Cork City 0
St Patrick’s Athletic 1
Denis Hurley reports from Turner’s Cross
SUB RONAN HALE kept up St Patrick’s Athletic’s record of breaking Cork City’s hearts with late goals this season as he conjured up a 90th-minute winner at Turner’s Cross on Friday night.
In each of the sides’ previous two meetings in 2019, the Inchicore side had scored equalisers at the death but this was even better for Harry Kenny’s side, who are now within six points of Bohemians following the Gypsies’ loss to Finn Harps.
That result will also be of note to City, who are now just four points ahead of the Donegal side, albeit with two games in hand.
The Rebel Army — now eight league games without a win — will feel that they did enough to earn a draw, but this was a game where clear-cut chances were at a premium.
Gearóid Morrissey went close with an early long-range effort while Joel Coustrain was denied by good Kevin Toner defending, but 0-0 at half-time was a fair scoreline.
On the resumption, City debutant Eoghan Stokes — on as a first-half sub for the injured Mark O’Sullivan — showed signs of threatening but Pat’s goalkeeper Brendan Clarke wasn’t troubled.
At the other end, Conor Clifford drove into the City area and went down under a challenge but when referee Ben Connolly whistled, it was for a home free-kick and a yellow card.
WATCH:
— eir Sport (@eirSport) August 2, 2019
Cork City 0-1 St Patricks Athletic
Ronan Hale with a long range effort to give the Saints the lead late in the game.
Live on eir Sport 1
#LOI pic.twitter.com/IJK6DpWBvY
Dean Clarke had a better opportunity for Pat’s, testing Mark McNulty, and while the visitors had the ball in the net from the resultant corner, the goalkeeper was being fouled.
Conor McCarthy and Karl Sheppard had good chances for City in the closing stages but Hale showed that Pat’s weren’t settling for a point as he just failed to meet a low cross on 89. A minute later, the former Ireland U21 international, who was only signed by Pat’s yesterday, had the ball in the net thanks to a low curling shot.
City did push for an equaliser but the closest they came was a Dan Casey shot when Stokes rolled a free-kick to him, the ball straight at Clarke.
CORK CITY: Mark McNulty; Colm Horgan, Conor McCarthy, Dan Casey, Ronan Hurley; Conor McCormack, Gearóid Morrissey; Joel Coustrain (Dáire O’Connor 62), Kevin O’Connor (Garry Buckley 62), Karl Sheppard; Mark O’Sullivan (Eoghan Stokes 26).
ST PATRICK’S ATHLETIC: Brendan Clarke; Lee Desmond, David Webster, Ciarán Kelly (Ronan Hale 74), Kevin Toner; Jamie Lennon; Dean Clarke, Darragh Markey (Cian Coleman 90), Conor Clifford, Ian Bermingham; Gary Shaw (Glen McAuley 84).
Referee: Ben Connolly.
The42 is on Instagram! Tap the button below on your phone to follow us!
I will always support CCFC but not the board,time for Carey and Co. to go before they wreck the club beyond repair.
@kopper96: Couldn’t agree more. Time to go and bring in a qualified board. Enough is enough.
@kopper96:
It wasn’t Carey and Co who gave Caulfield all of the European money to spend on players.
It wasn’t Carey and Co who signed a large number of substandard players while our rivals were strengthening.
It wasn’t Carey and Co who refused to adjust the tactics when it was clear they weren’t working.
And it hasn’t been Carey and Co who are persisting with the same underperforming players using tactics that clearly aren’t working for the past few weeks.
@kopper96: Bit late for that, club now wrecked already
Lads any chance of a bit of cop on? The state we’re in is not the doing of this board. This board is probably the best equipped bunch of business men the club has had, in one of the worst seasons we’ve had thanks to the irresponsiblilty of the previous board/management
@Seamus O Driscoll: please enlighten us as to what exactly you mean by the ‘’irresponsibility of the previous board ‘’
All we are hearing from the present board is fudge and spin . Fans are leaving in their droves and all genuine fans are worried that that the club is going down the tubes.
@Gene O’Keeffe: the projected attendances by the previous board in the budget, giving free will to Caulfield with the money from Europe for an array of poor signings and no money for the rainy day fund as a result
@Seamus O Driscoll: I’m sure the previous board can and will account for their decisions. But as you seem to have an inside track to the present board can you let us know 1. What attendance figure did the PRESENT board budget for?
2. Where are the ‘’flood of signings’’the present board promised us in the window?
3. Where did all the money from Europe go?
4. Is the club solvent?
@Gene O’Keeffe:
1. The budget for this season was ratified before the present board took over.
2. When did the board ever claim that?
3. Given to Caulfield by the previous board.
4. Yes.
@Alex Ó Duinín: I’m still in the dark regarding the budgeted attendance figure . What is the figure?
Are you saying that all the money from Europe was spent last season before John Caulfield left? Can you put a figure on it?
As far as I can remember the present chairman of the board said he expected a lot of activity re signings in the window. Didn’t happen.
As a City fan from the beginning I’m glad to hear that you’ve confirmed that the Club is solvent. Can you give us some figures to back that up?
@Gene O’Keeffe:
I believe the budgeted attendance figure is somewhere in the range of 3,500 to 4,000.
Yes. Caulfield asked the board for more money for signings, and he was given it, with that money being the European money. We got over €800,000 from Europe.
I don’t remember the board saying that, but given how large the squad was at the start of the season, we were always going to have to lose players before we could sign players, and I’d much rather we signed a handful of quality players over a number of duds which we have done for the past 2 years.
I can’t give you exact figures, but any debts are manageable. The recent sale of McLoughlin will also help, and with most players being out of contract this season, it allows the club to start on a clean slate, financially.
@Seamus O Driscoll: it was the current board who wasted the money bringing over all those loan signings from England at the start of the season.
The same idiots got rid of Cummins b4 the games in Europe. City were seeded against a team that were lucky to get over a University team and there was an extra 240k to be made.
Then they replaced Cummins with 3 poor attackers. Where is the financial sense in that. Faith should have been kept in an attacking trio of Sheppard, Cummins & O’Connor.
The current board of idiots are just as much at fault.
@John Buckley:
It wasn’t the current board. It was Caulfield who signed those players. The board have absolutely no say on who the manager signs. Cummins left because he is on a huge wage and money needed to be saved. He’s also scored just 5 goals for City before he left. We didn’t lose to Progres because we let Cummins go. We lost to Progres because we have a poorly assembled squad with no heart and no desire.
@Alex Ó Duinín: a manager is not in charge of the money. The board has to ratify signings. If there was financial problems they should have not allowed the signings.
Cummins wages were hardly much more than the three they signed. They should have held on to him for another couple of weeks. You don’t get rid of your only centre forward when the seasons biggest reward is there. As bad as Citys squad is, they should have beaten a poor Progres team. That Cardiff team they were lucky to beat had no professional and actually have to pay to play.
No matter what biased crap you post, the current board are partly responsible for the mess
@Alex Ó Duinín: The players must be deliriously happy to read that the Board think that about them . It must really lift the spirit fir the cup game against Cabinteely.
@John Buckley: A manager isn’t in charge of the money, but what a manager is in charge of is the quality of player they sign with the money, and it’s a simple fact that the previous board gave Caulfield the money to sign players. The financial issues have arose as a result poor results on the pitch leading to lowering attendances, because of the bloated squad with few players who actually added to the squad and the refusal to adjust tactically. Given that Cummins is/was one of our highest earners, his wages would have been significantly higher than the 3 we signed. We should have beaten Progres but again, it wasn’t because we lost Cummins; we were a shambles all over the pitch in the first leg, and we collapsed in the second leg. Also could you explain how I’m being biased?
@Gene O’Keeffe: that’s not what the Board think, that’s my own opinion on the current squad.
@Alex Ó Duinín: you are obviously a buddy of Carey or another board member, that’s why you are biased. Alternatively you are an idiot.
If you have only 1 centre forward, you don’t get rid of him the week before the biggest game of the season from purely a financial reason. Only the biggest idiots would do this with the amount of money at stake.
You keep going on about the previous boards budgeting. All the loan signing were sanctioned by the current board. Why didn’t they look a the budget to see if it was affordable? It is because they are idiots without the required expertise for the job. Carey has no qualification or experience that makes him suitable for the position
@John Buckley: I don’t know anyone of the current board. Nor do I know anyone on the previous board. Calling me an idiot because I’ve a different opinion to you says a lot about you, and leads me to believe that you are buddies with people on the previous board. You seem to be fixated on the fact Cummins left. Has it occured to you at all that maybe Cummins wanted to leave? As for the loan signings, there is no way they would have eaten into every last cent of the European money, so I have no idea why you’re so focused on them. How do you know they have no experience or qualifications for the positions? You do realise that the board positions are voluntary roles and anyone can go for them?
@Alex Ó Duinín: you could have fooled me.
@Alex Ó Duinín: you are on this site all day giving information on behalf of the board regarding budgets, slagging off John Caulfield and the previous board .You then also claim to know how much Graham Cummings was paid and why he was forced to leave etc etc. You then go on to question the present players and accuse them of not trying which I think is a new low. When I questioned how the players would react to the comments you said they were your personal comments and not those of the board. You can’t have it both ways
@Gene O’Keeffe: I’m on here because I’m fed up of constantly seeing the same misinformation regarding the club’s current state. Me stating what actually happened regarding the budget isn’t slagging off the board and Caulfield. Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on the board being branded unqualified and idiots? In fairness now, it’s clear that Cummins is one of the biggest earners at the club. He hardly left Scotland to come to City for peanuts. As for you thinking it’s a new low to question the desire of the players, given the performances on the pitch this season, I’m justified in questioning them, because it is my opinion. I’m genuinely unsure as to why you think that is the opinion of the board and why I can’t have it both ways.
Go now!
John Cotter prob not been best choice to replace Caulfield. Caulfield prob punched above his weight with budget he had. Club could do with clean sweep as Cotter was part of old set up where the rot set in.
With Finn Harps fast catching us, and Cabinteely probably knocking us out of the cup next week, hard to see much of a future, maybe 1st division football might kick up backside the club needs…
@running man: not good to hear you saying that….
@John O’Keeffe: I know, somebody has to…
Disgraceful what is going on at our club and the future looks no better
The current situation at the Club reminds me of the piece I read last week about the managing director of a company who was pushed out, and on leaving gave the incoming chairman advice on what to do if things weren’t going well.
He said he left three envelopes in his desk and in the event is a crisis open the first one. A few months later results were disastrous and he decided to open the first letter.
It read ‘’blame the previous guy’’
A few months later and results still not improving he opened the second letter.
It read ‘’reorganize the company’’
Months later and things going from bad to worse in desperation he opened letter number three and it read ‘‘ write three letters’’