I've always been of the opinion that if you want to watch something that's pretty for the sake of pretty, you can go to the ballet. For me, football is tribal, it's about your team winning games and getting results, doesn't matter if the goals come from a 30-pass flowing move or off Gary Doherty's arse after a miskick from their keeper.
In my opinion, Trap has gotten us punching above our weight, no matter how the football looks (and I don't even think it's that bad, I remember being in the horrors every time the opposition attacked under Stan, a bit of stability seems nice after that, it's not all about the attackers!).
Last edited by peadar1987; 06/09/2012 at 10:47 AM.
I do think that there's a bit of refusal to accept qualification on its own merit. With us its always begrudging "sure we only got there cos we drew Iran / Estonia", anyone else and we'd have been out". I think any second / third placed seed that qualifies usually gets a bit of luck along the way. Only the big boys coast in.
That said, over the years the Swedes and Danes have qualified relatively regularly by actually engaging in football matches. The Swedes are as stuck on 4-4-2 as we are but they get better results than we do largely because they take teams on.
Trap's methods have worked in qualifying so far but I think cracks have been papered over and the goals against column is misleading. We ship lots of chances even to mediocre teams and I fear that this will cost us. Our inability or unwillingness to retain the ball is at the root of the opposition getting possession which gives chances. I hope Trap has realised this. I think we need to play on the front foot more.
'Concede'.Originally Posted by jbyrne
Am well aware of the strengths of having a good defence, fine. And yes for us, it's a results business.
But it's also the manner in which we play...
Some of which would be alleviated by what Stutts just said in his last post.
I sometimes wonder if some on here have even the slightest clue about tactics or how to set teams up...
Why play up the positives of course. Kazakhstan are up-and-coming superstars, we're saving a performance for Germany, Whelan only got by-passed half-a-dozen times etc etc...*kidding*
I'd say nearly everyone besides Mrs Trappattoni would agree losing on Friday would be a complete disaster.
It'd be more interesting if we managed to lose/draw but actually played fantastic, expansive football, as unlikely as it is.
Ou-est le Centre George Pompidou?
Don't Kazakhstan come good in September?
Meaning...
but you do and you know also how to avoid typos'Concede'.
Am well aware of the strengths of having a good defence, fine. And yes for us, it's a results business.
But it's also the manner in which we play...
Some of which would be alleviated by what Stutts just said in his last post.
I sometimes wonder if some on here have even the slightest clue about tactics or how to set teams up...
Pretty much. But it's all relative.
That argument usually ignores the results over the preceding 18 months that meant we could be drawn against the likes of Estonia or Iran. Particularly the Estonia draw, we were the only third seeded team from the qualifiers in the top seeds for the play offs.
I've heard the 'good football is more important than results' thing before. As we cycled through various managers at Harps this has been proven not to be true- if you're playing nice football but losing every week your crowds drop and those that remain wish for a better defence.
Often when Ireland try to play passing football they give the ball away anyway and in more dangerous positions than they would by being more direct. At a club side you could work on evolving with style and abilities of your players but that's very difficult with an international side. Especially with a squad that has very few really good players.
Would I like to see Ireland play sexy, attacking football? Hell yeah! But we don't have the players for it in my opinion. I see the comments people make about some of our peripheral players whose abilities seem stellar and wonder if we're talking about the same guys. But then there's always a tendency in football to over rate your own players.
Meanwhile we made it to the Euros for only the second time in our history- with probably the worst squad we've ever taken to a major finals. So clearly the system isn't as bad as people make it out to be.
But the media have turned on Trap, like they do eventually on all Ireland managers and public opinion is inclined to agree. So he's in big trouble the first time we have some poor results.
#NeverStopNotGivingUp
Just regurgitating one of Stan's comical quotes in response to SkStu's, "Just out of interest, how will the Trap fanboys (joke!) react if we don't win on Friday while playing the usual turgid sh!te?"
For me it's not about playing pretty football versus playing ugly football. I'd take ugly with results any day of the week.
My point is more that we can play more effective football. We regularly get dominated in midfield even against lowly ranked opposition, we play without the ball too much, our full backs barely venture forward, we hoof it too much, we retain the ball badly and we concede chances. I think we can improve on all those counts while keeping the conservative foundations in tact.
Danny, not sure that joke works.
And agree with Stutts again...
With the simple point also, we have virtually zilch creativity from central midfield.
IMO a disgrace.
A midfielder that looks to receive the ball from the back 4 and play it at least sideways is a great improvement, not to mention a bit of technical skill to handle a bit of pressure.
I think we are moving in the direction of a 50/50 game, possession football/hoofing.
I'd second all this.
It's tiring to read comment after comment suggesting that posters who'd like us to pass the ball better 'would prefer how we were under Stan' or words to that effect.
Are we better than we were then? Of course, but that doesn't mean we are as good as we can be. We have a game plan now which involves conceding huge amounts of possession to even the poorest of teams, and relying on our defensive organisation get through games. It's a game plan that got us through the group, but it was the foundation for our destruction in the Euros. And I'm worried that we will keep the same system in place for this campaign with changes only happening to personnel, rather than the system and roles players are told to play.
Guarniad take on Trap.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/b...t_gu&fb=native
Last edited by ArdeeBhoy; 06/09/2012 at 10:41 AM.
The buzz word "system". Why, because Spain played us off the park. We were NOT played off the park by Croatia (on another day it would have been 1-1) and we have matched Italy in our previous games, all playing 4-4-2. Other than the Russian game, we have more than held our own away from home playing 4-4-2 or whatever. I think Trapp's system, formation, tactics whatever you want to call them work away from home with the opposition coming on to us (2 unbeaten campaigns away speaks volumes).
His (our) problem is at home. It just doesn't work. We have had some pretty poor teams come to Dublin and outplay us (Celtic Cup aside where we faced other sides equally uncomfortable on the ball). A solution is required for at home. I am not paid €1.5 million (at least not as a football manager) a year so I don't know the answer but we need one.
As to "good football" versus results football, no contest. How much "good football" we can play with a smattering of first teamers from the lower reaches of the EPL, reserve EPL players, Championship players and a couple of across the pond players I am not sure. This debate will have to wait for another day (perhaps two games if both go pear shaped) but for the moment, it's time to put that cat back in the bag and get on with what we've got.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
I really doubt there would be too many people making excuses in that eventuality. I would probably fall into the fanboy camp but I couldn't defend him if he doesn't get a win over there.
Just my way of saying that anything other than three points from this game would be indefensible, just like Stan's comical excuse for our shambolic performance against the supposed banana-skin of San Marino. We're ranked 116 places above Kazakhstan; they're ranked 142nd in the world for a reason.
I laughed at your joke, Danny.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks