Republic of Ireland Team Talk/News/Rumours 2020/2021 - see Mod Note in OP [18/11/20]

Starlord_01

pjohnson wrote: »

I'd pick O'Hara over Travers next time.

Saturday is the perfect time to blood Bazunu IMO.

NufcNavan

My thoughts on the game for what it's worth:

Bitter-sweet really. I expected a 2 or 3 nil loss and a big Kenny Out pile on. In the end we put in more than a credible performance with the players available and could have gotten a draw.

Overall Serbia were the better team, but I was glad we got back into it because 3-1 would have been harsh as they didn't pepper Ireland with chances. Tadic ran the show and got the freedom of midfield once Hendrick came on. That sub was a mistake by Kenny as Knight would have been a straight swap for Molumby and would have brought a similar energy.

Mitrovic would be the first player down on our team sheet but is a sub for Serbia. That is a nice luxury to have.

Overall it was a good performance and let down by keeper inexperience and a few players missing. If Randolph and Egan were fit, we get a draw from this game.

And for those saying 'if Mick or Mon were in charge we'd have gotten a draw', they both tried and failed in the last two campaigns to qualify. It's not as if there was some magical trade off for their style of play and results we were getting. We lost to Serbia under Mon, lost to Switzerland (similar level opposition) under Mick in the last two campaigns alone. They are gone and Kenny is in. Time to move on.

plibige

Remember your man McDermott the goalie playing in Norway, is he not getting a game anymore or what's the story there? He made a few squads under (not 100% sure but I think) Mccarthy and O'Neill.

If he's still getting a game would he not be worth a consideration? I know nothing about the guy beyond him having a very short stint at Dinamo Bucharest.

I know the squad isn't changing now, just a hypothetical I was thinking of this morning

noodler

I am satisfied enough, SK can't account for individual errors like that or an extremely poor (cowardly?) Refereeing decision.

There was the odd nice move, especially in the second half, but some seem to have seen a wildly different style.

I will settle for controlling the game against lesser teams and accept having to play tighter against the higher seeds.

Please God we get the win on Saturday and can then start to look forward.

johnnyryan89

Starlord_01 wrote: »

Saturday is the perfect time to blood Bazunu IMO.

Kenny could be ruthless and drop him, don't think anyone excepted the likes of Hendrick, Duffy or Brady to be all dropped, but if Bazunu was going to be starting qualifiers he would have started last night.

I think he should have started, think he's the better keeper presently and long term he's going to be much better. Either way with our first choice and second choice out it was always going to be tricky.

Had it been Bazunu that started and he made mistakes we probably would have said it's too early for him to be starting. Had it been O'Hara we would have been moaning that one of the young lads should have gotten the experience because O'Hara is never going to be good enough.

DM_7

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Under Trap or Mick we'd have got the point tonight.

Instead we end up with nothing trying to play a style we can't play.

We need to go back to our strengths.

Picking up on this as it was also mentioned in the match thread. I don't for a moment expect to change your mind in anyway so I am quoting more for the talking point.

The Ireland team is not a living organism with set traits that do not change. The strengths and weaknesses of the team are directly related to the the players available. There is no set way to approach a game across generations of players. Selecting an international team should of course have a focus on getting the best output from the players it can pick from today.

In last night game the manager did select a team and system to get the best from the players he had/has from the start and also when he adjusted towards the end of the game.

In defence, He went to a back 5 which is a way of playing that Stevens and Doherty know very well. As well as it suiting them as defenders, both players regularly featured in attacking phases, creating triangles and ball movement early - they got involved further up field to aid the attack also.

He used Coleman as the experienced defender to help lead the defence overall in the tyep of role that Azpilicueta has had for Chelsea and one that suited him. He used O'Shea well and in selecting him he opened up better use of the ball than would ever be possible with Duffy.

In midfield he selected Cullen to keep things moving and he did a very good job overall of taking the ball in a busy area of the pitch and keeping the ball moving. The three in midfield suited Molumby and Browne with the latter able to get forward into the areas of the pitch he is best utilised.

Robinson was used perfectly, balls to feet so he could carry the ball into the attacking third. It was exactly how he should be used. Connolly did well occupying the opponents CBs and continually made runs and calls in behind which pushed them back and created space for others.

The errors were the tactical adjustments and individual errors during the game. The keeper is caught in no mans land for the first two goals, for both goals the young players in O'Shea (did not step out) and Cullen (playing to feet as he would have for Connolly instead of over the top for Long) make poor choices that are severely punished. Kenny needed to tighten the team up before half time to make sure no goals were conceded and should probably have changed his attack to get Collins on earlier.

When the team changes cam later on it became much more 'Burnley' like by playing onto corners, looking for crosses and hitting Collins to try and hold up the ball. I think that was the right option for the players he had available, to move to their strengths, but not the option he should have started with on the night.

His biggest mistake was probably use of Hendricks who offered little of anything that I could see anyway.

I suppose my point in short is that Kenny did in fact play to the collective strengths of his players suitably mixed with his ideals on how a game should be approached.

gormdubhgorm

DM_7 wrote: »

Picking up on this as it was also mentioned in the match thread. I don't for a moment expect to change your mind in anyway so I am quoting more for the talking point.

The Ireland team is not a living organism with set traits that do not change. The strengths and weaknesses of the team are directly related to the the players available. There is no set way to approach a game across generations of players. Selecting an international team should of course have a focus on getting the best output from the players it can pick from today.

In last night game the manager did select a team and system to get the best from the players he had/has from the start and also when he adjusted towards the end of the game.

In defence, He went to a back 5 which is a way of playing that Stevens and Doherty know very well. As well as it suiting them as defenders, both players regularly featured in attacking phases, creating triangles and ball movement early - they got involved further up field to aid the attack also.

He used Coleman as the experienced defender to help lead the defence overall in the tyep of role that Azpilicueta has had for Chelsea and one that suited him. He used O'Shea well and in selecting him he opened up better use of the ball than would ever be possible with Duffy.

In midfield he selected Cullen to keep things moving and he did a very good job overall of taking the ball in a busy area of the pitch and keeping the ball moving. The three in midfield suited Molumby and Browne with the latter able to get forward into the areas of the pitch he is best utilised.

Robinson was used perfectly, balls to feet so he could carry the ball into the attacking third. It was exactly how he should be used. Connolly did well occupying the opponents CBs and continually made runs and calls in behind which pushed them back and created space for others.

The errors were the tactical adjustments and individual errors during the game. The keeper is caught in no mans land for the first two goals, for both goals the young players in O'Shea (did not step out) and Cullen (playing to feet as he would have for Connolly instead of over the top for Long) make poor choices that are severely punished. Kenny needed to tighten the team up before half time to make sure no goals were conceded and should probably have changed his attack to get Collins on earlier.

When the team changes cam later on it became much more 'Burnley' like by playing onto corners, looking for crosses and hitting Collins to try and hold up the ball. I think that was the right option for the players he had available, to move to their strengths, but not the option he should have started with on the night.

His biggest mistake was probably use of Hendricks who offered little of anything that I could see anyway.

I suppose my point in short is that Kenny did in fact play to the collective strengths of his players suitably mixed with his ideals on how a game should be approached.

Jayus, that analysis is miles better than you hear from the panelists/analysts at Ireland games. Hard to disagree with any of it.

wadacrack

This style of football under Kenny is much better for long term prospects, the game has moved on from just sitting on your 18 yard box defending and hoping to score from set pieces We are unlikely to even be in contention for the World Cup. Capping younger players hopefully aids their development.

GK Bazunu Kelleher

Defenders: Collins, O'Shea

Midfield: Molumpy, Knight, Smallbone, Coventry

Strikers: Idah, Connolly, Parrot, Obafemi


Ideally we need 3 or 4 to progress well in their careers. Important to to remember that not all young talented players will progress from youth football for a variety of reasons.. Players also will probably emerge that are not in the fold at the moment.

Bazunu, Collins , Knight and Smallbone and Parrot I think are the most likely to the best of the four.

Im not sure how good Connolly is and atm hes not good enough for the Premier League. Robinson who is basically a good Championship player has been much better for Ireland.

johnnyryan89

https://twitter.com/dvehendo/status/1375008494080888832

Good little thread from Dave Henderson, whose family know a thing or two about keepers. Definitely needs to get away from Bournemouth because I can't see him being first choice there ever. They're definitely going to bring in an experienced first choice if Begavic decides to leave and Travers can't afford to sit around being second choice when Kelleher could possibly be out on loan and you'd except City to send Bazunu out on loan again.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Jayus, that analysis is miles better than you hear from the panelists/analysts at Ireland games. Hard to disagree with any of it.

It's a pity you can't like it more than once.

Tchaikovsky

No way that Vlahovic is 21 - guy was the jock in American Pie.

gormdubhgorm

wadacrack wrote: »

This style of football under Kenny is much better for long term prospects, the game has moved on from just sitting on your 18 yard box defending and hoping to score from set pieces We are unlikely to even be in contention for the World Cup. Capping younger players hopefully aids their development.

GK Bazunu Kelleher

Defenders: Collins, O'Shea

Midfield: Molumpy, Knight, Smallbone, Coventry

Strikers: Idah, Connolly, Parrot, Obafemi


Ideally we need 3 or 4 to progress well in their careers. Important to to remember that not all young talented players will progress from youth football for a variety of reasons.. Players also will probably emerge that are not in the fold at the moment.

Bazunu, Collins , Knight and Smallbone and Parrot I think are the most likely to the best of the four.

Im not sure how good Connolly is and atm hes not good enough for the Premier League. Robinson who is basically a good Championship player has been much better for Ireland.

Obafemi has really gone backwards. Injury has not helped his cause. I have a feeling he will end up at Portsmouth or somewhere like that. He doesn't seem to have a 'football brain' relying on pure pace.

Kenny seems to love Parrot and Idah in particular. Hopefully Idah will progress into the striker Kenny believes he can become. Ireland badly need a striker.


Although Ireland scored two goals yesterday. One was from a midfielder. The other although scored by a forward (Collins) was not because of excellent finishing or skillful forward play. Just old fashioned harrying from Shane Long - pressure that Jack Chartlon would have been proud of.

Plus Ireland need a passing midfielder to emerge to service this striker whoever it is that develops.

I noticed that Browne mentioned that he enjoys the 3-5-2 in his post match. Because it gives him more freedom in midfield. Hopefully such 'freedom' will allow players to be less afraid to at least attempt to play more penetrative passes in future?

Short passing does not mean side to side all the time.

Francie Barrett

DM_7 wrote: »

Picking up on this as it was also mentioned in the match thread. I don't for a moment expect to change your mind in anyway so I am quoting more for the talking point.

The Ireland team is not a living organism with set traits that do not change. The strengths and weaknesses of the team are directly related to the the players available. There is no set way to approach a game across generations of players. Selecting an international team should of course have a focus on getting the best output from the players it can pick from today.

In last night game the manager did select a team and system to get the best from the players he had/has from the start and also when he adjusted towards the end of the game.

In defence, He went to a back 5 which is a way of playing that Stevens and Doherty know very well. As well as it suiting them as defenders, both players regularly featured in attacking phases, creating triangles and ball movement early - they got involved further up field to aid the attack also.

He used Coleman as the experienced defender to help lead the defence overall in the tyep of role that Azpilicueta has had for Chelsea and one that suited him. He used O'Shea well and in selecting him he opened up better use of the ball than would ever be possible with Duffy.

In midfield he selected Cullen to keep things moving and he did a very good job overall of taking the ball in a busy area of the pitch and keeping the ball moving. The three in midfield suited Molumby and Browne with the latter able to get forward into the areas of the pitch he is best utilised.

Robinson was used perfectly, balls to feet so he could carry the ball into the attacking third. It was exactly how he should be used. Connolly did well occupying the opponents CBs and continually made runs and calls in behind which pushed them back and created space for others.

The errors were the tactical adjustments and individual errors during the game. The keeper is caught in no mans land for the first two goals, for both goals the young players in O'Shea (did not step out) and Cullen (playing to feet as he would have for Connolly instead of over the top for Long) make poor choices that are severely punished. Kenny needed to tighten the team up before half time to make sure no goals were conceded and should probably have changed his attack to get Collins on earlier.

When the team changes cam later on it became much more 'Burnley' like by playing onto corners, looking for crosses and hitting Collins to try and hold up the ball. I think that was the right option for the players he had available, to move to their strengths, but not the option he should have started with on the night.

His biggest mistake was probably use of Hendricks who offered little of anything that I could see anyway.

I suppose my point in short is that Kenny did in fact play to the collective strengths of his players suitably mixed with his ideals on how a game should be approached.

This is spot on.

The only thing I would add and is I think the tiredness of the players was a real factor for us. The players put in a huge shift for the first 30 minutes and while we were brilliant, it had an impact later on. You can see as early as the end of the first half we started looking a little leggy as our pressing was slackening off and the Serbs were in the ascendency. By the middle of the second half, the midfield was definitely starting to look tired, and it's not surprising that mistakes were made and the Serbs got two goals.

I think the thing to learn is that if we are playing a high energy game and have 5 subs, we need to be using them earlier. I wonder if we had made three subs at around the 60 minute mark, would the fresh legs have maybe made an impact and stopped us conceding two goals in rapid succession.

sheroman01

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Azerbaijan will take points in this group . Only lost one nil tonight. Early days in group but obviously with only 8 games to be played the margin for error is thin.

Ah, Portugal were all over them. They had 29 goal attempts, 15 on target.

Tchaikovsky

Incredible the criticism continually aimed at Stephen Kenny - people saying we'd get smacked 5-0 and then when we lose narrowly, he should still go? His interview style when he's being asked questions via satellite with a (clearly audible) 5 second delay? Give me a ****ing break.

Captain Havoc

I can never be happy with a loss, and three points gained by our rivals for second spot. There are plenty of positives and a few negatives. The first few minutes were a mix of positive attacking and what looked like at times a pub team trying to play tikki takka but as the match progressed the team did really well in keeping possession and overall it was a positive performance.

Stephen Kenny is not Mick or MON or Trap, which is why he is the manager, it's something different. He is terrible at interviews, which probably comes from years of not being polished by PR training, sometimes this can be refreshing but not with Kenny.

I wasn't crazy about Connolly last night, and I think Travers shouldn't be criticized, he's a young league 1 keeper, and he was possibly our best choice last night, I've only ever seen Bazanu play when he was 16. Alan Browne though is someone I hope has nailed his place in the team down.

I'm looking forward to Saturday as for the first time in ages, I get the feeling this isn't going to be a hard and bravely fought victory against a small nation. I'm also looking forward to the Aviva reopening and being entertained again, something I don't think we've had since Brian Kerr or even Mick Mk1.

Francie Barrett

Captain Havoc wrote: »

I wasn't crazy about Connolly last night

Connolly was dwarfed by the size of the Serbian defenders. While Robinson had the pace and trickery to be able to lose his defenders at times, Connolly tended to be in a physical battle which could only end one way. I think it might have been better if Long started and Connolly came on as the impact sub when the Serbs started to tire.

johnnyryan89

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Plus Ireland need a passing midfielder to emerge to service this striker whoever it is that develops.

Step on up Will Smallbone.

This lad could be that passing midfielder we need. Hasenhuttl rates him highly, so much I think he prefers to keep him around to learn within the squad rather than loaning him out. Though I think someone mentioned that Southampton often prefer to keep lads around the club when developing rather than sending them out on loan.

He could be that 10 for us if he can stay fit and get game time. Hasenhuttl has said he's more comfortable at 6 but has the skills to allow him play more advance and possibly create chances.

Outside of Smallbone the options are probably limited. Jack Byrne is currently injured, Ronan is in the second division of Switzerland, Jamie McGrath is playing well at St Mirren and could possibly get a move to a bigger club.

Other than those I'm not sure who'd you look at and say he could be a good option. You look at whose currently in the U21s and I'm not sure what Gavin Kilkenny's long term role will be plus he's warming the bench for Bournemouth, Luca Connell is a 6 and not sure about the other midfielders bar Louie Watson whose apparently an attacking midfielder.

Tchaikovsky

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Step on up Will Smallbone.

This lad could be that passing midfielder we need. Hasenhuttl rates him highly, so much I think he prefers to keep him around to learn within the squad rather than loaning him out. Though I think someone mentioned that Southampton often prefer to keep lads around the club when developing rather than sending them out on loan.

He could be that 10 for us if he can stay fit and get game time. Hasenhuttl has said he's more comfortable at 6 but has the skills to allow him play more advance and possibly create chances.

Outside of Smallbone the options are probably limited. Jack Byrne is currently injured, Ronan is in the second division of Switzerland, Jamie McGrath is playing well at St Mirren and could possibly get a move to a bigger club.

Other than those I'm not sure who'd you look at and say he could be a good option. You look at whose currently in the U21s and I'm not sure what Gavin Kilkenny's long term role will be plus he's warming the bench for Bournemouth, Luca Connell is a 6 and not sure about the other midfielders bar Louie Watson whose apparently an attacking midfielder.

Really like Jamie, he's had a good season with St Mirren by all accounts but I think he might need to make a step up before he has a shout at some caps.

plibige

Unfortunately there are people who would have never given Kenny a chance due to being from the league of Ireland. And due to the results to this point (whether the circumstances helped or not) they have a lot of ammo.

In saying that, I think its fair to say there are positives coming for sure.

And let's be honest, this is probably the worst Ireland squad in 40+ years talent wise.

Maybe I'm wrong (and I'll happily admit it if so) but the Ireland of the past few decades wasn't working anymore. We always got by on having a couple of top talented premier league players, heart, grit, determination and luck. The most important part of that being the handful of top premier league players. We don't have that anymore. And might not for some time.

I'd rather give this campaign and next campaign a go "trying something different", bleeding in the young guys and hopefully building something a bit more sustainable down the line.

I keep saying it but "Rome wasn't built in a day", let's see where this goes

Morzadec

I'm a big fan of Stephen Kenny from what I've seen. I'm not someone who will call for style over substance, you have to be pragmatic. But I do think that if given time Kenny will get the results.

I think he got close to the best he could out of that squad last night, and we probably get a result if either of our first 2 keepers are available. And that's against a team that is clearly superior to us on paper.

This is the most engaged I've been with the Irish national team for a while, I genuinely enjoyed that match last night. Imo that looked a well coached team, well set up, driven, confident and playing for their manager.

I really hope the fans and the FAI keep patience with Kenny and he gets this and the next qualifying campaign. Qualifying for a World Cup is incredibly difficult for a team of Ireland's quality (we're clearly not in the top 13 teams in Europe). Qualifying for a Euros should be attainable (we should be in and around the top 24). I hope Kenny gets that chance to try take us to the next Euros, bringing the young lads through and playing good confident football.

Tchaikovsky

plibige wrote: »

Unfortunately there are people who would have never given Kenny a chance due to being from the league of Ireland. And due to the results to this point (whether the circumstances helped or not) they have a lot of ammo.

In saying that, I think its fair to say there are positives coming for sure.

And let's be honest, this is probably the worst Ireland squad in 40+ years talent wise.

Maybe I'm wrong (and I'll happily admit it if so) but the Ireland of the past few decades wasn't working anymore. We always got by on having a couple of top talented premier league players, heart, grit, determination and luck. The most important part of that being the handful of top premier league players. We don't have that anymore. And might not for some time.

I'd rather give this campaign and next campaign a go "trying something different", bleeding in the young guys and hopefully building something a bit more sustainable down the line.

I keep saying it but "Rome wasn't built in a day", let's see where this goes

Absolutely. It was mentioned widely when SK took over that it would be short term pain for long term gain. We're certainly moving in the right direction. People saying that we would've gotten a result last night with Mick - no we wouldn't; it would've been exactly like away to Switzerland a few years ago where we huffed and puffed but didn't overly worry them.

We don't expect to qualify but I think there will be surprises in this group. Portugal can sometimes flatter to deceive and think we can certainly beat Serbia at home, with hopefully a full house. The fans will push the players on, we saw it against Switzerland and Denmark at home with the late equalizers.

Despite their attacking talent, Serbia didn't have any clear cut chances bar the one that brushed past the post in the second half and we were undone but a silly error of judgement by our keeper for the second. It's odd for an Irish keeper to make a costly mistake in a big game - I honestly can't think of the last time it happened... Packie dropping the ball against Holland in 94?

johnnyryan89

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

Really like Jamie, he's had a good season with St Mirren by all accounts but I think he might need to make a step up before he has a shout at some caps.

Unfortunately even if additional call ups were allowed for the Qatar game, I don't think we would even call him up with it being a friendly as St Mirren would definitely refuse the call up given the lad is holding off on shoulder surgery that he needs for the time being.

Kermit.de.frog

I'd be OK with Kenny having the Euro's. We won't be going to this world cup clearly so all that we can do now is try to mould something for the next tournament.

That should be the target now for this campaign.

I just don't think we have the players to play the game for 90 minutes he wants to play.

dr.kenneth noisewater

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Connolly was dwarfed by the size of the Serbian defenders. While Robinson had the pace and trickery to be able to lose his defenders at times, Connolly tended to be in a physical battle which could only end one way. I think it might have been better if Long started and Connolly came on as the impact sub when the Serbs started to tire.

Yeah I'd have to agree, Connolly looked lightweight and not fully fit. Always though Long looked best in a front 2 as well. Connolly and Molumphy need to get fitter for this level, both were gassed by the hour mark which isnt great.

gormdubhgorm

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

It's odd for an Irish keeper to make a costly mistake in a big game - I honestly can't think of the last time it happened... Packie dropping the ball against Holland in 94?

I know it wasn't a 'big game' but:

Darren Randolph v Finland Away 66 min - short goal kick gone wrong (October 2020).

https://punditarena.com/football/paul-moore/darren-randolph/

(Goal in video @3:21)

I didn't remember it off the top of my head. I had to resort to an internet search. I think we are blanking out traumatic events at this stage!

Tchaikovsky

Nations League isn't a big game though.. it's a glorified friendly.

Banjaxed82

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

Nations League isn't a big game though.. it's a glorified friendly.

We need put a halt to this friendly game talk. Given our size and ability to qualify for tournaments, any competition that offers us even a glimmer of hope for qualifying should be taken seriously.

Yeah, the Europa league is sh!te, but you can guarantee that any club that suddenly finds themselves deeper into the competition, a few games from the champions league, suddenly takes it very serious.

Incidentally, I've watched plenty of the matches involving the top nations, and the level of commitment is on par with a regular qualifier. So not sure where this friendly narrative comes from. There's promotion/relegation and a mini tournament to decide an overall winner. Your performance is this affects ranking and qualifying hopes in other comps. How is that a friendly?

Kermit.de.frog

Agree. The fact is we couldn't even qualify for a Euro's of 24 teams. That's where we are coming from.

The nations league offers weak teams like ours a route out of a rut and a foundation from which to build as well as something tangible to aim for which friendlies don't.

showpony1

fullstop wrote: »

Is that why he couldn’t displace the mighty Dan Burn to get back in the Brighton team for most of last season and they shipped him up to the SPL :pac:

If Duffy played and made a mistake you’d be in having a go at ‘Stephen’ for not having the balls to drop him like Celtic did.

Did you see the 3rd goal for the Serbs? Case closed on why Shane should be starting. We also had nothing from set pieces at the other end of the pitch.

I struggle to understand how it has to be justified that wasn't a great game from us. We were brushed aside quite easily and looked like a European minnow.

johnnyryan89

dr.kenneth noisewater wrote: »

Yeah I'd have to agree, Connolly looked lightweight and not fully fit. Always though Long looked best in a front 2 as well. Connolly and Molumphy need to get fitter for this level, both were gassed by the hour mark which isnt great.

It's where McGoldrick was badly missed last night as his presence and hold up play would have been a plus against the Serbian defence.

Ronan Curtis could be an option. He's bigger than Connolly and he puts in good work hassling defenders. Only downside to him is he wouldn't have the pace that other forwards have like Connolly, Long or Obafemi if he can work his way back into squads.

Long term you're hoping Idah comes good, but that all depends on how Norwich handle his development. For now they clearly prefer for him to remain at the club and monitor his development closely. But if they're in the premier league again next season they could buy another striker if Pukki doesn't sign a new contract. He'll be 32 and a free agent come July 2022, and our nation's league campaign starts not long after that.

showpony1

DM_7 wrote: »

Connolly did well occupying the opponents CBs and continually made runs and calls in behind which pushed them back and created space for others.

He stood there pointing in between the two centre backs as if our midfield were going to thread the eye of a needle and land it on a plate in front of their goal for him rather than being busy with movement taking them into the channel and try to get the ball in front of him in space.

A midfield carrier created a 2 on 2 nearly at one stage and he still tried run in between the two CBs pointing rather than go wide of them making an angle.

He didn't want to know about taking it into feet and holding it either.

I'm sure i'll be told he played well though on here.

showpony1

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

It's where McGoldrick was badly missed last night as his presence and hold up play would have been a plus against the Serbian defence.

Agreed a huge loss - it seems unusual he wanted to focus on the championship rather than a crack at the World Cup which probably speaks volumes of our managerial appointment. I think if we get in Chris Wilder to replace Stephen we might get David back.

Banjaxed82

showpony1 wrote: »

Agreed a huge loss - it seems unusual he wanted to focus on the championship rather than a crack at the World Cup which probably speaks volumes of our managerial appointment. I think if we get in Chris Wilder to replace Stephen we might get David back.

There was every likelihood that come the World Cup (had we qualified)...

a) he might not be in starting 11

b) might not even get selected for the squad

A year and a half is a long time when you're his age.

showpony1

Banjaxed82 wrote: »

There was every likelihood that come the World Cup (had we qualified)...

a) he might not be in starting 11

b) might not even get selected for the squad

A year and a half is a long time when you're his age.

well he is currently miles above any of our attackers imvho.

very hard to see him not even selected for the squad!!

athlone99

showpony1 wrote: »

Did you see the 3rd goal for the Serbs? Case closed on why Shane should be starting. We also had nothing from set pieces at the other end of the pitch.

I struggle to understand how it has to be justified that wasn't a great game from us. We were brushed aside quite easily and looked like a European minnow.

Did you see the rest of the game where the CB's were comfortable on the ball. SK basically said Duffy wasn't fit enough to start, has played something like 60 mins for Celtic since Feb. If he started Duffy and he was at fault for 2 goals or caught for pace SK would have been slated for playing a player who is out of form and not match sharp. He picked 2 CB's playing premier league week in week out for the last 2 months. I doubt if Duffy was really in his thoughts and if you asked Shane Duffy he wouldn't question the managers decision either!

If we were brushed aside by a so called European minnow, what does that make us? Wake up, they are 12 places above us in the world rankings for a reason. That kinda talk in nonsense, we have always been a minnow who punched above our weight and the years of under investment/lack of interest in developing players on this island in now coming back to bite us!

Banjaxed82

showpony1 wrote: »

well he is currently miles above any of our attackers imvho.

very hard to see him not even selected for the squad!!

He'd be 35 if we made it to Qatar. 18 months in football is a long time.

He hedged his bets now. Do I break my bollocks, then some new player (a player not even on our radar at the moment) swoops in 6 months before the world cup.

It's fairly obvious he didn't want to go on the journey if he wasn't guaranteed to get to the destination.

johnnyryan89

Banjaxed82 wrote: »

There was every likelihood that come the World Cup (had we qualified)...

a) he might not be in starting 11

b) might not even get selected for the squad

A year and a half is a long time when you're his age.

I assume he was replying to me since I mentioned McGoldrick, can't see his replies as I've him ignored. But McGoldrick is a family man and clearly wants to spend time with his family and nobody knows what could be going on in the background. Similar you've got CJ Stander retiring from rugby to be with his family.

For some people spending time with their families is more important, and I'm sure Covid has helped a lot of those people make decisions sooner rather than later. More so Stander than McGoldrick given their ages.

showpony1

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

Absolutely. It was mentioned widely when SK took over that it would be short term pain for long term gain. We're certainly moving in the right direction.

I don't really think you can say that.

From talking to anyone i know about the last few games - I think it is equal people who want Stephen out no matter what and those who want to lavish praise him for 10 mins where we kept the ball in the first half.

showpony1

athlone99 wrote: »

If we were brushed aside by a so called European minnow, what does that make us? Wake up, they are 12 places above us in the world rankings for a reason. That kinda talk in nonsense, we have always been a minnow who punched above our weight and the years of under investment/lack of interest in developing players on this island in now coming back to bite us!

re-read my post, i said we are a minnow not Serbia.
sad to see you attacking me without even fully reading my post.

athlone99

showpony1 wrote: »

re-read my post, i said we are a minnow not Serbia.
sad to see you attacking me without even fully reading my post.

My apologies you stating we looked like a European minnow which in fact we are.

Can you accept that Shane Duffy should have been no where near the team last night?

showpony1

athlone99 wrote: »

My apologies you stating we looked like a European minnow which in fact we are.

Can you accept that Shane Duffy should have been no where near the team last night?

Apology accepted.

My thoughts are Duffy is a talisman type for the Irish side & these type of players don't often need to be necessarily playing week in, week out to perform when internationals come around.

I'd have backed him to possibly have been there for the first goal and certainly stopped the 3rd goals.

When you add that he might have even got on the end of a few corners at the other end of the pitch i don't agree that it's a no-brainer that O'Shea is playing over him. I don't particuarly see the excellent footballer playing out from the back that everyone else is seeing, i see an inexperienced CB that looks like has mistakes in him.

athlone99

showpony1 wrote: »

Apology accepted.

My thoughts are Duffy is a talisman type for the Irish side & these type of players don't often need to be necessarily playing week in, week out to perform when internationals come around.

I'd have backed him to possibly have been there for the first goal and certainly stopped the 3rd goals.

When you add that he might have even got on the end of a few corners at the other end of the pitch i don't agree that it's a no-brainer that O'Shea is playing over him. I don't particuarly see the excellent footballer playing out from the back that everyone else is seeing, i see an inexperienced CB that looks like has mistakes in him.

I dont think he would have lasted 90 mins. On the first goal, Duffy has a turning circle of the ship currently stuck in the Suez Canal, so it wouldn't have made a difference as Clark was beaten as the left sided CB and Duffy would have been where O'Shea was. Again 3rd goal came against the left sided CB and Duffy wouldnt have been near the cross. So to my mind due to where he would have played he wouldnt have affected the goals.

As for attack set pieces he might have been a threat but the set piece delivery last night was shocking all round from Browne to Brady and then the standard of crossing was also shocking.

showpony1

athlone99 wrote: »

I dont think he would have lasted 90 mins. On the first goal, Duffy has a turning circle of the ship currently stuck in the Suez Canal, so it wouldn't have made a difference as Clark was beaten as the left sided CB and Duffy would have been where O'Shea was. Again 3rd goal came against the left sided CB and Duffy wouldnt have been near the cross. So to my mind due to where he would have played he wouldnt have affected the goals.

As for attack set pieces he might have been a threat but the set piece delivery last night was shocking all round from Browne to Brady and then the standard of crossing was also shocking.

Egan would make a big difference along with McCarthy sitting in front of the defence. As soon as i saw McCarthy playing against Man United a few weeks ago i said i guarantee he somehow won't be fit fro ireland, and he went off injured later that game.

Banjaxed82

showpony1 wrote: »

Apology accepted.

My thoughts are Duffy is a talisman type for the Irish side & these type of players don't often need to be necessarily playing week in, week out to perform when internationals come around.

I'd have backed him to possibly have been there for the first goal and certainly stopped the 3rd goals.

When you add that he might have even got on the end of a few corners at the other end of the pitch i don't agree that it's a no-brainer that O'Shea is playing over him. I don't particuarly see the excellent footballer playing out from the back that everyone else is seeing, i see an inexperienced CB that looks like has mistakes in him.

It's too easy to lay a potential narrative onto a factual narrative.

Maybe Duffy would have stormed it or maybe the match would have been over a halftime.

I don't think picking out individual moments is a constructive way of analysing a game without also factoring in what may have gone wrong with Shane Duffy playing.

But this is it. We'll never know either way.

athlone99

Rather than Duffy, i think John Egan was the bigger miss. Egan in with O'Shea rather than Clark would be my long term CB's.

I'm so unsure on McCarthy. I've never seen him do what Cullen did last night for Ireland. He sometimes tends to run around and point rather than demand the ball like Cullen did last night. McCarthy is a good footballer but i dont think he has produced for Ireland albeit its a long time since he played consistently.

Banjaxed82

athlone99 wrote: »

Rather than Duffy, i think John Egan was the bigger miss. Egan in with O'Shea rather than Clark would be my long term CB's.

I'm so unsure on McCarthy. I've never seen him do what Cullen did last night for Ireland. He sometimes tends to run around and point rather than demand the ball like Cullen did last night. McCarthy is a good footballer but i dont think he has produced for Ireland albeit its a long time since he played consistently.

McCarthy never lacked bravery off the ball, just on the ball. Or wanting to be on the ball.

as annoying as Trap could be at times, he was spot on when he said that McCarthy lacks "personality" on the pitch.

Cullen did last night what we always wanted McCarty to do which is the proactively seek out the ball consistently. This is a level of responsibility the McCarthy did not do on a consistent basis.

He definitely had it in his locker to do it, but for whatever reason he didn't.

Tchaikovsky

showpony1 wrote: »

I don't really think you can say that.

From talking to anyone i know about the last few games - I think it is equal people who want Stephen out no matter what and those who want to lavish praise him for 10 mins where we kept the ball in the first half.

Well that's my opinion. I don't understand people who want him out no matter what. Who would they bring in as a replacement? What players will they magic up to go and beat Portugal? It's not about lavishing praise for passing the ball for 10 minutes, the overall shape of the team and confidence on the ball is a lot better than what it was under the last 4-5 managers. He hasn't had a settled team at all yet so obviously it's hard to gain consistency in this style. Hopefully it settles down injury-wise and we have our strongest XI available. That's progress in the right direction in my opinion.

~Rebel~

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

I assume he was replying to me since I mentioned McGoldrick, can't see his replies as I've him ignored. But McGoldrick is a family man and clearly wants to spend time with his family and nobody knows what could be going on in the background. Similar you've got CJ Stander retiring from rugby to be with his family.

For some people spending time with their families is more important, and I'm sure Covid has helped a lot of those people make decisions sooner rather than later. More so Stander than McGoldrick given their ages.

He’s also coming into the last year of his contract - can totally see the pragmatic decision to pour his efforts into his club game, and take his much needed recovery time during international breaks. If it earns him a contract extension, or a decent deal elsewhere, it’ll have been majorly worth it.

johnnyryan89

athlone99 wrote: »

Rather than Duffy, i think John Egan was the bigger miss. Egan in with O'Shea rather than Clark would be my long term CB's.

I'm so unsure on McCarthy. I've never seen him do what Cullen did last night for Ireland. He sometimes tends to run around and point rather than demand the ball like Cullen did last night. McCarthy is a good footballer but i dont think he has produced for Ireland albeit its a long time since he played consistently.

Yeah Egan was possibly the biggest loss from the defence. That first goal probably doesn't happen as Egan possibly anticipates what's going to happen and steps up to play the defender offside or drops back a bit to have a better chance of challenging for the second ball.

The lads at half time mentioned that Clark rushing out to challenge Tadic for the ball has probably affected O'Shea's thinking a bit and that little delay has caught him out. Or it was something along those lines as I'm pretty sure they mention that there's no need for Clark to rush out and challenge for the ball like that.

Egan playing that position of central in a back three week in week out organises that defence better. If the 3-5-2 is going to be kept then this is the back five I'd be going with in September:

Coleman - ? - Egan - ? - Stevens

I've put two ? either side of Egan because we don't know if or how some defenders will be playing come September. If Mick wants Duffy at Cardiff then even better for us as he'll be playing in a back five and playing regularly again. Could see himself playing RCB for us if he gets his form back.

Clark was easily beaten for the third, and rushed out to challenge Tadic for the first when he wasn't going to win it. Lenihan is someone that could play next to Egan at LCB. He's played in a back five for Blackburn and would be a more physical defender than Clark and taller than Clark.

Coleman for me plays RWB if we are lining up like we did last night rather than how Serbia lined up. Colemans game intelligence is much better than Doherty's which only benefits us more in the final third. Doherty is a more direct player, and that suited Wolves because they lined up like Serbia so had someone playing further forward out wide to link up with Doherty.

~Rebel~ wrote: »

He’s also coming into the last year of his contract - can totally see the pragmatic decision to pour his efforts into his club game, and take his much needed recovery time during international breaks. If it earns him a contract extension, or a decent deal elsewhere, it’ll have been majorly worth it.

He'll probably retire given his age, which again wouldn't have benefited us because the WC would have been played a few months later. So him retiring now was probably for the best rather plugging a hole for us and then being in this same position again down the line. Long should be similar given he's older than McGoldrick but he's probably going to be an impact player for us this campaign.

showpony1

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

Well that's my opinion. I don't understand people who want him out no matter what. Who would they bring in as a replacement? What players will they magic up to go and beat Portugal? It's not about lavishing praise for passing the ball for 10 minutes, the overall shape of the team and confidence on the ball is a lot better than what it was under the last 4-5 managers. He hasn't had a settled team at all yet so obviously it's hard to gain consistency in this style. Hopefully it settles down injury-wise and we have our strongest XI available. That's progress in the right direction in my opinion.

Chris Wilder.

probably "want him out no matter what" was a bad phrasing - but more so if we continue to just lose games comfortably they will criticize and want Stephen Kennedy gone.

I couldn't agree that this is progress from the period of the last 4/5 managers, this is progress from where we were at Euro 2016? We had lads passing the ball around against Italy there & also a bit of backbone.

I could maybe agree that last night was progress from where Kennedy was a few months ago, but not progress of our team from over the years. We look like anyone will beat us now but lads are confident passing the ball?

I am struggling to see how passages of trying to pass it on the deck is all people want.