A place for Andy Reid.

JimiTime

Seeing how this seems to be the question which is in most peoples heads about the Trappatoni regime (well mine anyway), I decided to give it its own thread.

So, should Andy Reid be in Irish side, and if so, how should he be deployed?

Personally, I think he should be. There are a few ways I would fit him in.

1)

---

Whelen

---

S.Reid
McGeady

---

A Reid

---

Keane

---

Doyle

McGeady having a bit of a free role, ala Ronaldo at Man Utd. A.Reid playing in the gap between midfield and forward line ala Totti.

2)

---

A.Reid

---

S.Reid
McGeady

---

Hunt

---

Keane

---

Doyle

Probably would be the most balanced side. S.Reid being the guy who sits back more allowing A.Reid to link up with keane up front more.

3)

---

Whealen

---

S.Reid
McGeady

---

Hunt

---

A.Reid

---

Keane

Losing the ariel threat of Doyle, so maybe nullifying Mcgeadys talents to swing balls into the box? However, Reid and Keane are clever, and quick thinking. They may unlock defences efficiently like this. Maybe Mcgeady cutting inside more and getting involved in quick one two type movements with Reid and keane.

Anyone given it any extensive thought? Or does anyone think leaving him out is the right thing to do?

Xavi6

He should be used in home games and in the centre, never on the left hand side.

LuckyLloyd

Agree with Xavi. Leave him on the bench away from home. End of.

JimiTime

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Agree with Xavi. Leave him on the bench away from home. End of.

what would be your reason for leaving him on the bench?

JimiTime

Xavi6 wrote: »

He should be used in home games and in the centre, never on the left hand side.

Why not in away games too? None of the deployments I gave above would have him on the wing. i agree, he's got to be deployed centrally.

Xavi6

JimiTime wrote: »

what would be your reason for leaving him on the bench?

International football should never be about 'fitting players in'. See England for example.

Trap has a system to play away from home and Reid is not the type of player to play it so on the bench he stays.

herbieflowers

I think the hype surrounding Reid is a bit excessive. The RTE brigade harp on about it plus a few football correspondents and suddenly he's our best player.

LuckyLloyd

JimiTime wrote: »

what would be your reason for leaving him on the bench?

He is not as effective as Reid and Whelan when we don't have the ball - and we will spend more time without it away from Croke Park. If we are setting out to soak up pressure and break quickly and directly he isn't a good fit for that gameplan.

At home the onus will be on us to use the ball and break teams down - and therefore he will have value for us in the center of the park.

noodler

Again absolute **** that he is a defensive liability away frome home. Maybe against Italy but that it another story).

If we have a player who can consistently pass the ball accurately over 20 yards AND manage to turn the entire opposition's back four with one through ball then I would play him.

You don't just balance who will make the most tackles or stay back (Whelan or A.Reid), you should also compare who will use the ball better and give it away more.

Anyway, Id probly accomodate him on the left if Hunt didn't make it, and just give him licence to roam. (Or McGeady on the left and A.Reid on the right(

ronbyrne2005

Too small to play in centre midfield away from home when we are playing 2 up front.

ronbyrne2005

noodler wrote: »

Again absolute **** that he is a defensive liability away frome home. Maybe against Italy but that it another story).

If we have a player who can consistently pass the ball accurately over 20 yards AND manage to turn the entire opposition's back four with one through ball then I would play him.

You don't just balance who will make the most tackles or stay back (Whelan or A.Reid), you should also compare who will use the ball better and give it away more.

Anyway, Id probly accomodate him on the left if Hunt didn't make it, and just give him licence to roam. (Or McGeady on the left and A.Reid on the right(

This is why Trap is one of best ever managers and you are spouting off on messageboards.

JimiTime

TBH, I wouldn't be 'fitting him in'. I thought the team in Georgia really lacked a cutting edge. Reid is not an amazing player, and I don't think there's been any 'hype' about him. I think some are just a bit baffled as to why arguably our most creative player has not got a look in. I wouldn't criticise Trapatoni over it, like Xavi said, he knows what he wants. He plays his system etc. I'd much prefer that mentality than one that caved in to popular opinion. I just think that even with Whelan and S.Reid on the pitch against Georgia, he put Miller on. We really could have done with someone who could hold and use the ball, but instead we got another runner, who can give away silly free kicks. Brady, when he was a pundit seemed to fancy Reid, but talked about his weight a few times. I just wonder if its more than the system thats keeping him out of the side.

JimiTime

Lads, lets keep it peaceful. We can disagree without shouting 'your talking sh!t' etc.

noodler

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

This is why Trap is one of best ever managers and you are spouting off on messageboards.

Wow, its nice to see sensible and well thought out opinions being discussed here. Seriously though can we just say the above EVERYTIME someone doesn't agree with something the manager does?

Were you sayin the same cute little line when Staunton was playing wrong-sided Fullbacks?

No one doubts Trap's ability as a coach. It is just once decision I find baffling. If we had someone of the quality of Mascherano or Gattuso as a DMF then it it wouldn't seem like such a contentious decision. I think most people are just questioning the quality (or rather ability) of the replacement.

LuckyLloyd

noodler wrote: »

Again absolute **** that he is a defensive liability away frome home. Maybe against Italy but that it another story).

If we have a player who can consistently pass the ball accurately over 20 yards AND manage to turn the entire opposition's back four with one through ball then I would play him.

You don't just balance who will make the most tackles or stay back (Whelan or A.Reid), you should also compare who will use the ball better and give it away more.

Anyway, Id probly accomodate him on the left if Hunt didn't make it, and just give him licence to roam. (Or McGeady on the left and A.Reid on the right(

Lets try some yes and no questions:

- Would you agree that he is not as effective defensively as Whelan and Reid?
- Would you agree that if the gameplan is to play on the break as quickly as possible that having Hunt and McGeady on the wings is better than Reid who is not particularly quick?
- Finally, would you agree that the overall system devised by an expert coach should take precedence over and above individual player types and strengths? And that if a player isn't a good fit for a certain system he should be replaced by one who is?

Fall_Guy

I think Reid should be in ahead of Whelan to be honest. Home or away doesn't come into it for me, but rather the quality of the opposition. If we're playing a much better footballing side where we don't expect to have much of the ball and our main aim is to stifle the opposition then I would make a case for whelan with stephen reid.

But against teams where we should be able to at least match them footballing-wise I think Andy Reid should be in the middle ahead of Whelan. Reid is not as good as whelan when the opposition have the ball (he's still not bad off the ball) but that weakness is offset by the fact that Ireland would not give the ball away as much if he was in the team. Keeping possession is the best way to nullify the threat of the opposition at the end of the day.

noodler

I would say yes to the first and third question.

When we are breaking, I think Andy Reid's ability to play someone in down the wing or through the centre may be more effective.

Theres another aspect to consider here, when we play Andy Reid we get alot more out of Robbie Keane.

JimiTime

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He is not as effective as Reid and Whelan when we don't have the ball - and we will spend more time without it away from Croke Park. If we are setting out to soak up pressure and break quickly and directly he isn't a good fit for that gameplan.

At home the onus will be on us to use the ball and break teams down - and therefore he will have value for us in the center of the park.

I don't think Reid is a defensive liability as much as people think tbh. I think he's a grafter without the ball. The Georgia game was the 1st time I saw good qualities in Whelen apart from just tackling, but I can't help wondering why he never even gave A.Reid a run when he took Doyle off. BTW, I'm not getting on Traps case, i trust him as a world class manager. We don't have alot going forward though. Keane, arguably our top player looks isolated. I think A.reid will get the tackles in, and also be a great creative influence.

Xavi6

noodler wrote: »

Wow, its nice to see sensible and well thought out opinions being discussed here. Seriously though can we just say the above EVERYTIME someone doesn't agree with something the manager does?

Were you sayin the same cute little line when Staunton was playing wrong-sided Fullbacks?

No one doubts Trap's ability as a coach. It is just once decision I find baffling. If we had someone of the quality of Mascherano or Gattuso as a DMF then it it wouldn't seem like such a contentious decision. I think most people are just questioning the quality (or rather ability) of the replacement.

Well that was as much a good idea as playing Reid on the left is to be fair. He's not a winger and it would unbalance the side, much the same a wrong footed full backs would.

Fall_Guy wrote: »

I think Reid should be in ahead of Whelan to be honest. Home or away doesn't come into it for me, but rather the quality of the opposition. If we're playing a much better footballing side where we don't expect to have much of the ball and our main aim is to stifle the opposition then I would make a case for whelan with stephen reid.

Can't agree.

It's already been stated on a number of threads how some teams 'don't travel well' i.e. Cyprus. Therefore they play much better at home than away so of course it comes into it.

JimiTime

noodler wrote: »

Theres another aspect to consider here, when we play Andy Reid we get alot more out of Robbie Keane.

Thats one of the biggies for me. Also, alot is being said of Reids lack of defensive qualities, but I think thats not the case with him. I've really seen him mix it playing for Sunderland. I really wonder if it is a system thing with him. Do they think he's not fit or something, maybe?

As I said, the miller substitution ahead of A.Reid was bizarre don't you think?

JimiTime

Xavi6 wrote: »

Well that was as much a good idea as playing Reid on the left is to be fair. He's not a winger and it would unbalance the side, much the same a wrong footed full backs would.

I don't think anyone is talking about Reid being deployed on the wing though?

herbieflowers

I don't think it's a fitness thing, didn't he play the whole League Cup game for Sunderland a while back (that went to e-t)? And he has looked slimmer.

LuckyLloyd

JimiTime wrote: »

Brady, when he was a pundit seemed to fancy Reid, but talked about his weight a few times. I just wonder if its more than the system thats keeping him out of the side.

I like your sig by the way - great quote.

I honestly think that after Keane, Dunne and Keane there are no automatic selections on the Irish squad. Reid is a decent creative player who passes the ball well. Additionally, despite the constant speculation about his body shape and supposed weight problems - Roy Keane is sufficiently satisfied with his physical preparedness to have him play a full 90 mins in the premiership.

But the reality is that Reid is a relatively poor athlete at the highest levels. He lacks speed and agility which means that he can be played through or bypassed by opposition players and can struggle to adjust to sudden runs or changes of direction. Added to this, he is not technically great in the tackle and is at a disadvantage in the air due to his lack of height. Even if he does give great effort off the ball - he is limited in his effectiveness because of his athletic tools

As such, playing Reid weakens us to some extent defensively. And given the system deployed against Georgia, he would have a limited opportunity to impose his strengths on the game. Therefore the question would be whether we should aim to change the gameplan or the system so that it fits his skillsets better. And honestly, I don't believe that he is that great of a player to warrant such a decision.

noodler

Playing someone on the left doesn't mean they are a winger either.

Whats been Ireland's biggest problem in recent years away from home? I'd say it is trying to hold onto a result and inviting pressure. I think Andy Reid can help overcome this to a certain degree. Whelan doesn't deserve to be dropped after Saturday thats why there is a case to accomodate Andy.

Hell, I'll admit it was the best defensive display in terms of tracking back I have seen from McGeady but you have to wonder if having two wingers is worth it when, offensively, one goes missing for huge periods of a match and the other can be slightly headless at times.

Fall_Guy

Xavi6 wrote: »

Can't agree.

It's already been stated on a number of threads how some teams 'don't travel well' i.e. Cyprus. Therefore they play much better at home than away so of course it comes into it.

I think that tends to be a confidence/belief issue. Setting your team up with more ball-winners than ball-players against a team like cyprus just because they are at home plays into their hands and gives them more of an opportunity to play. They won't play so well if they're chasing after us trying to get possession as opposed to us giving them the ball repeatedly and letting them grow into the game.

Xavi6

JimiTime wrote: »

I don't think anyone is talking about Reid being deployed on the wing though?

Yep they did -

noodler wrote: »

Anyway, Id probly accomodate him on the left if Hunt didn't make it, and just give him licence to roam. (Or McGeady on the left and A.Reid on the right(

And this guy also complained about wrong footed full backs then says it's ok to play the left footed Reid on the right

JimiTime

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I like your sig by the way - great quote.

I honestly think that after Keane, Dunne and Keane there are no automatic selections on the Irish squad. Reid is a decent creative player who passes the ball well. Additionally, despite the constant speculation about his body shape and supposed weight problems - Roy Keane is sufficiently satisfied with his physical preparedness to have him play a full 90 mins in the premiership.

But the reality is that Reid is a relatively poor athlete at the highest levels. He lacks speed and agility which means that he can be played through or bypassed by opposition players and can struggle to adjust to sudden runs or changes of direction. Added to this, he is not technically great in the tackle and is at a disadvantage in the air due to his lack of height. Even if he does give great effort off the ball - he is limited in his effectiveness because of his athletic tools

As such, playing Reid weakens us to some extent defensively. And given the system deployed against Georgia, he would have a limited opportunity to impose his strengths on the game. Therefore the question would be whether we should aim to change the gameplan or the system so that it fits his skillsets better. And honestly, I don't believe that he is that great of a player to warrant such a decision.

A fair asessment. Still puzzled by the miller substitution though i suppose we'll have to wait and see if there is a different system for home games.

Does it not make you curious though, not even putting him on when we were struggling to keep posession?

noodler

Fall_Guy wrote: »

I think that tends to be a confidence/belief issue. Setting your team up with more ball-winners than ball-players against a team like cyprus just because they are at home plays into their hands and gives them more of an opportunity to play. They won't play so well if they're chasing after us trying to get possession as opposed to us giving them the ball repeatedly and letting them grow into the game.

This.

Anyway. I hope that, if there is 20 minutes to go in Montenagro and we are scoreless and looking unlikely to break them down, Trap will go for it and bring Andy Reid on.

JimiTime

Xavi6 wrote: »

Yep they did -



And this guy also complained about wrong footed full backs then says it's ok to play the left footed Reid on the right

Sorry, my bad. I wouldn't deploy him on the wing, but if its a roaming role, I'd say he'd do a job.

noodler

Xavi6 wrote: »

Yep they did -



And this guy also complained about wrong footed full backs then says it's ok to play the left footed Reid on the right

Sad. This type of thing is common enough in football, were you blind to how often McGeady and Hunt switched wings on Saturday? Or would remembering that wreck your argument?

Anyway, left OF MIDFIELD is just a starting position and he would invariably come inside alot.

LuckyLloyd

JimiTime wrote: »

Does it not make you curious though, not even putting him on when we were struggling to keep posession?

Yeah sure, it wasn't the substitution I would have made but Trap must have been perceiving the way the game was flowing at that point differently to me.

Xavi6

noodler wrote: »

Sad. This type of thing is common enough in football, were you blind to how often McGeady and Hunt switched wings on Saturday? Or would remembering that wreck your argument?

No argument, I'm merely trying to understand the hypocricy.

Anyway, left OF MIDFIELD is just a starting position and he would invariably come inside alot.

I'd rather the team was balanced with two proper full back and two proper winners. None of this 'coming inside' crap crowding the midfield. If you want three central midfielders then play 3-5-2.

JimiTime

Fall_Guy wrote: »

I think that tends to be a confidence/belief issue. Setting your team up with more ball-winners than ball-players against a team like cyprus just because they are at home plays into their hands and gives them more of an opportunity to play. They won't play so well if they're chasing after us trying to get possession as opposed to us giving them the ball repeatedly and letting them grow into the game.

Thats my Philosophy too. The Home/Away system scenario should really not apply when taking on teams which you clearly have the beating of. Not to be confused with complacency though.

LuckyLloyd

noodler wrote: »

Anyway, left OF MIDFIELD is just a starting position and he would invariably come inside alot.

This can be a problem though and be counter - productive to the team's shape and flow. Watching Liverpool play with Kuyt and Yossi on the flanks can be a good example.

eagle eye

International soccer fans just make laugh sometimes. We have the most experienced manager we have ever had. We have only played one competitive game and we won it. One player who has shown form in the PL in central midfield is not in the team and there is all this furore about it. FFS will you guys give Trap a chance and if we keep winning then stfu and enjoy it.

I can imagine it now with you guys, we win all our games up to the time we play Italy away and if we lose that game and Andy Reid is not playing then it will be all about how he should have been playing.

All I can say is that you make lmfao.

LuckyLloyd

JimiTime wrote: »

Thats my Philosophy too. The Home/Away system scenario should really not apply when taking on teams which you clearly have the beating of. Not to be confused with complacency though.

This theory is put forth on this message board often when discussing the merits of a variety of teams and managers. The reality is that there are top class coaches with great CVs who tend to favor the opposite school of thought - i.e. get men behind the ball, soak up pressure and play on the break in an intimidating environment. Stop the opposition from playing and nick something at the other end.

Are they all wrong? Should they all be fired?

noodler

Xavi6 wrote: »

No argument, I'm merely trying to understand the hypocricy.



I'd rather the team was balanced with two proper full back and two proper winners. None of this 'coming inside' crap crowding the midfield. If you want three central midfielders then play 3-5-2.

Okay. You can not see the difference with playing fullbacks on the WRONG side to playing Rightsiders on the left etc?

Are you kidding me? I dunno if you have ever played fullback but its obviously helps with your tackling and positioning if you are on the correct side. Obviously more important for a defender.

Wingers (or SMF) switching sides is a tactical ploy aimed at increasing a team's attacking options.

Personally I wouldn't mid a 4-5-1 (or 4-5-3) with Reids and Whelan in the centre and Keane and McGeady around Doyle. I doubt I would have the balls to implement it as boss but it might solve the Keane not getting involved enough issue.

herbieflowers

4-5-3?!

JimiTime

eagle eye wrote: »

International soccer fans just make laugh sometimes. We have the most experienced manager we have ever had. We have only played one competitive game and we won it. One player who has shown form in the PL in central midfield is not in the team and there is all this furore about it. FFS will you guys give Trap a chance and if we keep winning then stfu and enjoy it.

I can imagine it now with you guys, we win all our games up to the time we play Italy away and if we lose that game and Andy Reid is not playing then it will be all about how he should have been playing.

All I can say is that you make lmfao.

Nobody has crticised Tapatoni, in fact there is praise for him. There's only a question mark about why A.Reid is being omited, and we're discussing it as this is a discussion board. Personally I like discussing football. We all have our opinions, and its good to have others who appreciate the game share them with one another.

Fall_Guy

eagle eye wrote: »

International soccer fans just make laugh sometimes. We have the most experienced manager we have ever had. We have only played one competitive game and we won it. One player who has shown form in the PL in central midfield is not in the team and there is all this furore about it. FFS will you guys give Trap a chance and if we keep winning then stfu and enjoy it.

I can imagine it now with you guys, we win all our games up to the time we play Italy away and if we lose that game and Andy Reid is not playing then it will be all about how he should have been playing.

All I can say is that you make lmfao.

I don't think anyone's attacking trappotoni or anything, why shouldn't we discuss our opinions on how Ireland should play? Sure that's the whole point of a discussion forum!

noodler

herbieflowers wrote: »

4-5-3?!

I've always been a fan of the system alright...

herbieflowers

there'd be no need for Andy Reid!

Xavi6

noodler wrote: »

Okay. You can not see the difference with playing fullbacks on the WRONG side to playing Rightsiders on the left etc?

Are you kidding me? I dunno if you have ever played fullback but its obviously helps with your tackling and positioning if you are on the correct side. Obviously more important for a defender.

Isn't the primary function of a winger to get down the wing and get balls into the box? That's how I would see it.

So how is Andy Reid supposed to do that if all his right foot is good for is standing on? Yes he can cut inside but therein lies the problem with a crowded midfield.

Why do you think England have such problems on the left side? If it could be solved by simply putting a right footer out there then Beckham would have been made do it years ago.

We're just lucky to have McGeady who can play both sides depending on who else is available.

Fall_Guy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

This theory is put forth on this message board often when discussing the merits of a variety of teams and managers. The reality is that there are top class coaches with great CVs who tend to favor the opposite school of thought - i.e. get men behind the ball, soak up pressure and play on the break in an intimidating environment. Stop the opposition from playing and nick something at the other end.

Are they all wrong? Should they all be fired?

But what makes an environment "intimidating"? Cyprus have been mentionjed in this thread as a team that play better at home. I've been at the last two Ireland games in Cyprus. There was not much home support at either, and plenty of Irish support. A cauldron of partizan home support it was not. Nor will it be next time round.

JimiTime

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

This theory is put forth on this message board often when discussing the merits of a variety of teams and managers. The reality is that there are top class coaches with great CVs who tend to favor the opposite school of thought - i.e. get men behind the ball, soak up pressure and play on the break in an intimidating environment. Stop the opposition from playing and nick something at the other end.

Are they all wrong? Should they all be fired?

yes they should:)

Seriously though, its a part of the game I'm always confused about. apart from the arguement above, i.e. Surely they know better, i can think of no reason why a team like Spain wouldn't play to their fullest attacking prowess against a team like Andorra, to use an extreme example.

I remember we were playing against Macedonia in the last game of the Euro 200- (I think) qualifiers. Up 1 nil, all over them, and a striker is withdrawn for Lee Carsely. We invite them on, they win a corner, equalise and rather than qualify, we are in the play offs.

noodler

Come on,not as a winger for the last time. I would happily place him there and let him drift inside.
Its a question of balance versus quality.

Bar the goal, I can't remember another cross McGeady got into the box. I could be wrong tho. I avoid criticism of the guy though cos he really made an effort getting back.

whatawaster

I think Andy Reid should be in there with Stephen Reid. And if Stephen Ireland comes back (i know that's for another thread) i'd play him on the right, he's good there for City, with McGeady on the left. That would be a quality Midfield.
It would be very interesting to see what would happen if Whelan were injured. Would Trappatoni bring in Reid, or does he just not fancy him?

ronbyrne2005

Trap's system works. The best individual players don't always fit the system. The system changes depending on opponents and other shtuff. Kilbane is a good example of an average player being more effective in a good system.

JimiTime

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

Trap's system works.

So far so good anyway. I think time will tell us if it really does work though.

tred

If we get Duff back and fit, and some good performances from Mcgeady, id be happy with the 2 in midfield as is. I honestly dont get the Hype of Andy Reid. He played unreal last year in the champoinship for charlton, brother is a fan. but playing out of your skin in a league below the prem, and never mind international level doesnt count for me. I think trap is seeing stuff in training, with whelan and reid thats ahead of what he gets with andy reid.
Hed be a great option to change things around but if hes sulking, i wouldnt even have him on the bench, id have him at home. Need a good unit to get out of this group.

Signed Denis o Brien

eagle eye

I've always been a fan of Damien Duff but getting him back and fit is asking for a lot, he has been injury prone for so long now and even when he plays he looks like he has lost a lot of pace which was a real important part of his game and allowed him to beat players.

Realistically the only player that is could make a huge difference to us is Stephen Ireland. He can play on the right and would be exactly what we need to leave a selection poser for the manager on the other side. I am not saying that he should be back in, I don't know how well he gets on with the other players in the squad and maybe his inclusion would be a bad thing overall if he does not get on with the others, but he is a class act.

Andy Reid is a good footballer and I am sure he will get chances to prove himself in the team, but he is not a world beater by any means so whats going on here is just ridiculous. I don't get why so many people are all about his inclusion. He is just not cut out for the left wing, he doesn't have the pace to cover back and he will be inclined to come inside too often.

He is a central/att. central midfielder now, I don' think he will get his place there unless Whelan plays a poor game or there is an injury.