Feb 9 Friendly - N Ireland v Canada POST-match [R]

[Cheeta]

Weather or no, I still think Sutton was way too timid. In part, making his own troubles for himself and his backline. Maybe it's just his style to play deeper in his box. Montreal bunch would be better able to answer that than I.

Gervais may have blown it. Hard booking (that 1st one anyway) but he seemed lost in that unfamiliar back line when he was on.

Think the NI intensity threw the boys for a loop off the hop. Friendly wasn't so friendly and it took our Canadas a half hour to get into the spirit of the matter.

Sure makes a difference how your opponents play you when they know you offer little in the way of an offensive threat.

And I'll write it again. Too late on the subs. Occean was spent half way through the 2nd half and I don't think NI packed it in for the last 20-25 minutes, they were just plain tired. Choice pickings for Hume (and Peters even) and a little individual display. Too late, Frankie.

[The Beaver]

Just to show how silly the FIFA rankings are, I find it ludicrous that we could end up higher-ranked than a team like Scotland which is clearly our superior. I am not saying they are leagues a head of us, but they are clearly better at the moment (despite all their woes.) With that said, I think we have the potential to be a better team than Scotland, IF we get the right players together on a consistent basis.

[beachesl]

quote:Originally posted by Soju

Jeez, no more Radz?

Radzinski'd: To receive inaccurate passes from midfielders over and over resulting in astronomical amounts of headshaking and flailing arms. Usage: "I kept getting Radzinski'd so I just gave up".

How about:

Radzinski'd: to hang around in-line with the last opposing defenseman hoping to sweep in and recieve a long pass to score, without ever coming back and helping teamates in the play. Usage: "We were pressing forward, but our lone striker just Radzinski'd us so we got nowhere."

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

Weather or no, I still think Sutton was way too timid. In part, making his own troubles for himself and his backline. Maybe it's just his style to play deeper in his box. Montreal bunch would be better able to answer that than I.

To be fair to Sutton, the cross that end up on the post was almost deflected by a NI player at the 6 yard line, so that wasn't his ball. We see a lot of those cross ending in the back of the net at all level, no way a keeper can predict the player will miss the ball.

The one I think he should've a go after was the header that went wide, but again this wind was vicious.

Sutton has good hands and didn,t mess up with shots that he should save. Looked very confident.

It's been a long time since I,ve seen Lars play but I think that he should feel some competition from Sutton after the NI game. And that's very good for the future, some competition for your GK spot can do no wrong to your team.

[Grizzly]

I am disappointed that certain Voyageurs in this thread and the fire Yallop thread will disparage the opinions of other posters who have a different opinion than them, implying that they are overly negative or not true fans. There are a few baiters that post on any topic and disagree with everything but those posting valid and well thought out opinions should be respected and not grouped in with these people. That is not respecting others opinions nor operating in spirit of open debate that this forum is supposed to be. If some posters thought Canada played well and that this result was positive then that is there right and I will read and respect their opinion even if I don't agree with it. If I were to use a similar tactic of discrediting posters of oposing views I could start a post such as: I am disappointed that so many Canadian posters have such a poor knowledge of soccer, are unable to recognize poor tactical play and technical skills and willing to look at the game through rose-coloured glasses to satisfy delusions that we are progressing. Then we will have a thread full of effective propagandistic arguments, personal insults and little actual content.

The reasons for my disappointment in the performance are as follows:

1) We were unable to string more than two passes together with any regularity and rarely could keep possession longer than 10 seconds. Few players were able to receive passes whether at their feet or at the chest. We rarely challenged the NI players with the ball and seldom stole the ball allowing them to pass it between them and fire in crosses

at will. Half the time we couldn't even hoof the ball upfield properly often only getting it 10 metres and sometimes even hoofing it toward our own goal.

2) Playing in poor weather and a man down is a part of soccer and occurs quite regularly. While it may affect the level of play it shouldn't lead to a complete breakdown in the team.

3) The team may be young and inexperienced internationally but they are still all professional players. They should have the ability to perform at a basic level regardless of the condition. I was not expecting world class but this looked like Conference level soccer.

4) Northern Ireland had well in excess of 10 good chances, 4 or 5 of which were almost sure things. If they had had one decent striker the game could just have easily finished 4-1. The victory has more to do with the ineptitude of the NI strikers than strong defending on our part. I was not claiming earlier that Belize is a stronger team than NI but they did appear to have a couple of strikers who could put in a good shot on the few occasions they got near our goal. Despite all of NI's chances and possession the hardest save Sutton had to make was against his own player. While NI may be stronger than Belize I do think they are weaker than any of the teams in our recent WCQ group and that is without even making the Hex which is the level we have to aspire to to qualify. The goal was great and getting one goal from two chances is much better than our usual percentage. However, this was a game Northern Ireland lost more than a game we won, ie. the defining character of the game was poor NI attacking not strong Canadian defending.

5) I am not calling for Yallop to be fired after this game and am willing to give him a chance. I have nothing against Yallop and even (in retrospect mistakenly) supported his hiring. However, in my opinion, his performance in WCQ was terrible and he did not improve on this in this game. Once again poor tactical decisions, poor deployment of players and a lack of recognition of who is playing well and not (any of this sound familiar?) I will give credit to him for helping some of our younger players get contracts and develop but if this is all he brings to the table than he should be our U-23 or B-team coach and not the national coach. I am worried that he is not a coach with enough ability to coach at the Hex WCQ level and he will have to start improving soon to change this opinion.

We need to see some improvement in both Yallop's coaching and the play of our team, otherwise we once again won't even make the Hex again in 4 years time regardless of whether we steal a win against a poor European side in bad weather and a man down. I wasn't expecting us to walk all over NI but we should at least be able to string three passes together and maintain possession for longer than 10 seconds whether at 10 men or not.

[BC supporter]

I don't know why I keep being surprised. You take a Canadian team that hasn't played in months, completely revamp the line-up, and you end up with a bunch of strangers who play with zippo cohesion. Not wildly dissimilar to Canada's first game of WCQ.

That being said, the disjointed performance shouldn't negate a road victory -- despite what some would say (including coaches), victories are key for players at international level. I just wish the referee's silly red-card decision hadn't turned the match into such an utter scramble (c'mon, Mr Ref, these are two bottom-ranked teams playing a friendly; jeezus, no one's there to watch you ref).

BTW, kudos to the Irish fans (including those who visited this board) for their spirit and goodwill -- although, for the life of me, I don't get the "USA, USA" chant. Hard to credit someone taking the p*ss when you're not in on the joke.

[Gian-Luca]

The first Irish post was a fluke, caused by the wind getting hold of a cross from the touch-line, of all places and whipping it in to the goal. Difficult to blame the keeper there with such unpredictability.

My only criticism of Sutton is that he didn't communicate with McKenna on a ball that was going to head straight for him. McKenna didn't take any chances and tried to clear it away, it bounced straight to an Irish striker who's shot was blocked by Simpson.

Then again, perhaps he did shout & it got lost in the wind.

But again, lack of communication & familiarity seems to be cause of so many of our problems on the night.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by BC supporter

BTW, kudos to the Irish fans (including those who visited this board) for their spirit and goodwill -- although, for the life of me, I don't get the "USA, USA" chant. Hard to credit someone taking the p*ss when you're not in on the joke.

Having looked in on their forum, the funniest thing about the reaction of many of the supporters on each side is how many of each side believe the team could have played much better & should have smoked the opposition.

They can't both be correct about that.

[The Beaver]

G-L--the N Irish really should have notched a couple of goals. But that is their problem. I know many of us predicted a Canada win, and I know that my predictions are meant to have some sort of superstitious reverse effect, but in all honesty, I was expecting a very tight, messy, scrappy game, and expected us to LOSE. The way we played, ten men only for most of the game, we really should have lost. But should haves mean ****e in sport. Either you do or you don't. In this case, we got our goal. We had two chances all game, and we scored on one of them. I am absolutely confident we would have played a much more complete game had we trained for a week before this game. Without a doubt.

Grizz--I hear you, but I can't help but wonder where some of us are getting our expectations from. Clearly not reality. I take considerable issue with our having ridiculous expectations. We wouldn't expect our junior hockey team to beat a full Russian or US or Swedish team, would we. Yet, we expect a bunch of very young players--professional or not hardly matters if you're inexperienced and unfamiliar with your teammates--to come up with an aesthetically pleasing brand of football. I've seen a good many game where a team is down a player, and to my recollection, few if any, are able to string a brace of good passes together. They rarely get out of their own end.

It is fine to be critical, but a dose of realism is necessary. We know how they played. We all saw it. I cannot ever fathom such emotional reactions. (Well, I expect it from Luis.)

[hottoddy7]

Wow on the irish forum they have a thread discussing us as the worst national team ever. I have some problems with what happened yesterday but if we're the worst ever, play our b team, go down a man after 20 minutes and still beat you what the hell does that say about your squad.

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by hottoddy7

Wow on the irish forum they have a thread discussing us as the worst national team ever. I have some problems with what happened yesterday but if we're the worst ever, play our b team, go down a man after 20 minutes and still beat you what the hell does that say about your squad.

Well, we weren't good--but we still put the ball in the back of the net. The Northern Irish looked some sort of team that gets loads of middling chances but can never finish. Whoah, sorry, that sounds like us.

[hottoddy7]

true we weren't good but we won. If we lost to a team playing a b-squad that was down to 10 men I would be upset but I don't think I would disparage them.

[Mimglow]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Having looked in on their forum, the funniest thing about the reaction of many of the supporters on each side is how many of each side believe the team could have played much better & should have smoked the opposition.

They can't both be correct about that.

Gian-luca with precise precision in his post once again.

It was nice to see the Ottawa contingent of the Vees once again.

I have to admit that I wasn't as active on the site since the WCQ campaign, owing to the pure vitriol spewing forth from this forum following our disapointing showing. I was in no mood to contribute to the discussion, since those with cool heads and reasoned arguments seemed to get shouted down at every turn.

I'm glad to see that most of that stuff has died down and we have gotten back to civil, intelligent discussion. The passion for the team and the game couldn't keep me away for long, though.

As for the Fergus Inn, they've changed management in the past year. Looks to me like the manager doesn't have quite the same eye for "talent" as the previous gentlemen When that waitress told me she knew me from somewhere, I thought: "Not Bloody Likely!!!!"

[BrennanFan]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

I am disappointed that so many Canadian posters have such a poor knowledge of soccer, are unable to recognize poor tactical play and technical skills and willing to look at the game through rose-coloured glasses to satisfy delusions that we are progressing.

sorry to dissappoint you again, but...

Positives of the game:

- we have a new, solid option in net with Sutton, undoubtedly an improvement over Onstad

- we finished cleanly on our best chance to score (THIS I WHAT KILLED US IN WCQ)

- Klukowski proved himself

- Brennan is back and doing well

- Simpson clearly has the unteachable ability to skip past the opposition

- Reda looks like a solid option at the back

...and most importantly

- our core group for WCQ 2006 got together, worked hard, and won a game against the odds. Its all about playing together, and gaining confidence.

[Cheeta]

quote:Originally posted by Mimglow

As for the Fergus Inn, they've changed management in the past year. Looks to me like the manager doesn't have quite the same eye for "talent" as the previous gentlemen When that waitress told me she knew me from somewhere, I thought: "Not Bloody Likely!!!!"

Says you.

You never know sometimes. As they say; Just like riding a moped. Totaly uncool but surprisingly fun. Just don't let your friends catch you at it.

Holy cripes. Just having a 2nd look at the match and wondering how Hell did Gillespie escape a booking inside the 1st 5 minutes there?

At least he got the ball on the last of those 3 challenges, Simpsons 1st touchline run, but his left leg (trailing) sliced Simpson down from behind. Bug-ger...

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by The Beaver

G-L--the N Irish really should have notched a couple of goals.

That's not what I meant. Many supporters of both teams seem to believe that both teams could play much better, that both teams played their worst games ever, and that if both teams played well they would destroy there opponents because both group of supporters feel that their team is clearly better than the incredibly crap opposition. They are calling us the worst international team ever while we are suggesting that Belize would have done better against us than they did. On both sides, that is about as low as you can get.

Both groups can't possibly be correct, and I'm inclined to think that neither are. But I will say this - I know which team is 2-0-1 against the other one!

[Ivan]

I have now had the chance to watch the game twice. Many of my comments are similar to those posted.

In summary,

My good - a 1-0 win, Sutton, Klukowski, best goal I have seen Canada score in a while, Hume's electricity.

My mediocore - Bernier, Serioux, Reda, Imhof's defence.

My bad - our overall play, time of substitutions, Imhof's offence, refereeing.

My disappointment - Play of "veterans" DeRo and McKenna, albeit under difficult circumstances.

[imported_n/a1394647443]

quote:Originally posted by Ivan

My disappointment - Play of "veterans" DeRo and McKenna, albeit under difficult circumstances.

I also rewatched the debacle and on sober second thought had some differing opinions than my original ones.

DeRo was forced to change gears and try to do a job that he is not accustomed to. Made some bad passes but remember when Hume came on DeRo had a fire lit under him and he went by two guys and rattled one off the post. If you're invisible the whole game and then can appear long enough to stuff the onion bag then I say mission accomplished.

As for Kevin I too thought it wasn't one of his better nights. But rewatching thought he wasn't all that bad. Made a pretty big mistake but on this night who didn't. He was injured going in and came off injured so this may have affected him. I've seen him look a lot better so that may have been the cause.

[Grizzly]

quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan

sorry to dissappoint you again, but...

Positives of the game:

- we have a new, solid option in net with Sutton, undoubtedly an improvement over Onstad

- we finished cleanly on our best chance to score (THIS I WHAT KILLED US IN WCQ)

- Klukowski proved himself

- Brennan is back and doing well

- Simpson clearly has the unteachable ability to skip past the opposition

- Reda looks like a solid option at the back

...and most importantly

- our core group for WCQ 2006 got together, worked hard, and won a game against the odds. Its all about playing together, and gaining confidence.

My quote is taken out of context and you either didn't understand me or are baiting. What I am disappointed in is not that some people find some positives or see the game more positively than I do. What disappoints me is that some of these people are disparaging others for holding opposing views and taking the debate to the personal level as opposed to arguing about the actual subject. The quote above is merely an example of a similar style of post that I could use as a reply to such posts if I was interested in doing so. Every game has some positives and I agree with some though not all of the positives you mention.

Gianluca this is the second time you are misquoting me in regards to Belize. I never stated Belize would have done better than NI or is a better team. What I do state is that Belize had a couple of strikers who had good shots and could put the ball on net and force a good save (during the rare chance they received the ball in our half). If these Belizean strikers had four or five chances alone in front of our keeper and 10 to 20 other decent chances I think they might have put a few in. One has to almost wonder how many penalties NI would have needed to score a goal. I am saying, however, that NI is not as good a team as Guatemala, Honduras or Costa Rica at least based on what they showed last night. Their general record doesn't really refute this opinion.

As far as expectations and realistic judging of the two teams, I think in this case the FIFA ranking of the teams relative to each other is reasonably accurate if we both had full squads. NI were missing a couple of players but not nearly so many as we were when one considers Radz and DeVos would also have been there if we had not been eliminated from WCQ. I would judge the teams about equal with the lineups that we had. Thus, I did not expect an easy victory or us to walk over them especially with 10 men. I do, however, expect us to be able to occasionally string 3 passes together and keep the ball for longer than 10 seconds regardless of the weather or a man sent off. I also expect us to occasionally win the ball from the other team instead of letting them pass it between themselves at will. I also expect the coach to play effective tactics, change them if they are not working (I don't see how anyone could claim his tactics were working as a decent team would have put in 4 or 5 against us. The only thing working was Beaver's curse on their strikers), remove ineffective players and make substitutions at appropriate times. Apparently these are unrealistic expectations.

[Nolberto S.]

Well I didn't see most of the the game only bits and pieces and rarely follow Canada nowadays..yeah.. I wonder why to those posters who will say that 1st..but the same pattern is emerging in this thread regarding negative criticism being taken to the personal level by most poster *cough*The Beaver, Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy*cough* and others, and people who wish to make a valid negative criticism, compared to the regular pessimists, myself included. I just hope this discussion keeps things focused in regards to Canada's need for improvement, getting games together and actually having a National league in my lifetime. At the same time, I hope that more people not be afraid to post negative comments, just cuz the Voyageurs seems to be the exact polar opposite of pessimistic news..Well I said my 2 cents, I hope to read more discussions in a lively manner.

Sincerely,

Nolberto S.

[JayWay]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

Well I didn't see most of the the game only bits and pieces and rarely follow Canada nowadays..yeah.. I wonder why to those posters who will say that 1st..but the same pattern is emerging in this thread regarding negative criticism being taken to the personal level by most poster *cough*The Beaver, Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy*cough* and others, and people who wish to make a valid negative criticism, compared to the regular pessimists, myself included.

You're not a pessimist; you're not even a Canadian soccer fan.

I don't say this because you're being critical of the team. I say this because immidiately following the Guatemala match, you messaged me laughing at the fact Canada's qualifying hopes were all but dead.

And this was at a point where we hadn't spoked in more than a year. In other words, you went out of your way to get my contact info just so you could rub it in my face and laugh it up.

I'm not attacking you for it - you can do what you want. But at least be honest about it and drop the concerned Canuck routine (or as you put it, pessimist).

[imported_n/a1394647443]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

but the same pattern is emerging in this thread regarding negative criticism being taken to the personal level by most poster *cough*The Beaver, Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy*cough* and others, and people who wish to make a valid negative criticism, compared to the regular pessimists, myself included.

Sincerely,

Nolberto S.

Now who's getting personal? I'm still trying to think who I insulted. Was it women when I said the guy whined like a girl. Was that you? I just don't think grown men should whine.

Oh well the ol' Tail Gunner got hit with some flack. Ya give it out ya gotta take it.

Having said that, the people with their agendas, anti-CSA, anti-Yallop, anti-commercials, etc if you are going to post about it ad nauseum, ad infinitem, then I'm goin after ya. Bang, Bang [}]

[big paddy]

we are ambarrassed . [:I]

quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack

Nobody should be surprised about the harsh criticisms, as they have come from the usual suspects. I wanted Yallop fired after the WCQ debacle, but I think people should give credit where its due. Yes, we played like crap, but we won. We played on the road, with 10 men for 70 minutes, with most players out of season. NI should be embarrassed.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

Gianluca this is the second time you are misquoting me in regards to Belize. I never stated Belize would have done better than NI or is a better team.

Well I never actually quoted you either time but I will now if you like. [] What I said initially is that you drew unfavourable comparisons between Belize & Northern Ireland, which you indeed did - "Even Belize might have put in a couple of goals if we had given them as many chances as we gave NI today, Belize certainly looked a lot more dangerous on the few chances they had."

That is by definition an unfavourable comparison. On the second occasion I stated that "we are suggesting that Belize would have done better against us than they did." - I think I could be forgiven for thinking that this is what you were suggesting given the quote above. To my mind, If we gave Belize the chances we gave NI they could have put them away where NI couldn't = a suggestion that Belize could have done better.

True, you never stated that you thought they were a better team than NI, but I didn't actually state that you did. I still think the earlier suggestion was extremely harsh on NI - I think they missed one chance badly (the header near the end of the half) where the player could have expected to have done better. Otherwise they hit two posts with well taken shots against a keeper playing his angles correct, missed closely on a nifty re-direct on a free kick and that's it, AFAIR. They didn't actually get too many other strikes on goal, and when they did, they were blocked by defenders like Reda, Simpson & Klukowski - who all deserve credit for their timely interventions IMO. By suggesting that it was purely bad shooting, rather than good defending on those shots by our defenders & keepers, I think we are perhaps guilty of belittling the efforts of our own team.

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Mimglow

Gian-luca with precise precision in his post once again.

Yeah, my family & I got a kick out of that as well. Craig does fumble his words at times when he's excited (I thought what next - "Occean headed the ball in with powerful power? ) but I can forgive him for that since it comes out of excitement. And at least he doesn't panic. I loved Gerry's comment in the 2nd half that "Northern Ireland are in total command of the match" - yeah, except for the slight problem that their opponents had the lead!