George Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 (BBC) Rep of Ireland 3-0 Canada A wonder goal by Damien Duff and two Robbie Keane strikes earned the Republic of Ireland a somewhat flattering success over Canada at Lansdowne Road. Duff's first half solo effort was by far the highlight of a largely lacklustre contest. In addition to Duff and Keane, debutant Andy Reid impressed for the home team but the Irish defence looked hesistant on occasions and the Canadians will wonder how they failed to score. Graham Kavanagh's first start for the Irish lasted less than 10 minutes with a heavy tackle by Marc Bircham resulting in ankle damage for the Cardiff player. Kavanagh attempted to run off the injury after the third minute tackle but to no avail and Matt Holland was introduced. The first chance fell to the John O'Shea in the sixth minute but the unmarked Manchester United player glanced the header wide. A minute later, Stephen Carr's underhit backpass almost let in Tomasz Radzinski but Shay Given sprinted off his line to avert the danger. Andy Reid, earning his first cap after some superb recent displays for Nottingham Forest, threaded a delightful ball through to Robbie Keane in the 18th minute but the Tottenham striker failed to get enough elevation on the shot. However, the Republic did take the lead five minutes later thanks to Duff's sensational goal. The Chelsea star picked up possession just outside his own penalty area and after running unchallenged to just outside the Canadian box, then beat two tackles before steering the ball under Lars Hirschfeld. It was Duff's sixth international goal and surely his best. Canada should have been on terms within four minutes but Radzinski produced a weak shot with only Given to beat after a superb pass from Peschisolido. On the half-hour, Radzinski was left unmarked again in the Irish area but Peschisolido's cross was a fraction high and the Everton striker headed over the crossbar. A rare Kenny Cunningham mistaken then gifted the Canadians another chance but both Radzinski and full-back Richard Hastings miskicked with the goal at their mercy. Irish boss Brian Kerr introduced Clinton Morrison and Ian Harte at half-time with Doherty and Stephen Carr withdrawn. However, the changes did nothing to inject urgency in the Irish performance with some sloppy passing from the home side a feature of the 10 minutes after half-time. The Canadians thought they had levelled in the 55th minute when Jason De Vos stabbed the ball to the net from close range but the effort was ruled out for offside. On the hour, the Irish notched a second goal which they scarcely deserved with Andy Reid's superb cross headed over the line by Keane despite the combined efforts of De Vos and Hirschfeld. With substitutions breaking whatever little pattern the game had, the final quarter saw little incident. However, Robbie Keane delighted the home crowd by producing some trickery in the Canadian box six minutes from time to notch Ireland's third goal. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rep of Ireland: Given, Carr, O'Shea, Dunne, Cunningham, Steven Reid, Kavanagh, Duff, Andy Reid, Keane, Doherty. Subs: Harte, Thompson, Holland, Kilbane, Colgan, Delap, McPhail, Morrison, Murphy. Canada: Hirschfeld, Bent, Hastings, Bircham, De Vos, McKenna, Stalteri, Imhof, Radzinski, Peschisolido, Jazic. Subs: Rogers, Dasovic, Fenwick, Nash, Bernier, Stamatopoulos. Referee: M Whitby (Wales) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Oh good, its just not me who thinks that then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiankick97 Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 Yes, watching the game myself,I agree that Ireland shouldn't have won by three goals. Canada had a few chances to level up the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I only saw the first half, but I thought we outplayed them from 10 minutes to the half time break. The only problem is that the defence were too far back when Ireland was counter-attacking. If they had played 5 yards up, all of those long balls that the Irish midfield was hoofing forward would have been offside. The right hand side looked solid, with Stalteri, Bent and Bircham, and occasionally Pesch or Radz controlling the ball. There were a few brutal first touches in the half, though, from Bent, Bircham and McKenna. Hastings was absolutely invisible, which is better than seeing a lot of him getting burned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 quote:Originally posted by jonovision The only problem is that the defence were too far back when Ireland was counter-attacking. If they had played 5 yards up, all of those long balls that the Irish midfield was hoofing forward would have been offside. Good call. Miller saw this too and the Irish were caught offside five times in the first ten mins of the second half. I thought they did a nice job of keeping the line higher in the second half. Though there was still a little lack of willingness to challenge Duff, but he is a pretty special player. cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 quote:Originally posted by jonovision The only problem is that the defence were too far back when Ireland was counter-attacking. If they had played 5 yards up, all of those long balls that the Irish midfield was hoofing forward would have been offside. Good call. Miller saw this too and the Irish were caught offside five times in the first ten mins of the second half. I thought they did a nice job of keeping the line higher in the second half. Though there was still a little lack of willingness to challenge Duff, but he is a pretty special player. cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natesta Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I'm sorry, but this game has solidified my fear that unless there are some major changes/improvememnts to this squad in terms of skill and tactics we have no chance at all of qualifying for the next WC. I think that 2010 is a better goal for us. Our defence (which was supposed to be our strongest asset, was absolutely terrible.) It was embarassing how bad they were. Against any other decent side not one of those three goals would have even materialized into opportunities. I try to stay optomistic, but you who say this was a good effort by our boys are looking through rose coloured glasses. This was poor, end of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Observer Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 The first goal was embarrasing....as the article rightly points out Duff ran from his own 18 yard box unchallenged to our own 18 yard box. Where were Bircham or Imoff, and why did not one of the four defenders not challenge him. This being said, I thought we actually played quite well at times. Perhaps with some more time together and few more additions, we will have a pretty competitive side. I still think 2006 is realistic as we have 4 strikers that can score, a couple of tall defenders for set pieces, a fast workman like midfield. We really need to cut down on the defensive errors and hopefully this will come with them playing together more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highbury Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 First post here. I am skipping the lurking period and jumping right in because, frankly, there is not often big news to talk about. I was generally optimistic about the Ireland game. The Canadians, whilst attacking seemed fairly well organized. The defence though seemed to lack basic skills in tackling and stopping players from waltzing right through. Another thing I noticed was in the midfield. After a Canadian attack, when the Irish had won back possession, the WHOLE midfield could be found to be empty, leaving Irish players the freedom of the field. They could approach the defence however they pleased. The Canadian players often seemed to lack skill and it was frustrating/embarrassing the number of miss-kicks, sloppy passes, defending by simply booting the ball out. I was amazed at why we were not trying to thread as many through-balls to Radzinski. He has the speed to beat defenders, and the skill to do something. The few times he was serviced, the had a shot. OK, I said I was optimistic. The game was televized! The national team played a quality oposition! Great experience for the players and for the Canadian public. Get the game out into the world. As I said, when they wanted to, their attack seemed reasonably well-organized. The skill level was just not their. Great to see our team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Welcome to the boards, Highbury & Natesta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 where was bircham on the duff goal? well he ran back for about 25 yards, but never at full speed and never came within 5 yards of duff. he then slowed to a near walk and motioned for a defender to challenge (which they should have done). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David C. Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 From TeamTalk: Wednesday November 19, 09:54 AM Miller: Radzinski was gutted Canada caretaker boss Colin Miller revealed Tomasz Radzinski was gutted after the 3-0 defeat by Republic of Ireland. Miller blamed sloppy defending and poor finishing for his side's Lansdowne Road loss, with Everton striker Radzinski was one of the guilty culprits. Miller said: "We created a number of chances and didn't take them. I'm encouraged because we caused Ireland problems but I've got class players like Tomasz Radzinski who are gutted in the dressing room because they know they could have put the ball in the back of the net." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strobe_z Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Can someone please explain to me how deVos was offside? He's clearly onside when the free kick is taken... he follow forward then tracks back to line up onside when the ball is booted away. From the angle shown on Sportsnet, it sure looks like he's onside when the second lob is kicked. From there it's the header, off the keeper and to deVos' feet. The ball is in front of him the whole time. What am I missing? I didn't see it the first time, I didn't see it on the live replay... and I haven't seen it in the 5 times I've watched that play on tape. Am I blind or what? As a whole, I think if that goal had gone in.. it would've ended in a draw (probably 1-1). Our lads looked a little less composed after that was called back. That combined with the goaline bouncing and McKenna on his ass was more than enough "luck of the Irish" in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 quote:Originally posted by strobe_z Can someone please explain to me how deVos was offside? He's clearly onside when the free kick is taken... he follow forward then tracks back to line up onside when the ball is booted away. From the angle shown on Sportsnet, it sure looks like he's onside when the second lob is kicked. From there it's the header, off the keeper and to deVos' feet. The ball is in front of him the whole time. What am I missing? I didn't see it the first time, I didn't see it on the live replay... and I haven't seen it in the 5 times I've watched that play on tape. Am I blind or what? As a whole, I think if that goal had gone in.. it would've ended in a draw (probably 1-1). Our lads looked a little less composed after that was called back. That combined with the goaline bouncing and McKenna on his ass was more than enough "luck of the Irish" in my opinion. He was offside when Pesch headed the ball. Half step or so in front of the last Irsih defender and ahead of the pesky one. At least that is the way it looked on Sportsnet twice with the multiple replays shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 The really unfortunate thing is that if he leaves the ball alone & Pesch puts in his own re-bound (which he would have done in any event) then its a goal. You can't really blame De Vos, as its natural to anticipate & go for goal when you see the opportunity. Its just a shame that with two people available for the easy tap in to tie up the match it went to the wrong one. Combine this with the Irish just barely squeaking the ball over the line a few moments later (with a very odd bounce - De Vos clears off the line but the ball bounced back in the direction it was originally coming from) and you have your classic TSN Turning Point, with a bit of the Luck of the Irish for good measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strobe_z Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Ok... I'll look again. I was watching for it off Pesch's header, but didn't see it. Probably my normal reaction when watching Canadian goals called back... my left eye closes and my head automatically jerks to the right side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strobe_z Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 grumble... ok.. I see it... grrrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Natesta I'm sorry, but this game has solidified my fear that unless there are some major changes/improvememnts to this squad in terms of skill and tactics we have no chance at all of qualifying for the next WC. I think that 2010 is a better goal for us. Our defence (which was supposed to be our strongest asset, was absolutely terrible.) It was embarassing how bad they were. Against any other decent side not one of those three goals would have even materialized into opportunities. Yeah, I pretty much agree. I mean Canada created alot of chances in the first half, but all that did was expose their woeful finishing! If you can't finish and can't defend, you're in trouble! Then again, the quality of the opposition must be considered. Most of Ireland's players are in the EPL while Canada has a starter who plays for MVV! So its not like we can expect anything other than a humbling defeat. As an aside, why must Sportsnet use their own broadcasters for this game?? Last time I checked Ireland was also an English-speaking country. Why not just use their commentary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highbury Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Well how else can we develope the ability to properly comment on a soccer match. It could have been worse: Max Bretos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.