What were the main causes of the Flight of the Earls?

 

 

The Flight of the Earls occurred on the 14 of September 1607 when the Earl of Tyrconnel Rory O Donnell and the Earl of Tyrone Hugh O’Neill left the island of Ireland along with many of their followers to seek refuge and a chance to regroup in mainland Europe. This move by the Earls was as sudden as it was shocking. The flight of the earls is regarded as one of the most remembered events in Irish history, however the causes for the Flight of the Earls have differed greatly among historians over the years.[1] One thing that can be agreed was that the power of the former Gaelic lords or Earls as they had become to be known with the agreement of surrender and regrant had been diminishing greatly. Many causes can be accredited for the eventual departure of the Earls however some of the key factors can include events such as the nine years war which culminated in the Battle of Kinsale. Other factors such as the strengthening of English rule in Ireland all played a role which led to the Earls leaving Ireland. Throughout this essay I will focus on these various issues and explain how they aided in the migration of the Earl of Tyrone and Tyrconnel in 1607.

 

The Nine Years War or Tyrone’s rebellion as it was also known as took place from the years 1594 to 1603. Over this nine year period sporadic fighting took place between English forces and Irish earls, who would be later joined by Spanish support. The high point of the nine years war was the Battle of Kinsale. It was during this battle that the Irish would suffer a heavy defeat. However it was not the loss which was the main cause for the flight of the earls but it was the manner of the defeat in general. There were many other Irish lords involved in the battle of Kinsale however not all were as brave as the forces of Tyrconnel or Tyrone. It is noted during the battle that various other Irish chiefs ‘’mounted their horses, and fled like cowards, leaving there infantry to their fate.’’[2] The idea of Irish chief’s retreating from battle would be seen as a something extremely unlikely for a society which prided itself on warfare. Perhaps this act taken by some Irish chiefs indicated that there was a turning of the tide and there military power was not as strong as once was.

 

The idea of the Earls having diminishing military power can be quiet evident in the loss they suffered during the Battle of Kinsale. Irish casualties as well as wounded had been reported to be as high as two thousand, whereas English losses were relatively low in comparison.[3] The loss at Kinsale would have played a huge blow to the Irish chiefs. It showed them that they could not defeat the English garrisons even with aid. The loss at Kinsale, although morally damaging for Tyrone and Tyrconnell was not the most prominent reason for their departure from Ireland. The events of the Battle of Kinsale were whitewashed over afterwards through O’Neill’s submission of power to the English monarchy with the signing of the Treaty of Mellifont in March 1603.[4] This treaty would have added to the further humiliation of Tyrone and perhaps aided him further with his decision to depart from Ireland.

 

One of the main causes which can be associated with the Flight of the Earls which has been greatly overlooked is the significant disrespect which the Earls where subjected too by the English army as well as the government in Ireland. One example of how low the Earls stature had dropped was with the pardon of Captain Edmund Ellis who had raped a young girl and was given a pardon even though Rory O’Donnell had objected to it.[5] Not only was Ellis given a pardon but he was also re-appointed to the post of military office in Donegal in December 1606.[6] This incident highlights just how low the sway that the Earls now commanded. Ellis’s behaviour as well as the government’s acceptance of it can be seen as an important cause for the Flight of the Earls. In fact it played such a role in his decision to leave that he includes it ‘Tyrconnell’s Grievances’.[7]

 

The pressure the army placed as well as disrespect that the forces of Ulster where showing towards the Earls seriously affected their power to govern effectively. Tyrone or Tyrconnell could no longer stop forces from passing through their land. Under the viceroyalty of Sir George Carey Earl Hugh gives an account of how troops from a Derry garrison passing through his land came across one of the Earls kinsmen and ‘without any speech, one of the soldiers shot him through, and killed him dead’.[8] It was not just single killings which were taking place on the lands of the Earls but also massacres. For instance during the reign of King James a company commanded by Sir Henry Folliott entered the lands of Tyrone and set about not only seizing ‘above 200 cows’ but killing the herdsmen as well as ‘many other poor men, women and children’.[9] No doubt that this event constituted a massacre and highlighted the loss in power that the earls now had. If the Earls could no longer protect their people what reason would these followers have to say loyal to them? This factor would have added to the Earls reasoning for leaving Ireland, if they could no longer protect their followers what power did they have in Ireland.

 

Not only where the followers of the Earls of Tyrone and Tyrconnell under threat from the Ulster forces but O’Donnell and O’Neill were under threat themselves. This was partly to do with the introduction of martial law. Marital Law had been in operation in Ireland on and off since 1556 under Lord Deputy Sussex. It was under the reign of Viceroy Chichester that marital law became a real concern to Earls Rory and Hugh. The historian David Edwards best sums up the role of Marital law as being ‘a major addition to the crowns capacity for repression.’[10] Marital law basically granted private armies, sanctioned by the viceroy free reign to persecute whoever they pleased, be it by seizing of land or by physical abuse. This measure only strengthened the garrisons of Ulster and allowed them to increase hostilities with the two earls.[11] Not only did marital law strengthen English control against disobedience in Ulster, it also put the lives of Tyrconnell and Tyrone in danger. This stern enforcement of martial law would have added with the Earls disillusionment with Ireland and added in their decision to leave the country.

 

There have been many causes accredited for the Flight of the Earls in 1607. Although Kinsale played a key role in the Tyrone and Tyrconnell’s departure it was not the main one. The pressure which the military placed on the Earls was a key cause for their departure from Ireland. As the historian David Edwards states, it was ‘‘the military threat to Tyrone and Tyrconnell was greater than has ever been acknowledged.’’[12]  Not only where the Earls facing a threat to their lives through the enforcement of martial law but they were also witnessing there power and kingdom being stripped from their grasp. The Earls territories had been significantly eroded through the years by the likes of Niall Garbh O’Donnell and George Montgomery.[13] The increasing power of the Ulster garrisons had been slowly suffocating the Earls. It was these reasons that caused the Earls to leave the shores of Ireland. Hugh O’Neill even mentions this fact in article twenty of ‘Tryone’s Grievances’. Tyrone states how he had suffered so many abuses at the hands of King James’s ministers as well as inferior officers, and that he had lost so much of his honour and dignity that these circumstances could drive anyone to forego the country they loved.[14] It was the subjection which both O’Neill and O’Donnell suffered at the hands of the crown which was the main cause in forcing them to take flight to the continent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Alfred D’Alton, Edward, History of Ireland: from the earliest time to the present day, Volume 3, (The Gresham Publishing Company, London, 1910)

Bardon, Jonathan, A History of Ulster, (The Blackstaff Press, Belfast, 1994)

Edwards, David, Beyond Reform: Marital Law and the Tudor Reconquest of Ireland: Irish history, Vol.5, No.2, (Summer 1997), (Wordwell, Dublin, 1997)

McCavit, John, The Flight of the Earls, (Gill and Macmillan, Dublin, 2002)

McGurk, John, The Elizabethan conquest of Ireland: The 1590s crisis, (Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1997)

O’Connor, Thomas, &, Lyons, Mary Ann, The Ulster earls and baroque Europe: Refashioning Irish identities, 1600-1800, (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2010)

 

---

[1] McCavit, John, The Flight of the Earls, (Gill and Macmillan, Dublin, 2002), p. 1.

[2] Alfred D’Alton, Edward, History of Ireland: from the earliest time to the present day, Volume 3, (The Gresham Publishing Company, London, 1910), p. 178.

[3] Ibid., p. 179.

[4] McGurk, John, The Elizabethan conquest of Ireland: The 1590s crisis, (Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1997), p. 75.

[5] O’Connor, Thomas, & , Lyons, Mary Ann, The Ulster earls and baroque Europe: Refashioning Irish identities, 1600-1800, (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2010), p. 55.

[6] Ibid., p. 55.

[7] Ibid., p. 55.

[8] Ibid., p. 69.

[9] Ibid., p. 70.

[10] Edwards, David, Beyond Reform: Marital Law and the Tudor Reconquest of Ireland: Irish history, Vol.5, No.2, (Summer 1997), (Wordwell, Dublin, 1997), p. 17. 

[11] O’Connor, Thomas, & , Lyons, Mary Ann, The Ulster earls and baroque Europe: Refashioning Irish identities, 1600-1800, (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2010), p. 63.

[12] Ibid., p. 76.

[13] Bardon, Jonathan, A History of Ulster, (The Blackstaff Press, Belfast, 1994), p. 116.

[14] O’Connor, Thomas, & , Lyons, Mary Ann, The Ulster earls and baroque Europe: Refashioning Irish identities, 1600-1800, (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2010), p. 76.

The major changes in Irish diet from 1801-1914 with reference to the differences between different social strata

Foods as well as drink are perhaps the most important elements of life, not just in Irish society but society in general. Without it one literally could not survive, and in Ireland throughout the nineteenth as well as early twentieth century food played a key role in the makeup of people’s lives. Large proportions of people’s income where devoted to paying for food and drink. Although large amounts of income went towards basic necessities of food, diet amongst the various social strata in Ireland during this period tended to be extremely different. The more affluent members of society tended to enjoy a richer more broad selection of diet, while the poor or the working class had to make do with a narrow selection of food, or none at all as the case could often be. However throughout this period the makeup of diets for the different members of society did evolve and by the beginning of the twentieth century they would have been completely different to that of the early ninetieth century. 

 

As economists point out the richer you become the percentage of income to food decreases however you also broaden your rage of foods. By the early nineteenth century Ireland could be split in two in terms of diet. Those of the middling and upper classes tended to enjoy varied diets which consisted of meat, grain-based foods, various dairy produce, fish, fruit, vegetables, wines and spirits. While people of low income tended to consume a diet chiefly of potatoes.[1]  Meat, poultry and rabbits tended to account for more than one-third of all food expenditure of the upper class. The most common consumed by these groups were beef and mutton, although veal, lamb, pork, offal and poultry were also eaten.[2] A typical meal for someone of a wealthy background would include ‘’hare soup, sheep’s head mince, and a roast lion of beef’’[3]. However it wasn’t just animals that were consumed by the wealthy the middling and upper classes spent large part of their income on various forms of cereals. Cakes as well as other forms of confectionaries where common and many families kept regular cake accounts with local bakers.[4] The rich tended also to avail of more imported goods from British colonies. From the period 1803-1807 a combined total 327,148cwt of coffee, tea and sugar was imported into Ireland.[5] The rich tended to import many goods, as was noted between the periods 1808-1812 5,470 tuns of wine as well as 981,421 gallons of spirits were brought into the country.[6] It is clear to see from the above figures that from the early nineteenth century the upper classes in Ireland diet were not greatly different from those of the gentry in England.[7]

 

While the diet of the gentry in Ireland was more diverse and exotic the poorer sections of Irish society’s diet tended to be much more conservative. The poor tended to live of a diet of potatoes.[8] Although potatoes were the main staple of the poor’s diet, they were sometimes supplemented with the likes of meal, fish in the form of salted herring and also bacon.[9] Coastal areas such as Gorey in Wexford tended to sometimes eat herrings or cod. Shellfish was a part of the poor’s diet, however the consumption in this decreased by the end of the nineteenth century.[10] As mentioned the main food group of the poor were potatoes. Estimates have shown that labouring men could tend to eat up to fourteen pounds worth of potatoes a day.[11]

 

With the onset of the famine in 1845 diets of the poor would be vastly altered with the food group that they became most dependent on, the potato suffering from blight. During this period the poor grew more dependent on grain and other wheat products. Work houses as well as soup kitchens where established to combat the onset of famine. Milk, which was a big part of the poor’s diet prior to the famine, was replaced by a sugar based syrup called treacle in many areas.[12] In general the diet of the poor suffered negatively during this period as many where unable to afford any form of sustenance. Those upper classes who could afford food during the famine, their diet tended not to change whereas the poor gentry where forced to either accept aid or go hungry. In Cork city during this period there was an increase in crimes such as theft, malicious injuries and others which where punishable by imprisonment. The local grand jury noted that the availability of an abundance of milk in the prison as opposed to the workhouses perhaps played a part in the increase of crime.[13]

 

For the poor who survived the famine and for those not forced to emigrate there was a stark change in choices of what was available to eat and what also to be able to afford. Disposable income to spend on eating and drinking had increased dramatically for the poor in contrast to their ancestors a generation ago. Food consumption much like it had been with the rich during the early parts of the nineteenth century became much more diversified.[14]  Although they might not be able to afford the same quality of produce as the rich gentry, they were now not forced to rely so heavily on potatoes as there staple form of food. By 1839 the average daily consumption of Potatoes was 184ounces by 1859 it had fallen dramatically to 61ounces and by 1904 it stood at 28 ounces in rural areas and 17 ounces in urban.[15]Consumption of food and drink such as eggs, butter, tea and sugar accounted for 10.6ounces of average male labours daily consumption by 1904.[16] This is a stark contrast to earlier times in the nineteenth century when these foodstuffs were seldom available for the labouring class, only the upper gentry could afford them. It should be noted that although poor labourers had greater access to these new types of food they tended to eat them sparingly. Foods such as beef, pork, bacon and fish were eaten in small quantities and even poorer families tasted meat once a month or possible on special occasions.[17] However there was much more bacon consumed amongst the lower social strata of society with fatty American bacon being cheaper and thus more easily accessible for the poor. It tended to be the poorer cuts of meat that the labouring strata of society dined on.

 

The consumption of alcohol became much more frequent amongst the poor during the late nineteenth century early twentieth. There was a movement away from the consumption of homemade sprits such as poteen to a greater demand for beer. By 1901 per captia consumption of beer stood at 26 gallons.[18]

 

Major changes to diet were more prevalent amongst the lower strata of society then that in the upper gentry. Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth century the diets of the rich tended to be much more varied and colourful. Having an abundance of income meant they could afford much more diverse food and drink. Their diets where much more a kin to those of the upper social strata in Britain who also enjoyed the more expensive types of food and drink.  Food and drink such as meat, fish, fruit, beer, wine, grain and dairy based products were commonly and excessively consumed amongst the middle and upper classes during this period of the union. While wealthier people’s diet tended not to alter during this period the poor’s in contrast changed quiet dramatically. From a post famine diet centred around the potato with the varied inclusion of butter milk, herring’s and other odd variants. The poor’s diet altered after the famine as labour now commanded a higher wage. The lower strata could now afford some of the delicacies of the rich, like sugar, beer and meat. Although the quality of some of these products were not as good and they would not have been consumed to the same volume as the rich, nonetheless the poor’s diet changed dramatically from one being centred around the potato to one now being more diverse and in line with British counterparts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

·         Clarkson, L.A, Crawford, M, Feast and Famine: A History of food and Nutrition in Ireland 1500-1920, (Oxford University Press, UK, 2001)

·         Mac Laughlin, Jim, Troubled Waters: A second and cultural history of Ireland’s sea fisheries, (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2010)

·         O Grada, Cormac, Black 47 and Beyond: The Great Irish Famine in History, Economy and Memory, (Princeton University Press, UK, 1999)

---

[1] Clarkson, L. A., Crawford, E. Margaret, Feast and Famine: A History of Food and Nutrition in Ireland 1500-1920, (Oxford University Press, UK, 2001), pp.29.

[2] Ibid, pp.36

[3] Clarkson, L. A., Crawford, E. Margaret, Feast and Famine: A History of Food and Nutrition in Ireland 1500-1920, (Oxford University Press, UK, 2001), pp. 38.

[4] Ibid, pp.43.

[5] Ibid, pp.54.

[6] Ibid, pp.54.

[7] Ibid, pp.57.

[8] Ibid, pp.68.

[9] Ibid, pp.69.

[10] Mac Laughlin, Jim, Troubled Waters: A social and cultural history of Ireland’s sea fisheries, (Four Courts Press, Dublin, 2010), pp.220.

[11]Clarkson, L. A., Crawford, E. Margaret, Feast and Famine: A History of Food and Nutrition in Ireland 1500-1920, (Oxford University Press, UK, 2001), pp.74.

[12] O’Grada, Cormac, Black ’47 and Beyond: The Great Irish Famine in History, Economy and Memory, (Princeton University Press, United Kingdom, 1999), pp.71.

[13] Ibid, pp.268.

[14] Clarkson, L. A., Crawford, E. Margaret, Feast and Famine: A History of Food and Nutrition in Ireland 1500-1920, (Oxford University Press, UK, 2001), pp.90.

[15] Ibid, pp.91

[16] Ibid, pp.91.

[17] Ibid, pp.105.

[18] Ibid, pp.108.

Hunting for goals

After examining the goals to game ratios of the various Irish forwards playing across both the English Premier League and English Championship to try and determine who Giovanni Trapattoni should choose in order to maximise his goal scoring threat, it has been brought to my attention that I was focusing in on the wrong area. As was pointed out to me it would be of much more use to examine the goals per minute of these eight men rather than their goals per game. Focusing in on games can skew the statistics and make some players seem more proficient in front of goals then they actually are. Likewise it can also diminishing certain players achievements. So having re-examined my findings and taking into consideration the latest round of fixtures in both the Premier League and Championship the following results were determined.

Perhaps not surprising Jon Walters, the man who holds the current record for most consecutive appearances for an outfield Premier League player has also played the most minutes of football out of the men examined. Walters has played 2,828 minutes of football, both for Stoke and the Republic of Ireland so far this season. Followed closely behind him is Kevin Doyle who has been on the field for 2,748 minutes. Conor Sammon and Simon Cox have played 2,317 minutes and 2,109 minutes respectively. Further down the list is Daryl Murphy with 1,823 minutes and Andy Keogh with 1,814 minutes. Ireland’s top Premier League scorer Shane Long has only played 1,460 minutes while Noel Hunt has played the least out of anyone with 876 minutes.

Jonathan Walters’s achievement is all the more impressive when you take into account that he is has played so far this season thirty three games. This would mean that out of the 2,970 minutes of football Walters could have competed in he has only not been on the pitch for 146 minutes. This is an incredible statistic considering that amount of energy he exerts during a match, as anyone who has seen him play will back up. On the other side Noel Hunt has only played in 876 minutes out of a possible 1,890 minutes available to him. Some heed should be taken into this figure though as most of Hunts appearances this season have been off the bench.

This is all well and good but who is the most effective Irish striker in terms of goals scored per minute? Well just like his goals per game ratio Shane Long tops the list; however he is also joined by Noel Hunt. Although there is a big difference in terms of the amount of minutes each man has been on the pitch, in terms of goals per minute they are equal. Both players score one goal every 146 minutes. The next best return is Andy Keogh. The Millwall man finds the net every 259 minutes. Daryl Murphy finds the net every 304 minutes. Although Jonathan Walters spends the most time on the pitch out of any other player examined this has affected his goals per minute ratio. Even with his nine goals already this season it still takes Walters 314 minutes to score one. Conor Sammon will score a goal for Derby Country every 331 minutes. Kevin Doyle and Simon Cox have the worst goals per minute return of the players examined. Cox scores a goal every 422 minutes while Doyle doesn’t fare much better scoring a goal every 393 minutes.

So it appears from the goals per minute results that Shane Long and Noel Hunt are equally as affective in front of goals. Perhaps Noel Hunt should feel particularly downhearted that Giovanni Trapattoni hasn’t called him up to the Poland squad, considering he has a better goals per minute ratio then Kevin Doyle, Jonathan Walters, Conor Sammon, Andy Keogh and Simon Cox. Of course goals only tell you so much about a player. It is difficult to measure their ability to hold up the ball, work the channels, track back or generally trouble defenders. All these factors need to be considered when deciding who Ireland should choose as their main forwards. Although at the end of the day goals win you games and it seems that Hunt is as good as any Irish forward at finding them.   

 

Irish forwards and their goals per minute

Shane Long:                1 every 146 minutes

Noel Hunt:                  1 every 146 minutes

Andy Keogh:             1 every 259 minutes

Daryl Murphy:            1 every 304 minutes

Jon Walters:                1 every 314 minutes

Conor Sammon:          1 every 331 minutes

Kevin Doyle:               1 every 393 minutes

Simon Cox:                 1 every 422 minutes

 

Source: http://www.soccerbase.com/players/home.sd

Time Up for Doyle and Cox?

With the pivotal qualification games against Sweden and Austria approaching ever sooner, Republic of Ireland manager Giovanni Trapattoni has a real dilemma in terms of not only trying to produce a team capable of getting results but also picking a squad capable of maximising our limited talent pool. One of the areas of most importance for these games will be which strikers will be chosen, not only in the starting line-up but also in the squad. From the forwards announced for the upcoming friendly against Poland it seems Trapattoni has some idea of a combination of forwards between the likes of Simon Cox, Andy Keogh, Jonathan Walters, Shane Long, Conor Sammon and Kevin Doyle. Although Robbie Keane is excluded no doubt he will be included for the March qualifiers given his impressive goal scoring record for both club and country. Who will make up the other four strikers that Trappatoni will choose for what is deemed to be two games in which our qualification hopes rest on?

Given Ireland’s limited pool of strikers playing top flight football Trapattoni has had to cast his net into the English Championship in the hopes of finding proficient goal scorers. However is he looking at the right players or are some players only being chosen on merit rather than ability? When looking at the most successful Irish strikers playing in England this season two other names must also be included. These are Daryl Murphy of Ipswich and Noel Hunt of Reading. With these two men as well as the six listed which four should be chosen alongside Robbie Keane as Irelands main forwards?

As many people would argue Ireland’s most successful striker so far this season has been Shane Long. From examining the goals to game ratios of these players that assertion can be backed up. Having played twenty nine games for both club and country this season Shane Long has notched a fairly impressive ten goals. This accounts for a goal every 2.9 games. What about the others? Well quiet surprisingly Noel Hunt is the second highest return in terms of goals per game, scoring one in every 3.5 games. This is followed by Jon Walters with one in 3.6 games. It takes Andy Keogh 3.8 games to score and Conor Sammon 4.1. Daryl Murphy will find the back of the net in 4.6 games. Kevin Doyle and Simon Cox have the worst goals to game ratios with Doyle scoring one in 4.7 games while Cox is much worse scoring once every 6.2 games.  

It is clear from this that the likes of Long, Hunt and Walters are much better at finding the net then Murphy, Doyle and Cox. As the saying goes, goals win you games but whose goals win the most? If you are a Nottingham Forest fan you will be unhappy to know that when Simon Cox scores the outcome of the match is usually a draw. Sixty percent of games Cox has scored in this season have ended in a draw for Nottingham Forest with only one resulting in a win. However if you are a Derby County fan and Conor Sammon finds the net be prepared to celebrate as anytime Sammon scores Derby go on to win their games. A Daryl Murphy goal results in an Ipswich win just over sixty six percent of the time while a Jon Walters goal sees Stoke win fifty seven percent of their games. Shane Long’s goals produce a win for his team fifty five percent of the time while Andy Keoghs will get you a win sixty six percent of the time. When Noel Hunt scores Reading win forty percent of their games. Kevin Doyle’s goals have resulted in a win sixty percent of the time.

When it comes to goals winning games Conor Sammon leaps ahead of everyone else, while the likes of Daryl Murphy Andy Keogh and Kevin Doyle finding the net usually means your team has a good chance of winning the game. Much like his goals to game ratio, Simon Cox’s returns are the poorest with his goals only leading to a victory twenty percent of the time.

Perhaps it is unfair to judge a forward on how his goals affect a game. Even if he scores it is up to the rest of the team also to ensure their victory. A goal to game ratio is a much fairer way of determining who our main forwards should be. If we go by this criteria then the obvious beneficiaries would be the likes of Shane Long, Jonathan Walters, Andy Keogh and Noel Hunt. The Waterford born Hunt should feel particularly aggrieved that he hasn’t added to his three previous international appearances, the last coming in October 2009 against Montenegro. So far this season out of the eight strikers examined Hunts goal to game ratio is only bettered by Shane Long. When you look at the returns for both Simon Cox and Kevin Doyle it is very hard to justify why they should be included in the squad at all. Out of the forwards studied these two men proved the worst when it comes to finding the back of the net. Yet they are continually included in international squads. Why is this? Maybe they bring other assets to the squad besides goal scoring? Perhaps it would be best for Giovanni Trapattoni to look to the likes of Keogh, Hunt, Sammon or even Murphy to provide Ireland’s goal scoring threat along with our current crop, Long, Walters and Keane rather than Doyle or Cox.

Irish Strikers and their goals

33 games 7 goals Kevin Doyle

25 games 6 goals Daryl Murphy

23 games 6 goals Andy Keogh

29 games 7 goals Connor Sammon

31 games 5 goals Simon Cox

32 games 9 goals Jon Walters

21 games 6 goals Noel Hunt



29 games 10 goals Shane Long


 

 

Source: http://www.soccerbase.com/players/home.sd