Martin O'Neill...

I am not sure about that, neither Arter or Hendrick would have been seen, in the build up to the game at least, as players suited to direct football. I think we were guilty of overestimating them, like what we do with Wes. As much as I can appreciate what the latter brings to us I can also understand why he doesn't start and that is because he gives the ball away. A lot and often in dangerous areas. I don't think starting Hendrick over him equates to long ball football. The problem is when he isn't arsed and Arter has gone walk about we were left shapeless and disorganised, he tried to change it, as you suggested, but it only made things worse. It was only when Murphy came on that we became more organised and structured.

rolo wrote: To say that this is more of the same is absurd. We've a weaker panel of players now. And the results have been good. Great management to get some great days and nights out of these players, at times it's been like a return to the good old days, winning big qualifiers, claiming big scalps, winning a match at a tournament (by the way the most games we've ever won at a single tournament is one, the only time we fell below that was 2012). It hasn't been perfect but MON did well to turn us around from the rabble we were in the last couple of years under Trap.  Also, Bosnia were a better side than Estonia, simple as. The highlight of the Trap era was beating the nine men of Estonia 4-0. Heady times.  I don't agree with the people who said Trap had a great record in the first two campaigns. The second campaign was a weak group: Russia, Slovakia, ourselves, Macedonia, Armenia, Andorra.  We had bad days in that campaign, poor home performances (Russia and Slovakia) and nothing much to shout about, we got by ultimately because Slovakia were sh*te.  So don't be so critical when we're second in a group that is much, much tougher than that group.

No it isn't. That group had Russia at it's head. This group has Wales. Everyone wanted them as top seeds. Nobody wants Russia in their group, let alone top seeds. And nobody wants them in Group A of the coming World Cup, as they know the scale of the task in front of them. Slovakia had just knocked Italy, the full strength Italy side out of the World Cup (compared to the B side we scraped past) and won in Moscow. That was the quality of opposition in that group. There's nothing like that level of strength in this one.

The poor home performance against Slovakia that gets dragged up over and over again put us critically ahead of them on head to head. The similiar poor home performances against Poland and Scotland put us behind both on head to head, and the poor one shot home performances against Austria and Wales with 10 men, may still bring about serious consequences.

notpropaganda73 wrote: You can have your own little argument in your head and huff and puff and be bitter about whatever Martin O'Neill or any future manager does because the wrongs against Trap in your head will never be righted. You'll be on here again after Georgia no matter the result of performance, you'll be on here again after the Serbia game and again after that just going on and on and on and on and on about records and tactics and limited group this and primitive football that, it doesn't matter what happens on the pitch or if we qualify or anything. MON won't get any credit from you regardless of what happens. Just cut your losses and switch off until O'Neill eventually resigns or is sacked and then you can come back to try and enjoy watching your national team maybe.

If that is what you want, well hehe, you'll be waiting.

What I do is hold his record to the same scrutiny Trap's was, and if you don't like it, well now you know what I had to put up with when he was in charge. Because we were promised a revolution from someone who "understood Irish football culture". What we got is a long way from that, and I hold the hypocrisy of that to account.

pre Madonna wrote: I am not sure about that, neither Arter or Hendrick would have been seen, in the build up to the game at least, as players suited to direct football. I think we were guilty of overestimating them, like what we do with Wes. As much as I can appreciate what the latter brings to us I can also understand why he doesn't start and that is because he gives the ball away. A lot and often in dangerous areas. I don't think starting Hendrick over him equates to long ball football. The problem is when he isn't arsed and Arter has gone walk about we were left shapeless and disorganised, he tried to change it, as you suggested, but it only made things worse. It was only when Murphy came on that we became more organised and structured.

The fact that the two of them had a limited impact on the game perhaps proves your point that they are not suited to a longball game. However, they're both physically stronger and more able runners than Hoolahan, so I guess that's why they were selected ahead of him.

Hoolahan is prone to giving the ball away but I suppose that is the risk you take. If longball under O'Neill is about taking few risks, then the result also means few chances created.

Wes is the player most likely to look for and play a pass, and sometimes that pass is all you need to unlock a defence.

I can't imagine that either Arter or Hendrick were instructed by O'Neill to show for the ball but didn't. This has been going on for too long now for it to be anything other than the plan.

Hendrick's best game for us was against Sweden, where he worked well from deep and pushed forward with the ball, aided by Brady on the left. He has completely lost that form, but is that because of himself or is it O'Neill's tactics?

And I agree that Murphy has done well as a target man for us in the last year.

We played a 4-3-3 against Italy at the Euros. We had Murphy up the middle and Long on the right wing and it worked. But with Brady there against Austria it didn't.

So I think it shows one of the flaws in O'Neill's plans. He wants to play direct but, as we saw against Austria, sometimes we aren't fully committed to it for it to work in the manner that it should.

Using Murphy and partnering him with either Walters or Long has worked, but this may mean having to change the team around and dropping one of Ward, Brady or McClean.

pre Madonna wrote: I don't think we wanted to play direct against Austria, it was merely because Arter and Hendrick were anonymous that we ended up playing aimless punts, many of them ending up in the stands. I think it was very much a case of Arter and Hendrick either not showing for the ball and not being good enough on it. I too would have started Wes but I also see the risks he brings, it isn't just as simple as 'he is that kind of player', it is that he finds himself coming deep and losing it in positions we end up very exposed from. Many of us felt that the eleven on the pitch could have won that game with Austria and I am sure Martin did too! I think the reality is that we have a dearth of midfield players of the required level and ability for us to go anything but direct. McCarthy, Arter, Hendrick and Hoolahan all flatter to deceive in terms of what we expect from them and the one midfielder we have who regularly meets expectations is derided for doing so! There is also the problem of Robbie Brady, another who flatters to deceive but, to be fair to him, it is quite clear that his position is wide left, either of a flat four or a wider five, anywhere else and he looks completely lost. It then becomes a question of getting your best eleven on the pitch or the best team. Based on form I would drop Brady, especially as his set-pieces are deteriorating rapidly. I think the problem is he wants to mix it up, I think he knows we have the players to play direct but it was well know that Trap's style was part of the reason for his exit. I just think he needs to be a little bit braver over the next two games. I don't think direct football is automatically negative football and, besides all that, the most important thing now is to make Russia. Everything else is secondary.

MC Hammered wrote: What's the story with implementing an ignore button for the forum?

irishmufc wrote: 'well hehe.you'll be waiting' I don't remember you ever posting in that giddy manner before. At least now that and the ludicrous 'I'm not anti O'Neill' line shows that you're just one in a long list of boring wums on this forum. I'd have a modicum of more respect if you were just a deluded Trap fan that can't see any wrong/mistakes in what he did. At least that's honest if misguided. And you don't hold O'Neill to the same scrutiny as Trap as you've never criticised Trap and have always criticised O'Neill. Just another look at me, look at me daddy wum when everyone else was looking forward to going to France you wouldnt take a chance because of ISIS Whether you're wumming or were being serious, it's still pathetic

kearney304 wrote: pre Madonna wrote: I don't think we wanted to play direct against Austria, it was merely because Arter and Hendrick were anonymous that we ended up playing aimless punts, many of them ending up in the stands. I think it was very much a case of Arter and Hendrick either not showing for the ball and not being good enough on it. I too would have started Wes but I also see the risks he brings, it isn't just as simple as 'he is that kind of player', it is that he finds himself coming deep and losing it in positions we end up very exposed from. Many of us felt that the eleven on the pitch could have won that game with Austria and I am sure Martin did too! I think the reality is that we have a dearth of midfield players of the required level and ability for us to go anything but direct. McCarthy, Arter, Hendrick and Hoolahan all flatter to deceive in terms of what we expect from them and the one midfielder we have who regularly meets expectations is derided for doing so! There is also the problem of Robbie Brady, another who flatters to deceive but, to be fair to him, it is quite clear that his position is wide left, either of a flat four or a wider five, anywhere else and he looks completely lost. It then becomes a question of getting your best eleven on the pitch or the best team. Based on form I would drop Brady, especially as his set-pieces are deteriorating rapidly. I think the problem is he wants to mix it up, I think he knows we have the players to play direct but it was well know that Trap's style was part of the reason for his exit. I just think he needs to be a little bit braver over the next two games. I don't think direct football is automatically negative football and, besides all that, the most important thing now is to make Russia. Everything else is secondary. Good solid post. All Irish fans just want to qualify. It's as simple as that. Play to your strengths. I think the Uruguay game gave MON belief we could do it on the big stage. The lads couldn't for whatever reason. On we go. 6 points from the next 2 games and the main haters will crawl back in to where they came from.

You don't do irony do you?

Stoked Up wrote: Echoing Deise316's comments somewhat. I don't recall the remit for any Irish manager being anything other than qualify for tournaments and then do as well as they can when they got there.  It's a load of nonsense that some people here are saying that the current regime were expected to have us playing in a more fluid style, no more than it was a requirement of the previous regime. Trap was let go because of our failure to make the last WC or at least the playoffs. O'Neill will prosper or fail by the same yardstick. Comparing the the two managers style of play is futile as they were both handed pretty much the same standard of players to work with. Whilst Trap had the slight advantage of some ageing stars, Mon appears to have a lesser hand, but the up and coming bunch could yet prove to be of better overall quality, depending on how they progress.

Good post.

As long as results are positive supporters will put up with the manager. The Trap apologists on here are trying to make the case that O'Neill gets an easier ride. You can only make that judgement if O'Neill's results start to decline and we either get embarrassed in Russia should we qualify and/or have a poor campaign for euro 2020.

Whatever about the media or fairweather fans Trap was still viewed on positively by the majority of actual supporters while things were going well. There were reservations with selections and style of play but there was no witchhunt among match going supporters up to Euro 2012 IMO.

The anti-Trap crowd would do well to remember where we were when he took over and O'Neill has built on that.

And that's why we were 2nd place in the WC group, unbeaten with the second highest amount of points ever