Trap Watch

ronsgonawin

Father Damo wrote: »

Orando Broom wrote: »

I thought this too. It was the main thing that worried me. One of the things I had underpinning our hopes was that we'd be the best conditioned team at the finals. I thoguht at the Bosnia game we looked great. full of running and sharp. I thought maybe one last day of hell in Italy would see a wind down of effort to the Croatia game. It seems the players were knackered by Hungary.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/euro-2012/9312639/Euro-2012-Giovanni-Trapattoni-rejects-talk-of-overtraining-his-Republic-of-Ireland-players-ahead-of-Croatia-opener.html

And I might imagine over- working the same 14 players in training could be the problem here tbh. Was it McGeady that demanded a rest day because he felt the first choice players were being trained to death, there certainly seemed to be a serious lack of momentum towards the end of the 2nd half. As full of hope as I was, beyond 70 odd the flow of the game in my mind had me knowing the Croats could see we were worn out and just needed to play it handy amongst themselves.

I still rate Trap but we need a serious re think. I reckon he will go backs to the wall for a goaless draw, same as in Moscow, and then try for a win against an Italy side that are not nearly as bad as their prior recent form suggested they were. It is a dangerous way of doing it, especially if Croatia win vs Italy, on 6 points, and leaves it a dogfight between the last 3 (Croatia with the pressure off, playing a second string side, would give Spain advantage in the last game, which if we only manage a draw against them is us as good as out. If Croatia have qualified by game 2, which I see as being likely, Spain will play against their second choice side whilst Jelavic and the likes are rested, and therefore will likely beat them. And with Italy fighting for their lives, dangerous mix. tbh with that set up for the final games a draw against Spain is not even good enough, and yet it is too hard to see a win)

I think you think too highly of Croatia. I would put Italy beating them.

Kiwi_knock

I think Trap has done a good job to get us here but I do think he has made a mistake by sticking to the same system and tactics. Long ball can be used effectively if you are knocking the ball into space and looking to stretch the defence. We saw examples of this mainly in the 1st half with Doyle exposing Corluka. However far too many of our long balls were just hopeful punts forward rather than tactical balls.

What we were missing was a presence in the centre of the field. Andrews tried hard at the end but neither him or Whelan are comfortable on the ball. We need someone that is looking to get on the ball and dictate the game. A player that can calm it down. Have a player like this in the side will not suddenly mean we have to play like Barcelona. These types of players can still put in defensive shifts, and will not weaken the team. We can still play similar style of football just with an outlet in the centre of the park that can unleash our wingers and strikers.

Have not seen enough of Hoolahan and McCarthy to comment on whether they could fit this build. However I saw a lot of Keith Fahey and really believe he could have fulfilled this role. He would certainly offer us something different to the midfielders than we currently have.

Trap's system is not that bad, and I think it has suited us well but I think it could do with some tweaking.

Coillte_Bhoy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Do you read this forum?

Yes of curse i do, maybe if you want to highlight some posts to illustrate your point cos its not the view im getting here.

jmayo

Father Damo wrote: »

...
I still rate Trap but we need a serious re think. I reckon he will go backs to the wall for a goaless draw, same as in Moscow, and then try for a win against an Italy side that are not nearly as bad as their prior recent form suggested they were.
It is a dangerous way of doing it, especially if Croatia win vs Italy, on 6 points, and leaves it a dogfight between the last 3 (Croatia with the pressure off, playing a second string side, would give Spain advantage in the last game, which if we only manage a draw against them is us as good as out. If Croatia have qualified by game 2, which I see as being likely, Spain will play against their second choice side whilst Jelavic and the likes are rested, and therefore will likely beat them. And with Italy fighting for their lives, dangerous mix. tbh with that set up for the final games a draw against Spain is not even good enough, and yet it is too hard to see a win)

This Italian side played briliantly against Spain and they now look very formidable.
They played like Mourinho's Inter, but with a bit more attacking gile thrown in.

Frankly both us an luck made Croatia look much better than they are.
They have Modric and if he gets half of the treatment Italy dished out to the Spanish midfield, Croatia will have problems.
Croatia's one big advantage is their physical strength and from now on they will rely on deadballs to try and grab goals.
The thing is the Italian defense looks solid enough and their midfield if anything like against Spain will stop the shots.

Croatia's attack could and should cause Spain problems at dead balls or with the right ball forward, but then again can anyone see them containing the Spanish midfield and even getting much posession.

As for us, once we lost to Croatia we were out.
We haven't really given any major country, bar a disjointed France, a good game of it over the last 4 odd years.
And that was a French team led by a donkey that would finally go off the rails at the world cup.
Being honest a draw against either Spain or Italy would be a major achievement and restore a hell of a lot of pride.
IMHO believing in anything else is believing in fairytales.

Of course this is football and anything could happen, but the odds are for Spain and Italy to go through.

yomtea98

We are only here because we got Estonia.Our players are not good enough.No manager can change that.But I feel there are better players on the bench than on the pitch

Laois_Man

yomtea98 wrote: »

We are only here because we got Estonia.Our players are not good enough.No manager can change that.But I feel there are better players on the bench than on the pitch

Serbia and Slovenia got Estonia too - and were eliminated by them!
yet I'd bet you'd say they're superior to Ireland - Serbia at least!

G.K.

One run doesn't mean anything.

yomtea98

Laois_Man wrote: »

Serbia and Slovenia got Estonia too - and were eliminated by them!
yet I'd bet you'd say they're superior to Ireland - Serbia at least!

Yes they are better than Ireland

plasmaguy

If Andy Reid isn't good enough for the EPL and playing the likes of Wigan, Stoke and so on, does anyone really think he'd be any good an Italian or Spanish side full of Champions League players? He certainly would be no better than what we have.

McCarthy, Coleman and other EPL players, there is certainly a case, but the Andy Reid argument is obsolete at this stage, he wouldn't be good enough against the likes of Spain and Italy. He wasn't good enough against the likes of Cyprus ffs.

noodler

plasmaguy wrote: »

If Andy Reid isn't good enough for the EPL and playing the likes of Wigan, Stoke and so on, does anyone really think he'd be any good an Italian or Spanish side full of Champions League players? He certainly would be no better than what we have.

Did you hit a time warp when you posted that back in 2008?

Who has been arguing for Andy Reid?

plasmaguy

noodler wrote: »

Did you hit a time warp when you posted that back in 2008?

Who has been arguing for Andy Reid?

Read back the thread and every anti Trap thread since he took over.

I'm certainly not going to link to the thousands of times the Andy Reid stick has been used.

Renn

plasmaguy having a stinker here

Coillte_Bhoy

plasmaguy wrote: »

If Andy Reid isn't good enough for the EPL and playing the likes of Wigan, Stoke and so on, does anyone really think he'd be any good an Italian or Spanish side full of Champions League players? He certainly would be no better than what we have.

McCarthy, Coleman and other EPL players, there is certainly a case, but the Andy Reid argument is obsolete at this stage, he wouldn't be good enough against the likes of Spain and Italy. He wasn't good enough against the likes of Cyprus ffs.

FFS there you go again, no one has mentioned Andy Reid.Why bring him into it? You dont seem to take any notice what anyone posts, you just sem to make it up to suit your agenda

noodler

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

FFS there you go again, no one has mentioned Andy Reid.Why bring him into it? You dont seem to take any notice what anyone posts, you just sem to make it up to suit your agenda

Speaking of which, I wish Charlton would play David O'Leary more!

plasmaguy

Well glad no-one mentioned Reid as a centre midfield option anyways.

We really don't have that many quality centre midfield options to be honest, I think most people would agree with that.

Coleman, McClean, Duff, McGeady are generally wide players so not sure they'd do much in the centre.

Apart from that I can't really think of a good centre midfielder who has proven themselves at the highest level and would be good enough to play against Spain and Italy. What we have though far from perfect is just about the best we can muster. No matter who we put in midfield against Spain, be it Coleman, Fahy, McClean or whoever people (not nessecarily me) would put in the middle, they would see little of the ball, be chasing shadows and be run ragged for 90 minutes.

I will admit though that I think Trap would be taking a gamble not to play 4-5-1 against the Spanish.

jmayo

plasmaguy wrote: »

If Andy Reid isn't good enough for the EPL and playing the likes of Wigan, Stoke and so on, does anyone really think he'd be any good an Italian or Spanish side full of Champions League players? He certainly would be no better than what we have.

Did anyone say this ?
No I said that his treatment by Trap almost looks like the start of a trend where Trap falls out or sidelines midfielders who happen to actually like to pass and are a bit better than the players that normally inhabit his midfield.

plasmaguy wrote: »

McCarthy, Coleman and other EPL players, there is certainly a case, but the Andy Reid argument is obsolete at this stage, he wouldn't be good enough against the likes of Spain and Italy. He wasn't good enough against the likes of Cyprus ffs.

Ahh FFS.
I just give up at this stage.

plasmaguy wrote: »

Read back the thread and every anti Trap thread since he took over.

I'm certainly not going to link to the thousands of times the Andy Reid stick has been used.

Are you related to Trap or something.
Liam is that you ???

noodler wrote: »

Speaking of which, I wish Charlton would play David O'Leary more!

Forget that I think Touhy should play Giles in goal.
Ah feck it I think Trap should play Giles instead of Whelan and Stapleton instead of Keane.
Hey you know you can have great fun if you just think like Plasmaguy.

plasmaguy

jmayo wrote: »

Did anyone say this ?
No I said that his treatment by Trap almost looks like the start of a trend where Trap falls out or sidelines midfielders who happen to actually like to pass and are a bit better than the players that normally inhabit his midfield.



Ahh FFS.
I just give up at this stage.



Are you related to Trap or something.
Liam is that you ???



Forget that I think Touhy should play Giles in goal.
Ah feck it I think Trap should play Giles instead of Whelan and Stapleton instead of Keane.
Hey you know you can have great fun if you just think like Plasmaguy.

Glad you give up as I give up on you too..goodbye

SirDelboy18

Well we do have some centre midfield options.

James McCarthy, who admittedly could not go to the Euros, has played against some of the best midfielders in the world and looked more than capable of holding his own. How he was continually overlooked is beyond me.

Darron Gibson deserves to start also. He has been effective since joining Everton and getting regular game time.

We could have those two sitting at the base of the midfield, with another player in the hole behind a lone striker. Admittedly Hoolahan is aging, but Anthony Pilkington can also play that position to some effect and is young.

And that is just the centre.

Wilson and Clark should already be heavily integrated into the squad.

Coleman should have had many more chances than he has had.

How these players don't make the squad I'll never know. His interviews yesterday were just nonsense, complete and utter dribble.

Coillte_Bhoy

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

Well we do have some centre midfield options.

James McCarthy, who admittedly could not go to the Euros, has played against some of the best midfielders in the world and looked more than capable of holding his own. How he was continually overlooked is beyond me.

Darron Gibson deserves to start also. He has been effective since joining Everton and getting regular game time.

We could have those two sitting at the base of the midfield, with another player in the hole behind a lone striker. Admittedly Hoolahan is aging, but Anthony Pilkington can also play that position to some effect and is young.

And that is just the centre.

Wilson and Clark should already be heavily integrated into the squad.

Coleman should have had many more chances than he has had.

How these players don't make the squad I'll never know. His interviews yesterday were just nonsense, complete and utter dribble.

Exactly, no one is necessarily saying they should be in the team but at least they should have been given reasonable time to stake a claim and not be continually ignored. And agreed, his interviews were bizarre.

plasmaguy

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

Well we do have some centre midfield options.

James McCarthy, who admittedly could not go to the Euros, has played against some of the best midfielders in the world and looked more than capable of holding his own. How he was continually overlooked is beyond me.

Darron Gibson deserves to start also. He has been effective since joining Everton and getting regular game time.

We could have those two sitting at the base of the midfield, with another player in the hole behind a lone striker. Admittedly Hoolahan is aging, but Anthony Pilkington can also play that position to some effect and is young.

And that is just the centre.

Wilson and Clark should already be heavily integrated into the squad.

Coleman should have had many more chances than he has had.

How these players don't make the squad I'll never know. His interviews yesterday were just nonsense, complete and utter dribble.

McCarthy didn't go you are right, so for the purposes of the Euros, we probably should exclude him as no point talking about somone who wasn't available for selection.

Of the other centre midfield options you list, to start Euro games probably Gibson and Coleman would have the best shout.

But are they really any better than Andrews and Whelan? Much of a muchness really, I don't think anyone could argue Gibson is a lot better than Whelan or Andrews. He's never really stood out for Ireland in the games he's played. Coleman, again, Andrews and Whelan, we were happy with them when we were going well in qualification, so it would be a bit late to change now.

As for Andrews and Whelan, my own view is that Trap has these players for a couple of weeks a year, he knows this full well, and he knows as an international manager you aren't going to improve the skill levels or technical abilities of limited players in a few weeks, no matter what some of his critics might think. The best Trap could hope for since he took over and given the limited time he had with the players was some form of system that limited players could play to.

I think it's a bit unfair to blame Trap for the defeat to Croatia the other night. We were exposed as a limited team with limited players, as we were in Moscow. It's one thing to look good against the Cyprus's and Macedonias of this world, its another to look good against the Russias, Croatias, Spains and Italys!

SirDelboy18

plasmaguy wrote: »

McCarthy didn't go you are right, so for the purposes of the Euros, we probably should exclude him as no point talking about somone who wasn't available for selection.

Of the other centre midfield options you list, to start Euro games probably Gibson and Coleman would have the best shout.

But are they really any better than Andrews and Whelan? Much of a muchness really, I don't think anyone could argue Gibson is a lot better than Whelan or Andrews. He's never really stood out for Ireland in the games he's played. Coleman, again, Andrews and Whelan, we were happy with them when we were going well in qualification, so it would be a bit late to change now.

As for Andrews and Whelan, my own view is that Trap has these players for a couple of weeks a year, he knows this full well, and he knows as an international manager you aren't going to improve the skill levels or technical abilities of limited players in a few weeks, no matter what some of his critics might think. The best Trap could hope for since he took over and given the limited time he had with the players was some form of system that limited players could play to.

I think it's a bit unfair to blame Trap for the defeat to Croatia the other night. We were exposed as a limited team with limited players, as we were in Moscow. It's one thing to look good against the Cyprus's and Macedonias of this world, its another to look good against the Russias, Croatias, Spains and Italys!

I think it is very fair to blame Trap for the defeat. You keep calling the players limited but I have just offered you alternatives who are able to get the ball down and pass it.

Gibson never stood out in Ireland games he played before his move to Everton. Now that he is getting regular game time he looks a better option than the other two.

Trap sticks with a 4-4-2, a formation I have already said is increasingly redundant in modern football. He allows our "limited" players to be completely over-run in the centre of the park, and because our players are so limited our plan-A is a hoof it to Doyle strategy.

I don't see in what world announcing your team a week before a match is a good move. Even within the confines of his system, which I don't agree with, he doesn't pick the best players. His substitutions the other night were baffling and his explanation even worse.

Corholio

plasmaguy wrote: »

McCarthy didn't go you are right, so for the purposes of the Euros, we probably should exclude him as no point talking about somone who wasn't available for selection.

Of the other centre midfield options you list, to start Euro games probably Gibson and Coleman would have the best shout.

But are they really any better than Andrews and Whelan? Much of a muchness really, I don't think anyone could argue Gibson is a lot better than Whelan or Andrews. He's never really stood out for Ireland in the games he's played. Coleman, again, Andrews and Whelan, we were happy with them when we were going well in qualification, so it would be a bit late to change now.

As for Andrews and Whelan, my own view is that Trap has these players for a couple of weeks a year, he knows this full well, and he knows as an international manager you aren't going to improve the skill levels or technical abilities of limited players in a few weeks, no matter what some of his critics might think. The best Trap could hope for since he took over and given the limited time he had with the players was some form of system that limited players could play to.

I think it's a bit unfair to blame Trap for the defeat to Croatia the other night. We were exposed as a limited team with limited players, as we were in Moscow. It's one thing to look good against the Cyprus's and Macedonias of this world, its another to look good against the Russias, Croatias, Spains and Italys!

Can't believe that statement to be honest. He picks the team, sets up the negative tactics and makes the substitutions and you can't blame him? Wow

Even with the limited players we have, if we had any sort of a go after we equalised we would have had a chance. Croatia aren't a great team at all, better technically than us, but we caused them trouble for a bit, and then we stopped, because we had equalised and back into 'Trap' mode.

Pro. F

plasmaguy wrote: »

Well glad no-one mentioned Reid as a centre midfield option anyways.

We really don't have that many quality centre midfield options to be honest, I think most people would agree with that.

Coleman, McClean, Duff, McGeady are generally wide players so not sure they'd do much in the centre.

Apart from that I can't really think of a good centre midfielder who has proven themselves at the highest level and would be good enough to play against Spain and Italy. What we have though far from perfect is just about the best we can muster. No matter who we put in midfield against Spain, be it Coleman, Fahy, McClean or whoever people (not nessecarily me) would put in the middle, they would see little of the ball, be chasing shadows and be run ragged for 90 minutes.

Did anyone even mention Coleman, McClean, Duff and McGeady as central options?

So because whoever we put in the middle would be run ragged by Spain that means the ones Trap has chosen are the best? I don't follow your logic.

plasmaguy wrote: »

McCarthy didn't go you are right, so for the purposes of the Euros, we probably should exclude him as no point talking about somone who wasn't available for selection.

And yet you spent how many pages shíteing on about Andy Reid? The only reason you are trying to limit the conversation to who is fit and available right now is because that so happens to be the players that Trap would have selected anyway. If Steven Reid, Fahey and McCarthy had been fit for this tournament Trap still would have started with the same 11 against Croatia. (And before some simpleton chimes in with "But S Reid is a retired!" He retired from international football because of how Trap treated him and has intimated that he would in fact be willing to return if it wasn't for Trap.)

We actually have a nice collection of central midfielders with decent technical ability (plus an ACM in Hoolihan). But Trap isn't interested in them because of his system.

plasmaguy

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

I think it is very fair to blame Trap for the defeat. You keep calling the players limited but I have just offered you alternatives who are able to get the ball down and pass it.

Gibson never stood out in Ireland games he played before his move to Everton. Now that he is getting regular game time he looks a better option than the other two.

Trap sticks with a 4-4-2, a formation I have already said is redundant in modern football. He allows our "limited" players to be completely over-run in the centre of the park, and because our players are so limited our plan-A is a hoof it to Doyle strategy.

I don't see in what world announcing your team a week before a match is a good move. Even within the confines of his system, which I don't agree with, he doesn't pick the best players. His substitutions the other night were baffling and his explanation even worse.

Well Eamon Dunphy calls Gibson a nothing player and while I wouldn't go that far, I would say he's certainly not much better than Andrews and probably Whelan either. The three are about the same level. I don't think Gibson would have been the solution to our problems against Croatia, in fact we would probably have been even more over run in midfield. He's ok Gibson but he's certainly not a great player and at this level you really need to be very good to make a difference.

Trap's system has served us well in qualifying and there may be a need to tinker with it and go 4-5-1 against Spain, drop either Keane or Doyle and play either Gibson, good for a few shots, or else Cox in midfield and hope he gets forward for a few attacks.

Doyle-Keane up front I think will be redundant against Spain as it's going to be a case of 9 or 10 men behind the ball for the whole game trying to plug holes.

As for Coleman, he might have made a difference, he might not have. You cannot really experiement with players during competitive matches as every game is crucial. And then in friendlies, well they are just friendlies and don't tell you that much either!

plasmaguy

Corholio wrote: »

Can't believe that statement to be honest. He picks the team, sets up the negative tactics and makes the substitutions and you can't blame him? Wow

Even with the limited players we have, if we had any sort of a go after we equalised we would have had a chance. Croatia aren't a great team at all, better technically than us, but we caused them trouble for a bit, and then we stopped, because we had equalised and back into 'Trap' mode.

An overly simplistic analysis redolent of most of Trap's critics.

gosplan

People losing sight of what actually happened the other day.

1. I personally blame Croatia for the defeat.

2. If you're blaming trap, keep in mind that we didn't lose because of a system or playing personnel. We lost because the players totally froze. We're limited yeah, but better than that, I mean when did we last concede such scrappy goals and one from a simple cross. Trap's team froze and as manager, he takes the blame for that. However to think that with a different midfielder, our defenders would have performed better or we could have won 4-3 is wrong.

eagle eye

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

Well we do have some centre midfield options.

James McCarthy, who admittedly could not go to the Euros, has played against some of the best midfielders in the world and looked more than capable of holding his own. How he was continually overlooked is beyond me.

McCarthy missed nearly four months of the 10/11 season just when Trap might was about to bring him into the squad. When he came back from that he was included in the squad for the Brazil friendly but he then pulled out of the Nation's Cup and Roberto Martinez said he was considering his international future. That put everything up in the air as did his start to the 11/12 season where he didn't play well over the first couple of months.

So you can start again now and explain these options we had.

Ferris_Bueller

This is pretty much what I feared from the euros, that the vultures would be out in force if it goes badly. Realistically, we should be expected to lose each game. Spain, Italy and Croatia all have much better squads than we have, I'd imagine most neutrals would have predicted us to finish on 0/1 points. My own reason for being optimistic (I'd imagine a lot are the same as me), was that under Trap we have become incredibly hard to beat, so that gave me a small bit of hope that we could maybe nick a result here and there. With the squad of players we have, I believe we done well to qualify, looking at teams that didn't make it such as Serbia, Switzerland, Belgium, Norway, Turkey we probably are not in the top 16 teams in Europe based on our squad.

I agree that we could probably be better on the ball, we are poor going forward and at keeping possession, however I think the route/tactic we are using at the minute is the right way to do things. I think people who are saying we could base our game on Swansea are kidding themselves, if it was that simple every country would be doing it. In International football the players get very little opportunity to play/train together, so therefore it would make sense to get the players playing in a system that is similar to what they play at club level. The calls for Coleman to be included are incredible IMO, he is a decent player, but what would be the point in calling 5 wingers into the squad? He is certainly the weakest option of the wingers we have at our disposal, and playing him at right back would be a disaster.

The one thing I will agree with, is that in the next set of qualifiers Trap will need to start blooding through more of the younger players or else we will be in a bad state going into the 2016 qualifiers.

plasmaguy

gosplan wrote: »

People losing sight of what actually happened the other day.

1. I personally blame Croatia for the defeat.

2. If you're blaming trap, keep in mind that we didn't lose because of a system or playing personnel. We lost because the players totally froze. We're limited yeah, but better than that, I mean when did we last concede such scrappy goals and one from a simple cross. Trap's team froze and as manager, he takes the blame for that. However to think that with a different midfielder, our defenders would have performed better or we could have won 4-3 is wrong.

Again, there is only so much a manager can do against what I consider a really good side when he has limited players to play with.

It would be like the manager of a club side in the EPL with limited funds trying to play against the likes of Chelsea, Man City and Man Utd.

While some good performances can occur for such a club side, eventually they find their proper place in the table.

The best manager in the world will struggle as manager of a club which has limited resources and to be honest we have no where near the resources in terms of playing quality at the moment as Croatia, Russia, Spain and Italy all of who can put out 11 players on the field with players who played in the CL this year or last year.

Can we please be realistic about the quality of players available to Trap. Most of them are of poor standard.

secman

I see the light... Trap is infallible............Trap is good mentality......... Trapp is never not right.........Trapp knows........Trapp good plaaayers........Trapp talk to plaaayers......Trapp .............................

See Josh saying they are all fearing being dropped by Trapp after Sunday...........must have had a sing song with evil guitar...... this bad mentality.......... not good plaaaayers.

Yet to see someone dropped for having a stinker, or several stinkers.


Secman

SirDelboy18

eagle eye wrote: »

McCarthy missed nearly four months of the 10/11 season just when Trap might was about to bring him into the squad. When he came back from that he was included in the squad for the Brazil friendly but he then pulled out of the Nation's Cup and Roberto Martinez said he was considering his international future. That put everything up in the air as did his start to the 11/12 season where he didn't play well over the first couple of months.

So you can start again now and explain these options we had.

Regardless of his 3 month injury, he was available for many squad selections since and wasn't chosen. He has had less than 60 minutes of game time in this regime.

Form didn't seem to matter when picking these squads due to the fact that Paul Green continually played despite not being guaranteed a starting role for Derby.

I don't think I need to start again, thanks for the offer though.

plasmaguy

When you really look at it, there's very few credible options in central midfield apart from Andrews and Whelan, which says more for the state of Irish football in general than it does for Trap.

Trap has worked miracles with a very average bunch of players.

Samich

If we are to play the long ball game, Robbie should be dropped. Who agrees? They spoke about it on RTE there.

SantryRed

For fcuk sake.

This has nothing to do with the ability of Whelan or Andrews. If Iniesta and Xavi were to play in a 4-4-2 against a 4-5-1 they'd struggle too, obviously not as bad though.

It was completely Trappatonis fault on sunday. If we were going to go for it should have been 4-4-2. But as we were just defending it should always have been 4-5-1. Any time we've played a team who uses 4-5-1 we get mauled.

Samich

plasmaguy wrote: »

When you really look at it, there's very few credible options in central midfield apart from Andrews and Whelan, which says more for the state of Irish football in general than it does for Trap.

Trap has worked miracles with a very average bunch of players.

I disagree. He's not done anything major.

Hasn't beaten a good team (France were muck back then remember, even lost to Belarus at home). The 2 draws against an awful Italy side too probably make us look good.

SLovakia are a shocking team too.

SirDelboy18

Samich wrote: »

If we are to play the long ball game, Robbie should be dropped. Who agrees? They spoke about it on RTE there.

Well Robbie is the least suited of our strikers to the system we play. The two best suited based on form, ability and ability within the system are Walters and Long.

G.K.

Formations are not inherantly attacking or defensive.

plasmaguy

SantryRed wrote: »

For fcuk sake.

This has nothing to do with the ability of Whelan or Andrews. If Iniesta and Xavi were to play in a 4-4-2 against a 4-5-1 they'd struggle too, obviously not as bad though.

It was completely Trappatonis fault on sunday. If we were going to go for it should have been 4-4-2. But as we were just defending it should always have been 4-5-1. Any time we've played a team who uses 4-5-1 we get mauled.

I've argued for 4-5-1 against Spain.

But to use 4-5-1 against teams that on paper it looks like we have a chance of beating such as Croatia, although it turns out they were better in reality than on paper, no, we should go for 4-4-2.

With 4-5-1, its very negative and shows you have no interest in trying to score, just to stop the others scoring. We needed a win against Croatia, not a 0-0 draw as we do against the others.

Renn

They didn't beat France though. And haven't been Slovakia since the Stan days.

Samich

Renn wrote: »

They didn't beat France though. And haven't been Slovakia since the Stan days.

Well they beat them 0-1 after 90 mins in France, but as I said France were shocking back then..

Anyone care to mention who the best team we beat under Trap was?

G.K.

plasmaguy wrote: »

I've argued for 4-5-1 against Spain.

But to use 4-5-1 against teams that on paper it looks like we have a chance of beating such as Croatia, although it turns out they were better in reality than on paper, no, we should go for 4-4-2.

With 4-5-1, its very negative and shows you have no interest in trying to score, just to stop the others scoring. We needed a win against Croatia, not a 0-0 draw as we do against the others.

Erm... No?

Renn

Recorded as a draw.

Renn

And they haven't beaten a top team since 2001 imo.

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

People losing sight of what actually happened the other day.

1. I personally blame Croatia for the defeat.

2. If you're blaming trap, keep in mind that we didn't lose because of a system or playing personnel. We lost because the players totally froze. We're limited yeah, but better than that, I mean when did we last concede such scrappy goals and one from a simple cross. Trap's team froze and as manager, he takes the blame for that. However to think that with a different midfielder, our defenders would have performed better or we could have won 4-3 is wrong.

The players didn't freeze. They played badly because they were in an impossible situation. Just like they are put in far too often. When you rely on Dunne and Given performing superhuman feats and massive slices of luck then you can't blame the team when those things run out.

Pro. F

plasmaguy wrote: »

When you really look at it, there's very few credible options in central midfield apart from Andrews and Whelan, which says more for the state of Irish football in general than it does for Trap.

How would you know? You refuse to really look at it.

Coillte_Bhoy

Renn wrote: »

Recorded as a draw.

Is that correct? Thought it would have been recorded as a 1-0 win

gosplan

Pro. F wrote: »

gosplan wrote: »

People losing sight of what actually happened the other day.

1. I personally blame Croatia for the defeat.

2. If you're blaming trap, keep in mind that we didn't lose because of a system or playing personnel. We lost because the players totally froze. We're limited yeah, but better than that, I mean when did we last concede such scrappy goals and one from a simple cross. Trap's team froze and as manager, he takes the blame for that. However to think that with a different midfielder, our defenders would have performed better or we could have won 4-3 is wrong.

The players didn't freeze. They played badly because they were in an impossible situation. Just like they are put in far too often. When you rely on Dunne and Given performing superhuman feats and massive slices of luck then you can't blame the team when those things run out.

That's a bit of a stretch Tbh. If we were a bit more attacking, our players would have had more confidance and not made basic defensive errors?

I'd more say that 8 of our first 11 were playing in their first international tournament and they didn't do the basic things that they'd been doing for a few years.

I'm sure managers can do things about players bottling it on the big stage but I think it's not really linked to the formation or team selection. Take arsenal for example.

plasmaguy

Samich wrote: »

Well they beat them 0-1 after 90 mins in France, but as I said France were shocking back then..

Anyone care to mention who the best team we beat under Trap was?

While we didn't beat them, we were unlucky not to beat France in Paris, I think you will agree, but for a hand ball, we beat them. I still prefer to think we beat them

Italy home and away we definitely 100% should have beaten. We had them on the rack in Bari. And we had the game sown up in Dublin but for defensive naivity which I know Trap was furious about.

We beat Italy in a friendly 2-0.

We should have beaten Bulgaria but for more defensive stupidity, one of them from a high ball which Kilbane got caught out in.

We haven't played that many big teams during the Trap era but apart from Russia, we've done alright.

Overall, we have been hard to beat under Trap, that is until the Croatia match.

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

That's a bit of a stretch Tbh. If we were a bit more attacking, our players would have had more confidance and not made basic defensive errors?

No. If they strung a few passes together they would get a bit of a break from being easily sliced open by the opposition. If they closed down in midfield properly and defended with some sort of team shape they wouldn't have to rely on Dunne and Given constantly getting it right. If they had a coherent plan for how to counter attack they would give the opposition something to worry about and not leave them so happy to push up on us.

gosplan wrote: »

I'd more say that 8 of our first 11 were playing in their first international tournament and they didn't do the basic things that they'd been doing for a few years.

I'm sure managers can do things about players bottling it on the big stage but I think it's not really linked to the formation or team selection. Take arsenal for example.

We've been sliced open by any decent and motivated opposition all through Trap's reign. Sunday was nothing different in that regard.

Arsenal are crap at defending because Wenger refuses to do give them any coaching, direction or discipline for when they don't have the ball. It's absolutely Wenger's fault for all the leads they have squandered. The situation is only confusing because he is so insanely good in the transfer market.

Pro. F

plasmaguy wrote: »

While we didn't beat them, we were unlucky not to beat France in Paris, I think you will agree, but for a hand ball, we beat them. I still prefer to think we beat them

If the two legs against France showed anything it is how much better we played once we abandoned Trap's system.

plasmaguy wrote: »

Italy home and away we definitely 100% should have beaten. We had them on the rack in Bari. And we had the game sown up in Dublin but for defensive naivity which I know Trap was furious about.

We beat Italy in a friendly 2-0.

We should have beaten Bulgaria but for more defensive stupidity, one of them from a high ball which Kilbane got caught out in.

We haven't played that many big teams during the Trap era but apart from Russia, we've done alright.

Overall, we have been hard to beat under Trap, that is until the Croatia match.

If you are going to say that we should have beaten Italy and Bulgaria then you can also say that we should have been beaten by Russia and Slovakia.