Republic of Ireland Team 2023/24 [old thread]

athlone99

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Watching the Euros makes me fundamentally reject the thesis of ‘there’s no point going to tournaments unless you play “proper” football’. Being there is everything. You can see that from the players and fans of ostensible “no hoper” teams like Macedonia or Finland.

The only thing that matters is competitiveness and whatever approach maximises our ability to qualify for these tournaments imo. This is solidified by watching then play out in our absence.

I agree with you to a point but i dont think i could never experience a tournament like 2012 again. We were a laughing stock on the pitch. A better brand of football than just sitting back and defending is essential going forward. Did you really enjoy watching Ireland getting hammered and embarrassed in every game? 2016 was a bit better because i think MON actually changed tactics and realized he needed Wes in the team to have a chance of getting out of the group.

Mantis Toboggan

Who were in our group in 2012?

~Rebel~

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Who were in our group in 2012?

Group of death! Spain, Italy, and Croatia.

It’s a really tough question - I’m ok with being at a tournament with a poor/mediocre team. But being there with a poor team in a group that is about as tough as they come is a really demeaning experience.

Like, I’d love to be there in Slovakia’s place right now - but would I like to be there in Hungary’s place this year? Christ, I don’t know..

(ok, on balance I think I still would - but with the whole tournament watched with squinted eyes and jaw clenched!)

Tchaikovsky

That's the only time, aside from Euro 88 which was a success, that we didn't get out of the group at a tournament. I think in the grand scheme of things, we've never really been shown up on a global stage. Scotland have never been out of a group, for instance.

Mantis Toboggan

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Who were in our group in 2012?

3 football teams and the Irish.

I get the "would love to be there" thing at the start of a tournament. But it's not fun when the writing is on the wall, like when it became clear the Dutch were going to win in 94, or after 2 games in 12.

Plus, it's not like hoofing it guarantees qualification. Like the final campaigns of Trap and O'Neill, where we hoofed and hoofed and still didn't make it.

LuckyLloyd

athlone99 wrote: »

I agree with you to a point but i dont think i could never experience a tournament like 2012 again. We were a laughing stock on the pitch. A better brand of football than just sitting back and defending is essential going forward. Did you really enjoy watching Ireland getting hammered and embarrassed in every game? 2016 was a bit better because i think MON actually changed tactics and realized he needed Wes in the team to have a chance of getting out of the group.

We got a nightmare draw and the Croatia game could have gone either way. But give me the feeling of being on the pitch and competing during the first half with that Spanish side than sitting it out.

I suppose I fundamentally disagree with your view on this though. And it's agree to disagree territory.

JKerova1

Jairo Gifted Safflower wrote: »

11 back and hoof the ball forward may get us the odd unexpected win but it won't see us qualify for anything either

We qualified in 2002, 2012 and 2016 playing this type of football and actually played some great stuff once we qualified in 02 and 16.


We might not have qualified for every tournament but we were extremely competitive, nearly winning the group in 2000, finishing 2 points off qualification for 2006, getting to the play offs for WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 2010 and WC 2018. We have a far better recent record than most similarly sized countries. Now we are going to sacrifice our competitive edge and probably destroy our seeding for the sake of some pipe dream about Ireland dominating teams by playing glorious free flowing football.

JKerova1

JKerova1 wrote: »

We qualified in 2002, 2012 and 2016 playing this type of football and actually played some great stuff once we qualified in 02 and 16.


We might not have qualified for every tournament but we were extremely competitive, nearly winning the group in 2000, finishing 2 points off qualification for 2006, getting to the play offs for WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 2010 and WC 2018. We have a far better recent record than most similarly sized countries. Now we are going to sacrifice our competitive edge and probably destroy our seeding for the sake of some pipe dream about Ireland dominating teams by playing glorious free flowing football.

There's a balance but parking the bus hasn't worked recently, football changes were never going to be pep barca and we shouldn't be aiming for that style but we have to be able to string a handful of passes together or were wasting our time.

~Rebel~

JKerova1 wrote: »

We qualified in 2002, 2012 and 2016 playing this type of football and actually played some great stuff once we qualified in 02 and 16.


We might not have qualified for every tournament but we were extremely competitive, nearly winning the group in 2000, finishing 2 points off qualification for 2006, getting to the play offs for WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 2010 and WC 2018. We have a far better recent record than most similarly sized countries. Now we are going to sacrifice our competitive edge and probably destroy our seeding for the sake of some pipe dream about Ireland dominating teams by playing glorious free flowing football.

This completely ignores the players we actually have, and what they’re actually good at. For a lot of those past teams, what we did was pragmatic. What we’re doing now is also pragmatic, because we don’t have a McGoldrick or a Doyle or a Walters or a Quinn to play long to.

People are getting way too obsessed with the passing thing, when it’s irrelevant to the actual problem. Whether we pass it, or hoof it, all that actually matters is creating a few chances. And we’ve been doing that - we’ve just not been scoring them.

Even against Andorra, we created two more easy easy chances, but Curtis and Collins couldn’t even get them on target.

Hoofing the ball up the field isn’t going to make our players finishing any better - if anything it’ll just further expose their flaws by asking them to fo even more, and we’ll create even fewer chances.

athlone99

JKerova1 wrote: »

We qualified in 2002, 2012 and 2016 playing this type of football and actually played some great stuff once we qualified in 02 and 16.


We might not have qualified for every tournament but we were extremely competitive, nearly winning the group in 2000, finishing 2 points off qualification for 2006, getting to the play offs for WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 2010 and WC 2018. We have a far better recent record than most similarly sized countries. Now we are going to sacrifice our competitive edge and probably destroy our seeding for the sake of some pipe dream about Ireland dominating teams by playing glorious free flowing football.

I'm not sure SK has actually said that (i dont remember as much and i may be wrong) but he said he believes in a better way of winning games, that doesnt mean he's trying to turn the team into Barca or Man City, he wants the team to be better on the ball and try and create chances rather than sitting back for 80 mins and hoping to nick a draw in the last 10 mins.

Almost all club football has moved to possession based, most international teams too and we have been left behind in that respect, we need to move on and find the balance of keeping the ball and building from the back and trying to win games.

lawred2

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

We got a nightmare draw and the Croatia game could have gone either way. But give me the feeling of being on the pitch and competing during the first half with that Spanish side than sitting it out.

I suppose I fundamentally disagree with your view on this though. And it's agree to disagree territory.

That's not how I remember it

Francie Barrett

athlone99 wrote: »

We were a laughing stock on the pitch. A better brand of football than just sitting back and defending is essential going forward.

I think you're conflating two different things.

We got a hiding because we were a mediocre team playing two outstanding teams, and one very good team, not because of any brand of football.

The only very good team we've played under Kenny's reign so far has been England. The mostly back-up team they put out wiped the floor with us in just 45 minutes. An Italy or Spain again would easily be able to do likewise no matter what style was used.

LuckyLloyd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

We got a nightmare draw and the Croatia game could have gone either way. But give me the feeling of being on the pitch and competing during the first half with that Spanish side than sitting it out.

Competing?

Duff was just talking about the game during the Scottish match just now.

He was laughing at how they had some outside hope of catching Spain, Torres scored within a few minutes, and we barely touched the ball after that.

Tchaikovsky

Francie Barrett wrote: »

The only very good team we've played under Kenny's reign so far has been England. The mostly back-up team they put out wiped the floor with us in just 45 minutes.

Fair is fair, it was mostly our backup team also.

athlone99

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I think you're conflating two different things.

We got a hiding because we were a mediocre team playing two outstanding teams, and one very good team, not because of any brand of football.

The only very good team we've played under Kenny's reign so far has been England. The mostly back-up team they put out wiped the floor with us in just 45 minutes. An Italy or Spain again would easily be able to do likewise no matter what style was used.

Not really, when you get to a tournament there are generally not that many poor teams. There's always 2 or 3 that may be whipped but thats it. We were that in 2012.

The brand of football was a huge part of it. The team could not string a few passes to together or keep the ball for a few mins and ended up camped on their own 18 yard line for 3 games. That squad was better than what they showed IMO.

England's 2nd team beat half our first team but that was a few games into a change of style/philosophy. There's a good chance Portugal could put 3/4/5 past us too. But i would rather lose trying to win the game rather than sitting back hoping not to lose.

noodler

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Watching the Euros makes me fundamentally reject the thesis of ‘there’s no point going to tournaments unless you play “proper” football’. Being there is everything. You can see that from the players and fans of ostensible “no hoper” teams like Macedonia or Finland.

The only thing that matters is competitiveness and whatever approach maximises our ability to qualify for these tournaments imo. This is solidified by watching then play out in our absence.

Absolutely.

If some fans are too afraid or embarrassed for us to go to the Euros because the best ever Spain team or Italy (the finalists in that 2012 tournament) might embarrass us then the whole following Ireland thing might not be for them.

Would love to be there now.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

If some fans are too afraid or embarrassed for us to go to the Euros because the best ever Spain team or Italy (the finalists in that 2012 tournament) might embarrass us then the whole following Ireland thing might not be for them...

Oh God, please, not the "we're better fans than ye" line, that's just lame.

But especially when some of the Kenny critics have been pretty open about hoping we'd lose games.

Ferris_Bueller

On the topic of being able to play football when we qualify for tournaments, we probably won't ever be in a position to dominate the bigger nations in possession, so in that sense it will always be a backs to the wall job to an extent. But I don't think I've seen a team who yet who've looked completely uncomfortable on the ball (although didn't watch Macedonia yesterday).

We want to be at a base level of at least being able to hold onto the ball at times, it doesn't mean we have to play tiki taka football, going long or direct will still be important, but we must genuinely be one of the least comfortable teams on the ball in all of Europe.

Francie Barrett

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I think you're conflating two different things.

We got a hiding because we were a mediocre team playing two outstanding teams, and one very good team, not because of any brand of football.

The only very good team we've played under Kenny's reign so far has been England. The mostly back-up team they put out wiped the floor with us in just 45 minutes. An Italy or Spain again would easily be able to do likewise no matter what style was used.

I mean define good we will never consistently beat Brazil but every team we play seems to be ****e according to some..Slovakia who we should have beaten are currently beating a Poland team including the best striker in the world. If our expectations is to be better than england consistently you may as well give up now

Francie Barrett

athlone99 wrote: »

The team could not string a few passes to together or keep the ball

They couldn't do it then, but they aren't really doing it now either, are they? For all the positivity of the Hungary game, they were still the better team, passing us off the field and very comfortable playing out from the back.

https://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro-2020/friendlies/match/2032172--hungary-vs-republic-of-ireland/statistics/

57% to 43% possession.
493 to 313 completed passes.

Kenny's philosophy is a perfectly fine one, but only if you have the players. Despite all the shuffling in previous games, it doesn't look like those players exist to fit that system.

~Rebel~

Francie Barrett wrote: »

They couldn't do it then, but they aren't really doing it now either, are they? For all the positivity of the Hungary game, they were still the better team, passing us off the field and very comfortable playing out from the back.

https://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro-2020/friendlies/match/2032172--hungary-vs-republic-of-ireland/statistics/

57% to 43% possession.
493 to 313 completed passes.

Kenny's philosophy is a perfectly fine one, but only if you have the players. Despite all the shuffling in previous games, it doesn't look like those players exist to fit that system.

I’m still yet to hear an accurate description of this philosophy that we don’t have the players to play. This team are being asked to do nothing that championship clubs don’t do. It keeps being made out as some silky tiki-taka peak Barca stuff when it’s just not. It’s; move to be a passing option, then find a man, then move to be an option. It’s basic stuff.

We don’t have the players to go direct, and we don’t have goalscorers, so the pragmatic thing to do is to work the ball forward through simple passing snd movement so the chances we make are a bit easier. Unfortunately - as the likes of Arter, Collins, and Curtis have shown - even easy chances created right in front of goal are very very missable for this team. And also unfortunately, there’s no tactical solution to players not kicking the ball into the goal from 6 yards - all you can do is get them there.

~Rebel~

I see one of Spain's sub keepers name is Robert Lynch Sánchez. Surely we've a grandad in the mix there somewhere?

Francie Barrett

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I’m still yet to hear an accurate description of this philosophy that we don’t have the players to play. This team are being asked to do nothing that championship clubs don’t do. It keeps being made out as some silky tiki-taka peak Barca stuff when it’s just not. It’s; move to be a passing option, then find a man, then move to be an option. It’s basic stuff.

The philosophy Kenny is asking the players to play is exactly the one you're describing.

All that's been asked is that defenders play passes to the midfield in a simple manner. The problem is that the whole approach is falling apart at the first hurdle because the defenders have very limited ability on the ball. Typically one of the three defenders receives the short ball from the keeper. The problems kick in straight away, as they lack the confidence to play the ball first time or to take a few steps forward and release it to the midfield player. Instead, they sit on it for a moment too long, this invites the opposition who sense opportunity to push forward, forcing the already uncomfortable defender to go sideways to another defender who is also equally uncomfortable or back to the keeper. One bit of indecision basically compounds on the entire back line and we lose the ball too cheaply. The likes of Cullen does try to help by dropping back to offer himself as an option, and while he has better ability than the back three, he's not so good that he can find enough space to go forward with the ball, instead usually being forced to go backwards/sideways.

As you say, this simple passing out from the back is certainly something that pretty much all the top half Championship teams do regular. Unfortunately, while we have some defenders who are excellent at the job of defending, they are poor with the ball at feet. Duffy is clearly a well documented case. Egan is another in that bracket, his own manager described him as "not a comfortable footballer" and has set up the Sheffield United defence to put two ball players either side of him. The jury is out on O'Shea as he's still young so can't be written off, but going by the Hungary game, the signs weren't great.

DJIMI TRARORE

~Rebel~ wrote:

I see one of Spain's sub keepers name is Robert Lynch Sánchez. Surely we've a grandad in the mix there somewhere?

He's with Brighton, get Connolly to have a chat, he's probably capped already

noodler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh God, please, not the "we're better fans than ye" line, that's just lame.

But especially when some of the Kenny critics have been pretty open about hoping we'd lose games.

What?

noodler

noodler wrote: »

What?

The theory over the last couple of pages that the end justifies the means as if somehow trying to qualify and trying to play football are mutually exclusive. And then you added the line that people who don't want to see humiliation shouldn't follow Ireland.

I want to see Ireland play football. I want them to qualify for tournaments and I think it's just as likely (in the sense of possible, rather than probable) to happen playing football as driving it into the clouds. And I don't want to see Ireland crushed like we were in 2012, where we combined puke football with humiliations.

Mantis Toboggan

2012 was brutal but the 3 other teams in the group were probably in the top 10 in the world at the time, proper group of death. Give me qualifying for major tournaments any day over struggling against minnows.

noodler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The theory over the last couple of pages that everything should be to optimise results to qualify, as if somehow trying to qualify and trying to play football are mutually exclusive. And then you added the line that people who don't want to see humiliation shouldn't follow Ireland.

I want to see Ireland play football. I want them to qualify for tournaments and I think it's just as likely (in the sense of possible, rather than probable) to happen playing football as driving it into the clouds. And I don't want to see Ireland crushed like we were in 2012, where we combined puke football with humiliations.

I don't like seeing Ireland crushed either

I would never hope we don't qualify for something for fear we might get crushed though.

As an aside, and because some people seem to doubt it, we could have had the 2002 team and been well beaten by those three teams in 2012.


I'd take puke football and losing to spain and Italy to losing at home to Luxembourg though.

You seem to be tarring everybody with an opinion different to yours as "wanting Kenny sacked from the start". To be clear, I was satisfied for him to stay on despite his poor start, it was the Luxembourg game that changed all that for me.

Mantis Toboggan

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

2012 was brutal but the 3 other teams in the group were probably in the top 10 in the world at the time, proper group of death. Give me qualifying for major tournaments any day over struggling against minnows.

The games against "minnows" Gibraltar showed we needed to change

Fandymo

JKerova1 wrote: »

We qualified in 2002, 2012 and 2016 playing this type of football and actually played some great stuff once we qualified in 02 and 16.


We might not have qualified for every tournament but we were extremely competitive, nearly winning the group in 2000, finishing 2 points off qualification for 2006, getting to the play offs for WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 2010 and WC 2018. We have a far better recent record than most similarly sized countries. Now we are going to sacrifice our competitive edge and probably destroy our seeding for the sake of some pipe dream about Ireland dominating teams by playing glorious free flowing football.

But think of the possession and completed passes stats!! Glorious, glorious stats.

noodler

Jairo Gifted Safflower wrote: »

The games against "minnows" Gibraltar showed we needed to change

I'm sure glad we have traded struggling wins over minnows like Gibraltar to struggling losses at home to (relative) minnows like Luxembourg.

I think draws against Denmark and Switzerland are better benchmarks of where we are now.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

I'm sure glad we have traded struggling wins over minnows like Gibraltar to struggling losses at home to (relative) minnows like Luxembourg.

I think draws against Denmark and Switzerland are better benchmarks of where we are now.

Gibraltar and Luxembourg are not like with like at all to be fair 195 vs 96 in fifa rankings. The Luxembourg game was bad no doubt but theyve run other talented teams close recently Gibraltar really haven't.

square ball

You'd hope the plan is to do something like Hungary were doing against Portugal tonight, tight and compact without the ball throwing themselves at everything defensively while also able to string a move together when they have the ball so it's not just a backs to the wall for the full 90 minutes against top opposition.

Then when playing against teams around our level and below it are we aiming to have most of the possession and go after the game trying to score rather than trying not to lose and knick one from a set piece?

I would be embarrassed seeing us at another tournament getting spanked playing caveman football like 2012. We enjoy watching attacking play and skill in hurling, football and rugby. No young fella wants to watch us hoofing it away for 90 minutes and we will have more Irish people supporting England than Ireland in another generation if we continue the way we were playing.

johnnyryan89

Brighton splashing the cash on a 23yr old forward that spent most of last season on the injury table. Will surely push Aaron Connolly further to the exit door, permanently or on loan (which he needs).

They've also struck up a partnership with Hibs to send players on loan. Could see Molumby moving up there on loan, though I'd rather he moves permanently as his future will not be with Brighton.

athlone99

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Brighton splashing the cash on a 23yr old forward that spent most of last season on the injury table. Will surely push Aaron Connolly further to the exit door, permanently or on loan (which he needs).

They've also struck up a partnership with Hibs to send players on loan. Could see Molumby moving up there on loan, though I'd rather he moves permanently as his future will not be with Brighton.

Your right, i think our players have to be mentally strong, see what they need and move permanently. No point staying at a so called big/premier league club but never playing games.

I think Molumby needs to move permanently as you say and Connolly on Loan. Id like to see him get a season of games even in the Championship to see what hes really about.

square ball

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Brighton splashing the cash on a 23yr old forward that spent most of last season on the injury table. Will surely push Aaron Connolly further to the exit door, permanently or on loan (which he needs).

They've also struck up a partnership with Hibs to send players on loan. Could see Molumby moving up there on loan, though I'd rather he moves permanently as his future will not be with Brighton.

Hibs would be a bad move for both. Molumby needs to move permanently to a mid table championship club, he looked to be capable of that at the very least off his loan with Millwall.

Connolly should be targeting a loan to somewhere similar. He needs a regular run of games where he can build a bit of form, and score a few goals. He needs a season where he plays 35 plus games and 10-15 or more goals.

Parrott also needs a decent loan but probably to a decent league 1. Bazunu, Travers and Kelleher need to be playing week in week out. Idah will probably get opportunities from the bench but if he isn't getting regular appearances he needs to go on loan at Christmas.

Big season again for a lot of our players. Very few actually played well domestically so surely a few are due good seasons this year.

spaceCreated

How many players at the Euros could have played for Ireland? Like you've Rice and Grealish obviously, Kane as well, O Shaughnessy for finland... is that it or am I missing a few?

celt262

spaceCreated wrote: »

How many players at the Euros could have played for Ireland? Like you've Rice and Grealish obviously, Kane as well, O Shaughnessy for finland... is that it or am I missing a few?

Philips is another.

DJIMI TRARORE

Delaney??, Ampadu

celt262

DJIMI TRARORE wrote: »

Delaney??, Ampadu

Not Delaney anyway.

Ferris_Bueller

spaceCreated wrote: »

How many players at the Euros could have played for Ireland? Like you've Rice and Grealish obviously, Kane as well, O Shaughnessy for finland... is that it or am I missing a few?

Miguel Delaney tweeted about a week or so ago saying there were 9 players who could have played for Ireland at the Euros. Can't remember off the top of my head but I think it was Grealish, Rice, Kane, Phillips, Bellingham, Ampadu, O'Shaughnessy and two others.

pjohnson

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

Miguel Delaney tweeted about a week or so ago saying there were 9 players who could have played for Ireland at the Euros. Can't remember off the top of my head but I think it was Grealish, Rice, Kane, Phillips, Bellingham, Ampadu, O'Shaughnessy and two others.

Conor Coady and (incorrectly) Thomas Delaney were the last 2.

spaceCreated

Had the core a fairly good team there

~Rebel~

pjohnson wrote: »

Conor Coady and (incorrectly) Thomas Delaney were the last 2.

Would Maguire not be the last one? Pretty sure he has 2 Irish grandparents. Remember reading he was eligible for England, Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Mervyn Skidmore

Bit off topic but aren't all UK born players eligible for all of England, Wales, Scotland, and NI?

noodler

Jairo Gifted Safflower wrote: »

Gibraltar and Luxembourg are not like with like at all to be fair 195 vs 96 in fifa rankings. The Luxembourg game was bad no doubt but theyve run other talented teams close recently Gibraltar really haven't.

Christ I even typed relatively.

Fine, Georgia. We've never been beaten by Georgians in fact have beaten at home every time even though they have ran us and other big teams close also.

Or Kazakhstan.

Or Macedonia.

Cyprus.

Armenia.

The point is we had made a habit of beating the reasonable lower seeds over the years.

Not now though.

johnnyryan89

Mervyn Skidmore wrote: »

Bit off topic but aren't all UK born players eligible for all of England, Wales, Scotland, and NI?

Nope, they've got an agreement that you need to have ties to one of the territories in order to represent them. They made a slight change to it and now if you spend five years of education in Scotland for example but have no family ties to Scotland you can play for them.

Think before if you were born outside the UK, and had no family ties to anywhere in the UK but in time became a UK citizen then you could pick which team you wanted to play for. Not sure if that's still allowed.

Francie Barrett

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

Brighton splashing the cash on a 23yr old forward that spent most of last season on the injury table. Will surely push Aaron Connolly further to the exit door, permanently or on loan (which he needs).

They've also struck up a partnership with Hibs to send players on loan. Could see Molumby moving up there on loan, though I'd rather he moves permanently as his future will not be with Brighton.

Both Molumby and Connolly need permanent moves.

Molumby is going 22 this season, he's had two loan periods already. What he needs now is a manager who believes in him and sees him as part of a long term plan.

If Brighton go with this Argentinian lad, it's hard to see a future for Connolly either with Maupay top dog and Welbeck supposed being offered a contract. Is he really going to benefit rolling the dice on a loan move?

eire4

athlone99 wrote: »

Your right, i think our players have to be mentally strong, see what they need and move permanently. No point staying at a so called big/premier league club but never playing games.

I think Molumby needs to move permanently as you say and Connolly on Loan. Id like to see him get a season of games even in the Championship to see what hes really about.

Still think Connolly is a wide player and not a central striker. But agree needs a good loan move where he can get a season of games under his belt next season.

johnnyryan89

square ball wrote: »

Big season again for a lot of our players. Very few actually played well domestically so surely a few are due good seasons this year.

It's even bigger when you consider that the 22/23 Nations League starts June of next year, and those will be the only games next year unless we do play some friendlies against teams that qualify for Qatar.

You've four Nation's League games in June and two more in September. These will be our main games before Euro 2024 qualifiers begin to further give the youngsters in the squad more experienced and possibly blood a couple of more. The next 12 months is the opportunity for someone to raise their hand to be included.

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Both Molumby and Connolly need permanent moves.

Molumby is going 22 this season, he's had two loan periods already. What he needs now is a manager who believes in him and sees him as part of a long term plan.

If Brighton go with this Argentinian lad, it's hard to see a future for Connolly either with Maupay top dog and Welbeck supposed being offered a contract. Is he really going to benefit rolling the dice on a loan move?

Yeah unfortunately for Molumby he just doesn't seem to suit Potter and can't afford to waste another year of his career. Knight is where Molumby should probably be in terms of his career but injuries has stalled his career, and he can't afford anymore wasted seasons like he just had. Possibly Millwall will look to make another bid to bring him there permanently.

I'd agree that I'd rather see both leave permanently, but I can't see Brighton selling Connolly anytime soon unless he still remains in the news for off the pitch reasons. Which could be the reason for his poor injury record since Obafemi was also name checked a few times by his manager for not being professional and looking after his body which lead to injury issues.

It's why I think a loan move would be for the best, a sort of pull your socks up and show us what you can do or you're future won't be here.