collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Recent Topics

Follow us on...

Author Topic: The Martin O'Neill thread (with added sacking #2188)  (Read 350347 times)

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 15428
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1905 on: March 19, 2013, 11:03:13 PM »
I think Sunderlands stadium is a great place - I went there when it first opened when (however way they were doing it) they did have full houses (in Kev Phillips' day) - we played them once on a Monday night and I was up there - it was a superb atmosphere and we bought about 400 which was a decent effort as I think we were going through a dodgy spell - might have been under Gregory.  We drew 1-1 after scoring first.  Considering that stadium was built for only 19m quid and you compare that to the cost of Wembley I think it is a good ground.  But they are a turgid team full of also rans, and he has to accept a good deal of the blame for that.

Didn't they only have to pay for the part of the stadium that was built above ground level?

Offline maidstonevillain

  • Member
  • Posts: 4954
  • GM : 26.11.2024
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1906 on: March 19, 2013, 11:30:47 PM »
If it wasn't for Pubehead I'd really feel sorry for them. As a group of fans, they're a real decent bunch, far superior to their neighbours up the road and deserve a lot better than the crap they're suffering.

Same here.

And here.
Also over here. Their supporters are great and deserve far better.
Another member of the Sunderland fan appreciation society here.

I suppose the ideal scenario would be, like McCleish, for MON's position to become untenable with a few games to go, ideally after we thrash them, but for Sunderland to just survive. Providing they do not stay up at our expense, obviously

Offline SoccerHQ

  • Member
  • Posts: 43241
  • Location: Down, down, deeper and Down.
  • GM : 19.06.2021
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1907 on: March 19, 2013, 11:31:24 PM »
I remember very little about that Chelsea game...almost as much of a non-event as the Cup Final against them a decade before. The whole "if Gabby had been given a penalty" in that game and "if Vidic had been sent off" in the League Cup final a few weeks earlier always seemed a bit straw-clutching to me and that we were still thinking like a small team hoping to get a break against the giants rather than seeing them as competitors/near equals which I thought the whole point of that stage in our ascent under O'Neill was.

O'Neill's whole ethos and character is suited to that of a plucky manager at a club in thrall to the big boys.

I'd buy that more if the Vidic tackle hadn't deserved a straight red.  99% of the time a tackle like that, in that situation, is a red card.  That he wasn't even booked which meant he could carry on kicking lumps out of us until he finally did get booked in the 2nd half.  That's why a lot of fans still cling to that one, the whole game could've changed if the ref hadn't bottled out of a fairly simple decision: Was it a foul? Was he the last man? Was Gabby through with a clear goalscoring chance if he wasn't fouled?  Yes to all 3 is a red card.

There is nothing of thinking like a small team about that, no one can know what would've happened afterwards and we might still have lost but being pissed off at a terrible decision isn't limited to small teams, Fergie bitches about the ref every time they lose (although probably mostly in a "I'm dropping him next week after that" way).

That's fair enough, it's just the assertion that we had to get a break like that for us to even have a chance of winning. We'd played them in the league at VP a few weeks earlier and Nani was sent-off early on yet they had the better chances after that and the game finished level. We got a penalty out of the Vidic challenge and we didn't look like scoring for the rest of the game so I don't feel as strongly as most do, legitimately as you described, with regards to the non-sending off.

Losing a central defender to a red is a little different to losing a kamikaze wide player who dosen't track back much (although it hurt them against Madrid).

For a start they'd have needed to have brought a new central defender on (think their back up that day was Wes Brown....) and would've probably taken off Owen who scored the equaliser.

1-0 down and with 10 men I'd have fancied us big time given what we were like on the counter attack at the time.

Yeah the Chelsea game I felt less confident about but from memory for the first 60 mins it was an uneven game with few chances for both teams. First goal was always going to be crucial.

Other thing I remember is Milner being kicked from the first minute to the last.

Online pauliewalnuts

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 74593
  • GM : 28.08.2025
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1908 on: March 19, 2013, 11:43:37 PM »
I think Sunderlands stadium is a great place - I went there when it first opened when (however way they were doing it) they did have full houses (in Kev Phillips' day) - we played them once on a Monday night and I was up there - it was a superb atmosphere and we bought about 400 which was a decent effort as I think we were going through a dodgy spell - might have been under Gregory.  We drew 1-1 after scoring first.  Considering that stadium was built for only 19m quid and you compare that to the cost of Wembley I think it is a good ground.  But they are a turgid team full of also rans, and he has to accept a good deal of the blame for that.

It is a good ground, but there's no point even beginning to compare the cost of demolishing and rebuilding a national stadium in London with that of building a new stadium on empty land in Sunderland.

Offline ozzjim

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 31051
  • Location: Here.
  • GM : 30.08.2022
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1909 on: March 19, 2013, 11:44:14 PM »
Terry should have gone in that semi for a horrible tackle on Milner. Woeful officiating again. We never get a good un.

Online paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 37261
  • Age: 45
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1910 on: March 20, 2013, 09:00:43 AM »
I think Sunderlands stadium is a great place - I went there when it first opened when (however way they were doing it) they did have full houses (in Kev Phillips' day) - we played them once on a Monday night and I was up there - it was a superb atmosphere and we bought about 400 which was a decent effort as I think we were going through a dodgy spell - might have been under Gregory.  We drew 1-1 after scoring first.  Considering that stadium was built for only 19m quid and you compare that to the cost of Wembley I think it is a good ground.  But they are a turgid team full of also rans, and he has to accept a good deal of the blame for that.

It is a good ground, but there's no point even beginning to compare the cost of demolishing and rebuilding a national stadium in London with that of building a new stadium on empty land in Sunderland.

Not just empty land, it was the pit entrance for the largest colliery up there (my father-in-law worked there for 25years) - it's a fantastic location in the city, 10 minute walk from the city centre, just the other side of the river.  The land was dirt cheap because housing developers weren't interested, it had been a brown field site for 2 years before they even considered it for the stadium, the original plan having been to build by the Nissan plant (which is about 10 miles inland from there and has nothing around it).

I'll be really upset if Sunderland go down, they're easily the most likeable club in their region, I did warn all my in-laws what they could expect from MoN though, even when they were all excited by signing Johnson I was telling them it'd turn out badly.

Offline Ads

  • Member
  • Posts: 42925
  • Location: The Breeze
  • GM : 17.04.2024
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1911 on: March 20, 2013, 09:04:28 AM »
Its alright, its a bit bland inside, with too much concrete on show for my liking.

I am delighted that the away fans are now in the upper tier. This season was the only time I can remember going to Sunderland and not being bloody freezing.

Offline dave.woodhall

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 63352
  • Location: Treading water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry.
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1912 on: March 20, 2013, 11:13:58 AM »
I don't mind Sunderland, but ever since the ground was opened they've given thousands of tickets away for every match. It was said that in the first two seasons, when virtually every game was close to capacity, the average number of full-paying supporters was around 28,000.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 11:42:26 AM by dave.woodhall »

Offline CJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 7888
  • Age: 71
  • Location: Downtown Cookley
  • GM : 12.07.2017
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1913 on: March 20, 2013, 11:40:42 AM »
The PA system at Sunderland is the best I've heard as well. Is it still Prokofiev it belts out just before the players come out?

Online pauliewalnuts

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 74593
  • GM : 28.08.2025
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1914 on: March 20, 2013, 11:44:45 AM »
I don't mind Sunderland, but ever since the ground was opened they've given thousands of tickets away for every match. It was said that in the first two seasons, when virtually every game was close to capacity, the average number of full-paying supporters was around 28,000.

Ah, Sunderland, who amongst us doesn't remember Dave going head to head with that Sunderland supporter on the news when we bought Darren Bent?

Offline dave shelley

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 16027
  • Age: 76
  • Location: between a rock and a hard place
  • GM : 01.02.2026
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1915 on: March 20, 2013, 11:51:25 AM »
Anyone heard from Davey B lately?  It would be interesting to hear his take on things as he's a decent bloke and is an optimist.  It's fans like Davey who really deserve better.  He does seem to have a blind spot though when it comes to MON.  He's probably begun to see woods through the trees.  I hope it's because he's got a job and he's too busy to post.

C'mon Davey, where are you?

Offline Chico Hamilton III

  • Member
  • Posts: 19657
  • Location: South London
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1916 on: March 20, 2013, 12:01:35 PM »
I always think of Sunderland as a North Eastern equivalent of Wolves, for some reason


Offline eastie

  • Member
  • Posts: 19940
  • Age: 59
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1917 on: March 20, 2013, 12:04:16 PM »
Anyone heard from Davey B lately?  It would be interesting to hear his take on things as he's a decent bloke and is an optimist.  It's fans like Davey who really deserve better.  He does seem to have a blind spot though when it comes to MON.  He's probably begun to see woods through the trees.  I hope it's because he's got a job and he's too busy to post.

C'mon Davey, where are you?

He's working for a company making villa pop- working long hours and not getting much chance for footie chat , he is still behind mon but I think very dispirited with things on wearside at the moment.
I was talking to him last week and he is doing fine and sends his regards- I'm sure he will return if he gets some time to spare.

Offline dave shelley

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 16027
  • Age: 76
  • Location: between a rock and a hard place
  • GM : 01.02.2026
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1918 on: March 20, 2013, 12:27:53 PM »
Thanks Eastie.  How's the gammy knee?

Offline eastie

  • Member
  • Posts: 19940
  • Age: 59
Re: The Martin O'Neill thread
« Reply #1919 on: March 20, 2013, 12:41:54 PM »
Thanks Eastie.  How's the gammy knee?

Operation is done and resting.
Bandaged and stitched up and very painful- should ease as swelling goes down but painkillers are doing their best - thanks for asking :)

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal