Trap Watch

SantryRed

plasmaguy wrote: »

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.

Russia played 4-5-1 against the Czechs and scored 4 on Friday. Look at how Poland are containing them playing 4-5-1 themselves. Bar a lapse in concentration from a set piece they've looked a hell of a lot more compact than we did against them and I think we've better players than Poland.

gosplan

Pro. F wrote: »

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.



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.

It seems like you're on a rant and i won't try to stop it with mere logic.

briany

Here's more on that Spanish assessment of the game from earlier,

Spanish pour scorn on Irish showing

By Dermot Corrigan
Tuesday, June 12, 2012

The clichés were flowing as Spanish observers rained on Ireland’s unexpectedly poor performance in losing 3-1 to Croatia in Sunday’s Euro 2012 Group C game.



"Poznan was like Limerick," wrote Fermín de la Calle in AS.

"Cold, incessant rain and stands filled with green. Ireland, decent and catholic, were faithful to their traditions, lining up in jerseys one to eleven. Their first move ended with the ball sent into the opponents penalty area from 70 metres."

There had been some concern in Madrid during the tournament build-up that Giovanni Trapattoni’s influence had instilled an age-old Italian-style mentality and defensive discipline into the Irish team.

Trap was described as "the old master of catenaccio" and discussed in an interview how he had drilled the Irish players to work hard, deny opponents space and never get caught out of position.

However, while the modern 21st century version of Italy had surprisingly given Spain plenty of problems in their 1-1 draw earlier, Trap’s Ireland were unimpressive both with and without the ball, reckoned de la Calle.

"The green catenaccio lasted 120 seconds," he wrote. "Ireland were fragile like crystal and they had terrible problems in possession of the ball."

Ladislao Javier Monino García argued in his match report for El País that Trapattoni’s careful approach had removed Ireland’s traditional strength.

"They never showed the frenetic up and at them approach which always characterises the Irish," Monino García wrote. "Ireland were unable to change, and they lost the game and a lot of their identity."

The thinking in Spain had been that any unpredictability in Ireland’s play would come from Aiden McGeady, but there was scorn at the Spartak Moscow winger’s muted performance.

"McGeady, Ireland’s ‘enfant terrible’, was the one who was supposed to bring a certain class to the Irish play," according to de la Calle. "But McGeady, who Roy Keane said he would never pick, was anonymous."

plasmaguy

SantryRed wrote: »

Russia played 4-5-1 against the Czechs and scored 4 on Friday. Look at how Poland are containing them playing 4-5-1 themselves. Bar a lapse in concentration from a set piece they've looked a hell of a lot more compact than we did against them and I think we've better players than Poland.

Well we should try it yeh.

The problem with Trap is once a formula is successful for him he sticks with it and qualification was a success so why change the formula. It's hard to blame him.

But when we went 1 down 2-1 down or 3-1 down against the Croats, what was the point of 4-5-1 then?

Which of our strikers would you drop for 4-5-1?

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

It seems like you're on a rant and i won't try to stop it with mere logic.

I was nothing but reasonable and logical in that post.

ronsgonawin

plasmaguy wrote: »

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.

you didn't answer the question!

SantryRed

plasmaguy wrote: »

SantryRed wrote: »

Russia played 4-5-1 against the Czechs and scored 4 on Friday. Look at how Poland are containing them playing 4-5-1 themselves. Bar a lapse in concentration from a set piece they've looked a hell of a lot more compact than we did against them and I think we've better players than Poland.

Well we should try it yeh.

The problem with Trap is once a formula is successful for him he sticks with it and qualification was a success so why change the formula. It's hard to blame him.

But when we went 1 down 2-1 down or 3-1 down against the Croats, what was the point of 4-5-1 then?

Which of our strikers would you drop for 4-5-1?

We still would have been more solid and still would have been able to attack and retain the ball a bit better.

I'd drop both. Bring in Walters as he is perfect for 4-5-1. Holds the ball up brilliantly and is a pain in the arse for defenders.

Benimar

plasmaguy wrote: »

Which of our strikers would you drop for 4-5-1?

Both. I'd play Walters and Gibson.

I'd also have a serious think about dropping Ward and McGeady. Trap won't drop either though, I know that.

frisbeeface

I think Walters is most likely to ruffle the Spanish defenders. Would love to see Trap drop Keane and Doyle and put Walters and Gibson in.

plasmaguy

well that's the problem Trap faces. Robbie Keane is like a god and Doyle isnt far off it.

For many supporters dropping them is unthinkable and if you did drop them and Ireland lost their would be calls for his head.

I'd also be in favour of dropping both for the Spain match though. Shane Long has done more than enough both at Ireland and WBA to prove he is well capable of leading the line.

I think we may see a seismic shift in Traps thinking with the Spain and Italy match, the first time (I think) he goes 4-5-1 in recognition of a stronger team.

His default has always been 4-4-2 which is fine against average teams you often find in the qualifying stages, but when you come up against Russia and Spain, it has to be 4-5-1 all the way.

gosplan

Pro. F wrote: »

gosplan wrote: »

It seems like you're on a rant and i won't try to stop it with mere logic.

I was nothing but reasonable and logical in that post.

Just watch the first few mins of the match again. We conceded to a pretty poor header from a ball that wasn't cleared properly given a couple of chances to do so.

You're argument is that it's down to selection and style

I'm saying we didn't turn up for the big occasion.

You seem to be taking a general argument against trap's tactics and that's fine and you're entitled to it. What I'm trying to say is that our players played far worse and made more basic mistakes the other night than they have for a long time.

Where arsenal comes into it is not that arsenal conceded so many goals this season but that if you put them in a cup final against Birmingham, they'll find a way to throw the game away.

In short, while Ireland could have been set up better, our big problem is that we bottled it. This team has produced far better performances but we couldn't find one when it matters.

I mean, the first goal was conceded sloppily before half our team had touched the ball. How do you blame tactics for that?

DM_7

I always find it odd that Trap plays 4-4-2 but focuses on keeping things tight. It has never made sense to me.

I would prefer a third midfield player that provides real cover for the defence. This would be an immediate improvement and for example allows the full backs to contribute to the attack.

But when I look at the squad of players he took over I see why he went with 4-4-2. Players like McGeady, Duff, Doyle and Keane were/are deserving of a place in the first choice 11. Ireland just don't have a stand out candidate that must be played ahead of them and play as a third midfielder.

Forcing the situation and trying to fit another player in may have stopped the team getting to the Euro's at all.

Re Trap Watch - he won't be able to Ignore Long, McClean, McCarthy come the end of this tournament. I would guess he will try and fit the system around the players come WC 2014 qualifying.

plasmaguy

He's going to have to be fairly ruthless after the Euros. He may even use the last two games to see if the older players have it any more and if they don't perform, you can be sure they won't be around for the WC qualifiers. He's ruthless when he wants to be but other times not so much.

grenache

Well us anti-Trap brigade have been proven right, as we knew we would. Not much point in keeping clean sheets against Estonia and Armenia if you're going to tactically and physically out-played against decent sides. When the likes of Armenia and Slovakia come to Dublin and dominate possession, you know you're in trouble.

The fact that Trap got us to the Euros has been rendered irrelevant by the pastings we took from Russia and Croatia, and are about to be given by Spain and Italy. I'd rather not qualify if we are going there just to be embarrassed.

Robbie Keane said last week that Ireland were not at the tournament to make up the numbers. With Trap and his anti-football, anti-winning tactics, it appears we are there for nothing else.

Xavi6

plasmaguy wrote: »

Fine, I'm outta this thread anyways.

plasmaguy wrote: »

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

Can we get a "Is plasmaguy done yet?" thread for all these false promises?

klose

plasmaguy wrote: »

well that's the problem Trap faces. Robbie Keane is like a god and Doyle isnt far off it.

For many supporters dropping them is unthinkable and if you did drop them and Ireland lost their would be calls for his head.

I'd also be in favour of dropping both for the Spain match though. Shane Long has done more than enough both at Ireland and WBA to prove he is well capable of leading the line.

I think we may see a seismic shift in Traps thinking with the Spain and Italy match, the first time (I think) he goes 4-5-1 in recognition of a stronger team.

His default has always been 4-4-2 which is fine against average teams you often find in the qualifying stages, but when you come up against Russia and Spain, it has to be 4-5-1 all the way.

No he's not would you go away with yourself! If keane was dropped there would be uproar and rightly so, you just cant debate his goal scoring record and that he always pops up with one, doyle had an awful season and nobody would give a hoot if he is dropped thursday. Most will welcome it be it walters or long and it does indeed look that way and maybe more changes according to the news.
The best thing doyle could do is somehow fluke a transfer to another premiership team and get away from wolves, hes only 28, hes far from done as a player.

Going by the media it looks like trap will switch it up for thursday, good to see as I thought he wouldnt at all no matter what but his eyes are opened and knows whats ahead.

grenache

whippedcream wrote: »

No he's not would you go away with yourself! If keane was dropped there would be uproar and rightly so, you just cant debate his goal scoring record and that he always pops up with one, doyle had an awful season and nobody would give a hoot if he is dropped thursday. Most will welcome it be it walters or long and it does indeed look that way and maybe more changes according to the news.
The best thing doyle could do is somehow fluke a transfer to another premiership team and get away from wolves, hes only 28, hes far from done as a player.

Going by the media it looks like trap will switch it up for thursday, good to see as I thought he wouldnt at all no matter what but his eyes are opened and knows whats ahead.

Most of the pundits, certainly on Newstalk and RTE, seem to be in agreement that Keane should be dropped. He's offered nothing to the team in the last year - unless holding his hands in despair and whinging at the referee count. I agree with a point made by Liam Mackey yesterday: with Keane in the team you effectively have 10 men, he runs into silly positions miles from goal and is no longer the threat he once was. Yes he has a good goal record, but his current form, or lack of it, suggests he should be dropped. Long and Walters are the obvious choice. Keane should not be an entitled to start. I fully expect Trap to do so however, he seems a specialist in picking the wrong players and sticking by them.

Mr.Nice Guy

I think when Trap took over his first thought was 'where are the goals coming from'? At the time Doyle and Keane were the only impressive striking options we had (Long wasn't as good as he has since gone on to become) and Doyle and Keane don't work well in a lone role. As soon as it became clear we needed two strikers, a 4-4-2 was the logical choice and so it was felt we needed two combative midfielders in the centre to provide the solidity.

I think the key is Trap's system relies a lot on the individual components. When they fail, Ireland fail. I think the 'Doyle role' is a prime example. If he underperforms, Ireland tend to struggle. I recall Skrtel marking him out of one of the qualifying games against Slovakia, and also Russia keeping him quiet in Moscow. That meant he couldn't hold the ball up and with the system being light on the midfield side of things, we got overrun. That leads to another element where we rely heavily on the individuals: defence. Richard Dunne has earned the team points on plenty of occasions - even prior to Russia away - with last ditch tackles on many occasions, and of course Shay has saved our bacon numerous times. It is then an imperfect system imo but it has achieved the desired results.

Having said all that, I do think the system could - and should - be adapted going forward. I think 4-4-2 is being replaced in the modern game and I think the Russia, Hungary and Croatia games have highlighted that. I think the increased strength we have up front now affords us the option of looking at playing with one lone striker and adding a body behind in the centre in a deeper role.

My own view is that a 4-2-3-1 system, like that applied by the Dutch, would be worth experimenting with after the Euros. The Dutch keep combative midfielders (De Jong and Van Bommel) ahead of their back four, and we could similarly keep Andrews and Whelan ahead of our defence. We could then, as the Dutch do, get our really creative wide players (Duff, McGeady, or possibly McClean) to get on the ball more. I heard Brady talking the other day about how he wanted McGeady in particular to have more of the ball in the middle in matches. A system like this would allow for that. A guy like Long (or Walters, though I'd try Long first) could then be asked to play the lone striker role and could make it work.

The problem of course is this brings us to the 'Sneijder role'. We would need a really creative player in there who can make things happen just behind. This is where we have a problem.

We could try McGeady there (then use McClean and Duff as the other attacking midfielders) but I'm not sure McGeady has the vision required to make the position work. We could try Gibson there (and it would give him license to attack more and see if he could spread the play to boot) but I'm sceptical that he could make this work. So my suggestion would be to see if Keane could pull it off. He has probably the best football brain in the squad, but whether he could evolve from a forward to a forward-thinking attacking midfielder I'm again not so sure. I would though try it in a friendly to see (what's the harm?). Without meaning to open the usual can of worms but clearly a Stephen Ireland-type would be really exciting here but...yeah, we know the difficulties with that one.

To sum up, I agree that we ought to look towards trying new things in future. I don't think though that now is the time for tinkering. My hope ahead of the Spain game is that those individual components can do a job as they have so often done, and personally the only change I'd make for that one would be bringing in Long for Doyle.

I think criticism of Trap and some players has been OTT. His system asks a lot of the players ; on Sunday the players were clearly lacking. I think we can look at tweaking this demanding system in the months ahead, but to suggest we look for a new manager? Well, it's a no from me. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

grenache

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I think when Trap took over his first thought was 'where are the goals coming from'? At the time Doyle and Keane were the only impressive striking options we had (Long wasn't as good as he has since gone on to become) and Doyle and Keane don't work well in a lone role. As soon as it became clear we needed two strikers, a 4-4-2 was the logical choice and so it was felt we needed two combative midfielders in the centre to provide the solidity.

I think the key is Trap's system relies a lot on the individual components. When they fail, Ireland fail. I think the 'Doyle role' is a prime example. If he underperforms, Ireland tend to struggle. I recall Skrtel marking him out of one of the qualifying games against Slovakia, and also Russia keeping him quiet in Moscow. That meant he couldn't hold the ball up and with the system being light on the midfield side of things, we got overrun. That leads to another element where we rely heavily on the individuals: defence. Richard Dunne has earned the team points on plenty of occasions - even prior to Russia away - with last ditch tackles on many occasions, and of course Shay has saved our bacon numerous times. It is then an imperfect system imo but it has achieved the desired results.

Having said all that, I do think the system could - and should - be adapted going forward. I think 4-4-2 is being replaced in the modern game and I think the Russia, Hungary and Croatia games have highlighted that. I think the increased strength we have up front now affords us the option of looking at playing with one lone striker and adding a body behind in the centre in a deeper role.

My own view is that a 4-2-3-1 system, like that applied by the Dutch, would be worth experimenting with after the Euros. The Dutch keep combative midfielders (De Jong and Van Bommel) ahead of their back four, and we could similarly keep Andrews and Whelan ahead of our defence. We could then, as the Dutch do, get our really creative wide players (Duff, McGeady, or possibly McClean) to get on the ball more. I heard Brady talking the other day about how he wanted McGeady in particular to have more of the ball in the middle in matches. A system like this would allow for that. A guy like Long (or Walters, though I'd try Long first) could then be asked to play the lone striker role and could make it work.

The problem of course is this brings us to the 'Sneijder role'. We would need a really creative player in there who can make things happen just behind. This is where we have a problem.

We could try McGeady there (then use McClean and Duff as the other attacking midfielders) but I'm not sure McGeady has the vision required to make the position work. We could try Gibson there (and it would give him license to attack more and see if he could spread the play to boot) but I'm sceptical that he could make this work. So my suggestion would be to see if Keane could pull it off. He has probably the best football brain in the squad, but whether he could evolve from a forward to a forward-thinking attacking midfielder I'm again not so sure. I would though try it in a friendly to see (what's the harm?). Without meaning to open the usual can of worms but clearly a Stephen Ireland-type would be really exciting here but...yeah, we know the difficulties with that one.

To sum up, I agree that we ought to look towards trying new things in future. I don't think though that now is the time for tinkering. My hope ahead of the Spain game is that those individual components can do a job as they have so often done, and personally the only change I'd make for that one would be bringing in Long for Doyle.

I think criticism of Trap and some players has been OTT. His system asks a lot of the players ; on Sunday the players were clearly lacking. I think we can look at tweaking this demanding system in the months ahead, but to suggest we look for a new manager? Well, it's a no from me. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

While I agree with much of what you say, the unfortunate thing is that this baby is 73, out of touch with the changes occuring in modern day football (the words of my Italian Juve supporting friend) and unwilling to adapt for certain situations. This baby certainly needs dumping. God forbid we might actually see Ireland play a little bit of football! People seem to think you can't be defensively sound and play football. Nonsense.

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

Just watch the first few mins of the match again. We conceded to a pretty poor header from a ball that wasn't cleared properly given a couple of chances to do so.
...
I mean, the first goal was conceded sloppily before half our team had touched the ball. How do you blame tactics for that?

The chance that we conceded which gave the guy an opportunity to score the header was nothing unusual and no more clear cut than the normal dozen or so good chances we give up whenever we play decent passing opposition. That type of opposition get those types of chances against us horribly regularly. When you give up good chances so regularly eventually your luck runs out and your keeper and centre backs stop being invincible.

Croatia got the corner which led to the header from a spell of possession which started when Whelan hoofed the ball aimlessly even though he was under little pressure. So there it is, a direct result of Trap's tactics, which place zero emphasis on retaining possession, led to the corner from which the goal was scored.

gosplan wrote: »

You're argument is that it's down to selection and style

I'm saying we didn't turn up for the big occasion.

You seem to be taking a general argument against trap's tactics and that's fine and you're entitled to it. What I'm trying to say is that our players played far worse and made more basic mistakes the other night than they have for a long time.
...
In short, while Ireland could have been set up better, our big problem is that we bottled it. This team has produced far better performances but we couldn't find one when it matters.

I don't agree that our players played far worse than they have done previously. If the Croatians' second goal had been correctly ruled out for the foul on Andrews and the Keane penalty had been correctly given and converted then I am 100% sure that people would be on here today lauding our ugly performance.

The way we allowed the opposition too much space in midfield and had to deal with silly crosses and passes into the danger area was just like normal as far as I'm concerned. The only difference this time was that Given and Dunne didn't bale us out.

gosplan wrote: »

Where arsenal comes into it is not that arsenal conceded so many goals this season but that if you put them in a cup final against Birmingham, they'll find a way to throw the game away.

Through terrible defensive organisation. Something they have done in many many games, not just that cup final. It is definitely the fault of their manager imo.

Now, why could you not respond like this in the first place and just leave out your nonsense claim that I was ranting and would be unresponsive to logic? You respond to my post now and don't even acknowledge your ad hominem argument existed.

kryogen

If Trap would go 451 for me against the Spanish and line up like

---

Given

---

Kelly----Dunne----St. Ledger---O Shea

---

Whelan

---

---

Andrews

---

Gibson

---

Duff

---

McGeady

---

Walters/Long

---

Id be quite happy with him, and actually bring on McLean this time!

Even if he was to play Andrews and Whelan beside each other deep and had Gibson in front of them I think it would be an improvement.

Try to survive for 80 minutes and then try to sneak one

gosplan

Pro. F wrote: »

Now, why could you not respond like this in the first place and just leave out your nonsense claim that I was ranting and would be unresponsive to logic? You respond to my post now and don't even acknowledge your ad hominem argument existed.

Because I think you're going to just disagree with me no matter what.

Conceding from a second or third ball off a corner is exactly what trap's eradicated from the team, not introduced.

And that's blindingly obvious to anyone.

You're so eager to blame his system for everything that you can't accept that.

gosplan

grenache wrote: »

the fact that Trap got us to the Euros has been rendered irrelevant by the pastings we took from Russia and Croatia, and are about to be given by Spain and Italy. I'd rather not qualify if we are going there just to be embarrassed.

Says it all really.

Orando Broom

gosplan wrote: »

Because I think you're going to just disagree with me no matter what.

Conceding from a second or third ball off a corner is exactly what trap's eradicated from the team, not introduced.

And that's blindingly obvious to anyone.

You're so eager to blame his system for everything that you can't accept that.

This is a key point. We started putting ourselves in bother three and four phases of play before the goals. We seemed incapable there after to do the smart, sensible thing and regroup. The second goal's genesis was Ward playing an atrocious infield sideways pass four yards behind Whelan that was intercepted. Ireland never for reorganised even at the corner and eventually the chance was coughed up to Jelavic. It was atypical of what we've seen from Ireland for the, majority of Trap's tenure.

BraziliaNZ

SantryRed wrote: »

I think we've better players than Poland.

LOL, did you see the football they played last night? It seems every one of their players is faster and actually able to pass the ball. They were an absolute pleasure to watch. So far Ireland and Greece and the worst teams in this.

ronsgonawin

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I think when Trap took over his first thought was 'where are the goals coming from'? At the time Doyle and Keane were the only impressive striking options we had (Long wasn't as good as he has since gone on to become) and Doyle and Keane don't work well in a lone role. As soon as it became clear we needed two strikers, a 4-4-2 was the logical choice and so it was felt we needed two combative midfielders in the centre to provide the solidity.

I think the key is Trap's system relies a lot on the individual components. When they fail, Ireland fail. I think the 'Doyle role' is a prime example. If he underperforms, Ireland tend to struggle. I recall Skrtel marking him out of one of the qualifying games against Slovakia, and also Russia keeping him quiet in Moscow. That meant he couldn't hold the ball up and with the system being light on the midfield side of things, we got overrun. That leads to another element where we rely heavily on the individuals: defence. Richard Dunne has earned the team points on plenty of occasions - even prior to Russia away - with last ditch tackles on many occasions, and of course Shay has saved our bacon numerous times. It is then an imperfect system imo but it has achieved the desired results.

Having said all that, I do think the system could - and should - be adapted going forward. I think 4-4-2 is being replaced in the modern game and I think the Russia, Hungary and Croatia games have highlighted that. I think the increased strength we have up front now affords us the option of looking at playing with one lone striker and adding a body behind in the centre in a deeper role.

My own view is that a 4-2-3-1 system, like that applied by the Dutch, would be worth experimenting with after the Euros. The Dutch keep combative midfielders (De Jong and Van Bommel) ahead of their back four, and we could similarly keep Andrews and Whelan ahead of our defence. We could then, as the Dutch do, get our really creative wide players (Duff, McGeady, or possibly McClean) to get on the ball more. I heard Brady talking the other day about how he wanted McGeady in particular to have more of the ball in the middle in matches. A system like this would allow for that. A guy like Long (or Walters, though I'd try Long first) could then be asked to play the lone striker role and could make it work.

The problem of course is this brings us to the 'Sneijder role'. We would need a really creative player in there who can make things happen just behind. This is where we have a problem.

We could try McGeady there (then use McClean and Duff as the other attacking midfielders) but I'm not sure McGeady has the vision required to make the position work. We could try Gibson there (and it would give him license to attack more and see if he could spread the play to boot) but I'm sceptical that he could make this work. So my suggestion would be to see if Keane could pull it off. He has probably the best football brain in the squad, but whether he could evolve from a forward to a forward-thinking attacking midfielder I'm again not so sure. I would though try it in a friendly to see (what's the harm?). Without meaning to open the usual can of worms but clearly a Stephen Ireland-type would be really exciting here but...yeah, we know the difficulties with that one.

To sum up, I agree that we ought to look towards trying new things in future. I don't think though that now is the time for tinkering. My hope ahead of the Spain game is that those individual components can do a job as they have so often done, and personally the only change I'd make for that one would be bringing in Long for Doyle.

I think criticism of Trap and some players has been OTT. His system asks a lot of the players ; on Sunday the players were clearly lacking. I think we can look at tweaking this demanding system in the months ahead, but to suggest we look for a new manager? Well, it's a no from me. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I also agree with that formation and have been calling for it for a long time because I reckon that we have the players for this. I do think Keane can plays this role and did so while at loan at Villa this season and played really well.

Something I do disagree with you on is that I dont believe Trap is the man to do this for us as I feel he is removed from the modern game and is incapable of change.

Orando Broom

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I think when Trap took over his first thought was 'where are the goals coming from'? At the time Doyle and Keane were the only impressive striking options we had (Long wasn't as good as he has since gone on to become) and Doyle and Keane don't work well in a lone role. As soon as it became clear we needed two strikers, a 4-4-2 was the logical choice and so it was felt we needed two combative midfielders in the centre to provide the solidity.

I think the key is Trap's system relies a lot on the individual components. When they fail, Ireland fail. I think the 'Doyle role' is a prime example. If he underperforms, Ireland tend to struggle. I recall Skrtel marking him out of one of the qualifying games against Slovakia, and also Russia keeping him quiet in Moscow. That meant he couldn't hold the ball up and with the system being light on the midfield side of things, we got overrun. That leads to another element where we rely heavily on the individuals: defence. Richard Dunne has earned the team points on plenty of occasions - even prior to Russia away - with last ditch tackles on many occasions, and of course Shay has saved our bacon numerous times. It is then an imperfect system imo but it has achieved the desired results.

Having said all that, I do think the system could - and should - be adapted going forward. I think 4-4-2 is being replaced in the modern game and I think the Russia, Hungary and Croatia games have highlighted that. I think the increased strength we have up front now affords us the option of looking at playing with one lone striker and adding a body behind in the centre in a deeper role.

My own view is that a 4-2-3-1 system, like that applied by the Dutch, would be worth experimenting with after the Euros. The Dutch keep combative midfielders (De Jong and Van Bommel) ahead of their back four, and we could similarly keep Andrews and Whelan ahead of our defence. We could then, as the Dutch do, get our really creative wide players (Duff, McGeady, or possibly McClean) to get on the ball more. I heard Brady talking the other day about how he wanted McGeady in particular to have more of the ball in the middle in matches. A system like this would allow for that. A guy like Long (or Walters, though I'd try Long first) could then be asked to play the lone striker role and could make it work.

The problem of course is this brings us to the 'Sneijder role'. We would need a really creative player in there who can make things happen just behind. This is where we have a problem.

We could try McGeady there (then use McClean and Duff as the other attacking midfielders) but I'm not sure McGeady has the vision required to make the position work. We could try Gibson there (and it would give him license to attack more and see if he could spread the play to boot) but I'm sceptical that he could make this work. So my suggestion would be to see if Keane could pull it off. He has probably the best football brain in the squad, but whether he could evolve from a forward to a forward-thinking attacking midfielder I'm again not so sure. I would though try it in a friendly to see (what's the harm?). Without meaning to open the usual can of worms but clearly a Stephen Ireland-type would be really exciting here but...yeah, we know the difficulties with that one.

To sum up, I agree that we ought to look towards trying new things in future. I don't think though that now is the time for tinkering. My hope ahead of the Spain game is that those individual components can do a job as they have so often done, and personally the only change I'd make for that one would be bringing in Long for Doyle.

I think criticism of Trap and some players has been OTT. His system asks a lot of the players ; on Sunday the players were clearly lacking. I think we can look at tweaking this demanding system in the months ahead, but to suggest we look for a new manager? Well, it's a no from me. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Excellent Post! I agree with the analysis espceically the 4-2-3-1. I think Ireland are actually really well stocked in all departments for that system to be successful in that system. In the holding roles you have potentially, Clark Wilson, O'Shea, McCarthy, Gibson Whelan and Andrews. In the midfield front 3 you have ample choice already there and bringing in potentially the likes of Houilhan, Brady and Walters. Up front then you have a lot choices too.

LuckyLloyd

Have any of Whelan / Gibson / Andrews logged much time in club football as pure defensive midfielders sitting infront of the back four as part of a 4 - 5 - 1?

Have any of Whelan / Gibson / Andrews logged much time in club football as pure attacking midfielders getting up to help a lone striker as part of a 4 - 5 - 1?

SirDelboy18

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Have any of Whelan / Gibson / Andrews logged much time in club football as pure defensive midfielders sitting infront of the back four as part of a 4 - 5 - 1?

Have any of Whelan / Gibson / Andrews logged much time in club football as pure attacking midfielders getting up to help a lone striker as part of a 4 - 5 - 1?

I'm not sure have you read anything that has been posted so far, but it has been said many times that formations don't have to be inherently defensive or attacking. Likewise, players functions don't have to be completely defensive or attacking.

Plenty of options to play in the hole ( Hoolahan, Pilkington ) and sitting further back should be our two best midfielders, McCarthy and Gibson.

ronsgonawin

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

I'm not sure have you read anything that has been posted so far, but it has been said many times that formations don't have to be inherently defensive or attacking. Likewise, players functions don't have to be completely defensive or attacking.

Plenty of options to play in the hole ( Hoolahan, Pilkington ) and sitting further back should be our two best midfielders, McCarthy and Gibson.

Well said, I dont think he does!

LuckyLloyd

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

I'm not sure have you read anything that has been posted so far, but it has been said many times that formations don't have to be inherently defensive or attacking. Likewise, players functions don't have to be completely defensive or attacking.

Plenty of options to play in the hole ( Hoolahan, Pilkington ) and sitting further back should be our two best midfielders, McCarthy and Gibson.

Hoolahan / Pilkington / McCarthy aren't in the squad. I am fully aware that a formation doesn't have to be inherently defensive or attacking, but once you go to a three man central midfield based formation, you require the players at the center of the formation to fulfill certain roles.

The four central midfielders we have in the squad have played the majority of their club football as two way central midfielders.

People keep saying 'play 4 - 5 - 1' like it's something you can just decide to do on the day. Our squad hasn't practised it, and they largely don't have the skillset for it and they generally don't play it with their clubs.

And if this is a theoretical conversation over what to do for the 2014 Qualifiers or what we should have done for this tournament I really am wondering where people's heads are at. We play the reigning World and European champions in THIS tournament with THIS squad on THURSDAY.

BraziliaNZ

Did anyone notice our inability to keep the ball after a throw in the other night? I've noticed this with Ireland before, Trap's Ireland anyway.

SirDelboy18

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Hoolahan / Pilkington / McCarthy aren't in the squad. I am fully aware that a formation doesn't have to be inherently defensive or attacking, but once you go to a three man central midfield based formation, you require the players at the center of the formation to fulfill certain roles.

The four central midfielders we have in the squad have played the majority of their club football as two way central midfielders.

People keep saying 'play 4 - 5 - 1' like it's something you can just decide to do on the day. Our squad hasn't practised it, and they largely don't have the skillset for it and they generally don't play it with their clubs.

And if this is a theoretical conversation over what to do for the 2014 Qualifiers or what we should have done for this tournament I really am wondering where people's heads are at. We play the reigning World and European champions in THIS tournament with THIS squad on THURSDAY.

Where people's heads are at is that we have just been dominated by a Croatian side who don't come close to Italy or Spain in terms of ability.

I think many, and realistically so, think we would be better off looking forward because of the great unlikelyhood of us beating either Italy or Spain. Not ignoring this campaign completely, but looking towards the next campaign for the system and personnel changes that need to be made.

Trapattoni has refused to play both the formation we need and our best players throughout his reign.

For Thursday, of course we should play 4-5-1. I genuinely cannot see any argument whatsoever to justify how a midfield two, which has been over run by Croatia, Russia and Slovakia is going to be able to withstand Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Alonso, Fabregas and Silva. Just read over those names again and tell me how Whelan and Andrews in the centre makes sense.

One option is to bring Duff(and yes he can play there) into the centre, have Gibson, Andrews and Duff in the middle and put McClean on the left with McGeady on the right. Robbie Keane should not start this game and we need to play either Long or Walters. My personal preference would be Long due to the fact that he offers better pace and finishing.

Banjaxed82

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

Did anyone notice our inability to keep the ball after a throw in the other night? I've noticed this with Ireland before, Trap's Ireland anyway.

Did anyone notice our inability to keep the ball

This is the fundamental root of ALL Ireland's problems.

BraziliaNZ

Banjaxed82 wrote: »

Did anyone notice our inability to keep the ball

This is the fundamental root of ALL Ireland's problems.

Yeah but we can't even use throw ins to our advantage, that's pretty bad

Colonialboy

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

Did anyone notice our inability to keep the ball after a throw in the other night? I've noticed this with Ireland before, Trap's Ireland anyway.

Ive noticed it for a long time.
Trap has the players so focused on doing their individual jobs they have forgotten that they also need to work in pairs.
All the best teams do it, 2+ players close down at the same time, 2+ players make a run drwaing the defence at the same time giving options.

With ireland its like subbuteo you move one man at a time.
A player gives the ball, says my jobs done, stops and says now you do something .

It easy for defense to stop , one runner, one defender job done... but when more than one player is in motion at the same time , thats the modern game and thats what we need.

Traps international record in tournaments is crap.
Maybe club football is more about a system focused on 'not losing' and you might sneak a win. but international football is about 'getting a win' otherewise your out on your ear.
I still support him and the team 100% though.
Im loving the tournament , has everything.

LuckyLloyd

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

Where people's heads are at is that we have just been dominated by a Croatian side who don't come close to Italy or Spain in terms of ability.

I think many, and realistically so, think we would be better off looking forward because of the great unlikelyhood of us beating either Italy or Spain. Not ignoring this campaign completely, but looking towards the next campaign for the system and personnel changes that need to be made.

Trapattoni has refused to play both the formation we need and our best players throughout his reign.

For Thursday, of course we should play 4-5-1. I genuinely cannot see any argument whatsoever to justify how a midfield two, which has been over run by Croatia, Russia and Slovakia is going to be able to withstand Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Alonso, Fabregas and Silva. Just read over those names again and tell me how Whelan and Andrews in the centre makes sense.

One option is to bring Duff(and yes he can play there) into the centre, have Gibson, Andrews and Duff in the middle and put McClean on the left with McGeady on the right. Robbie Keane should not start this game and we need to play either Long or Walters. My personal preference would be Long due to the fact that he offers better pace and finishing.

So put Duff in as an attacking midfielder and drop Keane?

Sounds like people are fixated about how 'modern' our formation is, and have decided that it must be 4 - 5 - 1 irrespective of its workability with the players that are at our disposal.

Paris seems instructive as how the 4 - 4 - 2 can work against superior opposition if the players are on it. I'd drop Whelan for Gibson and Doyle for Walters, but I'd otherwise stay with the formation that best fits the players and skillsets in our squad, and is the formation that they have worked on as a group ad nauseum.

After that it's about the players playing well and us getting a few bounces - as it always was at the outset of this tournament.

SirDelboy18

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

So put Duff in as an attacking midfielder and drop Keane?

Sounds like people are fixated about how 'modern' our formation is, and have decided that it must be 4 - 5 - 1 irrespective of its workability with the players that are at our disposal.

Paris seems instructive as how the 4 - 4 - 2 can work against superior opposition if the players are on it. I'd drop Whelan for Gibson and Doyle for Walters, but I'd otherwise stay with the formation that best fits the players and skillsets in our squad, and is the formation that they have worked on as a group ad nauseum.

After that it's about the players playing well and us getting a few bounces - as it always was at the outset of this tournament.

Using Paris as the basis for your argument is fairly damning of the argument itself. The French team was in complete disarray, and went on to be defeated by both Mexico and South Africa in the WC. Their players revolted and they were awful. One performance against a team on the brink of collapse does not justify a formation over a myriad of performances where we have been overrun.

We have the players to play another formation and should have been doing it already. We have outlined the players and the system. Please stop banging the same drum about not having the players. We have them. Trap won't pick them or play them. End of.

LuckyLloyd

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

We have the players to play another formation and should have been doing it already. We have outlined the players and the system. Please stop banging the same drum about not having the players. We have them. Trap won't pick them or play them. End of.

You have outlined players not in Poland. Of the players Trapp has picked, they do not ably fit a 4 - 5 - 1. Most importantly however, it is not something this group has spent any time practising either in training or in a match.

This tournament is not over for us until the final whistle blows against Spain. The players we have available for selection against Spain best fit the formation that got them here. We should do what gives us the best possible chance while we still have a chance - and switch into development / forward thinking mode when our participation in this tournament has ended.

tolosenc

I think Trap deserves the benefit of the doubt. I'll be very disappointed if change doesn't come after these championships.

In the friendly in Belgrade in August, I'd like to see the following:

Westwood

Cunningham
St Ledger
Dunne (c)
Coleman

Clifford
McCarthy

McGeady
Brady
McClean

Long

Making use of the following at some point off the bench:


Duffy
Wilson
Foley

Treacy
Gibson

Best

ronsgonawin

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You have outlined players not in Poland. Of the players Trapp has picked, they do not ably fit a 4 - 5 - 1. Most importantly however, it is not something this group has spent any time practising either in training or in a match.

This tournament is not over for us until the final whistle blows against Spain. The players we have available for selection against Spain best fit the formation that got them here. We should do what gives us the best possible chance while we still have a chance - and switch into development / forward thinking mode when our participation in this tournament has ended.

To be fair Everton play some form of this system with 1 up top, so do WBA and Stoke do too When they play 1 up front it is during this is system WHEN Whelan normally plays.

Actually most professional footballers are interchangeable because depending on the game and type of opponent depends on the type of system they play.

Sticking with the same system irrelevant of the opposition is just illogical. Clubs spend fortunes on scouting other teams so they know how to play against them instead of just turning up.

LuckyLloyd

ronsgonawin wrote: »

To be fair Everton play some form of this system with 1 up top, so do WBA and Stoke do too When they play 1 up front it is during this is system WHEN Whelan normally plays.

Actually most professional footballers are interchangeable because depending on the game and type of opponent depends on the type of system they play.

Sticking with the same system irrelevant of the opposition is just illogical. Clubs spend fortunes on scouting other teams so they know how to play against them instead of just turning up.

Everton, Stoke and WBA use the system from time to time, but the point is that - when they do employ it - none of our three best central midfielders fill in either of the more complex and nuanced roles within the three man central midfield. They might know what they other guys on the team should be doing in such scenarios but they don't actually do it themselves...

TaosHum

Isn't Stephen Ireland making himself available for selection again afer the Euro's? I know he would not be the most popular of selections, but after having a decent season for a poor Villa side, he would at least provide a more technical option in midfield.

A midfield three of Gibson, Ireland and McCarthy against the poorer sides in the group would work well IMO.

monkey9

grenache wrote: »

Well us anti-Trap brigade have been proven right, as we knew we would. Not much point in keeping clean sheets against Estonia and Armenia if you're going to tactically and physically out-played against decent sides. When the likes of Armenia and Slovakia come to Dublin and dominate possession, you know you're in trouble.

The fact that Trap got us to the Euros has been rendered irrelevant by the pastings we took from Russia and Croatia, and are about to be given by Spain and Italy. I'd rather not qualify if we are going there just to be embarrassed.

Robbie Keane said last week that Ireland were not at the tournament to make up the numbers. With Trap and his anti-football, anti-winning tactics, it appears we are there for nothing else.

Jaysus!!!

wonderfullife

do ye not think we should save the inquest for after the tournament and focus on supporting the boys tomorrow night?

tolosenc

wonderfullife wrote: »

do ye not think we should save the inquest for after the tournament and focus on supporting the boys tomorrow night?

Fair. If we do beat Spain, we'd be in a better state than many imagined before the Croatia game.

Plus if we win and Italy win, then, what with their love of both Trap and rigging matches, we should get the exact result we need to go through!

monkey9

wonderfullife wrote: »

do ye not think we should save the inquest for after the tournament and focus on supporting the boys tomorrow night?

So what, everyone just keeps posting 'Come On Ireland' until we get knocked out and only then, we can start a discussion on a forum???

wonderfullife

monkey9 wrote: »

So what, everyone just keeps posting 'Come On Ireland' until we get knocked out and only then, we can start a discussion on a forum???

no.

By all means we should have opinions on selection and tactics etc but we should save the talk of the future i.e. Pilkington, Wilson, Hoolahan for after the tournament and focus our discussions on the here and now. It's our first major tournament in 10 years, personally i'd rather discuss who i would like to see playing tomorrow, in what formation etc than discussing Traps future or players for the future. And yeah a bit more "come on ireland" versus "Trap is a stubborn old man" would be more my cup of tea

wonderfullife

Speaking of which:

---

Given

---

O'Shea

---

Dunne

---

St. Ledger

---

Ward

---

Gibson

---

Andrews

---

Duff

---

Keane

---

McGeady

---

Walters

---

I just feel Walters is a better option for the long diagonals. Doyle played ok but has had a difficult season. Walters is in better form, slightly more pace and can hold the ball up. Italy got tremendous joy from long diagonals to Cassano. Granted, they had Pirlo to play those balls. I think Gibson is our best option passing wise so i'd have him in for that reason.

Pro. F

gosplan wrote: »

Because I think you're going to just disagree with me no matter what.

And you're about to agree with me are you? Of course not. We're arguing about something. Your nonsense about ranting and ignoring of logic was just a cop out.

gosplan wrote: »

Conceding from a second or third ball off a corner is exactly what trap's eradicated from the team, not introduced.

And that's blindingly obvious to anyone.

You're so eager to blame his system for everything that you can't accept that.

As far as I've seen we give up space in front of our last line of defence all the time. That leads to crosses, passes and shots coming in from there. I agree it's less likely to happen just after a corner, but it does still happen. And when you give up so much possession in the first place like we do then you are going to give up more corners and be tested more often. Too often - eventually it's going to crack.