Houllier says Ireland Must Up His Game

[pauliewalnuts]

Ireland just needs a game where he is actually given the ball. Then we can see what he does.

That would involve him having to look interested.

Against Chelsea he was constantly getting into decent space and looking for the ball, but getting frustrated when we didn't get it to him.

I think it is too easy to say he just doesn't look interested, he was certainly interested in that game.

[Can Gana Be Bettered!?!?]

Basically, Milner was a great centre-midfielder and I don't think there are many teams who could replace someone as good as him in their team.

Ireland is way short of Milners good abilities: running, fast, tackling, passing, shooting, dribbling etc., that much is clear.

It doesn't help that he just doesn't look like he's bothered. Surely any new player should be trying to endear themselves to the crowd and if that means running around and putting the effort in then so be it, even if the pass/shot/dribble doesn't come off then at least you know they're trying.

[LeeB]

I'll give you that one Paulie, but one game since arriving is not good enough, and contrast that with the next game up at Sunderland, where he did a passable impression of Johnny X, Fulchester United's famous invisible striker.

[Can Gana Be Bettered!?!?]

Ireland just needs a game where he is actually given the ball. Then we can see what he does.

That would involve him having to look interested.

Against Chelsea he was constantly getting into decent space and looking for the ball, but getting frustrated when we didn't get it to him.

I think it is too easy to say he just doesn't look interested, he was certainly interested in that game.

It is too easy to say it, that's what's worrying. He needs to try. OK, he has found himself in good positions and not recieved the ball, but, especially when the other team has the ball, he just cannot be bothered and we can't carry a player like that. Only certain players can get away with that. Merson was the last player for us who you could forgive because you knew he could, potentially, win us the game at any moment.

[Merv]

Well you could argue that we spent £8m of it on Ireland, and now we're all stratching our heads trying to think of formations that might fit him in, so that one's worked out well.

I'm not, I know exactly how we should fit him in. Just seems that Houllier doesn't. Yet.

[Merv]

Ireland is way short of Milners good abilities: running, fast, tackling, passing, shooting, dribbling etc., that much is clear.

I'll give you running fast and tackling but the rest: no.

[LeeB]

Well you could argue that we spent £8m of it on Ireland, and now we're all stratching our heads trying to think of formations that might fit him in, so that one's worked out well.

I'm not, I know exactly how we should fit him in. Just seems that Houllier doesn't. Yet.

Well quite Merv, it's just a shame you were overlooked for the interviews.

Anyway, my view is that when you join a new team you fit yourself into it in any way you can, through graft.

[Chris Smith]

You seem determined to make Ireland out to be some kind of duffer yet:

Ireland was player of the year at Citeh under Hughes and national Young Player of the Year.

This during a time when Man Citeh had a whole host of world class players lets not forget.

In contrast, Milner played alongside the likes of Smith, Barton and Sibierski at Newcastle and Petrov, Sidwell and NRC at Villa.

So not identical backgrounds (Milner has also got a few years head start on Ireland as he broke through at 16)  but a similar trajectory in so far as they are both 24, both play midfield, both have  had one consistently good season and good periods in other campaigns and both have scooped the national Young Player of the Year gong.

It's not an unreasonable comparison on that basis, they're not exactly a million miles apart ability or experience wise. Even if they are different types of players.  Yet you won't see it as a similar trajectory for the same reason you didn't see us visibly tire as a side past the 60 minute mark last year and you didn't see the signings of Harewood and Heskey as questionable - because you flat out don't want to.

It suited your pro manager argument to turn the other way when it came to the above (I can only assume it was because you had your back turned to most of our matches that you couldn't see what was so blindingly obvious).  It suits your new position to be critical of any business dealings at the club - particularly a transfer that might have played a part in the departure of MON - so you can't/ won't see any merit in the signing of Ireland.  Or in any suggestion that he could -in time- be as effective as Milner was for us.

We've seen this routine before. It's dull, change it.

yet more obfuscation.

You've made claims that you can't back up so try to throw in all sorts of other shit.

Man City got what they wanted from the deal, we didn't. It's therefore highly contentious to say we got the better of it.

Milner's career is on the up, Irealand's gas, at best. levelled out.

I'm not claiming that he's a duffer, despite your consitent attempts to twist my words to pretend that I have, he's just not as good a player as Milner.

“If you say, ‘He’s a good player but he doesn’t defend, but he doesn’t run back, but he loses too many balls in crucial areas’, that’s difficult. He needs to get rid of these ‘buts’ and be a good player. We put him in at Sunderland behind the striker and he needs to get hold of the ball and play.”

[Merv]

Well quite Merv, it's just a shame you were overlooked for the interviews.

I know, what can you do? I was told I was above Sven in the pecking order and then K-Mac's chances took a massive knock after losing at Newcastle... but then Houllier suddenly threw his name into the frame and that was that.

Seriously though, he needs to be central midfield, in the thick of it - I'd have two deeper midfielders behind him but I'd also consider him alongside NRC. Worryingly, Houllier seems to have him pegged as some sort of second striker, which I think leaves him isolated, or a kind of stand-in for Ashley Young... which, let's face it, means Ireland is always going to struggle to get in.

[Chris Smith]

I just don't see how any sensible case can be made for us having the better of it.

I would suggest then that this is down to your perception rather than the actual facts of the case.

Milner vs £18m + Stephen Ireland and you can't see a sensible case that we got the better of the deal?

£18m on its own would have been a very good deal considering what we signed Milner for, add Stephen Ireland in to that and we have an excellent deal. You seem to be just weighing up Ireland v Milner, and discounting the £18m because we have yet to spend it. We could get another two or three top quality players in for that money, for instance this summer Spurs picked up Van Der Vaart for £8m, Man Utd picked up Hernandez for £6m which would still leave £4m in small change. I'm amazed that you can't envisage the possibilities of what that £18m can buy, on top of the potential that Ireland could possibly realise, even if Ireland fails dismally we would still get £6m + for him. 

Whatever we do with the £18m, that money has come into the club and will help the club, and Ireland will turn out to be a valuable asset, either if in time he flourishes as a player or for his resale value, if that "us" you talk of is AVFC, then 'we' have certainly got the better of the deal. I'm pretty sure most managers in the land would bite your hand off if offered the above deal.

Sorry but your above statement really does make it clear how myopic your argument really is.

When the deal was first discussed we didn't want to sell him then we were asking for £30m, in the end we got £18m and one of the players they needed to get off the books valued at £6m. They got what they wanted we had to settle for what they'd give us. It's a better deal for them.

[Merv]

Valued at £6m, valued at £8m, I've read both.... City will put Ireland down as £6m because it makes the overall fee for Milner look better - if you can call £24m for Milner 'better'. But others may just easily say Ireland, at his best, is a £10m player at least, so we're nearer the £30m we originally wanted.

As of today, City look like they got the better of the deal. It may not look that way in a year.

[TimTheVillain]

*REMINDER*

This is what we purchased.

http://vodpod.com/watch/4058683-video-evidence-stephen-ireland

[Mazrim]

The previous summer Milner would have been valued at about £10m and Ireland £20m so I'm not really bothered.
At the time I thought getting Ireland and £18m was about as good a deal as we could have possibly got for Milner.

Time and only time will tell how good this deal was.

[KevinGage]

yet more obfuscation.

You've made claims that you can't back up so try to throw in all sorts of other shit.

I've backed up my point of view with reasoned argument. I'll leave the hypothetical's and any other odd tangents to you.

Man City got what they wanted from the deal, we didn't. It's therefore highly contentious to say we got the better of it.

Milner's career is on the up, Irealand's gas, at best. levelled out.

Simple question, go back 12 months and had we been offered a straight trade -no cash involved- who do you think would have got the better end of the deal? I can guess your answer but I think most would have seen us as the winners in that one.

Fast forward 12 months and not only do we get Ireland but we also get £16 million.
I can accept that some see Milner as the better player, as it happens with the way we're currently set up I'd rather see him in our centre midfield. But there is not a £16 million difference between the pair, no way. Ergo we've got the better end of the deal. if we see something approaching his earlier form at Man City, that is.

Ireland at 22/23 was more than holding his own in a City side containing some of the world's best players. Milner at 24 currently isn't. It remains to be seen whether he can have the impact for City that Ireland managed. If he plays CM and discovers something approximating his form last year with us possibly. If he plays RM/ LM or RB I doubt it.

[KevinGage]

Valued at £6m, valued at £8m, I've read both.... City will put Ireland down as £6m because it makes the overall fee for Milner look better - if you can call £24m for Milner 'better'. But others may just easily say Ireland, at his best, is a £10m player at least, so we're nearer the £30m we originally wanted.

As of today, City look like they got the better of the deal. It may not look that way in a year.

Agreed Merv.

Or even in 2/3 months.