Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: U21 National Team
we need defensive midfielders. that gives you the freedom and safety in the middle, and also a lightness to prepare offensive. (This player has played every at U21, to grow faster because early in the season, go in qualifying.)
I saw the game, it's not just about rank. I have not seen a clear scoring opportunity, and New Zealand was weaker than Ireland U21, but they knew to have possession. I know that tactic is made by players not vice versa.
I saw the game, it's not just about rank. I have not seen a clear scoring opportunity, and New Zealand was weaker than Ireland U21, but they knew to have possession. I know that tactic is made by players not vice versa.
is logical, win a man in the middle ... where you can create more opportunities to make. I do not think we should mock me
Position 7 is a clear defmidposition. It's not because we play with a low defence that nr 7 has to go down with the defence to be called a defmid.
is logical, win a man in the middle
I had only three mids available U20 this weekend, so that was never an option.
I had only three mids available U20 this weekend, so that was never an option.
After that play with five defenders, you have a defmid!!! where the defense is solid! Sathiamoorthy (good mid) must play as a winger or center, more offensive, not defmid, already had five defenders.
your problem is you play, but do not forget one thing: here are a national team, and must give everything, you're not at your club team, where results count more or less. You have to do miracles, not to hide after Cherry and say: that you did not have many players, that is all you could do, a great performance is a defeat with a team of the same caliber.
your problem is you play, but do not forget one thing: here are a national team, and must give everything, you're not at your club team, where results count more or less. You have to do miracles, not to hide after Cherry and say: that you did not have many players, that is all you could do, a great performance is a defeat with a team of the same caliber.
Take a chill pill its only his second game, he's new to irish community and hes only getting to know the players, im sure the future results will be better
I know it's new, but to play with five defenders and a middef ... with a weaker team like you, and in the two matches, i have not seen changes in tactics. and the worst i have not seen a clear scoring opportunity.
(edited)
(edited)
I'll let you know before when I'll play with 5 defs again so you can take some precautions ;).
Take a chill pill
that's good advice:) I don't want to offend you but it's true. youngboys, if you wanna help the irish team, you could write sth about what you would do...i mean critisism that supports the national coach. If you write that you haven't seen any opportunities to score, it does not say anything that one could take into consideration...it sounds more like a reproach. So if you give advice in how placing the attacker for example or how to place a defense with 4 players if you think that worked better, would be helpful.
If i was Groene Smurf, i wouldn't be that patient with you...you gotta keep in mind that he tries to answer to your postings even if your sentences include hard critisism.
I know that what i wrote sounds very smart-alec...i don't mean it like this.
Think about...
that's good advice:) I don't want to offend you but it's true. youngboys, if you wanna help the irish team, you could write sth about what you would do...i mean critisism that supports the national coach. If you write that you haven't seen any opportunities to score, it does not say anything that one could take into consideration...it sounds more like a reproach. So if you give advice in how placing the attacker for example or how to place a defense with 4 players if you think that worked better, would be helpful.
If i was Groene Smurf, i wouldn't be that patient with you...you gotta keep in mind that he tries to answer to your postings even if your sentences include hard critisism.
I know that what i wrote sounds very smart-alec...i don't mean it like this.
Think about...
I said after the first game, the mistakes I saw, and how they should do for the win. But did not change anything, played all as he wanted. And not only that said, that must change tactics. Please, that before you post something, read all previous posts, and then concluded.
If two matches did not change anything, it is clear that our views not taken into account, i f loudly criticized him for saying that he played very well, it made great performance, and it seems to me a mocked.
until the next election, I will not mention anything, but you'll see that the results will give me justice.
(edited)
If two matches did not change anything, it is clear that our views not taken into account, i f loudly criticized him for saying that he played very well, it made great performance, and it seems to me a mocked.
until the next election, I will not mention anything, but you'll see that the results will give me justice.
(edited)
I said after the first game, the mistakes I saw
that is nice, but then it's the coach who decides to follow your ideas or not...and you have to respect when he takes other decisions.
Please, that before you post something, read all previous posts
I did. What i see is, that you mention "faults" made by the irish NT. What i see is 7:3 shots in a game againt New Zealand and 8:12 shots in the game against a better Österreich. For that reason i do not like to hear "but you'll see that the results will give me justice". You already mentioned x times that with better tactics Ireland would have won. With 7:3 shots it should be possible to score...it could have been 3:0 or 3:1 in that game...
I saw the first half of the game against New Zealand. Especially in the beginning there were a lot of oppotunities. And there were a lot of dangerous passes, but the attackers couldn't reach them. I don't consider the tactics as bad in that match, it could have come out differently. I think the throw-in positions of the offensive players was not lucky, but it seems to be a solid tactic to me.
If two matches did not change anything, it is clear that our views not taken into account
hmm...sometimes i don't follow the advice of swiss managers. It is hard to implement other ideas because the tactics got to be the own thing. I tried sometimes, but the outcome was strange because i didn't manage to place the players exactly as recommended.
until the next election, I will not mention anything
i think this is not necessary...it's just the postings, that are pretty..ehm...let's say reproachful.
Once again, i do not write that to let you down. It's the way i see it.
that is nice, but then it's the coach who decides to follow your ideas or not...and you have to respect when he takes other decisions.
Please, that before you post something, read all previous posts
I did. What i see is, that you mention "faults" made by the irish NT. What i see is 7:3 shots in a game againt New Zealand and 8:12 shots in the game against a better Österreich. For that reason i do not like to hear "but you'll see that the results will give me justice". You already mentioned x times that with better tactics Ireland would have won. With 7:3 shots it should be possible to score...it could have been 3:0 or 3:1 in that game...
I saw the first half of the game against New Zealand. Especially in the beginning there were a lot of oppotunities. And there were a lot of dangerous passes, but the attackers couldn't reach them. I don't consider the tactics as bad in that match, it could have come out differently. I think the throw-in positions of the offensive players was not lucky, but it seems to be a solid tactic to me.
If two matches did not change anything, it is clear that our views not taken into account
hmm...sometimes i don't follow the advice of swiss managers. It is hard to implement other ideas because the tactics got to be the own thing. I tried sometimes, but the outcome was strange because i didn't manage to place the players exactly as recommended.
until the next election, I will not mention anything
i think this is not necessary...it's just the postings, that are pretty..ehm...let's say reproachful.
Once again, i do not write that to let you down. It's the way i see it.
I think the throw-in positions of the offensive players was not lucky, but it seems to be a solid tactic to me.
Like I said after the match, that was a real fault in the tactic. With a better positioning with the throw-ins we could have had a couple of chances, and possible some goals, more... I wanted that the second striker did the throw-in towards the MID, but they were slightly out of position whereafter it went wrong. It was a bit a stupid mistake, I agree.
Let's go to the other match. It could be a very interesting match U21 against Canada with two teams who have the same rating when complete. It will be an interesting game anyhow with hopefully the first win for Ireland after I became coach.
(edited)
Like I said after the match, that was a real fault in the tactic. With a better positioning with the throw-ins we could have had a couple of chances, and possible some goals, more... I wanted that the second striker did the throw-in towards the MID, but they were slightly out of position whereafter it went wrong. It was a bit a stupid mistake, I agree.
Let's go to the other match. It could be a very interesting match U21 against Canada with two teams who have the same rating when complete. It will be an interesting game anyhow with hopefully the first win for Ireland after I became coach.
(edited)
its very good to see someone so enthusiastic as you are in our forum. but if you want people to listen to you, you have to keep in mind how to say it. it's a simple fact every successful teacher, coach, adviser or anyone who wants to sell things or ideas always keeps in mind.
rule 1: wrap your critism in a compliment, that way it tastes much better and the other might swallow it.
rule 2: dont repeat yourself, this gives the impression you have no real argument unless you are kato and still want karthago to be destroyed
rule 3: always give alternatives and options, pure criticism helps no one. this means the use of "must" or "cant" is useless.
of course you can go on like you wish. but after a few more similar comments probably no irish user will read them anymore. unless i m mistaken about the user attitude in our forum.
rule 1: wrap your critism in a compliment, that way it tastes much better and the other might swallow it.
rule 2: dont repeat yourself, this gives the impression you have no real argument unless you are kato and still want karthago to be destroyed
rule 3: always give alternatives and options, pure criticism helps no one. this means the use of "must" or "cant" is useless.
of course you can go on like you wish. but after a few more similar comments probably no irish user will read them anymore. unless i m mistaken about the user attitude in our forum.
"must" or "cant" is useless.
ups...i gotta read threw my postings:/
You are a bargainer aren't you:))?
ups...i gotta read threw my postings:/
You are a bargainer aren't you:))?
It could be a very interesting match U21 against Canada with two teams who have the same rating when complete.
yah not a bad idea to look forward:) Good luck
yah not a bad idea to look forward:) Good luck
What i see is 7:3 shots in a game againt New Zealand
You should have seen the match, there was no clear scoring opportunity. From my point of view, why have not played with five defenders and a middef with a much weaker team than Ireland, must play more offensive, and considering that the strikers are weak, had to put in value, playing with wing, or with more midfielders.
but it seems to be a solid tactic to me
5-3-2 is a solid tactic, but it is not advantageous when playing against a weaker team, especially when we have very good defenders.
in all games we played at a higher level, i won the scoring against teams from the same level, and we dominated the game completely. All thanks to a good tactic.
i do not write that to let you down
I'll never fall down, because I am right in what I said. I tried to give advice, ideas, but mystery Smurf neither wanted to consider. on the contrary! That i said to read all my posts, not just the last page.
You should have seen the match, there was no clear scoring opportunity. From my point of view, why have not played with five defenders and a middef with a much weaker team than Ireland, must play more offensive, and considering that the strikers are weak, had to put in value, playing with wing, or with more midfielders.
but it seems to be a solid tactic to me
5-3-2 is a solid tactic, but it is not advantageous when playing against a weaker team, especially when we have very good defenders.
in all games we played at a higher level, i won the scoring against teams from the same level, and we dominated the game completely. All thanks to a good tactic.
i do not write that to let you down
I'll never fall down, because I am right in what I said. I tried to give advice, ideas, but mystery Smurf neither wanted to consider. on the contrary! That i said to read all my posts, not just the last page.