 L5 pts3. Seeded 4/5, finished 5.
WC 06: P10, W2, D3, L5 pts 9. Seeded 5/6, finished 4.
EC 08: P12, W6 D2, L4 pts 20. Seeded 6/7, finished 3.
WC 10: P10, W4, D3, L3, pts15. Seeded 3/6, finished 4.
Sanchez's part-time salary at NI: ca £125- 150k
And full-time at Fulham: ca £750k- £1 million.
So he used them as a stepping stone?
Big deal.
NI amaze me sometimes, they must be both very very frustrating and exhilarating to watch for their fans! They have beaten some of the top teams in recent years, Spain, Sweden, England etc, but then followed them up with results like losing to Iceland. And yet again this campaign seems to be heading the same direction, they have got a fantastic win against World Cup finalists Slovenia, but I wouldnt back them to get a win against Estonia for example.
Whereas in our case in recent years we have been particularly good at beating the lower level teams but have by and large failed to beat the top teams.
Nail on head, sir. On both counts.
And backs up the points I made earlier, albeit in a more articulate fashion.
You flatter me AB!
Tram's tend to go from A-B. Rollercoasters go round in circles.
Ou-est le Centre George Pompidou?
It's quite common for managers to resign international jobs for more money in English club football. See also McLeish or Hughes. Or even McCarthy (I know he was sacked, but his next full-time job must have paid more than the part-time one for the FAI).
Isn't almost all international football like that? You can wait six months for the next games, look forward to a trip across Europe, then see the squad playing like they've just lurched out of the pub in yet another beating.
Actually this campagin is significantly different to most in the recent past, even after one game. We haven't started with a win since 2000, or beaten a bigger/ higher ranked team in an away qualifier since Euro 96.And yet again this campaign seems to be heading the same direction, they have got a fantastic win against World Cup finalists Slovenia, but I wouldnt back them to get a win against Estonia for example
I'd back us to beat Estonia at home. As will the bookies, probably.
Not quite. In the last four years you've failed to beat Montenegro (twice), Cyprus (twice) and Wales in qualifiers.Whereas in our case in recent years we have been particularly good at beating the lower level teams but have by and large failed to beat the top teams
It does seem a recurring theme in Geysir's posts. Of course, EG and I may be more sensitive to digs at the NI team than you and AB, given that both of you make clear you'd like it abolished.
Good luck in boosting Brand Republic, btw. After some of our recent friendly beatings the image has been as bad as Brand Russell.
Last edited by Gather round; 18/09/2010 at 7:33 AM.
Or of course you could just ignore any posts, good or bad, alluding to the North's team rather than post the same tedious and deluded paranoid drivel on a team you barely ever see FFS!
Yeah, but then they go back from B to A again, maybe after a change of driver.
At least we have trams, they don't.
There was a discussion with radio (football) personalities in front of a live audience on BBC Radio 5 last evening, Newcastle or Sunderland can't remember - prob Newcastle as most of the debate was Newcastle fans making the case that they were a bigger, better and more successful club than Sunderland. Some sort of myopic obsession that makes sense to the natives.
As long as you get off at the right stop - say Stuttgart, Genoa, New York or Suwon - you're doing OK. Although sometimes you can fall asleep and end up back where you started....
Ou-est le Centre George Pompidou?
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks