QuoteHe wasn't in the squad a few days earlier because of injury. It's looking more like Kenny decided to take a risk out of desperation.Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
There's a difference between being fit and being match fit. If he wasn't fit, he wouldn't be in the squad.
He wasn't in the squad a few days earlier because of injury. It's looking more like Kenny decided to take a risk out of desperation.
Hmmm but not recovered enough to start. Anyway, it's all irrelevant now. It was a pity he only got 14 games for Ireland.
Jesus Boom….
At every level of the sport, you’ll have physios clear you to play a certain number of minutes when rehabbing an injury. You do a fitness test, you’re not cleared to play. A few days later, you get told 20 or 30 minutes. A few days later you might be up to 45 or 60 minutes. It’s often about incremental build of load after an injury.
None of us were there so no point speculating on the physios report. I just don't think that an injury prone player, coming back from an injury gets risked if we weren't losing against Finland.
Says you, who then immediately goes speculating on the nature of his injury?
He was injured according to reports. He was thrown on when we were losing to Finland a few days later. I don't see any speculation there.
He was lacking match fitness - so 20 minutes makes sense.
He was injured for the away game a month later.
It says he was coming back from injury in that article.
I thought he was dropped by Kenny. It seems though that he was an integral part of his plans. This again goes against the myth that Kenny was building for 2024.
Boom is this u by any chance on twitter ?!
This guy tweets once a day "No Stephen kenny has not been sacked today"
( and nothing else) at first i thought weird
Now I realise he's a comedy genius
https://mobile.twitter.com/KennySacked
It says "Kenny said that McGoldrick's lack of match fitness means he will not be in the starting XI."
A lack of match fitness is often because someone's coming back from injury.
Which is different to being actually injured.
Jaysus - he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't with you, isn't he? Kenny drops McGoldrick - bad call. He wants to play him? Bad call - not building to the future.
This is the kind of tedious stuff that gets in the way of the genuinely valid stuff that can be in your posts as well.
Tiochfaith ár lá!
The match against Finland was 3 days after the Bulgaria game in which McGoldrick was ruled out injured.
I didn't say picking McGoldrick was a bad call, people are quick to attribute things and try to put words in people's mouth. I was just showing what Kenny stated post Luxembourg defeat was complete bull. There was no building for 2024, he was picking the best team he thought he had available to him.
Does every player on the pitch have to be involved in building for the future? Because I'd argue you can build for the future while acknowledging that our options up front were so woejusly ****e that McGoldrick could still be considered a starter.
I also think you're still missing the point of "coming back from injury" tbh. If he was unavailable for selection, why didn't his club withdraw him for example? And he played the next league game for his club. So - it does seem he was coming back from injury, which is conducive with coming off the bench but not starting.
But he practically picked the exact same team as McCarthy picked for his first 10 games. That's why the building for the future excuse was and is nonsense. You don't pick 32 and 33 year old players in 2020 if you're building for Euro 2024. People seem to be coping onto this fact now after the recent friendlies but it was obvious 2 years ago.
Again, no one here knows how fit he was or otherwise. I thought he was dropped but it was pointed out that he was injured. If he was injured for the game 3 days previously then he probably shouldn't and wouldn't have been risked if we weren't losing. That's all I'm saying. I think it's time we moved on.
So you acknowledge that this is wrong -
I agree it does sound like he probably wouldn't have been thrown on had we not been losing. But it's the above that's being disputed. But if you're retracting that, then that's fine.
You were disputing that I was speculating on the injury which I was not. All the other stuff had already been sorted.
But yeah, the whole McGoldrick selection issue adds to the evidence that exposes Kenny as a spoofer. Building for 2024 he was not.
Well you continued to dispute it for a while after ("So he wasn't fit but Kenny threw him on for 20 minutes? Even if what you say is true, it's still not putting a good reflection on Kenny"; post #418)
I don't agree bringing him off the bench against Finland reflects badly on Kenny. It probably wouldn't have happened had we been winning, but he was on the bench to be brought on, so...
I've said a few times, none of us were there so we don't know how injured, fit or otherwise he was. I'm not sure why you've got issues with all this. I think you need to let it go.
Maybe you have a comment on Kenny claiming to build for 2024 but only after selecting what he thought were full strength teams for his first 10 games?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks