Our best 11?

[eirebhoy]

I suppose this would be an interesting enough thread now that we put in a decent performance against the Czechs and have 14 or 15 players to come back.

Given is obviously 1st name on the teamsheet. Finnan, Dunne and now McShane are certs for me. It's a choice between O'Shea and Harte for left back. Tough choice but I'd probably have to go with Harte. He's a natural left back and was in great form when Kerr brought him back into the team.

Carsley, S.Reid and Duff are again definite starters for me in midfield if fit. There's 3 spots left and 4 players that I'd like to start:
A.Reid, McGeady, Doyle, Keane

I'm finding it really hard to choose 3 out of that lot. When fully fit I believe A.Reid will be a definite starter for us but if we were playing tomorrow I'd have to go with:

---------------Given---------------
Finnan----Dunne---McShane---Harte
McGeady--Carsley---S.Reid---Duffer
------------Doyle--Keane----------

That's an excellent team on paper and stronger a 1st choice than anything since Charlton's imo. I'd have Doyle staying in the box for the most part with Keane dropping off and McGeady and Duff supporting.

[endabob1]

---------------Given---------------
Finnan----Dunne---McShane---Harte
McGeady--Carsley---S.Reid---Duffer
------------Doyle--Keane----------


I wouldn't have Harte at left back, it would have to be O'Shea I think despite his shortcomings he's a better defender than Harte.
McShane was fantastic against the Czechs but he is only 20 and very inexperienced, 1 swallow does not make a summer and all that but at the moment he's in the shirt so I suppose it's up to O'Brien to get playing again and try to get back in the team.
Apart from that I think the rest of the side looks good, well balanced in midfield but McGeady is another 'prospect' I hope he delivers but only time will tell. As you said if Andy Reid could shed some pounds he'd be close and to be honest Kilbane out wide still works as well as anyone in a green shirt and would add some height and a bit of protection to a weak left back (who ever plays there).

[DmanDmythDledge]

Given
Finnan
Dunne
McShane
Kelly
Duff
Carsley
S. Reid
McGeady
Keane
Doyle

Carr would be the cover at FB, with Finnan slotting to LB if Kelly is unavailable. Douglas and Andy Reid cover in midfield and god knows who covers up front. Switching to 4-5-1 would be the best option if Doyle or Keane are out IMO.

[drinkfeckarse]

I'd like to see us try a 3-5-2 sometime. Doubt it will happen like but I think it would open up some different options for us.

------------------Given------------------

--------Finnan - Dunne - McShane

-McGeady - Carsley - S Reid - Duff-
-----------------A Reid--------------------

-----------Keane -- Doyle-----------

Plenty of options there like swapping McGeady and Andy Reid. Also you could stick O'Shea in the left hand side of the back 3, put McShane on the right and push Finnan into the wing back role instead of McGeady.

There's plenty of cover in the midfield and both wing backs can defend as well as getting forward. I'd love to see something like that tried in a friendly.

[Dr. Ogba]

I'd like to see us try a 3-5-2 sometime. Doubt it will happen like but I think it would open up some different options for us.

------------------Given------------------

--------Finnan - Dunne - McShane

-McGeady - Carsley - S Reid - Duff-
-----------------A Reid--------------------

-----------Keane -- Doyle-----------

Plenty of options there like swapping McGeady and Andy Reid. Also you could stick O'Shea in the left hand side of the back 3, put McShane on the right and push Finnan into the wing back role instead of McGeady.

There's plenty of cover in the midfield and both wing backs can defend as well as getting forward. I'd love to see something like that tried in a friendly.

3-5-2 with Finnan at CB???? Are you Mick McCarthy in disguise? :p

[endabob1]

No offence drinkfeckarse but that team would be ripped apart, McGeady & Duff are attacking players, in a 442 Duff is honest enough to track back, and McGeady does it to a lesser degree but they are not defenders and would get torn apart. Even if you put Finnan on the right we'd be lopsided.As a relatively weak side we should stick to a solid formation that is easy to play in and that the players are used to, messing about with it would be disastrous.

[drinkfeckarse]

That's why I said in a friendly. Gary Neville has often played on the right hand side of a back 3 for England. Why can't Finnan. He's a very good defender and you don't have to be 6ft 4" to slot in there in fact I think to have 3 big bulky centre halfs in there could be a disadvantage. It helps to have mobility.

Personally I'd rather have Finnan in a back 3 than John O'Shea as he's a better defender.

Duff is well used to playing that sort of system as he was deployed there a lot at Chelsea albeit detrimental to his attacking play but I blame Mourinho rather than the systen for that.

Strachan will tell you that he's worked with Aidan McGeady constantly to improve his workrate off the ball and his tracking of players. That's why I think he could play that role. I'd prefer him to have more of an attacking role which he would have playing in behind the front 2 but you can't have Andy Reid as a wing back!!

Do you really think we can get any more predictable playing that way than we are playing a 4 4 2. Thats the old Dave Bassett/ Harry Redknapp days. You have to try things my friend.

It's something I would like to see us try as I've said. If it doesn't work then you haven't lost anything, you can only gain.

[shakermaker1982]

I love how the English media are blaming the 3-5-2 formation as the reason for John Terry to lose his marker for the first goal. Hilarious!!!

My strongest 11?

Given
Finnan
Dunne
McShane
Kelly

McGeady
Carsley
S Reid
Duffer

Keano
Doyle

This is a bloody decent side IMO: Douglas, A Reid and co would all be pushing for places and competiiton is hopefully going to spur the starting 11 on to bigger and better things.

[Istabraq]

You cant have Kelly at left back. He is very uncomfortable on his left foot. Almost refusing to use it. He nearly got badly caught out a few times by trying to switch on to his right. He had a decent game, but I guarantee he would be found out in no time.

Given

Finnan
Dunne (c)
McShane
Harte

McGeady
S Reid
Carsley
Duff

Keane
Doyle

[Dr. Ogba]

Fair enough trying it in a friendly but I'd have to agree with endabob in that both Duff and especially McGeady would be tempted to turn a blind eye to defensive duties from time to time and I'd sooner have Finnan at the RWB position.

I was actually quite pleasantly surprised with how well 4-5-1 worked and think its definitely a viable option if one of our main strikers are missing.

If 4-5-1 I'd go for:

Given

Finnan------------McShane-------Dunne-------Harte

--------------------Carsley------------------------

McGeady-----------S.Reid-------------Duff

--------------------A.Reid----------------------

---------------Keane/Doyle------------------


If 4-4-2 it gets a bit more tricky, Doyle would have to come in and maybe McGeady would have to be sacrificed...

Edit: I forgot about S. Reid - Would put him in there instead of S. Ireland

[OwlsFan]

Has to be 4-5-1 due to our weakeness in midfield. Worked well on Wednesday. Doyle/Keane to share run the socks off burden up front.

People who put Harte in the team have short memories - he is a defensive liability full stop. O'Shea is slightly less of a liability and has the height in a otherwise small team. I'd play Kilbane for the kick outs and height instead of McGeady who can come on in the 70th minute or so if needs be.

Otherwise team as above although McShane needs a few more games to see whether he is the real deal.

[endabob1]

That's why I said in a friendly. Gary Neville has often played on the right hand side of a back 3 for England. Why can't Finnan. He's a very good defender and you don't have to be 6ft 4" to slot in there in fact I think to have 3 big bulky centre halfs in there could be a disadvantage. It helps to have mobility.

Personally I'd rather have Finnan in a back 3 than John O'Shea as he's a better defender.

Duff is well used to playing that sort of system as he was deployed there a lot at Chelsea albeit detrimental to his attacking play but I blame Mourinho rather than the systen for that.

Strachan will tell you that he's worked with Aidan McGeady constantly to improve his workrate off the ball and his tracking of players. That's why I think he could play that role. I'd prefer him to have more of an attacking role which he would have playing in behind the front 2 but you can't have Andy Reid as a wing back!!

Do you really think we can get any more predictable playing that way than we are playing a 4 4 2. Thats the old Dave Bassett/ Harry Redknapp days. You have to try things my friend.

It's something I would like to see us try as I've said. If it doesn't work then you haven't lost anything, you can only gain.

Yeah, Englands experiments with 352 have worked a treat so far:D
Duff has never played in that system Chelsea play 4 at the back, under Morinhio they played 433 where duff was the left side of the front 3 there was still an orthodox left back behind him.

I'm all for a bit of experimentation but considering the crap we have produced in 3 of the 5 games under Stan I'd rather have a solid system where players know their roles and exactly what is expected, once you have that you can look to expand the flexibility. So you start 442 but you encourage the second striker to drop into midfield when we lose the ball, and the defensive midfielder to drop deeper, so it becomes more a 4141 formation etc... but with our weakness at the back the last thing we should be doing is trying Duff &/or Mcgeady out as wingbacks.

[drinkfeckarse]

I'm all for a bit of experimentation but considering the crap we have produced in 3 of the 5 games under Stan I'd rather have a solid system where players know their roles and exactly what is expected


Really don't understand your logic there at all. The crap we have produced in 3 of the last 5 games has been under the same solid system you talk about (4 4 2). It obviously hasn't worked so far.

Also just because a player hasn't done something before it doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to do it at all. If that was the case you'd never try anything because "he hasn't done that before". Heaven forbid getting them to try something new. What they are used to clearly isn't working or helping us.

[Dr. Ogba]

Really don't understand your logic there at all. The crap we have produced in 3 of the last 5 games has been under the same solid system you talk about (4 4 2). It obviously hasn't worked so far.

Also just because a player hasn't done something before it doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to do it at all. If that was the case you'd never try anything because "he hasn't done that before". Heaven forbid getting them to try something new. What they are used to clearly isn't working or helping us.

Yes but the 442 Stan has been playing has been with players out of position in the most important positions (namely O'Shea and Kilbane) and you're suggesting the exact same thing with effectively naming 3 players out of position with Finnan at CB and Duff and McGeady as WBs...I'd have to say that would leave us quite vulnerable at the back...

[endabob1]

Yes but the 442 Stan has been playing has been with players out of position in the most important positions (namely O'Shea and Kilbane) and you're suggesting the exact same thing with effectively naming 3 players out of position with Finnan at CB and Duff and McGeady as WBs...I'd have to say that would leave us quite vulnerable at the back...
Spot on
If playing a 442 means having O'Shea and Kilbane in the centre then we're starting to lose the solid bit aren't we.... Finnan at left back......
O'Shea has started in 3 different positions in 3 games I think that is an indication of a lact of solidity in our selections.

Aslo I think asking Duff & McGeady to defend is wasting their natural abilities which should be used at the other end of the pitch

[eirebhoy]

I'd like to see us try a 3-5-2 sometime. Doubt it will happen like but I think it would open up some different options for us.

------------------Given------------------

--------Finnan - Dunne - McShane

-McGeady - Carsley - S Reid - Duff-
-----------------A Reid--------------------

-----------Keane -- Doyle-----------

That looks very good on paper as it fits in arguably our 11 best players and leaves out the weak link at left back. I couldn't see it working in real life though (probably with the exception of San Marino). A 3-5-1 is just another version of the 5-3-1 with your full backs playing in a more attacking role. Duff and McGeady aren't full backs. Maybe Duff could play the wing back role but your sacrifising him taking on players.


People who put Harte in the team have short memories - he is a defensive liability full stop. O'Shea is slightly less of a liability and has the height in a otherwise small team.
I don't know. I think if we had this thread after the last Swiss game almost everyone would have Harte at left back. He was playing very well under Kerr.

http://foot.ie/showthread.php?t=30179

^^ A lot of them use his set pieces as the reason to have him in the team but he was very sound defensively for us at that time too. Actually, I think you'll find the last post in that thread very interesting... :D

[shakermaker1982]

I'm sticking by Kelly - Finnan will only do the same thing that Kelly and every other RB would do when asked to play on the left i.e. use your right foot!!!

[Dr. Ogba]

That looks very good on paper as it fits in arguably our 11 best players and leaves out the weak link at left back. I couldn't see it working in real life though (probably with the exception of San Marino). A 3-5-1 is just another version of the 5-3-1 with your full backs playing in a more attacking role. Duff and McGeady aren't full backs. Maybe Duff could play the wing back role but your sacrifising him taking on players.


I don't know. I think if we had this thread after the last Swiss game almost everyone would have Harte at left back. He was playing very well under Kerr.

http://foot.ie/showthread.php?t=30179

^^ A lot of them use his set pieces as the reason to have him in the team but he was very sound defensively for us at that time too. Actually, I think you'll find the last post in that thread very interesting... :D

The thing I find quite interesting about that thread is the slating "that donkey" Dunne gets....What a difference a year makes!

[drinkfeckarse]

Yes but the 442 Stan has been playing has been with players out of position in the most important positions (namely O'Shea and Kilbane) and you're suggesting the exact same thing with effectively naming 3 players out of position with Finnan at CB and Duff and McGeady as WBs...I'd have to say that would leave us quite vulnerable at the back...

I see it differently though. You're not an out and out centre half in the traditional sense when you play on the flanks of the 3. Dunne in this instance would the pinnacle of the defence. I really don't think it would affect Finnan at all.

I play in a back 3 most of the time and the one constant is that the middle man holds his position and keeps the shape of the 3 together. He is marking 99% of the time and the 2 attackers are passed along the line constantly between the 3.

Duff and McGeady are not out of position on the wings. It just means they have more defensive duties at times. In fact in an attacking sencse it will benefit us as they will be hugging the touchlines and taking players on and getting crosses in for the 2 forwards and the 2 of the 3 central midfielders.

The fact that you have i.e. Carlsey in the middle gives the back 3 protection as he will always be holding a deeper position.

It definately should be employed for the "easier" games in my view. San Marino are unlikely to trouble us (I hope!) and playing that system I believe would afford us a lot more attacking play and options. A strong back 3 against a relatively weak attck would negate the need for Duff and McGeady to have much defensive duties IMO.

[Dr. Ogba]

I see it differently though. You're not an out and out centre half in the traditional sense when you play on the flanks of the 3. Dunne in this instance would the pinnacle of the defence. I really don't think it would affect Finnan at all.

I play in a back 3 most of the time and the one constant is that the middle man holds his position and keeps the shape of the 3 together. He is marking 99% of the time and the 2 attackers are passed along the line constantly between the 3.

Duff and McGeady are not out of position on the wings. It just means they have more defensive duties at times. In fact in an attacking sencse it will benefit us as they will be hugging the touchlines and taking players on and getting crosses in for the 2 forwards and the 2 of the 3 central midfielders.

The fact that you have i.e. Carlsey in the middle gives the back 3 protection as he will always be holding a deeper position.

It definately should be employed for the "easier" games in my view. San Marino are unlikely to trouble us (I hope!) and playing that system I believe would afford us a lot more attacking play and options. A strong back 3 against a relatively weak attck would negate the need for Duff and McGeady to have much defensive duties IMO.


I'm not saying that 3-5-2 doesn't have its merits - i.e definitely being stronger down the middle which is where we've struggled of late but I just feel that 4-5-1 similar to that which was played on Wednesday gives us solidity in the middle while also allowing the wingers to have licence to attack without worrying as much about defence. Again the 352 you mention could be utilised and utilised well against the weaker teams but I think against the stronger teams in the group and against any manager with tactical nous we could be caught on the counter and badly exposed down the flanks...

[drinkfeckarse]

I'm not saying that 3-5-2 doesn't have its merits - i.e definitely being stronger down the middle which is where we've struggled of late but I just feel that 4-5-1 similar to that which was played on Wednesday gives us solidity in the middle while also allowing the wingers to have licence to attack without worrying as much about defence. Again the 352 you mention could be utilised and utilised well against the weaker teams but I think against the stronger teams in the group and against any manager with tactical nous we could be caught on the counter and badly exposed down the flanks...

I don't have a problem either with 4-5-1 as long as the right players are used. Definately feel that 4-4-2 is not our best formation though so as long as he tries different things then that's ok.

[frankbrett]

the 4-5-1 would require Kilbane to play wide left as he is the only option for kicks outs. This raises the question of where to play Duff.

One possibility is to play him in the the free role Andy Reid played in on Wednesday and bring in McGeady on the right.

In a 4-4-2, Doyle would offer the aerial option (albeit not a great one) and Killer could be sacrificed to make way for Duff and McGeady on the wings.

[NeilMcD]

I would not play him i the free role. When Quinn came on he went right and Duff went into the middle for ten mins. He barely got a kick of the ball. He went out wide again and set up the chance for Robbie Keane. Quinn was also much better in the middle than out wide. You need pace in the wings and you need good passing and vision in the middle.

[drinkfeckarse]

I'd play Kilbane for the kick outs and height



the 4-5-1 would require Kilbane to play wide left as he is the only option for kicks outs.


You cannot be seriously using that as an excuse to play a player!?

[SeanieBoy]

I suppose this would be an interesting enough thread now that we put in a decent performance against the Czechs and have 14 or 15 players to come back.

Given is obviously 1st name on the teamsheet. Finnan, Dunne and now McShane are certs for me. It's a choice between O'Shea and Harte for left back. Tough choice but I'd probably have to go with Harte. He's a natural left back and was in great form when Kerr brought him back into the team.

Carsley, S.Reid and Duff are again definite starters for me in midfield if fit. There's 3 spots left and 4 players that I'd like to start:
A.Reid, McGeady, Doyle, Keane

I'm finding it really hard to choose 3 out of that lot. When fully fit I believe A.Reid will be a definite starter for us but if we were playing tomorrow I'd have to go with:

---------------Given---------------
Finnan----Dunne---McShane---Harte
McGeady--Carsley---S.Reid---Duffer
------------Doyle--Keane----------

That's an excellent team on paper and stronger a 1st choice than anything since Charlton's imo. I'd have Doyle staying in the box for the most part with Keane dropping off and McGeady and Duff supporting.


That does look like our best option, but I do think that Douglas, Quinn & A.Reid should get a look in after their performances on Wed.

We are still pretty slack at LB, would be more confident if we had a decent player there & I certainly wouldn't have O'Shea there!!

[NeilMcD]

I think Kelly has given the best performance at left back in a long time for Ireland so i would be happy to keep him there as long as he is getting games at Birmingham. He was captain of U21s so he has character and I think Finnan Dunne Mc Shane and Kelly has good blance between old and new and hunger and experience. I would agree to Eirebhoys team other than Harte. You could also possibly say Douglas is a bit harshly left out but himself and Alan Quinn should be in the squad and on the bench as decent back ups along with Andy Reid.

[OwlsFan]

You cannot be seriously using that as an excuse to play a player!?


Not on its own but is an important factor if the ball just keeps coming back after every kick out. Kilbane would add a physicality that is badly lacking in the current side, especially if the relatively small centre-back McShane is playing. He also puts himself about the pitch and defends at corners as well. Centre-midfield for Killer was madness. Out wide is his best position. I don't think we can afford to play both McGeady and Duff.

[see's it]

who plays left full for the 21s?

[Stuttgart88]

marcos painter did for a bit until recently but he's not in the current squad. I think James Hand of Huddersfield may be picked for that role, though not too sure.

Any relation to eoin Hand? Didn't he have a Huddersfield connection?

[nedder]

I don't think we can afford to play both McGeady and Duff.

I'm with owls fan on this. If I was Stan I'd be reluctant to line out again with both Mcgeady and Duff, especially away from home. I actually think playing Kilbane on the left and Duff on the right gives us good balance. Another option would be Duff on left and either of the Reids on the right.

[bigmac]

I'd have to agree with the Kelly fans so far - I think he has that bit of pace that Jos lacks and looked more urgent the other night. Dunne and either McShane or Jos in centre defence - on present strengths , McShane is ahead in that one, with Finnan on the right.

I remain very worried about the strength of the midfield when we don't have the ball though. I'm not sure if the central pairing of Carsley and Steven Reid (failry clear choice at this stage) is strong enough to cope with having to cover for 4 out and out attackers. I think the formation with Andy Reid dropping off Keane worked well against the Czechs, and I'd be tempted to try Robbie Keane off Doyle in a similar role. Duffer on the left and McGeady on the right, but there's still that lack of steel across the pitch. Despite the fact that Doyle and Keane are two of our better players, I think if I had a full team to pick from I'd go with McGeady, Steven Reid, Carsley, Kilbane and Duff across the middle, with Doyle up front (based on present form) and Keane to come on for the last half hour in place of one of the midfield quartet. For a match that we really want to keep tight, perhaps Kavanagh to come in instead of Kilbane to add an extra bit of bite.

A bench with Keane, Andy Reid and O'Shea to come on covers all positions fairly easily.

As regards other players mentioned, Harte I'm not sure of, I think Andy Reid provides close to the same quality from dead balls, in fact IMO his delivery against the Czechs was better than Harte's has been for a long time - Harte is deadly when going for goal, but tends to be a bit hit and miss delivering crosses - Reid put in several very dangerous balls that could have hit the back of the net with a slight touch. Having Kilbane for height isn't necessary if Steven Reid is available (I still have him though) - he's another option for kick outs.

Anyway, my 11

--------------Given----------------

-Finnan- -Dunne- -McShane- -Kelly-

-----S Reid- -Carsley- -Kilbane-----
-McGeady---------------------Duff-

--------------Doyle----------------


Subs: Kenny, A.Reid, O'Shea, Keane, Morrisson, Quinn, Carr

[Dr. Ogba]

--------------Given----------------

-Finnan- -Dunne- -McShane- -Kelly-

-----S Reid- -Carsley- -Kilbane-----
-McGeady---------------------Duff-

--------------Doyle----------------


Subs: Kenny, A.Reid, O'Shea, Keane, Morrisson, Quinn, Carr


I'd agree with most of your comments but have a look at that central midfield....absolutely no creativity whatsoever. Carsley and Reid are both battlers , in that they get the tackle in, cover every blade of grass and generally make a nuisance of themselves. With these 2 in the team there is no need for Kilbane as he is the same kind of player except not as good. Andy Reid in there instead of Kilbane, put him in the withdrawn position and get him to pull the strings....

A solid spine to the team plus that bit of creativity and spark provided by A. Reid, Duff and McGeady...

[bigmac]

I'd agree with most of your comments but have a look at that central midfield....absolutely no creativity whatsoever. Carsley and Reid are both battlers , in that they get the tackle in, cover every blade of grass and generally make a nuisance of themselves. With these 2 in the team there is no need for Kilbane as he is the same kind of player except not as good. Andy Reid in there instead of Kilbane, put him in the withdrawn position and get him to pull the strings....

A solid spine to the team plus that bit of creativity and spark provided by A. Reid, Duff and McGeady...

Well my main point was that with Duff and McGeady in the team we need 3 battlers. I don't think we can play Duff, McGeady, Andy Reid and one of the front two and get away with it. I think that our best chance of penetration comes down the flanks or with McGeady and Duff cutting into the middle and running at the defence. I agree that there's no real creative spark in the centre of midfield, but I'm not sure that we have the luxury of playing someone like that. I'd be more inclined to pick 2 from 3 of Duff, McGeady and Andy Reid to be honest.

[Stuttgart88]

I think the formation with Andy Reid dropping off Keane worked well against the Czechs, and I'd be tempted to try Robbie Keane off Doyle in a similar role. Me too. You go on to say you'd have Robbie on the bench though but despite his glaring miss at the end I'd still have him in the team.

I think Steven Reid & Carsley would be a solid central midfield in theory, and Jonathon Douglas has put himself way ahead of the titches like Miller & Ireland. I'd almost go as far as saying that Douglas is the man in possession and it's up to Reid to play himself back in. I'd hope that Alan Quinn remains higher up in Staunton's (or wheoever's) plans in 2007. Joey O'Brien ought to be fit by then & hopefully Owen Garvan can be introduced to the senior squad.

If everyone's fully fit, how to accomodate McGeady, Andy Reid, Steven Reid etc. is a good problem to have. Lee Carsley's return adds so much to central midfield. Carsley and most of the above would be a competitive midfield in my opinion. Once central mid is competitive everything else then stands a chance of being competitive too.

[Dr. Ogba]

Well my main point was that with Duff and McGeady in the team we need 3 battlers. I don't think we can play Duff, McGeady, Andy Reid and one of the front two and get away with it. I think that our best chance of penetration comes down the flanks or with McGeady and Duff cutting into the middle and running at the defence. I agree that there's no real creative spark in the centre of midfield, but I'm not sure that we have the luxury of playing someone like that. I'd be more inclined to pick 2 from 3 of Duff, McGeady and Andy Reid to be honest.

Fair enough, I can see where you're coming from. Having said that, if you're going to drop one of those 3 I'd sacrifice McGeady (for the moment) and push Kilbane out to the wing as happened against the Czechs and keep Reid in there. So you have McGeady as the option of impact sub in the last 20 minutes to have a go at a tiring full-back...

[Noelys Guitar]

Kilbane scored and that is a plus. I have been against him playing for a long time but sometimes you have got to believe your eyes. I thought he and O'Shea played well on Wednesday. Kelly in the first half was superb. Tired in the second but his fitness should improve. Playing McGeady and Duff did'nt work in a 4-4-2 against Cyprus and wouldn't try again unless chasing the game. But would play both in a 4-5-1. I would have in defense Finnan, Dunne, McShane, Kelly or O'Shea
Given in Goal. S.Reid, Carsley, Kilbane, Duff
Doyle, Keane or Mcgeady

Subs Carr, Harte, Quinn, Douglas, Morrison, A REid

[NeilMcD]

Totally agree with you there Stuttgart, good post. Your posts are so much better when you are sober !!!!

[Stuttgart88]

My wife agrees!

[Littlest Hobo]

If all fit, this would be our strongest 11.

Given

Finnan Dunne O'Shea Kilbane

McGeady S.Reid Carsley Duff

Keane Doyle


I'd replace O'Brien with O'Shea, who looked comfortable in the centre the other night.
Wouldn't play Carr right and Finnan left, as it hasn't worked before.
Kilbane is better than Kelly, so would play him on the left.

McGeady and Duff are the best attacking options we have on the wings.
Happy to see carsely in the middle. He adds a bit of steel and drive that's been lacking lately. Steven Reid when fit is an automatic choice. Another solid performer who will get stuck in and won't be easily bullied.

The two boys up front are the best we have. Good to see Long coming through the ranks at Reading, although I wouldn't risk playing him in this campaign. Morrison and Elliot are just above him in pecking order.

[centre mid]

no O'Shea cant justify his place anymore - completely lost concentration for goal on wednesday,

[DmanDmythDledge]

Does anyone think we would be better off trying McGeady on the left and Duff on the right? We've seen that Duff can play well on the right for Chelsea, albeit in a different formation, and McGeady plays on the left for Celtic all the time. McGeady's best performances have seen him playing on the left.

[eirebhoy]

Well my main point was that with Duff and McGeady in the team we need 3 battlers. I don't think we can play Duff, McGeady, Andy Reid and one of the front two and get away with it.
I don't see why. If we played 2 up front we're going to be playing Duff and McGeady/Reid anyway. If we play 1 up front then surely the 3 of the can fit in?


Does anyone think we would be better off trying McGeady on the left and Duff on the right? We've seen that Duff can play well on the right for Chelsea, albeit in a different formation, and McGeady plays on the left for Celtic all the time. McGeady's best performances have seen him playing on the left.
I'd prefer Duff on the left. McGeady's best performances have come on the left because he doesn't play in any other position for Celtic. He's not really a winger anyway so it shouldn't bother him what side he plays on. The reason Strachan plays him on the left is the same reason he plays Maloney on the left and Nakamura on the right. He wants them cutting inside all the time like, say, Ronaldinho does.

[bigmac]

I don't see why. If we played 2 up front we're going to be playing Duff and McGeady/Reid anyway. If we play 1 up front then surely the 3 of the can fit in?

well I wouldn't play Duff and McGeady if we play 2 up front - I just think that it leaves our midfield looking extremely exposed. Both players are very attack minded and you end up with a situation where they can both get caught forward leaving us in a 4-2-4 formation.
As Dr.Ogba says, you could easily swap McGeady for Reid, but my main point is that I don't think we have a strong enough midfield to play 4 attacking players, which leads me to the 3 attackers, 3 scrappers approach. After that, it's just a matter of picking your trios. Unfortunately, while we have Keane, Doyle, McGeady, Andy Reid and Duff as attacking players, we are lacking someone who can combine the two. Steven Reid is the most attack minded of the others, and I'd be looking at 3 from himself, Kilbane, Carsley and Douglas after the Czech game.