AwayInAManger

If/when we do next qualify, at least there's a chance we'll get beyond the group stages. 😉 Not that winning/qualifying is the be-all-and-end-all for us - as the song goes: "We're not Brazil, we're Northern Ireland - but it's all the same to me" Anyhow, I came on here to see what Scottish fans thought about last night's game, not engage in the usual tribal pish that games like this sometimes bring out in certain quarters. I'm pleased to see that the majority of posters are the same, with a lot of interesting comments - I trust you'll understand if I don't engage with you further.

Yeah, you see and hear whatever suits you. Anyhow, If I were you I'd be more worried about my own support - when they weren't booing they were deathly quiet, no?

Point of Information: This won't have been whose tops you imagine. The NI training gear is blue, and has been for years, as below. As it happens, club tops are frowned upon at NI games, esp for away trips. HTH.

Michael O'Neill took over the NI job six years ago (approx) and his first campaign, qualification for WC2014, was very difficult, to say the least. (The performances weren't so bad, but the results were terrible). Anyway, he took them to a two match tour of South America in summer 2014, where they played Uruguay and Chile. A very sparse/weakened team ground out two narrow defeats, and seemed to have taken great heart from the trip, with several new players emerging to form part of the team which went on to perform excellently for the following two campaigns (Euro2016 qualification, and WC2018 Play-Offs). O'Neill often talks about how much he, his staff and the players got out of that trip, both in building morale and also in his getting his ideas across. And only the other day, he repeated this message in the context of Scotland's forthcoming tour: "Some of the reaction initially to the [Scotland] tour was poor. I think it's important the clubs try and support the national team. "For instance we (Northern Ireland) are going to Panama and Costa Rica. Four years ago we went to Uruguay and Chile. "One of the big things as an international team manager is when you're in a double header in qualification, it's so intense. This is a different environment, it's an easier environment if you're going to bring young players in. It's invaluable. "It is always different when you play international football and you can only benefit." https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44116957

Nothing particularly new here, but Michael O'Neill gave an interview the other day, where he reflected on his discussions on the Scotland job. It's clear that he could have been persuaded to take the job, and Stewart Regan really wanted him, but Regan couldn't get the SFA to move quickly enough, most likely because the latter weren't prepared to give Michael the autonomy and responsibility he wanted/needed to do the job properly: Michael O'Neill has admitted the delay in meeting with the Scottish FA "made it more difficult" for them to persuade him to take the Scotland job. It was three months on from the sacking of Gordon Strachan before then-chief executive Stewart Regan met O'Neill. "Possibly that process, that 102 days, made it more difficult for Stewart Regan to get me over the line and put me in the position." By contrast, our lot moved with unprecedented speed: "The IFA were very pro-active, they offered me an extension to my contract hours after the final game in Switzerland," said O'Neill. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44116957 I personally have no idea how McLeish will do, but I have absolutely no doubt that had Michael been given a fair crack* at the Scotland job, he would have been very successful. P.S. O'Neill also confirmed the soundness of his judgement when revealing that he spoke to both WBA and Sunderland about joining them, but declined to take either any further. Two bullets dodged there, Chris Coleman should have taken note! 😉 * - No interference, bring in his own people, re-build the under-age set-up etc

As an outsider, I have no idea of the practicalities and finances etc of staying or leaving. But as someone who has visited Hampden a half a dozen times since my first trip (1978?), I have to say I sympathise 100% with the above sentiment. No harm to the Old Firm or Murrayfield etc, but surely to goodness you have to find a way of staying at Hampden? Even in its present state, it's still one of the great football grounds of the world.

If you leave your preconceptions (and football colours!) at home when you visit Belfast, I'm sure you'll have a great time. I believe that when Scotland played the Republic recently, some of your fans actually stayed in Belfast, and were glad they did. Anyhow, I always think that Belfast is to Glasgow what Dublin is to Edinburgh. On which point, if you're at all interested in history, esp of the industrial/socio-economic sort, then a visit to The Titanic Centre is a must. (In fact, even if you're not so interested, you should go anyway, imo). The reason I say so is because in the absence of many exhibits from the ship itself - rich Americans have bought up all that stuff - it concentrates instead on how Belfast went from being a small provincial town by the Lagan, to being an industrial power-house with the largest shipyard in the world, the largest ropeworks, huge engineering factories and the rest, all within little more than half a century. In fact, by the time the Titanic and its two sister ships, Olympic and Britannic, were built around 1912 (3 x biggest ships in the world, I think?), not only was Belfast the largest city in Ireland, but also the wealthiest. Plus the Centre is on the very site where the Titanic was built, including the original drydock, with great views of Belfast Lough and the surrounding hills. It's a fascinating story all round, and you should appreciate the parallels with, and connections to, Glasgow particularly and Scotland generally. But I would caution one thing - if you're going to do it proper justice, allow at least 3 hours, ideally a half day. And for all that people mock a museum to a ship which sank on its maiden voyage, just remember that the Captain was an Englishman. And besides, as the yard foreman said at the time: "Sure she was allright when she left here!" http://titanicbelfast.com/

Once the original overtures were made, it was always going to leak one way or another. That is one of the (negative) consequences of doing it that way, just as your approach also has negative consequences (see previous post) The answer to that is that if you truly believe you've got your man, then you hold your nerve. Unless you (not you personally) are a follower of the sage who once declared: "It is a well known fact that there is no problem in football which cannot be solved by sacking your manager. Which explains why Halifax Town win the Champions League, season-in, season-out..."

The logical conclusion from that is either only approach people who are not already in a job, or hope that someone who's already employed will apply (of which see more below) This isn't like recruiting shelf-stackers for ASDA (no disrespect to supermarket workers, btw). The fact is, Michael undoubtedly was interested in "a" job, but not just any old job, such as previous Scottish managers have held (hardly successfully either, I would add). He wanted something where he could build for the future, from the grassroots up. So that if the SFA had merely put an ad in the paper saying "National Team Manager Wanted", he and other potential candidates already in a job are put in a difficult position. If they apply, and it turns out that they're not what the SFA requires, then they've blown their cover and risk putting themselves in their present employer's bad books. (Ditto if they are the right candidate, but the job's not right for them). Which is why you make overtures behind the scenes first. And in doing so, it greatly helps your chances of securing the candidate if he knows he's your No.1 choice (it's that "breaking cover" thing again). Meanwhile, those initial overtures must have offered sufficient encouragement to Michael for him to prepare for, and attend, a serious interview, where he clearly created a good impression. Yet still it eventually broke down. And with his turning down the offer, and Regan subsequently resigning, the obvious explanation is that ultimately Regan was unable to deliver the job which he had put to Michael in order for him to apply in the first place. And in the circumstances, I would actually sympathise with Regan, for even if he has been exposed for being incompetent etc, is there any evidence that any Chief Exec could wrest sufficient power and authority from the hands of the Blazers and vested interests who appear to have been in charge of the SFA for years? (We've suffered the same at the IFA for decades, except that by a combination of Government intervention - reform, or be denied funding - and pure luck, we seem to have made a wee bit of progress) As I say, had the job been the one he wanted (and Regan originally held out?), he definitely would have wanted it - he's not the sort to waste his own time, never mind anyone else's. As for other options, I believe Sunderland were very interested before Coleman, but Michael demurred, and WBA may have been sniffing around, too. But neither went anywhere, since he simply wasn't interested. Unlike the Scottish job.

As an NI fan, I'm not sure about the "prostituted" comment? Anyhow, there is a lot to be said for identifying a target and going for him. But you should at least try and establish whether that candidate is amenable to the suggestion before going public. I assume that the SFA did so - if nothing else, MO'N won't just have turned up for a chat and a cup of tea (or even a cup of whisky!) unless preliminary job specs etc were discussed. Yet it still eventually broke down, so the question must be why? Today's IFA Press Conference where MO'N's new contract was formally confirmed offers a big clue. For not just has he signed on as Manager for the next six years(!), but he has also been appointed "Chief Football Officer" in addition. Which fits in with everything we've learned about Michael to date. That is, he's not like your typical manager who'll just step from one job to another to satisfy his own, selfish, short-term needs (money, prestige, trophies etc). Rather he thinks long term, and "outside the box" (sorry, I hate that phrase, too). So not only has he talked about persuading our veterans to stay on, but he's also talked about finding new players (in GB, I assume) who are eligible. Best of all, he also eg name-checked a couple of 16 and 17 y.o.'s at EPL clubs whom he hopes to be capping before he goes, so he's clearly looking to the future, and with the full backing of the IFA. I have no doubt he envisaged something similar for Scotland, only with a wider talent pool from which to draw. And if I had to guess, I'd say Regan was up for this, too, but simply couldn't persuade the other decision-makers and Blazers as well, chiefly one Malky Mackay. Which really is Scotland's loss (imo), since after having taken the NI 1st XI to a new level, Michael clearly now intends to lift the whole set-up behind the scenes. And I really believe that if anyone can do so, he can, he's that good.

You're quite right about Tan (and Dahlam), but that still doesn't mean they're wrong about Mackay, in this instance at least. (The context was Cardiff's transfer committee and Warnock's role within that. All Dahlam needed to say was that the Transfer Committee was implemented after Mackay's departure, but he chose to stick the boot in.)

It may not be just the money or the drive etc. When Michael O'Neill was appointed by the IFA it was after he did a brilliant interview - not just how much he wanted the job, but what his plans were, how he would do the job, what he needed etc. He was exceptionally well prepared. There is no doubt he will have been the same with the Scotland job, which is why the SFA were so impressed at interview and went as far as they did financially. But I have no doubt that the SFA were not prepared to concede to him the authority and autonomy he required, and enjoys with the IFA, hence his turning you down. On which point, I strongly suspect that Malky Mackay was the sticking point. There was an interview in today's Sunday Times with the Chairman of Cardiff City, Mehmet Dalman. Included amongst the various topics discussed was this interesting aside: Trust is there [between manager Neil Warnock and owner Vincent Tan] that did not exist between Tan and Mackay, whose transfer activities - which Tan is still unravelling four years on - underpinned his dismissal. "It wasn't about the personalities. I think the media got that wrong," Dalman says. "It was about Mackay wanting all the glory and the power. He came with the view 'I'm untouchable, I got you promoted'. Whereas Vincent's view was 'Listen, it's my money, my club, everyone's touchable.'" Any candidate of note, with a decent CV and of whatever nationality, is bound to be concerned in case he finds himself answerable to someone like Mackay.

I spent a week and a bit in Israel around an NI game. Amazing place and really enjoyable imo (provided your politics don't get in the way.). Depending on travel arrangements and dates etc, you have to visit Jerusalem, for the history etc but it's a bit "moody", atmosphere-wise, so I'd suggest staying in Tel Aviv - completely different (modern, Western etc) and very laid back. Travel within the country is easy. One specific tip: EVERYTHING closes down on the Sabbath (sundown on Friday), apart from the airport, I think - something to bear in mind when planing your trip - might be a good day for a trip to Jordan? (Petra is stunning). Tirana is great crack too, and very cheap..

Yoo shudda got the freakin' wrecking ball... https://mobile.twitter.com/AndyGrayNI/status/955521289778814976/video/1

"A different spin on things" you mean? Michael will not have turned it down solely because of the money, as that article claims. And in any case, it was widely reported that the basic SFA salary wasn't that much below the IFA offer, with performance bonuses capable of bringing it above. I'd bet my mortgage that the chief reason Michael didn't accept was because he wasn't going to be given the autonomy he currently gets in the NI job, most likely due to Malky Mackay's influence. (The nearest equivalent to Mackay at the IFA was that of 'Elite performance Director', a post first filled by Jim Magilton, upon Michael's recommendation. They're best mates.) Instead, that whole article smacked to me of a desperate attempt by Regan to avoid blame, by pointing the finger everywhere else (O'Neill's greed, IFA's leak, SFA Blazers' stinginess etc). Now I believe English is not normally in the pocket of the SFA, so I can't help wondering what future "exclusives" he will squeeze from them in return for this latest piece of garbage from him? Or maybe he was just peeved that Douglas Alexander predicted Michael would turn down the SFA in the Sunday Times on 15th January, so just wants to keep in with Regan?