QuoteI asked the question here numerous times during Kerr's tenure that surely Hughton must surely have been at least partly responsible for the tactical errors & poor substitutions? Nobody seemed interested in responding. Anyone care to do so now?
I think losing Chris Hughton was bigger loss with the Kerr debacle.
I asked the question here numerous times during Kerr's tenure that surely Hughton must surely have been at least partly responsible for the tactical errors & poor substitutions? Nobody seemed interested in responding. Anyone care to do so now?
[QUOTE=barney;774184]Brian Kerr was a poor international manager.
He was the first manager not to get us a top two place in any qualifying group in 8 campaigns (since Eoin Hand). He did it twice. The second time we finished fourth in the group. And don't tell me that he took over when the first campaign was dead and buried. We would have qualified for the Euros if we beat Russia at home and drew with the Swiss away. In two spineless performances, particularly in Berne, we took one point from six.
He failed to beat any top 70 ranked team in competitive action in 8 attempts. We are talking France, Russia, Switzerland and Israel here not exactly world class opposition. He took 6 points from 24 in those games.
He didn't really blood anyone of any note, save for Andy Reid. At least Staunton has.
It was 6 points from 18. I agree that isn't particularly pleasant statistically but France with Zidane were a world class side and Russia and Switzerland are regular qualifiers. Israel are a very tough team to get a result against.
The Euro 2004 group was practically a no hoper by the time Kerr took charge, as to have any real hope we would have needed to win all our remaining games.
Yes, we finished 4th in the World Cup group, but there was only 2 points seperating 1st to 4th if I remember. That does put it into perspective a little.
The team Kerr inherited was suffering a world cup hangover (they had lost to Russia and Switzerland). Additionally, I believe many of the team were angered that Mick got the sack which made it harder for Kerr.
Yes, the biggest reason is because we know who replaced him.
My Guarantee
Am looking for old Irish matches on VHS, PM me if you have some and I'll upload them here
No, simple as.
COBH RAMBLERS FIRST DIV CHAMPS 2007
http://irish-abroad.appspot.com/GameDayDetails fantastic website by tetsujin1979
I'm not sure about the idea that the ability of the (unknown at the time) person who replaced him should play a part in answering this question.
Based on how Kerr himself performed, not comparing him to what came after, I'd say it was not a mistake to let him go.
In hindsight, it was a terrible mistake to hire Staunton, but I think they are (or can be) separate issues.
NOt really, I was happy enough with Kerr and I would have let him stay on but I understood why they might let him go if they had a world class replacment. Sadly they did not even have a high infants class replacment.
In Trap we trust
At the time I felt Kerr should go because the team looked bereft of ideas at times and certainly lacked the passion that we'd at the very least expect from an Irish team.
It is unfortunate for us that when we were crying out for a leader to take us forward and instill a bit of passion, the FAI delivered someone so out of his depth it made you cringe.
Top Breeders recommend drinkfeckarse....
Kerr was certainly far better than Staunton but he had to go. He had lost the dressingroom and the media.
He was the architect of his own downfall. He was a different person once John Delaney took over as CEO and performances suffered because of it.
Do you think maybe Delaney was the architect of his downfall.
In Trap we trust
I think the fact that Kerr blooded so few young players has more to do with the fact that the conveyerbelt of talent seized up for them few years. Can you name me someone he should have blooded that he didnt? He can be 'credited' with blooding John O'Shea, Andy Reid and McGeady
Kerr's problem was that a large section of the squad resented his appointment from day one. He was on a loser from the start due to the lack of respect for him.
As far as I see it, Kerr's dismissal and Staunton's appointment are not seperate issues, they are completely interlinked. Kerr should only have been disposed of if the FAI knew they could attract someone of a higher standard. They should have put the research in before they pulled the trigger on Kerr.
Instead they jumped the gun and treated Kerr, a man who has done a great service to Irish football at all levels, in an utterly shameful fashion. And then they had the brawn to go and appoint Stan..... what a shower!
Delaney is the architect of everything within Merrion Square. He is the Irish football dictatorOriginally Posted by NeilMcD
I suggest he backed the wrong man in a very misguided belief that he wasn't getting enough support from within the house.
http://pix.ie/widgets/generate/accou...000-F5F5FF.jpg
"It's time for the FAI to grow up." John O'Donoghue, Minister for Sport, RTE , Sunday 7 Nov 2004
I think its pretty obvious that Kerr's position was in jeopardy as soon as Delaney took charge. His undermining of his position and the fact he got rid of him at the earliest feasible opportunity is in stark contrast to his support for his own man.
SIGNATURESCOPE
Possibly Ireland, although whether or not he would have played for Kerr is another debate.
Lee Trundle - don't want to get into any debates about nationality and qualification but the facts of the matter were we were short on strikers, and creativity and he wanted to play for Ireland
Byrne should have been given more of a look in, regardless of whatever reaons he was given a cap.
Ditto Glen Crowe, he was still in good form when Kerr took over, and did well in the friendly against Greece.
Stephen Kelly was called into a few squads, I think he was on the bench against Brazil, but never played under Kerr
I asked what players got their first caps under Kerr before, eirebhoy answered with this post:
http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=580355&postcount=83
I don't remember Michael Doyle's cap. Amsterdam? He'd be worth a look again now.
Yeah, that was it, late substitute: http://www.soccerscene.ie/sssenior/m...ils.php?id=402
came on for Andy Reid
Getting rid of Kerr was a correct decision, appointing stan wasnt.
Kerr had lost the team and the final performance of the campaign to the Swiss when a win wouldve seen us qualify for the play offs was one of the tamest Irish performances Ive ever seen. The tactical game he played in Israel cost us three points as did the home game where when Keane cost injured in the first half he brought on Kavanagh and went defensive.
Although not as shambolic as under Stan, we were fortunate to come away from Cyprus with a 1-0 win, only for Shay Given that night we probably wouldve lost. As little progress as I see we are making under Stan, I do think we were going backwards under Kerr. Compare the Cyprus and French results at the start of the campaign to the Cyprus, French and Swiss games at the end. Marked difference.
Agreed.
There are more options other than Kerr or Stan. Kerr is better than Stan, but that doesn't necessarily mean we were wrong to get rid of him.
I don't think sacking Kerr was the right thing to do. He wasn't a brilliant manager, but he was competent and professional. When people were calling for his head I reminded everyone that John Delaney would be picking the new manager, and that could only be worse. At the time Delaney was making noises about Bryan Robson (another inept Staunton type manager).
Kerr finished fourth in a tight group and was only three points off the top. Pinger currently has us third, but eight points off the top (with still more humiliation to come, one would think.) I'll take Kerr's fourth place over Pinger's third place any day. He was also genuinely unlucky to get only two points off of Israel when we should have had at least four. We also had a goal wrongly disallowed in Basel for offside at 1-0 up. To say he came fourth and leave it at that hides how close he came, that's like saying we were crap in 1982 because we came third. We were in it right up until the final minute of the final match.He was the first manager not to get us a top two place in any qualifying group in 8 campaigns (since Eoin Hand). He did it twice. The second time we finished fourth in the group.
The problem lies with the players. They don't take international football seriously enough. Kerr bored them to death with things like tactics and preparation. Pinger let's them get the pints in and have a bit of fun, but that doesn't cut in international football anymore. Charlton could get away with that because he had top players, but now we have a weaker squad and we need to get the most out of it. You can bet your bottom dollar that Otto Rehhagel's Greece had a professional approach to every match in 2004.
What we need is a take-no-prisoners enforcer type manager to kick our boys into shape. Somebody with Kerr's extensive professionalism, but with the fist of Brian Clough to match.
Last edited by brine3; 19/09/2007 at 9:37 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks