So Niall Quinn was in the team for his silky skills on the deck? When we were losing to Germany and Spain WC 2002 the tactic was hoof it long to the big man.Originally Posted by back of the net
Niall Quinn's skills were quite good actually.
If your basing McCarthys playing philosphy as hoofball on your above mail then you are deluded sir.
When we were losing to spain in WC 2002 - we most certainly DID NOT hoof the ball
There's hoofball and then there's constant hoofball which Trap seem to enjoy
We hoofed it in moderation but we also had Damien Duff in his pomp who was a guaranteed out-ball. Point is we had the team set up to play the ball short or long, which forces the opposition to think a little bit more than just punting it up as soon as you get it.
We had some great players in their pomp Charlie - agreed .
But I think classifying Micks playing philosphhy as Ireland manager as per Emmets "hoofball" does a big disservice to Mick and his general playing style
You’re behind in the closing stages of a group game of a World Cup and a Second Round match... do you:
a. Try and pass it around and hope to get a break in a rigid German defence or a Spanish one we had trouble breaking down for the entire game
or
b. Hoof it long to a one of the most talented players we have who is an expert at taking knockdowns in the hope that one of them breaks to the most potent goalscorer that Ireland has ever produced?
Yeah! Tiki-bleedin’-taka all the way!
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
I wouldn't agree with Emmet's description of hoofball but my recollection is that Mick is practically wedded to 442. I know he did some experiments early in his tenure and I suppose it's fair to say 442 was perfect for the players we had back then, but I'd have some concern that Mick doesn't really have the thorough understanding of other shapes. I liked King's thinking wrt 4231, but felt Doyle took away from the balance with negative effect.
McCarthy's preferred formation is 442 but he changed to 451 for a good spell when Wolves were in the Premier League. I think he only really did it when Doyle was available though, and reverted back to 442 when Fletcher was signed.
442 was his ireland choice. It was his tried and trusted after a few other experimentations....thinking in particular against iceland and macedonia at home in wc98 quals and croatia away in euro 2000.
Last edited by back of the net; 16/10/2013 at 5:26 PM.
I'm thinking more and more Roy Keane. You won't have players moaning about being away for 10 days without playing for a start! I think I he'd provide more of an adrenaline shot rather than a more cerebral improvement but the players would go onto the pitch on a mission. There'd be less of this self defeatist nonsense from some of the players too. The FAI would be shaken out of complacency. And there'd be such a massive falling out and ensuing civil war part 2 in a couple of years we'll be able to waste more hours yapping on the internet.
Could dahamsta afford the hosting fees such an appointment would bring about?
It would be a distraction from the antics of the panel.
We were playing 4-5-2 when Roy Keane was on the pitch, how could we lose.
we wud get docked the 3points by fifa or uefa though
Football has changed since then.
Very few international teams seem married to 4-4-2 any more. Plus we had Roy in the middle of the park commanding play and winning ball better than any irish midfielder has done since
Folding my way into the big money!!!
It's all down to the manager though and their choice, rather than the current tactical fad. And hopefully someone who can get the best out of a rather limited squad.
Off topic but looks like Bob Bradley (Who guided the US to the top of the group over England in WC '10) Got the Sports Illustrated treatment. Glowing article, abject failure.
Article made it sound like he was pretty much the only sane voice in all of Egypt, and would take them to the WC amid all the death, after a home and home vs Ghana.
A bald american visiting cancer patients.
TBH I enjoyed it. I looked and Africa play is only six games?
Egypt were 6-0.
Now I look and Egypt lost 6-1 or something. To Ghana.
SI curse is real.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soc...bradley-egypt/
Last edited by Crosby87; 17/10/2013 at 12:46 AM.
No Somos muchos pero estamos locos.
Maybe time to change your name to Off Topic.
I'm not so sure Stutts. Scotland have been quite a mess for a while, so there was really only one direction that Strachan was going to be able to take them. and while I'm going to seriously stereotype Croatia here, you would have to question their motivation in 2013 - they've taken 1 point from their last 4 group games, and still cantered to 2nd spot - which was sealed by beating Serbia back in March. That said it will be interesting to see how well they do in the next set of qualifiers.
Coleman is just a bad manager. It was always going to end badly with Wales, particularly when he didn't appear to be the choice of the players.
European football has become tougher since Mick resigned, certainly at International level. Remove Spain, Germany, Holland, Russia and probably Italy, and then remove San Marino, Luxembourg, Andorra, Liechtenstein and Malta (i.e. the incredibly strong and weak) and there really isn't a lot to choose from the 40 odd teams left when they are broken into the seedings. Lots of the second seeded teams would fancy themselves at England, Greece.
Even looking at our group this time out. Austria took us in Vienna, and Sweden too. Sweden took us in Dublin, while Kazakhstan did a number on both. That's been replicated throughout groups this past decade. We'll need motivation and organisation as you say, that's fair enough, but when the whole of Europe is playing some form of either 451/4321/4231 then we need a manager that is tactically savvy.
Mick struggled not because of the fall out over Saipan - he struggled because when faced with Hakan Yakin lying deep, and Loskov doing the same for Russia.
Here they come! It’s the charge of the “Thanks” Brigade!
im in the john giles school of thinking, formations arent that important IMO. 4-5-1, 4-4-2, 4-3-2-1 or whatever. it still amount to 11 v 11. you play it as you see it and if your good enough you will get your rewards. now every game is different and if you need to dig in you dig in but im with gilsey on the formation thing. football is a simple game, dont overthink it.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks