Republic of Ireland Team Talk/News/Rumours

Lennonist

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Ah the old 'you need to be born in Ireland to be Irish' nonsense rears its head again. Been a while.

I don't think there is any sensible argument against picking players who qualify for Ireland through their parents or grandparents and I don't think anyone is making that argument. Ireland is a relatively small country in international soccer and there has always been a lot of emigration, so we should seek out and pick players who are willing to declare for Ireland.

I think there is an argument though that sometimes with fringe players it can actually be a slight advantage to be not born in Ireland over native born players. A non native born player will often get capped so that if he's good enough in the future he will be available to Ireland, thereby getting the opportunity of that 1st cap. Jack Charlton used to cap lots of players just for this reason, and if they weren't good enough for a regular slot he didn't play them after that, or only played them a few times in friendly games. Owen Coyle, Bernie Slaven, players like that got a few caps and opportunities whereas Irish born players that were around at the same time like Tommy Gaynor or Paul Byrne who weren't good enough to be regular internationalists for Ireland either, didn't get capped, and didn't get the opportunity of that 1st cap. Tommy Gaynor should've got a couple of caps I reckon, he was a regular for Nottingham Forest in the English top flight for a couple of seasons at the time.

Rhys Essien

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Ah the old 'you need to be born in Ireland to be Irish' nonsense rears its head again. Been a while.

That is not what I meant at all,so dont try and twist it around.

The likes of Kilbane who declared for the youths,I have no problem with.I have a problem with average English players who decide in their mid twenties that thay 'can' play for Ireland and are then fast tracked into the team no matter how average they are,while doing the average Irish lads out of a place.

Just dawned on me now,that Walters was with us from U21's so will forgive him.

keeponhurling

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Can anyone enlighten me as to why Rob Elliot was called up?
QUOTE]

Maybe to commit him to Ireland in case he does go on to be good, although he's 27 now so not sure.

Maybe the Irish coaching staff just want to have a closer look at him?
No harm in calling him up as sub goalie for some games that don't really matter.

Frankie Lee

Rhys Essien wrote: »

That is not what I meant at all,so dont try and twist it around.

The likes of Kilbane who declared for the youths,I have no problem with.I have a problem with average English players who decide in their mid twenties that thay 'can' play for Ireland and are then fast tracked into the team no matter how average they are,while doing the average Irish lads out of a place.

Just dawned on me now,that Walters was with us from U21's so will forgive him.

Leon Best has played for Ireland all the way up too.

TaosHum

TBF to Rob Elliot, he has played quite abit for Newcastle over the past 6 months when Krul was out injured for the end of last season. Done quite well also.

I'd hazard to guess, he has played more than any of the other back up Championship keepers did in the past 6 months.

yabadabado

Frankie Lee wrote: »

Leon Best has played for Ireland all the way up too.

afaik Leon Best was born in Ireland.

keeponhurling

From wiki (thread with caution), Best was born in Nottingham

"Best qualifies to play for the Republic of Ireland through his mother, who is from Bluebell, Dublin. He also lived in Dublin from the age of seven for a number of years as a child, playing for Lourdes Celtic before returning to Nottingham."

In any case, he's not really good enough for the Irish squad.

counterlock

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Just dawned on me now,that Walters was with us from U21's so will forgive him.

That's good of you

Frankie Lee

keeponhurling wrote: »

From wiki (thread with caution), Best was born in Nottingham

"Best qualifies to play for the Republic of Ireland through his mother, who is from Bluebell, Dublin. He also lived in Dublin from the age of seven for a number of years as a child, playing for Lourdes Celtic before returning to Nottingham."

In any case, he's not really good enough for the Irish squad.

He has had a bad time of it lately with injuries but during his time at Newcastle he was underutilised by Trappatoni. It would have made more sense hoofing long balls at him than it did to hoof them at Kevin Doyle.
Hopefully he gets his career back on track at some stage.

Aenaes

Frankie Lee wrote: »

He has had a bad time of it lately with injuries but during his time at Newcastle he was underutilised by Trappatoni. It would have made more sense hoofing long balls at him than it did to hoof them at Kevin Doyle.
Hopefully he gets his career back on track at some stage.

That's totally unfair. Doyle worked like a horse for Ireland, holding the ball up and feeding it to Keane. He won his fair share of headers, caused defences problems and helped the team win (Kazakhstan away).

Saying Best would have been a better option undermines Doyle's efforts and seems like another complaint against Trap.

Pro. F

simongurnick wrote: »

You have suggested a few times that he should play instead of Keane.Considering you want him to replace our record goalscorer and still the only guy that scores regularly for us today, then yes, he would need to be the messiah.

He hasn't done much when given the opportunity.

Didn't Hoolahan replace Brady against Greece? Obviously they are in different positions but it's not the same difference as him and Westwood, as you hilariously suggested.

This is the same Robbie Keane that you think maybe should be used as an impact sub? Yeah, dropping Keane does not mean his replacement has to be the Messiah. I've also said that I think Keane and Hoolahan could possibly play together with the right set up. And I've said that I can see the argument for starting Keane in a 442 with Hoolahan on the bench. None of that talk is treating him like the Messiah or pinning all my hopes on him. You are talking shít.

Hoolahan has done plenty when played to show he is worth continuing to get time on the pitch. But you are blind to it.

Against Greece Hoolahan and Doyle came on when Brady and Long went off. Cox went to the wing, Hoolahan went to ACM/no10 and Doyle went up front. There is no issue there. Brady was playing on the wing when he was on, Hoolahan was playing centrally when he was on.

simongurnick wrote: »

This shows how poor your football knowledge is. Every player relies on stamina and pace. They are two of the fundamentals of the game.

Lol. Talk about pedantic. Here I'll fix the sentence for you since you can't follow: "He's the type of player whose play prioritises skill over speed and strength, that will likely help him keep his standard up going into his early/mid thirties."

simongurnick wrote: »

Well, if you understood tenses, you should notice my sentence saying what a ****e state we are in....present tense. My comment refers to the fact that those players have been average throughout the entire period and now we find ourselves falling back on them again.
Everyone thought the sky was falling when Reid was excluded, yet since then he has just been knocking around the Championship. Similar for Gibson, couldn't make it at United, patchy at Everton and now being left out of squads. Hoolahan was a journeyman for years, had a couple of decent seasons and is now drifting back to his regular standard.

I understand tenses perfectly well. I also understand that when you talk about Trap's selection policy you are talking about things that happened in the past, not the future. It's very simple.

simongurnick

Pro. F wrote: »

This is the same Robbie Keane that you think maybe should be used as an impact sub? Yeah, dropping Keane does not mean his replacement has to be the Messiah. I've also said that I think Keane and Hoolahan could possibly play together with the right set up. And I've said that I can see the argument for starting Keane in a 442 with Hoolahan on the bench. None of that talk is treating him like the Messiah or pinning all my hopes on him. You are talking shít.

I like the way you just pick out the piece that suits you. I also said this in the exact same paragraph: Although Long wasn't great tonight either so I'd be wary of dropping him at this point.

Hoolahan has done plenty when played to show he is worth continuing to get time on the pitch. But you are blind to it.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point, although you probably can't bring yourself to even do that. You have a posting style that presumes your opinions are always right and anyone with a different or opposing opinion is basically an idiot. For someone who posts as much as you do on this forum you should have some understanding that discourse involves two sides and one of the beauties of football is the differing opinions one can get from the same games and players etc.

Against Greece Hoolahan and Doyle came on when Brady and Long went off. Cox went to the wing, Hoolahan went to ACM/no10 and Doyle went up front. There is no issue there. Brady was playing on the wing when he was on, Hoolahan was playing centrally when he was on.

I'm not saying there is an issue. I am pointing out they are not as completely different as you suggest.


Lol. Talk about pedantic. Here I'll fix the sentence for you since you can't follow: "He's the type of player whose play prioritises skill over speed and strength, that will likely help him keep his standard up going into his early/mid thirties."

It's not pedantic and despite the clarification I would still stand by the statement that every player requires pace and stamina regardless of their primary strength. Most players lose the pace as they get older and it's that loss of half a yard that prevents them from picking out a pass like they would have in their prime.


I understand tenses perfectly well. I also understand that when you talk about Trap's selection policy you are talking about things that happened in the past, not the future. It's very simple.

What's simple is that I spoke about more than one thing in the post. If you want to isolate certain parts to make some sort of redundant point, then off you go.

Lamper.sffc

Rhys Essien wrote: »

For nostalgia sake,I would have liked if Ian Harte was called up.He is getting his game for Bournemouth who are currently 8th in the Championship.

Eh they may be 8th but they have the second worst goals against in the league, 24 goals against already:o

Pro. F

simongurnick wrote: »

I like the way you just pick out the piece that suits you. I also said this in the exact same paragraph: Although Long wasn't great tonight either so I'd be wary of dropping him at this point.

It doesn't matter that you had reservations about it, you were still clearly open to the idea of dropping Keane. Yet when somebody else talks about dropping Keane you try to claim it would need to be a messiah coming in to replace him. You're contradicting yourself because you've argued yourself into a corner.

simongurnick wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point, although you probably can't bring yourself to even do that. You have a posting style that presumes your opinions are always right and anyone with a different or opposing opinion is basically an idiot. For someone who posts as much as you do on this forum you should have some understanding that discourse involves two sides and one of the beauties of football is the differing opinions one can get from the same games and players etc.

Wah wah wah.

simongurnick wrote: »

1I'm not saying there is an issue. I am pointing out they are not as completely different as you suggest.

2It's not pedantic and despite the clarification I would still stand by the statement that every player requires pace and stamina regardless of their primary strength. Most players lose the pace as they get older and it's that loss of half a yard that prevents them from picking out a pass like they would have in their prime.

3What's simple is that I spoke about more than one thing in the post. If you want to isolate certain parts to make some sort of redundant point, then off you go.

1So you are not saying there is an issue now? Good, I agree. Hoolahan getting game time won't impinge on Brady's development.

2 I never said there were players who don't require pace and stamina. Obviously there are some types of players who cope with deteriorating physical abilities better than others.

3You've been flapping around looking for any excuse to not include Hoolahan, the latest one is particularly dumb. Point made.

simongurnick

Pro. F wrote: »

It doesn't matter that you had reservations about it, you were still clearly open to the idea of dropping Keane. Yet when somebody else talks about dropping Keane you try to claim it would need to be a messiah coming in to replace him. You're contradicting yourself because you've argued yourself into a corner.

Why don't you go and dig up all my other posts about Keane?
You continually post about Hoolahan not being included.


Wah wah wah.

Seriously?



1So you are not saying there is an issue now? Good, I agree. Hoolahan getting game time won't impinge on Brady's development.

That's not what I said. I said we should focus more on players like Brady and that Hoolahan is no great shakes.

2 I never said there were players who don't require pace and stamina. Obviously there are some types of players who cope with deteriorating physical abilities better than others.

You said pace and stamina won't matter to Hoolahan. Not so.Once he loses his pace, he's done.

3You've been flapping around looking for any excuse to not include Hoolahan, the latest one is particularly dumb. Point made.

I don't need to look for excuses. He's not that great. We have the guts of a year before our next competitive game so I believe we should be looking to the future and maximising the opportunity to give our younger players some valuable experience in competitive international games.

Pro. F

simongurnick wrote: »

Why don't you go and dig up all my other posts about Keane? You continually post about Hoolahan not being included.

I don't need to dig up your other posts about Keane. You have shown that you are open to the idea of dropping him. The point is proven.

I continuously post about Hoolahan being excluded because foolish people continuously try to argue that it is right to exclude him.

Seriously?

Yes, for seriously. Your whining is tiresome.

That's not what I said. I said we should focus more on players like Brady and that Hoolahan is no great shakes.

I know you said that. It is a completely stupid reason for excluding Hoolahan, who doesn't even play in the same position.

You said pace and stamina won't matter to Hoolahan. Not so.Once he loses his pace, he's done.

I did not say that.

I don't need to look for excuses. He's not that great. We have the guts of a year before our next competitive game so I believe we should be looking to the future and maximising the opportunity to give our younger players some valuable experience in competitive international games.

Hoolahan is still one of the best central attacking midfielders we have available. And the idea that Hoolahan playing will somehow prevent us from maximising the opportunity to give Brady experience in competitive international games is still idiotic. They don't even play in the same position.

.

simongurnick

Pro. F wrote: »

.

I don't need to dig up your other posts about Keane. You have shown that you are open to the idea of dropping him. The point is proven.

Don't think so. I mentioned in a conversation about his potential retirement that he could be used as an impact sub, but right now I would be wary of dropping him...read my posts son.


I continuously post about Hoolahan being excluded because foolish people continuously try to argue that it is right to exclude him.

[B]Foolish people? Like his current manager? Hoolahan will make F - all difference to the team.

Yes, for seriously. Your whining is tiresome.

Pot.Kettle.Black.



I know you said that. It is a completely stupid reason for excluding Hoolahan, who doesn't even play in the same position.

The point stands that we should focus on our younger players.

Hoolahan is still one of the best central attacking midfielders we have available. And the idea that Hoolahan playing will somehow prevent us from maximising the opportunity to give Brady experience in competitive international games is still idiotic. They don't even play in the same position.

The guy is a journeyman...doesn't offer us much. Focus now should be on younger lads. They are both attacking midfielders, one wide, one central, so it's not beyond the realms of possibility that including one in a squad could exclude the other, especially if the gaffer has certain tactics in mind.

I eagerly await your intriguing response in the exact opposite to bring us around in a circle again. You must live alone?

Seaneh

yabadabado wrote: »

afaik Leon Best was born in Ireland.

Unless we annexed Nottingham at some point, he wasn't.

yabadabado

Seaneh wrote: »

Unless we annexed Nottingham at some point, he wasn't.

Yeah my bad. Thought he was born in Dublin and moved to England. Am I right saying he lived in Dublin for a period when he was a kid ?

Pro. F

simongurnick wrote: »

You must live alone?

Says the guy continuing an endless argument at 5 in the morning.

I've addressed all your points and we've already repeated this several times over. I'm going to leave you to it.

Rhys Essien

Fair play to Noel King.He is after calling in 5 LOI players(4-Dundalk,1-Shams) today to help out with 11 v 11 training.There was more good things done in the last few days than there was over the last few years with the other fella.

Noel for the job.

Jarrod

yabadabado wrote: »

Yeah my bad. Thought he was born in Dublin and moved to England. Am I right saying he lived in Dublin for a period when he was a kid ?

Yep, played for Lourdes Celtic, I think.

Corholio

astonaidan wrote: »

Not yet, if he gets back to the form that won him Villa player of the year Id have him in for Ireland
People have forgotten how good he was just cause he didnt fit into Lamberts plans

He was never that good for Villa though. Few glimpses here and there but winning player of the year was nothing to shout about, that was an atrocious year. He hasnt been good for a few years now, hope he gets back there but no way should he be in the squad right now.

keeponhurling

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Fair play to Noel King.He is after calling in 5 LOI players(4-Dundalk,1-Shams) today to help out with 11 v 11 training.There was more good things done in the last few days than there was over the last few years with the other fella.

Noel for the job.

Given that the standard of players we have coming over from UK clubs isn't the greatest, I'd like to see 2 or 3 LOI players (maybe aged 23 or below) being picked in every squad.

Rhys Essien

keeponhurling wrote: »

Given that the standard of players we have coming over from UK clubs isn't the greatest, I'd like to see 2 or 3 LOI players (maybe aged 23 or below) being picked in every squad.

Forde
Colman Delaney Meyler Ward
Fahy Quinn Hoolahan McClean
Long Doyle

circadian

There's about 5 or 6 players in the Villa youth setup eligible for Ireland. They won the nextgen football series this year.

Plenty of talent coming through, just need the right manage to pull it together.

I'm sure there's loads of good quality players eligible for Ireland both here and the UK.

yabadabado

circadian wrote: »

There's about 5 or 6 players in the Villa youth setup eligible for Ireland. They won the nextgen football series this year.

Plenty of talent coming through, just need the right manage to pull it together.

I'm sure there's loads of good quality players eligible for Ireland both here and the UK.

some excellent young talent at a few clubs at the moment ,hopefully some of them make the step up to senior football.

Jarrod

yabadabado wrote: »

some excellent young talent at a few clubs at the moment ,hopefully some of them make the step up to senior football.

That's it. Think back to the U-16 and U-18 Euros we won back in the '90s. Very few of those players went on to play for the senior side. It's a big step up to the highest level and a massive disadvantage we have which I believe is due to relying on English clubs developing our young players.

I'd love if we could keep young players here until they're 18th birthday, like they do in Brazil. I'm pretty sure it'd contravene EU law unfortunately. It would mean investing heavily in youth structures here but young players, 17/18 years old could go from underage football, to playing with senior sides in the LOI and then progress to EPL sides. I reckon it would prevent a lot of players getting lost somewhere between youth football and the senior team.

Banjaxed82

Anyone hazard a guess as to what the starting 11 might be?

First time in a while I've been stumped as to what the midfield/attack will be.

Andy Reid on the right is worth a flutter I'd say

Lando Griffin

Forde.
O Brien Clarke Delaney St Ledger Kelly
Coleman McCarthy Wilson Gibson McGeedy.
Doyle.
Unorthodox 5131 formation employing a sweeper but enabling a quick 41221 in attack insuring when ball given away a 5131 formation regained.

EdenHazard

Jarrod wrote: »

That's it. Think back to the U-16 and U-18 Euros we won back in the '90s. Very few of those players went on to play for the senior side. It's a big step up to the highest level and a massive disadvantage we have which I believe is due to relying on English clubs developing our young players.

I'd love if we could keep young players here until they're 18th birthday, like they do in Brazil. I'm pretty sure it'd contravene EU law unfortunately. It would mean investing heavily in youth structures here but young players, 17/18 years old could go from underage football, to playing with senior sides in the LOI and then progress to EPL sides. I reckon it would prevent a lot of players getting lost somewhere between youth football and the senior team.

I think there a lot of rules in football which technically break EU Law, I remember seeing something on it before.

SantryRed

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Forde.
O Brien Clarke Delaney St Ledger Kelly
Coleman McCarthy Wilson Gibson McGeedy.
Doyle.
Unorthodox 5131 formation employing a sweeper but enabling a quick 41221 in attack insuring when ball given away a 5131 formation regained.

You do know you're playing 12 men there?

We'd still lose though.

Mocha Joe

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Forde.
O Brien Clarke Delaney St Ledger Kelly
Coleman McCarthy Wilson Gibson McGeedy.
Doyle.
Unorthodox 5131 formation employing a sweeper but enabling a quick 41221 in attack insuring when ball given away a 5131 formation regained.

5-5-1 looks like an amazing formation. Hope we go with that.

Banjaxed82

This is what I think, and not necessarily what I want as the starting 11.

Forde

Coleman -- St. Ledger -- Clarke -- O'Brien

Reid -- McCarthy -- Hoolahan -- Wilson -- McGeady

Keane

I'd never play Keane as a lone striker, but you can't play 2 upfront away to Germany, and I can't see King dropping him, but you never know. Anyway, I just don't see how Keane fits into an away game against Germany. If we had Reid and Hoolahan in the team, I'd have more hope in Keane doing something as the lone man.

simongurnick

Pro. F wrote: »

Says the guy continuing an endless argument at 5 in the morning.

I've addressed all your points and we've already repeated this several times over. I'm going to leave you to it.

I live in North America.

Seaneh

King will probably play 4-4-2.

If he does I'd like the following team.

RB: Coleman
CB: Clark
CB: Dalaney
LB: O'Brien

RM: McGeady
CM: McCarthy
CM: Wilson
LM: Brady

CF: Keane
CF: Long



I'd much prefer a 4-5-1 though.

yabadabado

Seaneh wrote: »

King will probably play 4-4-2.

If he does I'd like the following team.

RB: Coleman
CB: Clark
CB: Dalaney
LB: O'Brien

RM: McGeady
CM: McCarthy
CM: Wilson
LM: Brady

CF: Keane
CF: Long



I'd much prefer a 4-5-1 though.

Brady isn't in the squad,withdrew.

keeponhurling

I kinda doubt he'll play 2 strikers, I think we need to focus on actually getting some possesion.

If he named the above team, I'd assume Robbie Keane would play midfield.
Or perhaps he'll give Gibson a start.

prettyboy81

I reckon the team will be setup in a 4-5-1 formation & even though I believe Long should be the lone striker, as he has the pace to run in behind the striker plus can win his fair share of headers/hold the ball up. King will start with Robbie Keane up top on his own & we are going to see plenty of arms in the air by Keane & lack of football into his feet.

Forde

Coleman Clark Delaney Wilson

McClean Gibson Whelan McCarthy Hoolohan

Keane

GBXI

prettyboy81 wrote: »

I reckon the team will be setup in a 4-5-1 formation & even though I believe Long should be the lone striker, as he has the pace to run in behind the striker plus can win his fair share of headers/hold the ball up. King will start with Robbie Keane up top on his own & we are going to see plenty of arms in the air by Keane & lack of football into his feet.

Forde

Coleman Clark Delaney Wilson

McClean Gibson Whelan McCarthy Hoolohan

Keane

Find it awful hard to see McClean start if King wants to keep the ball. Think that will be close to the team but McGeady to start ahead of McClean and maybe Green instead of Whelan. For me I'd have Andy Reid ahead of Wes all day.

Backstreet Moyes

Seaneh wrote: »

King will probably play 4-4-2.

If he does I'd like the following team.

RB: Coleman
CB: Clark
CB: Dalaney
LB: O'Brien

RM: McGeady
CM: McCarthy
CM: Wilson
LM: Brady

CF: Keane
CF: Long



I'd much prefer a 4-5-1 though.

Were going away to Germany trying to avoid a spanking and you suggest we line up with no goalkeeper:pac:

prettyboy81

GBXI wrote: »

Find it awful hard to see McClean start if King wants to keep the ball. Think that will be close to the team but McGeady to start ahead of McClean and maybe Green instead of Whelan. For me I'd have Andy Reid ahead of Wes all day.

Personally, I think it is a toss of a coin between McGeady & McClean.

However, IMO I'd pick Wes over Andy everyday of the week but I am not Noel King so we can only guess

GBXI

prettyboy81 wrote: »

Personally, I think it is a toss of a coin between McGeady & McClean.

However, IMO I'd pick Wes over Andy everyday of the week but I am not Noel King so we can only guess

Yeah I just think McGeady is miles better than McClean and plays at a higher level but we'll see what the boss does.

Generally you'd start Wes, but Reid is playing great stuff at the minute whereas Wes isn't even playing. It's also a huge bonus to have someone in your team as good at set-pieces as Reid is.

loyatemu

Jarrod wrote: »

That's it. Think back to the U-16 and U-18 Euros we won back in the '90s. Very few of those players went on to play for the senior side. It's a big step up to the highest level and a massive disadvantage we have which I believe is due to relying on English clubs developing our young players.

I'd love if we could keep young players here until they're 18th birthday, like they do in Brazil. I'm pretty sure it'd contravene EU law unfortunately. It would mean investing heavily in youth structures here but young players, 17/18 years old could go from underage football, to playing with senior sides in the LOI and then progress to EPL sides. I reckon it would prevent a lot of players getting lost somewhere between youth football and the senior team.

does the FAI have any sort of youth academy? Pay the best players to stay here, draft them out to the LOI teams to play a limited number of games a year whilst still receiving good technical coaching in the academy. (I assume there's some FIFA statute that bars national associations from holding player contracts though).

Pro. F

simongurnick wrote: »

I live in North America.

Great. Thanks for letting me know.

eire4

loyatemu wrote: »

does the FAI have any sort of youth academy? Pay the best players to stay here, draft them out to the LOI teams to play a limited number of games a year whilst still receiving good technical coaching in the academy. (I assume there's some FIFA statute that bars national associations from holding player contracts though).

No the FAI don't have any academy. To my mind what is needed is for the FAI to have a residential academy where say the best 40 odd 14-17 players are kept together and train full time while going to school at a local school that the FAI build an agreement with.

smellmepower

There's the new 'Emerging Talent Programme' that the FAI launched recently which is a sort of half arsed academy approach:

http://www.fai.ie/player-development/emerging-talent.html

On Friday I could King starting Stokes because he loves him and because he's been in decent form,I'd have Reid in ahead of Hoolahan too.

Adrift

King has hinted at a 4-2-3-1 formation. Could be interesting. I don't expect us to get anything out of the game really but I'd settle for us playing well and creating some good chances.

Since the Euros, and even as far back as the Russia games, it's been painful to watch us play against superior opposition, so even before getting to the game itself it's great to hear that King is going to try something different.

Line up could be something like

Forde

O' Brien St. Ledger Clark Coleman

Whelan Wilson

Gibson Reid McGeady

Keane

With that formation, the midfield could be juggled in all kinds of combination, anyone else got any thoughts on it?

keeponhurling

I think we do need two proper wingers as such, even just to give our full backs some protection.
German full backs are lethal at bombing forward.

So I'd say McGeady on the left, better bet than McClean.

Would have probably said Walters on the right, but I think he's injured.
How about Coleman on the right wing, with Stephen Kelly coming into one of the full back positions ?

yabadabado

Adrift wrote: »

King has hinted at a 4-2-3-1 formation. Could be interesting. I don't expect us to get anything out of the game really but I'd settle for us playing well and creating some good chances.

Since the Euros, and even as far back as the Russia games, it's been painful to watch us play against superior opposition, so even before getting to the game itself it's great to hear that King is going to try something different.

Line up could be something like

Forde

O' Brien St. Ledger Clark Coleman

Whelan Wilson

Gibson Reid McGeady

Keane

With that formation, the midfield could be juggled in all kinds of combination, anyone else got any thoughts on it?

No way will McCarthy be dropped. Wilson at LB and and Coleman RB.