nigel-harps1954
12/03/2013, 2:53 PM
Why do they have to be Premier League players though? The fact is that some of our Championship players are better than their Premier League equivalents, and this has been the case for a few years. We don't have such a high class of player that we can make the distinction.
Basically pointing out that people have been saying we have so little players playing in the Premier League when in fact we could almost put out two teams of Premier League players. The fact of the matter is, playing regularly at a higher standard has to be looked at seriously.
There's very little difference between that team and the team that started against the Faroes
Westwood
Coleman O'Dea O'Shea Wilson
McGeady Andrews McCarthy Brady
Walters Keane
As Paul pointed out, there's 5 differences. O'Dea being a particular weak link makes a big difference. Jurys out on Keane at this stage, but all being said and done, Long is a better option now.
Sweden in particular is a very bold statement and probably Austria too - who are getting better.
It's a bold statement surely, but I stand by it.
I meant in terms of talent or ability.
It's hard to compare Westwood and Bunn at the moment
I'd pick Dunne over O'Dea, although he was injured at the time and probably would have started otherwise
Brady over McClean, clearly has offered more in the last few games
Gibson over Andrews, although he was injured at the time and probably wouldn't have been in the squad anyway
It's a judgement call between Keane and Long right now
Basically, the biggest difference between the side nigel picked and the side Trapattoni sent out is Gibson
I did say it's a potential team.
Basically pointing out that people have been saying we have so little players playing in the Premier League when in fact we could almost put out two teams of Premier League players. The fact of the matter is, playing regularly at a higher standard has to be looked at seriously.
There's very little difference between that team and the team that started against the Faroes
Westwood
Coleman O'Dea O'Shea Wilson
McGeady Andrews McCarthy Brady
Walters Keane
As Paul pointed out, there's 5 differences. O'Dea being a particular weak link makes a big difference. Jurys out on Keane at this stage, but all being said and done, Long is a better option now.
Sweden in particular is a very bold statement and probably Austria too - who are getting better.
It's a bold statement surely, but I stand by it.
I meant in terms of talent or ability.
It's hard to compare Westwood and Bunn at the moment
I'd pick Dunne over O'Dea, although he was injured at the time and probably would have started otherwise
Brady over McClean, clearly has offered more in the last few games
Gibson over Andrews, although he was injured at the time and probably wouldn't have been in the squad anyway
It's a judgement call between Keane and Long right now
Basically, the biggest difference between the side nigel picked and the side Trapattoni sent out is Gibson
I did say it's a potential team.