A New Managers First Squad

I must warn you, I'm on my soap box here..

On another thread there, Trappatoni's communication skills were touched on and it's in keeping with something I've been thinking about in terms of our set up.... Communication.

I'm not talking language skill or mediums. I'm talking about everyone being on the same page. This week Cappello done something with England I've said here that both Kerr and Stan should have done for their first squads and I hope to God our next manager, whoever he may be, does; Name an extended squad.

Now, I can't claim to know why Cappello did it in this case (there has been talk of insulating the squad from the impact of withdrawels) But I think it's essential for a first squad, especially for a country with playing resources like ours, to name a first 23 (fit or not) supplemented by the fringe players that could conceivably paticipate over the following campaign.

In Irelands case this should amount to little more than 30 odd players. The first squad shouldn't be purely about training or match preperations. It should be about introductions, setting precedents, laying out the law of the land, setting expectations, and repsonsiblities.

I was sick over the last few years when senior experienced players like S Reid, I Harte, A Reid, Carsley and R Dunne (can you believe it) expressed disapointment and utter bewilderment as to why they weren't included in squads. A country with our resources cannot afford to be alienating players of that quality and experience.

Whether a manager has to ring around every fringe player after a squad is announced is another thing (I personally feel that a few 10 minute phone calls were required in cases such as Dunne isn't a big ask), but if a manger feels he shouldn't have to account to fringe players after every sqaud, all the more reason to be more inclusive in the very first squad, to set that out in stone from the start and remove the potential for murmerings over the course of a campaign.

I thinks it's about profesional respect, and respect should work both ways. The players are adults, and should be treated like adults. Who's to say that maybe those players that don't quite act it, will when treated as such. And maybe that level of communication is the first small step.

It extends beyond accounting for exclusions though. Why did Steven Ireland feel he had to lie about his partners miscarraige? Why did Stokes feel he didn't have to contact the U21's himself? Why was Keane pictured drunk days before a game against France? Why is Givens having a verbal tennis match with a 20 year old via the media?... Because they don't know any better that's why. Obviously you can't legislate for every eventuallity but if you set things in place from the outset, you can highlight options, define barriers and go some way to absorbing many of the variables involved in managing a large group of people...

But then Maybe the FAI will only pay for enough rooms to accomadate 23 players...

As Spandau Ballet used to say "Communications let me down".

The last 5 years or so has been really frustrating in this regard, but I can't help but feel that the media don't ask the right questions or if they do the editors doesn't deem it worthy of print.

As discussed earlier this week, Stephen Ireland's exclusion was a non-story, Morrison's omission and the return of Duff and S. Reid were the only other stories yet they barely got a mention while Ireland dominated the headlines.

I'd love to hear more stuff like "X isn't in the squad but I called him last week to say Y & Z have been playing well". Instead we're constantly under the impression that the manager doesn't even know about certain players, which given Premiership-mania, is quite a fair assumtion.