Hold your horses; it's a difference of 18 minutes in favour of Long. Not quite as definitive as you'd like to suggest, and Stutts demonstrates why it's over-simplistic to rely solely on such a statistic. I'm not against giving Long more time/starts. I'd like to see him play more (and, as I've said, would love for him to take his opportunities and assume Robbie's mantle, not just because I'm a fan of the guy, the way he plays and his attitude, but because it'd be good for the long-term future of Irish international football), but I have the luxury to say that as a supporter. What do I have to lose in making such demanding or expectant declarations? My job isn't on the line. As such, I can totally understand O'Neill's perspective on it.
O'Neill is being safe or conservative in continually opting for Robbie, no doubt, but he has to make the decision he feels will have the highest likelihood of ensuring goals; our qualification and his job depends wholeheartedly upon it. He's going with a proven and record goal-scorer over a player for whom expectations, no matter how many goals you claim you can guarantee he'd score against Gibraltar*, are still grounded more in hope than any sense of form, pedigree or consistency. What I'm saying really is that I can appreciate both sides of the argument; it's all very much debatable. Long is banging on the door, but he needs to step through and throw Robbie out. The goals against Poland and last night helped his case, without doubt, but his omissions from the starting line-up aren't quite at the level of intolerable just yet.
*It's easy to fall into a sort of "absent messiah" type of thinking when things aren't going as you'd like. In recent years, Andy Reid, Steven Reid and Stephen Ireland have all been erected as saviour figures and had their status/ability/potential utility inflated within the Irish media primarily on account of their absence. There's a tendency to assume that what we don't have or what we aren't utilising must be better than what we do have simply by virtue of the fact that what we are utilising isn't getting the results we want. It's very appealing as it gives the impression we have all the answers, but it's an appeal to ignorance and might seem convincing only in the sense that it is unverifiable, so ultimately disprovable too. It's nothing more than an assumption though. You can't guarantee that Shane Long would have scored the same or a greater number of goals against Gibraltar than Robbie's total against them.
I haven't seen the RTÉ panel's discussion on the Georgia game (how do others overseas manage since Hola stopped working?), but, from reading some of the comments here, it came across as being very much grounded in negative speculation.
Whilst that may be true, is it remotely likely we will lose tomorrow in the first place? No. We're favourites to win for a reason and I expect we will edge it, without taking the tricky opposition for granted.Originally Posted by Richie Sadlier
This is probably one of the toughest groups we've had in a while, no? And sure you could just as easily say, "if O'Neill picks up 5/7 points from the remaining games, it'll be a very respectable performance". It's not completely beyond the realms of possibility, is it? We're on 12 points now; just as a reminder, we finished our last group on 14 points with Trap in charge. Brady regularly jumped to Trap's defence and I'm not sure he would have come out with statements like the above in respect of the Italian. In Stan's ill-fated Euro 2008 qualifying campaign, we finished on 17 points, but also worth noting that there were seven teams in the group on that occasion. We'll see what transpires, but I think talk of dropping points at home to Georgia (who we've already beaten away) is needlessly premature and melodramatic.Originally Posted by Liam Brady
Someone should remind Brady that we did pretty shyte in our last group, clear 4th behind Germany, Sweden and Austria. Someone should call him on such hyperbolic claptrap.
I think my line up looks more offensive than it is in a way. It's not necessarily what I would go with, just a suggestion to get over the Long/Keane conundrum. You could always play Whelan instead of Hendrick but I just think it's overkill given the opposition we're facing. We should absolutely take the game to them from the start, high tempo and for once look to play with confidence instead of fear. I'm not convinced Georgia do have goals in them either, they got a freakish goal against us in Tbilisi but we were fairly untroubled otherwise. They scored one goal in five games against everybody else excluding Gibraltar. I'm not suggesting taking them lightly obviously but I'd expect more than keeping it tight, that should and will be their mentality. We're by far the better team and playing at home. I think Long, Walters and Hendrick/Hoolahan would be ideal to press high and cause a bit of panic for the Georgians. There would be no shortage of work rate defensively either.
Last edited by DeLorean; 06/09/2015 at 4:38 PM.
I find Brady painfully negative. No wonder he was so liked by Trap.
His disdain for Roy Keane is always bubbling under the surface which clouds his judgement also I feel.
Sadlier is still trying to carve out a career for himself by being argumentative and Dunphy is already plotting the demise of O'Neill's successor, whomever that may be.
Giles and Cunningham are the only ones on the RTÉ panel whose opinions I would give any credence to.
Folding my way into the big money!!!
Sure, but if I was to replace anyone it would be McCarthy. I'd rather have Whelan sitting and protecting the CBs if the full-backs are to push on. I don't think any of them do as defensively sound a job at the moment than Whelan.
And honestly, I think overkill is very possible - we've been caught cold at home before plenty of times and I still think Georgia are capable in front of goal. For me, if we keep a clean sheet, we'll win the game because I reckon we'll get at least one goal.
Ou-est le Centre George Pompidou?
Did you guys see the roy keane thing with the painting? That is hilarious.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/odd/roy...ting-1-3877941
No Somos muchos pero estamos locos.
the defining game is always the next most important game or the most important game looking back by the end of the qualifying campaign.
to me regardless unless we get to a play off his most defining will be Poland away. he will have done something no one else has achieved in a very a long time, if we beat Poland.
Ya I meant though that the last game against Poland would not be a nothing game, unless scotland completely capitulate the Poland game, assuming a win tomorrow, will be a big one.
I'm a bloke,I'm an ocker
And I really love your knockers,I'm a labourer by day,
I **** up all me pay,Watching footy on TV,
Just feed me more VB,Just pour my beer,And get my smokes, And go away
Yea this game is gonna be no pushover.
Wondering if Georgia can still nab 3rd spot?
I think they can if they beat German and the rest.
People keep saying we've only beaten two teams ranked higher than us in 14 years. Holland is one obviously but I can't figure out the other one?? Anyone?
Folding my way into the big money!!!
Yes, they can get 15 points in total which would put them above Poland who have 14 if Poland lost all their matches.
However that would put us on 15 too. However if they beat us they could I think actually get 2nd place!!
Requires a storming finish from Gibraltar though!
So in theory they could I think finish 2nd.
German win all, Poland lose all Gibraltar win all Scotland just get 3 points from Poland
Finishing like this due to Gibraltar beating us 10-1 in Dublin!!
Germany 25
Gibraltar 15
Ireland 15
Poland 14
Scotland 14
Gibraltar 9
I'll ask again AND include the Roy Painting thing, so we all be Hindu.
What are your best starting?
No Somos muchos pero estamos locos.
Bookmarks