Internationals....yawn

Savman

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but feck it. I think International games are the most monotonous matches in the world. I could watch a Sunday league side quicker than I could watch any of the qualifiers next weekend, in fact I'm just counting the days til the next round of Premiership games.

A few of us went to Lansdowne for the Ireland V Holland friendly last year, snooze fest even if the Dutch were good for the 4 goals. We hardly put in a tackle worthing shouting about and I haven't felt any passion from the Ireland team since the days of Big Jack. I guess you could say I'm a bad Ireland fan, I'll freely admit I only watch the big games or ones when I know they have to actually break a sweat. And our English buddies are no different, normally a team consisting of Premiership stars would make exciting viewing. That is, until they don that cursed white jersey and go out to play like overpaid, over exposed muppets who couldnt kick snow off a rope. How do you make Gerard, Rooney, Lampard & co. look crap? Hand them an England jersey.

In fact, other than the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to) and the European Championships, I would go so far to say I have absolutely no interest in any international fixture. Even Brazil in friendlies look like they couldn't be arsed and I wouldn't spend 2hrs of my life watching all these superstars going thru the motions. I dont ever remember it being this bad, but IMHO a lot of International football has lost it's guts. Seems the prima donas are more worried about getting injured and losing out with their clubs than they are prepared to die for the old fashioned honour of representing your country. I'm sure there are some odd exceptions, but generally right across the board you can see the players have Champions League and other things on their mind. Then there's the clubs who, like Newcastle with Owen, will take the national FA to the cleaners if their precious cargo comes back as tainted goods.

So unless it's Rep. of Ireland V England, Brazil V Argentina or some other local heated rivalry, I'll be channel hopping or websurfing next weekend while these torrid affairs take place. Come on Ireland etc etc, I genuinely hope they do Slovakia and I'll be looking out for the result. But you couldn't get me to watch these games for love nor money.

But that's just me, interested in hearing thoughts of others...

jameshayes

I would imagine you would prefer a game with 10 goals than a 1-0 win? (i dont mean it's not a bad thing)


This is because some people like different games, I would prefer a slow game like an international where it's more like chess... drawing out the defense, slowing the ball down, keeping posession... A game where you use your head rather than your ability to hit 1 in every 5 balls on target...

I like internationals...

Savman

jameshayes wrote:

I would imagine you would prefer a game with 10 goals than a 1-0 win?

Absolutely not, I watched a bit of Liverpool's 6-0 last week and got quite peeved at the awful defending by Derby.

I would prefer a slow game like an international where it's more like chess

That's fair enough, but it's not chess.

_blank_

I agree.

vorbis

I find myself agreeing with the OP. The majority of international matches lately haven been dull. Defensive football dominates and most teams seem unable to play well together. Even in the last world cup, after the group stages, the football was pretty poor in terms of entertainment value. Very few chances on goal, few goals and just a low overall intensity.

Comparing it to chess is a good description. Problem is I don't like watching chess! I'm not looking for 4 - 5 goals a match but a bit of attacking football wouldn't go amiss.

BaZmO*

Savman wrote:

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but feck it.

Always find it interesting when someone starts a post with that line. It generally indicates that the poster is well aware of the fact that they're about to spout out a load of sh1te.

Savman wrote:

A few of us went to Lansdowne for the Ireland V Holland friendly last year, snooze fest even if the Dutch were good for the 4 goals.

Exactly, you went to a friendly. What were you expecting?

Savman wrote:

We hardly put in a tackle worthing shouting about and I haven't felt any passion from the Ireland team since the days of Big Jack.

Ah things aren't what the used to be eh?
Small boys, in the park, jumpers for goal posts, etc. etc.

Savman wrote:

I guess you could say I'm a bad Ireland fan

Well you said it.

Savman

vorbis wrote:

Even in the last world cup, after the group stages, the football was pretty poor in terms of entertainment value. Very few chances on goal, few goals and just a low overall intensity.

The World Cup is a good example, I was routing for Germany simply because they set out to win it from the start, you could see what it meant to them.
Brazil, for a team with Ronaldo, Kaka & Ronaldinho, were a massive let down. In fact, the eventual winners Italy were the only team out with a point to prove and as a result got their just reward. This is what good players do when the chips are down, they go hell for leather and get stuck in. After all the controversy in Italian football, you'd have thought the Italians would play their usual defensive game but they actually conjured up some superb goals.

Although I was never a fan of Serie A, it is entirely possible the tide may be turning there. The way AC Milan beat Man U in last year's CL Semi Final epitomised everything a good team can be. Youth, experience, flair, aggression, determination, all the usual cliches. It was marvellous to watch.

I honestly don't think this chess game approach ever works in the long run, it has been tried, tested and failed. The basic flaw in that game plan, is that sooner or later you are gonna need to score a goal. England, under Eriksson, tried this "containment" idea, which was all well and good til they went a goal behind and found that when they needed to score they couldn't buy a goal. Same with the old Italian method of "score one goal and defend" - they were perennial underachievers until last year when they threw caution to the wind, probably to save their country's ass when its national league was crumbling beneath itself.

Brian CLough wrote:

Football is a simple game made complicated by people who should know better.

FWIW I agree with the big man, you can discuss tactics and formations til the cows come home but the fact is the team that scores the most goals wins. I like that idea, although maybe that makes me an idealist.

WellyJ

I agree,

Sure I enjoy watching Ireland, but only to stoke the memories of Italia 90 and USA 94. The current crowd are very boring to watch.

I would say that the standard of International football has dropped steadily over the last 10 years.

I mean, the WC last year was terrible. Not one memorable game.

AnCapaillMor

Lost interest in the internationals along time ago. all the pointless friendlies turned me off. Greece in the 2004 euro cup killed international football for me, great to see an underdog win but god it was boring. The WC is about the only thing worth watching and euro games when 2 decent teams are playing.

BaZmO*

WellyJ wrote:

Sure I enjoy watching Ireland, but only to stoke the memories of Italia 90 and USA 94. The current crowd are very boring to watch.

So you're a fan of Route 1 football?

WellyJ

BaZmO* wrote:

So you're a fan of Route 1 football?

Not at all,

Back then it was about crowding the local and having genuine hope that we could win games. It wasn't about the football, well I was a nipper so to me football was football. Tactics never came into it.

When I watch them now I don't get the same excitement. I think my interest died when Packie made a meal of things against the Dutch.

Savman

BaZmO* wrote:

Always find it interesting when someone starts a post with that line. It generally indicates that the poster is well aware of the fact that they're about to spout out a load of sh1te.

It does, does it? Starting off on the offensive I see, maybe you're right I should just pretend to like it cos that's the popular opinion.

Exactly, you went to a friendly. What were you expecting?

People who are honoured to play for their country in front of 30 odd thousand fans. I, like many, would give my right arm for a chance like that.

Ah things aren't what the used to be eh?

No they're not, that's kinda the whole point. Obviously I didn't make this clear enough for you bud.

Well you said it.

Yes I did and Yes I am. It was an honest admission of loss of interest. Have you actually got anything to contribute or should I put my flame jacket on for your next barrage of wisdom?:rolleyes:

eirebhoy

vorbis wrote:

I find myself agreeing with the OP. The majority of international matches lately haven been dull. Defensive football dominates and most teams seem unable to play well together. Even in the last world cup, after the group stages, the football was pretty poor in terms of entertainment value. Very few chances on goal, few goals and just a low overall intensity.

Italy v Germany was fantastic.

tbh I don't really care if Ireland are good to watch as long as we win.

Savman

BaZmO* wrote:

So you're a fan of Route 1 football?

Jaysis. Is that the choice? Defend or Route 1? FFS it's not too much to ask to see a team proactively trying to win the game rather than kill it. Possession counts for nothing. Put the ball in the back of the bloody net or you will get nowhere, I would've thought it was fairly straight forward.

Funny, this "long ball" jibe that gets bandied about. When the pass is right and a striker gets on the end of it to score, I don't hear anybody complaining?

Pighead

Savman wrote:

In fact, other than the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to) and the European Championships, I would go so far to say I have absolutely no interest in any international fixture.

Savman wrote:

Brazil, for a team with Ronaldo, Kaka & Ronaldinho, were a massive let down.

Its obvious you're just throwing out random general statements that you've heard down the pub recently.

On one hand you say the South American flair is all that is good about the World Cup and a minute later you're saying Brazil were rubbish. So what S. American teams brought flair to the last world Cup then? Argentina........... eh thats about it. The best games were mainly those involving European teams.

gustavo

Does your support for Aston Villa wane when they arent playing breathtakingly attractive football ? I know this must be a very rare occurance but still.

herbieflowers

Qualifiers have traditionally been boring for the most part, the only games which I've thoroughly enjoyed involving Ireland have been at WCs...but that's the nature of qualifying isn't it? The formal, monotonous prelude to the real stuff!

shatners basoon

Thats one thing i can never understand. Ireland played awful awful football back then, possibly the worst team by far in both tournaments at the knock out stages especially considering we'd some fine footballers. It was probably under McCarthy that we played the best football and actually got at teams (at least when we were underdogs), i especailly remember the draw against Germany where we really went at them to equalise, very enjoyable stuff.

Regarding Italy underachieving? Lost 94 on penalties, euro 2000 in extra time was it? When push comes to shove they generally perform no matter what tactics they've used. International friendlies are a complete waste of time especially with all the substitutions, can't ever see a team gelling with 10 bloody changes at half time.
England have always underachieved, noone really knows why, guess they find it very hard to get a balanced team. Too much of the same type of player and they've no one to control the midfield (whenever i watch them play its always Rio or Terry spraying the ball around poorly which makes no sense given their wealth of talent in midfield.

Not one memorable game in the world cup? Argentina Slovakia was memorable as Argentina played fantastic football. Great match against mexico too. Italy Germany was good and Italy vs the Ivory Coast was an excellent match. Spain had some good matches as did the Netherlands. France had two good games against Brazil and Spain (memorable for being Zidane's last moments of brilliance), and the final was memorable for Zidane's last moments of madness (in professional football at least...)

I blame friendlies for this thread.

Savman

Pighead wrote:

Its obvious you're just throwing out random general statements that you've heard down the pub recently.

Ok....

Pighead wrote:

The best games were mainly those involving European teams.

Hmmm....you and I both perhaps?

Can you please try not to misquote, I know it's hard.

me wrote:

the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to)

you wrote:

you say the South American flair is all that is good about the World Cup

Not exactly the same thing now is it? Try understand what's been discussed before you just dive in.

gustavo wrote:

Does your support for Aston Villa wane when they arent playing breathtakingly attractive football ? I know this must be a very rare occurance but still.

Sarcasm aside, it's a valid point. I've supported Villa thru some rough times, but the fans over there always demand better or someone's blood will be spilled.

I really don't know why it's different at Lansdowne. Maybe it's the Irish fans' subconcious acceptance that Ireland aren't world beaters. Like I said, Jack Charlton got the whole country believing we could beat the big boys and low and behold we eventually did. Seems lately it's just excuses about the lack of talent or resources (despite Kerr having a hugely successful youth team a few years back).

I'm sure some will point the blame at FAI, giving the job to a rookie with no experience. It's hard to care when decisions like that are made which quite clearly go against the fans' desires.

Pighead

Savman wrote:

Not exactly the same thing now is it? Try understand what's been discussed before you just dive in.

Deepest apologies Savman, didn't realise you were in such foul humour. Right I'll try again and this time I'll word it properly for you.

You said "In fact, other than the World Cup (which thankfully the South Americans bring some flair to)"

Exactly what South American teams brought flair to the last World Cup or indeed the last couple of World Cups.

Or were you just writing down the first thing that came into your head?

herbieflowers

shatners basoon wrote:

Thats one thing i can never understand. Ireland played awful awful football back then, possibly the worst team by far in both tournaments at the knock out stages especially considering we'd some fine footballers. It was probably under McCarthy that we played the best football and actually got at teams (at least when we were underdogs), i especailly remember the draw against Germany where we really went at them to equalise, very enjoyable stuff.

It's not necessarily about the standard of football, though. It's pride in one's country, passion and everything that goes with it. Being underdogs and mixing it with bigger nations, I don't think one could necessarily legitimately argue that that style of football (route one for the most part) was particularly alluring, it was more about seeing our "boys in green" succeed etc...without meaning to sound corny!

Savman

Pighead wrote:

Exactly what South American teams brought flair to the last World Cup or indeed the last couple of World Cups.

Or were you just writing down the first thing that came into your head?

Of course I was, wouldn't be a rant otherwise
Even though Brazil underperformed last year, there was still the odd moment of magic but barely a glimpse I will admit. Argentina were superb, got that goal of the tournament with the 20+ odd passes they strung together. Ecuador looked good at times too. There were some other good teams, Ivory Coast etc but traditionally the South Americans are well represented at the World Cup, maybe not so much last year in comparison to recent years with Colombia, Mexico but generally you can expect some goals from these teams

I think the African teams are on the up as they're players have spreaded across the top leagues in Europe and then there's the Japanese, Togo or South Korean surprise package. It's always interesting watching these cultures go head to head. Most are a credit to the beautiful game, as is any team who go out to win. I can't stand the 4-5-1 mentality as employed by England under Eriksson considering the players he had at his disposal.

There may be an argument against International friendlies but I can't see how they can get rid of them in reality. So I guess the players just come over, dragging their heals, trying not to get injured. The result is usually a borefest.:rolleyes:

Pepe LeFrits

International games outside of the WC and the EC bore me. The whole qualifying process should be streamlined so that the likes of Italy never have to play dross like San Marino. In Europe having a couple of seeded qualifying stages would be good. The sh1te teams can play against eachother (and actually avoid getting hockeyed for once) and the best of them gets into the next qualifying stage, where the next band of teams repeat the process. The best of them then joins the qualifying proper where the top seeded teams compete for places in the major tournaments.

Germany vs somebody half decent like Poland, Ireland, Switzerland or Slovakia is a game I might have an interest in. Germany vs the Faroe Islands is not.

Guy:Incognito

Frienlies should be done away with and footballers should have to work 1 1months of the year like the rest of us. ( a month break is more than enough at the end of the season) Between club seasons there should be a few weeks for all the competitive internationals to be played.

Savman

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

International games outside of the WC and the EC bore me. The whole qualifying process should be streamlined so that the likes of Italy never have to play dross like San Marino. In Europe having a couple of seeded qualifying stages would be good. The sh1te teams can play against eachother (and actually avoid getting hockeyed for once) and the best of them gets into the next qualifying stage, where the next band of teams repeat the process. The best of them then joins the qualifying proper where the top seeded teams compete for places in the major tournaments.

This I agree with. I'm sure we all remember the discussion regarding the San Marino's, why they even bother etc etc.
The other argument is that these small nations need the constant beatings if they are ever to improve. The only way you get better is to play against better opposition so I doubt the bureaucrats in FIFA would never be open to such a big change. They claim to be doing it "for the love of the game" but it seems the mickey mouse internationals are having the opposite effect. These are the same genius folk who decided the present World Cup holders have to re-qualify for the next tournament.:rolleyes:

Although I'd personally be in favour of a better seeding system.

Pepe LeFrits

Savman wrote:

This I agree with. I'm sure we all remember the discussion regarding the San Marino's, why they even bother etc etc.
The other argument is that these small nations need the constant beatings if they are ever to improve. The only way you get better is to play against better opposition so I doubt the bureaucrats in FIFA would never be open to such a big change. They claim to be doing it "for the love of the game" but it seems the mickey mouse internationals are having the opposite effect. These are the same genuis folk who decided the present World Cup holders have to re-qualify for the next tournament.:rolleyes:

Although I'd personally be in favour of a better seeding system.

I'd question the educational value of getting obliterated 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 - nil every time they play. The fact of the matter is that with such a tiny population they will never amount to anything on the international stage, and will continue to approach these games as an exercise in damage limitation.

Besides, even amongst the minnows, there are differences in quality. San Marino could probably learn something from playing Luxembourg, for example.

Savman

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

The fact of the matter is that with such a tiny population they will never amount to anything on the international stage

I'm sure someone, somewhere, at some time, said the very same thing about our little island.

_blank_

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

San Marino could probably learn something from playing Luxembourg, for example.

...or Ireland.

Pepe LeFrits

Savman wrote:

I'm sure someone, somewhere, at some time, said the very same thing about our little island.

Clever.

chopperbyrne

They should go back to only three subs allowed for friendlies. Changing most of the team each match does nothing for the squad.

tdv

Only South American teams are worth watching during the internationals.