Republic of Ireland V Luxembourg - Saturday, 27th March 2021 - World Cup Qualifier

Do we need a new thread for Saturday btw?

I wouldn't change a huge amount; that was a new team that played well away to a decent side (albeit one who I felt never found an extra gear they're capable of) and actually scored. Though the mindset for Luxembourg at home is different to Serbia away you'd imagine.

The keeper issue has been discussed at length but I don't think Travers did a huge amount wrong - the lob aside - and it would be harsh to drop him for that. But same XI again? Will Connolly be fit or should we try batter Luxembourg a bit with Long?

I think the same team if available should start. I thought Collins did well when he came on and linked up well with others. He is a decent threat when kicking it long. Its not subtle but its effective to change things up at times. I thought Robinson played well. How are Luxembourg against crosses into the box/long balls versus passing through them ?

I would of picked Bazunu last night over Travers but its a marginal call.

Kenny has to pick a team and formation that achieves a win. Any win at this stage is important.

New thread for the Luxembourg qualifier. I'll spin a new one for the Qatar friendly off of this after the game on Saturday

I think it might be freshened up a bit, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a 4-3-3 again to facilitate a more attacking approach. Doherty probably missing out in such case, Coleman moving to conventional right full and Stevens left. Cullen has to start again if fit and would be hard to justify dropping Molumby or Browne but might be worth one change to get fresher legs in, Hendrick might be the favorite, but after his lack of impact the other night maybe Knight gets a chance. Connolly and Robinson to start again if fit, with Long or Collins to make up the third attacker, maybe Collins just for being the more natural goal scorer and conventional centre forward to get on the end of crosses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passinginterest

with Long or Collins to make up the third attacker, maybe Collins just for being the more natural goal scorer and conventional centre forward to get on the end of crosses.

---

i thought collins did well last night. held the ball up well and passed it on with effect. also on hand to stick in the 2nd goal.
gets unreasonable criticism and worthy of more game time imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passinginterest

I think it might be freshened up a bit, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a 4-3-3 again to facilitate a more attacking approach. Doherty probably missing out in such case, Coleman moving to conventional right full and Stevens left. Cullen has to start again if fit and would be hard to justify dropping Molumby or Browne but might be worth one change to get fresher legs in, Hendrick might be the favorite, but after his lack of impact the other night maybe Knight gets a chance. Connolly and Robinson to start again if fit, with Long or Collins to make up the third attacker, maybe Collins just for being the more natural goal scorer and conventional centre forward to get on the end of crosses.

---

My thoughts exactly, three at the back worked well last night but the tasks at hand are chalk and cheese. Knight for Doherty for me too, the latter just isn't playing well at the moment and agree we need a stronger focal point in attack, be it Long or Collins. Connolly works best from the left anyway, if he's fit enough to start again. And yes, very hard on either Molumby or Browne, so what you said! Maybe retain Browne as the bigger goal threat.

I'm going to watch the match again before commenting on the Serbia game, but one thing he's got to do, is come up with a settled side - on a footdot WA group I posted the changes he's made/been forced to make in midfield for every game so far - we need consistency now. So my suggestion is...to change midfield! the irony.

I was delighted he went with the 352 because it can be easily tweaked to morph into a few different formations (343/3331/3232) against the weaker sides which Luxembourg absolutely are. I'd be inclined to keep the back 5 as it is, but with Doherty and Stevens having much more licence to get forward and to be stationed here predominantly, with Cullen having the responsibility just in front of OShea.
What I thought we really lacked last night, is the same thing we've always lacked, that touch of guile that we need just behind the striker. I've got to be honest, I'd start Troy Parrot. Its totally irrational, but he has something that nobody else in our squad has in that regard.

One last thing - this match is absolutely must win for the squad, for the public, and for SK. But it's worth remembering, that no Irish manager has had to wait 9 competitive games before getting their first "banker" match.
Charlton had 6 games, but had the Iceland tournament under his belt; (Lux A)
Mick PI 1st game (LTN A)
Kerr 3rd (Alb H)
Stan 2nd (CY A - ha!~) or 4 (SNM H) depending on your perspective.
Trap 1st (GIA N) or 3 (CY H);
ONeill 2nd (GIB H) - again 1st game was away to GIA
Mick PII 1st (Gib A)
SK 9th (Lux H)
(phew, my argument was nearly blown completely out of the water by that error)

So maybe, just maybe, cut him some slack. In light of the above, I reserve the right to believe that accepting England as a friendly opponent is right up there with one of the most stupid decisions made by the FAI in a long time.



-----Coleman --- OShea ---- Clark------

--------------------Cullen------------------

Doherty --------- Browne -----------Stevens

------------ Parrott------ Connolly ----------

--------------------Collins-------------------

or

-----Coleman --- O'Shea ---- Stevens--

--------------------Cullen------------------

Doherty ---Browne ----Molumby ----Connolly

------------------- Parrott ------ ----------

--------------------Collins-------------------

Oh and Travers to start. Bazunu comes in for the Qatar game, and lets never speak of it again.

I don't buy into the logic that Travers needs to keep his place for his confidence. Massive error aside, he never looked comfortable last night. hesitant to come off his line, positioning all over the place and was clearly nervous. I empathise with him and have no doubt he's a decent keeper but I would drop him immediately for Bazunu. He got his chance and wasn't good enough, lets see what Bazunu can do.

I fully expect Kenny to stick with Travers though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColourfulPeanut

I don't buy into the logic that Travers needs to keep his place for his confidence. Massive error aside, he never looked comfortable last night. hesitant to come off his line, positioning all over the place and was clearly nervous. I empathise with him and have no doubt he's a decent keeper but I would drop him immediately for Bazunu. He got his chance and wasn't good enough, lets see what Bazunu can do.

I fully expect Kenny to stick with Travers though.

---

No your right its ridiculous not to drop a guy because he is young, he was awful last night no presence, hesitant. sorry this is our country, Bazunu should start

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diggs246

No your right its ridiculous not to drop a guy because he is young, he was awful last night no presence, hesitant. sorry this is our country, Bazunu should start

---

He wasn't awful. He was caught out for the lob, sure. There wasn't much he could do about the other two goals, and he pulled off a decent save in the first half.

There's no guarantee Bazunu is any better (otherwise he wouldn't be shipping two goals a game in the third tier, and we're back to that point again). Kenny will have a better idea though based on what he's seen in training.

I would certainly be giving all three keepers game time over the next two games though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

He wasn't awful. He was caught out for the lob, sure. There wasn't much he could do about the other two goals, and he pulled off a decent save in the first half.

There's no guarantee Bazunu is any better (otherwise he wouldn't be shipping two goals a game in the third tier, and we're back to that point again). Kenny will have a better idea though based on what he's seen in training.

I would certainly be giving all three keepers game time over the next two games though.

---

Putting aside the goal, his positioning in general was awful and he had zero authority in his box. he was just poor

Well we can go round and about on that - I think it's very harsh, and I don't think I'd be alone in that - but it still stands that there's no guarantee Bazunu is any better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Well we can go round and about on that - I think it's very harsh, and I don't think I'd be alone in that - but it still stands that there's no guarantee Bazunu is any better.

---

"still stands that there's no guarantee Bazunu is any better"

True but we have imo the proof that travers isn't good enough or just not ready

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diggs246

"still stands that there's no guarantee Bazunu is any better"

True but we have imo the proof that travers isn't good enough or just not ready

---

This 100% , Travers directly responsible for the second goal and could hardly have done worse given he let in 3 of the 4 shots on target.
He is bench warming every week at Bournemouth and should never have been put in.
Bazunu is playing every week, how much worse could he possibly have been ?? 4 goals out of 4 shots ?? i doubt it.
Kenny will probably stick with Travers as it is easier than admitting he was wrong...god help us against Lux they are better than people think

Gavin Bazunu has been playing senior football for two and a half years, including games with the biggest club side in Ireland at only 16. He's one of the youngest players getting regular football in English football at the moment. He's been called into the senior side for the first time, and people still can't spell his name correctly
If you can spell McLoughlin, Caoimhin, McClean, Ibrahimovic, Gnabry, Mbappe etc correctly without needing to google it, you can get Bazunu correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColourfulPeanut

I don't buy into the logic that Travers needs to keep his place for his confidence. Massive error aside, he never looked comfortable last night. hesitant to come off his line, positioning all over the place and was clearly nervous. I empathise with him and have no doubt he's a decent keeper but I would drop him immediately for Bazunu. He got his chance and wasn't good enough, lets see what Bazunu can do.

I fully expect Kenny to stick with Travers though.

---

I agree with you in your appraisal of him.
I preferred Bazunu - on the basis of him playing week in-week out and how Crawford spoke so enthusiastically about him, however the goalie's union convinced me otherwise. As it happens, I thought he never looked right from the get go last night, possibly a back pass early on or a goal kick that he didn't really get in control of the situation.
However, it's not as much for his confidence, but the chemistry between staff and players. He wasn't awful, but I expected more of him, but to dump him now, for someone equally untested would be an unnecessary risk - in what should be a risk-free game. Much better to leave Travers in situ, and play Bazunu on Tues and see how he gets on.
Chances are Kelleher will go back to the top of the tree - it's possible we've seen the last of Randolph.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Well we can go round and about on that - I think it's very harsh, and I don't think I'd be alone in that - but it still stands that there's no guarantee Bazunu is any better.

---

The reality is that none of us has really seen enough of any of them to judge. I said on the Serbia thread last week that all 3 excite me and fill me with fear in equal measure. I stand by that.

In defence of Travers last night I was looking at Tadic's corners and I thought they were brilliant. You could see Travers was desperate to come and claim one but each one was in that no man's land where it was neither the keeper's to claim, nor was it not the keeper's to claim. Tadic was playing mind games with him and won easily.

Dave Henderson tweeted last night that Travers was positioned for the overhit through ball. That may be so but as soon as Mitrovic got the ball I thought "sh1t" he's been given an easy target to hit.

If our choice of keeper is the deciding factor versus Luxembourg then we're goosed. I'd be inclined to keep him and play Bazunu against Qatar. But there's no time to be sentimental and I'm looking forward to seeing Bazunu play soon.

The only change I would make is to ensure that if Brady "has to" come on at any point that he's not put in a position that he sees his skills as vital to decapitating the first defender. Alternatively, drop him altogether.

I've been calling out for wingbacks but Doherty disappoints me every time he plays for Ireland. I've no idea how he did so well at Wolves. He doesn't seem to know how to play any position and just relies on getting played through here and there to have a little highlight to show for his time. No tackles, no showing for the ball or positive movement, no ability to pick out a pass, no real pace unless he gets a good run at it. He's a physical presence but that's about it. Contrasted to Stevens, who makes mistakes here and there but always shows for it and moves after he plays simple balls. He was also involved in our goal and adds a threat up top to his defensive solidity.

With that in mind I'd go back to 4 agains Lux. Coleman, OShea, Clark, Stevens. Cullen.

I'd bring in Collins for Doherty and play with a proper center forward for Connolly, Browne and Robinson to play off of. Collins knows the role and we have nothing better. He's done just fine when called upon and can hold it up and bring the other 3 in. McGoldrick would make should a big difference but.....ah well.

I'd personally never have gone with Travers but they took the risk on him being a bit rusty and it bit us. More senior keepers have been beaten by lobs like that so he will hopefully dust himself off and learn from it. Now they have to manage his confidence and play him again. Bazunu should get a chance in the friendly. If he does well, then he has a good case to start.

So

--------------Travers
Coleman, O'Shea, Clark, Stevens
---------Cullen----Molumby
Robinson --Browne ---Connolly
-------------Collins

Long deserves another sub appearance. Hendrick and Brady do not. Get Knight in and maybe call Parrot back...maybe.

Still think we lack someone to spread the play and mix up the passing a bit from midfield. Cullen doesn't seem to be able to play a long ball at all as much as I like what he offers. If Robbie Brady ever decides he wants to do more than set pieces he could do it but I won't hold my breath.

Calls for Duffy to play based on the idea he would have beaten Mitrovic to the header are odd to me. Duffy would have be sliced apart multiple times by Tadic long before he had a chance to make amends by winning that header. The lad probably needs a break from football and there's no shame in that.

​

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kingdom

One last thing - this match is absolutely must win for the squad, for the public, and for SK. But it's worth remembering, that no Irish manager has had to wait 10 competitive games before getting their first "banker" match.

---

In fairness, Kenny had 2 matches against a dreadful Bulgaria. Beating Luxemburg is a must. The Serbia game was encouraging and we saw some good signs but we've lost again! A win will just ease the pressure from everyone and let us play freely. I have to say that I don't think Collins is up to it but I'll be delighted to be proved wrong. I think technically he is far off this level and Long still has far more to offer. I'd like to see Jason Knight get a run against Luxemburg. Think he can add some directness. I'd probably also make a change in goals but sticking with the same team is not a bad idea in my opinion.

I would also be behind maintaining a similar side again. Connolly didn't look right coming off and might be best off sitting this one out because Collins did well upon his introduction and should be able to cause Luxembourg problems.

I'm really undecided on the Travers conundrum. In the first half, he didn't come off his line quick enough for the Vlahovic goal (great finish though and the knock on was tidy) and he was too far off it for the two Mitrovic goals. However, I don't know if he is at fault for all the goals, two of them or even one of them. I really don't know enough about goalkeeping, if I'm honest.

Do you drop him and let him know that he is shouldering some blame? Is that even helpful? Or do you keep him in there and play Bazunu then against Qatar? Personally, I'd have started Bazunu last night. I thought it before the game and think it now. But I'm a softie and Travers looked gutted last night- I'd hate that feeling to be compounded with a dropping.

I would say that I'd like to see Knight start also but the midfield functioned well for 60 minutes without him so if all three are fit then its difficult to drop one of them for Knight.

Give me: Travers, Doherty, Coleman, O'Shea, Clark, Stevens, Cullen, Molumby, Browne, Robinson, Collins/Connolly

I made my feelings clear on Bazunu v Travers clear before Serbia game so Im not going to get into it again except to say that Travers looks like he will have a career in the lower leagues whilst Bazunu could be a star. I would start Bazunu on Saturday but I dont think he will.

Other than that I would go with the exact same side if everyone is fit. There were some players that didnt do as well as they should have yesterday but not so bad that I would drop them. Im thinking of Connolly and Doherty in particular. To me Doherty has done nothing in a green shirt to justify changing the formation of the team to fit him in. To me he is a very good back up right back to Coleman.

Connolly has a big summer ahead of him. He needs to get his head down and get fit and get back to what he showed in potential last season, otherwise he'll end up as an average Championship player if hes lucky. I know hes only coming back from injury but to see a 21 year old go down with cramp after an hour was ridiculous. At that age I could run all day and I was far from a professional.

That said I would still start both on Saturday in the hope it might spark something in them and we see the players they can be.

If Kenny persists with 3-5-2, I think Collins should start, maybe with Long. They are two proper out and out strikers capable of playing off each other well as the second goal demonstrated. Connolly cramping up after an hour didn't look good and contentious non-penalty aside I don't think he contributed much overall. He'll be a good option off the bench.

Thinking Kenny would stick with 4-3-3, I initially thought he might go with Parrott as the lone striker the other night, but considering he wasn't even in the matchday 23 it doesn't seem likely that he'll be involved. That said, Kenny can always spring a surprise.

I don't know why people aren't talking more about the fact that we conceded three very poor goals. They were fairly soft. Midfield issues were a major factor in them, but Liam Brady is right: Clark should have done a lot better with headers for goal 1 and 3 (he probably should've been tighter to Vlahovic or dropped off in the lead-up to 2 too) and though 2 was very much in Travers' remit, O'Shea (who was solid enough otherwise) didn't cover himself in glory there either.

Doherty's crossing last night was actually abysmal as well, even though one of his crosses inadvertently (via deflection/clearance) fell into the path of Browne for our goal. Had he not done so well at RCB, I'd nearly be inclined to put Coleman RWB.

I'd drop molumby for knight and drop travers. I thought molumby was a losse cannon last night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kingdom

One last thing - this match is absolutely must win for the squad, for the public, and for SK. But it's worth remembering, that no Irish manager has had to wait 10 competitive games before getting their first "banker" match.
Charlton had 6 games, but had the Iceland tournament under his belt; (Lux A)
Mick PI 1st game (LTN A)
Kerr 3rd (Alb H)
Stan 2nd (CY A - ha!~) or 4 (SNM H) depending on your perspective.
Trap 1st (GIA N) or 3 (CY H);
ONeill 2nd (GIB H) - again 1st game was away to GIA
Mick PII 1st (Gib A)
SK 10th (Lux H)

---

Isn't it nine competitive games, and ten overall? The England game was a friendly

Manager	1st Competitive	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th
Meagan	Czechoslovakia(0–3)	Denmark(1–1)	Hungary(0–4)	Sweden(1–1)	Sweden(0–1)	Italy(0–3)	Italy(1–2)	Austria(1–4)
Tuohy	Austria(0–6)	Soviet Union(1–2)	France(2–1)	Soviet Union(0–1)	France(1–1)
Giles	Soviet Union(3–0)	Turkey(1–1)	Switzerland(2–1)	Soviet Union(1–2)	Switzerland(0–1)	Turkey(4–0)	France(0–2)	France(1–0)	Bulgaria(1–2)
Hand	Netherlands(2–1)	Belgium(1–1)	France(0–2)	Cyprus(6–0)	Belgium(0–1)	Netherlands(2–2)	France(3–2)	Netherlands(1–2)	Iceland(2–0)
Charlton	Belgium(2–2)	Scotland(0–0)	Scotland(1–0)	Bulgaria(1–2)	Belgium(0–0)	Luxembourg(2–0)	Luxembourg(2–1)	Bulgaria(2–0)	England(1–0)
McCarthy	Liechtenstein(5–0)	Macedonia(3–0)	Iceland(0–0)	Macedonia(2–3)	Romania(0–1)	Liechtenstein(5–0)	Lithuania(0–0)	Iceland(4–2)	Lithuania(2–1)
Kerr	Georgia(2–1)	Albania(0–0)	Albania(2–1)	Georgia(2–0)	Russia(1–1)	Switzerland(0–2)	Cyprus(3–0)	Switzerland(1–1)	France(0–0)
Staunton	Germany(0–1)	Cyprus(2–5)	Czech Republic(1–1)	San Marino(5–0)	San Marino(2–1)	Wales(1–0)	Slovakia(1–0)	Slovakia(2–2)	Czech Republic(0–1)
Trapattoni	Georgia(2–1)	Montenegro(0–0)	Cyprus(1–0)	Georgia(2–1)	Bulgaria(1–1)	Italy(1–1)	Bulgaria(1–1)	Cyprus(2–1)	Italy(2–2)
O'Neill	Georgia(2–1)	Gibraltar(7–0)	Germany(1–1)	Scotland(0–1)	Poland(1–1)	Scotland(1–1)	Gibraltar(4–0)	Georgia(1–0)	Germany(1–0)
Kenny	Bulgaria(1-1)	Finland(0-1)	Slovakia(0-0)	Wales(0-0)	Finland(0-1)	Wales(0-1)	Bulgaria(0-0)	Serbia(2-3)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Gavin Bazunu has been playing senior football for two and a half years, including games with the biggest club side in Ireland at only 16. He's one of the youngest players getting regular football in English football at the moment. He's been called into the senior side for the first time, and people still can't spell his name correctly
If you can spell McLoughlin, Caoimhin, McClean, Ibrahimovic, Gnabry, Mbappe etc correctly without needing to google it, you can get Bazunu correct.

---

I read the first bit of this thinking it was some impassioned plea to have Bazunu start against Luxembourg.

Probably the longest spelling correction post I've seen in a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954

I read the first bit of this thinking it was some impassioned plea to have Bazunu start against Luxembourg.

Probably the longest spelling correction post I've seen in a while.

---

Hes right though. I seen multiple posters calling him Bazuna or Bazuno... I normally couldnt care less about spelling but player names annoy me when we can all see what they are. Hendricks is another one I see alot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Isn't it nine competitive games, and ten overall? The England game was a friendly

Manager	1st Competitive	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th
Meagan	Czechoslovakia(0–3)	Denmark(1–1)	Hungary(0–4)	Sweden(1–1)	Sweden(0–1)	Italy(0–3)	Italy(1–2)	Austria(1–4)
Tuohy	Austria(0–6)	Soviet Union(1–2)	France(2–1)	Soviet Union(0–1)	France(1–1)
Giles	Soviet Union(3–0)	Turkey(1–1)	Switzerland(2–1)	Soviet Union(1–2)	Switzerland(0–1)	Turkey(4–0)	France(0–2)	France(1–0)	Bulgaria(1–2)
Hand	Netherlands(2–1)	Belgium(1–1)	France(0–2)	Cyprus(6–0)	Belgium(0–1)	Netherlands(2–2)	France(3–2)	Netherlands(1–2)	Iceland(2–0)
Charlton	Belgium(2–2)	Scotland(0–0)	Scotland(1–0)	Bulgaria(1–2)	Belgium(0–0)	Luxembourg(2–0)	Luxembourg(2–1)	Bulgaria(2–0)	England(1–0)
McCarthy	Liechtenstein(5–0)	Macedonia(3–0)	Iceland(0–0)	Macedonia(2–3)	Romania(0–1)	Liechtenstein(5–0)	Lithuania(0–0)	Iceland(4–2)	Lithuania(2–1)
Kerr	Georgia(2–1)	Albania(0–0)	Albania(2–1)	Georgia(2–0)	Russia(1–1)	Switzerland(0–2)	Cyprus(3–0)	Switzerland(1–1)	France(0–0)
Staunton	Germany(0–1)	Cyprus(2–5)	Czech Republic(1–1)	San Marino(5–0)	San Marino(2–1)	Wales(1–0)	Slovakia(1–0)	Slovakia(2–2)	Czech Republic(0–1)
Trapattoni	Georgia(2–1)	Montenegro(0–0)	Cyprus(1–0)	Georgia(2–1)	Bulgaria(1–1)	Italy(1–1)	Bulgaria(1–1)	Cyprus(2–1)	Italy(2–2)
O'Neill	Georgia(2–1)	Gibraltar(7–0)	Germany(1–1)	Scotland(0–1)	Poland(1–1)	Scotland(1–1)	Gibraltar(4–0)	Georgia(1–0)	Germany(1–0)
Kenny	Bulgaria(1-1)	Finland(0-1)	Slovakia(0-0)	Wales(0-0)	Finland(0-1)	Wales(0-1)	Bulgaria(0-0)	Serbia(2-3)

---

Yes, we need the victory, I would go with Long-Collins partnership with Callum Robinson in the hole, Browne and Cullen keeping the flow, 3 at the back with Stevens, who was very good yesterday and Doherty attacking from the sides. If we play wide with a 3-4-1-2 we need presence in the box, Connolly and Parrott from the bench when they are a bit tired

Ditto this, Travers will play I think Kenny will back him up. I would go with O'Hara

--------------------O'Hara---------------------

-------Coleman O'Shea Clark--------


--Doherty Browne Cullen Stevens--

---------------- Robinson--------------------------

-------Long--------------Collins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Razors left peg

Hes right though. I seen multiple posters calling him Bazuna or Bazuno... I normally couldnt care less about spelling but player names annoy me when we can all see what they are. Hendricks is another one I see alot.

---

McLean :mad:

Really worried about this one to be honest. Luxembourg aren't, like, Iceland or anything, but they've been a better team the last few years than I think some people realise. Since that 0-0 draw with the French team that won the World Cup a year later they have draws with Bulgaria, Senegal, Moldova, Lithuania and Azerbaijan, and wins against Belarus, Hungary, Malta, Georgia, Cyprus and Montenegro. A few of those were friendlies, but still. They lost to Serbia by the same scoreline we just did last year, and kept the Asian Champions to a 1-0 win yesterday. When the draw for this group was made, you know their management were eyeing us up as the scalp they wanted to take.

Just feel there is too much automatic "Oh, it's only Luxembourg" type thinking around. It isn't like we were battering Gibraltar not too long ago under McCarthy.

I was thinking yesterday that the Nations League makes this a bit trickier too - Luxembourg got ten points in that last year (v Cyprus, Montenegro and Azerbaijan) and it may give them a little bit more confidence that they've won a few competitive games in a row now. Whereas ordinarily they might get the odd good result here or there (like the France draw), now they feel they can string some results together.

It's absolutely one they'll be targetting alright. I know we scored twice yesterday, but I don't think we were all that great in the final third (and our lack of forward options is well known at this stage), so if they sit deep and hit us on the counter, we could struggle to open them up a bit.

I'm more confident now than I was 24 hours ago, but that's not a ringing endorsement.

We have to go in with the expectation to win. If we play like we did yesterday we will be fine, we've always had a bad habit of playing down to the level of poorer teams though. I think Kenny will have them pumped up to get the no win monkey off their back and Id expect us to be good from the start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BOOMSHAKALAKA

​

In fairness, Kenny had 2 matches against a dreadful Bulgaria.

---

No, he didn't - in fairness. Bulgaria were no great shakes absolutely, but this narrative that is getting around, that we're expected to be beating teams like them or from pot 2, 3 and even 4 - I specifically referred to Kenny not having a "gimme" game yet - (to use golf parlance) a gimme is a game that you're expected to win comfortably. Bulgaria away is not a gimme. The rest is not directed towards you BOOMSHAKALAKA, so don't take offence.

For Ireland, for the players that make up our squad, and those within that squad that consider themselves first-team regulars at their clubs, Bulgaria is not a gimme.
Like, we've had far superior Irish teams go to places like Montenegro, Cyprus, Slovakia, Bosnia, Israel, and not win. This team could have done with such a gimme win in the run up to this campaign, but such is life.

Yesterday we selected:
- a novice international and sub at second division Bournemouth;
- a novice international and sub at to-be-relegated West Brom;
- a novice international at underachieving Anderlecht;
- a novice international and sub at second division PNE;
- a novice international playing out of position at PNE;
- a novice international without a senior goal at struggling Brighton;
- a novice international and sub at to-be-relegated West Brom;

- using a formation we've not played in a generation,
- where the highest goalscorer was the returning centre-back - who's been out of favour for two campaigns at least - with two goals.

and it was only when the:
- multiple international capped first team players with international tournament finals experience were subbed on, that we fell apart.

yet I still see the manager being questioned! and brian Kerr - BRIAN KERR!!! having a mini-go at the manager for the formation and this, that and the other, and that there's no time like the present. Why not question yourselves? Somewhere up there ^^^^ there's the suggestion of using this campaign, and the next NL to bed in the players that we're going to be relying on. It's not a suggestion, it's happening, as it has to happen.

It's absolutely infuriating watching, listening and talking to people who like football, but really don't have an absolute clue what they're talking about.
People online, and in the media are looking to hang the manager to dry over his goalkeeper selection - and this is a direct point to you Bielsa: catch yourself on. There must be 5 posts in a row where you talk about using Sean McDermott, or Colin Doyle. We saw Colin Doyle play for Ireland - he was ****e, and not at the level required. Sean Mcdermott as has been pointed out elsewhere, hasn't started back yet in Norway. It would have made as much sense to pick James Talbot as McDermott. - he had a crap hand to pick from, and he made a calculated decision.

"Hmmm do I pick the 3rd choice (debatable) keeper who's been in some of my squads, and has had some recent first team football in the new year that I know - or do I pick the 5th choice keeper that nobody rates, or the newbie who has no big-game experience and no international experience?". If he picks Bazunu and he similar to Travers makes an error, then he's goosed.
Either way - he is goosed. It's not the Italy 98 squad where the choice is Buffon, Toldo or Pagliuca, and if they're damaged we can fall back on Peruzzi, Marchegianni or Bucci!

We need perspective, and a lot of it.

In a years time, we could have quite possibly Kelleher in goals, Nathan Collins, JJ Finn in midfield with Idah, Parrott and Noss leading the line for us. Now, more than ever, we are feeding off scraps in the UK, where it's becoming harder and harder for our better players to feature because competition is so fierce. The emboldened bit is half ****take, half serious - done to underline the seriousness of the situation we're in. We've absolutely no control over what happens to those young seriously talented players that leave Ireland to further their careers. none. Finn and Noss could easily fizzle out, and likewise Parrott and Idah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ontheotherhand

Calls for Duffy to play based on the idea he would have beaten Mitrovic to the header are odd to me. Duffy would have be sliced apart multiple times by Tadic long before he had a chance to make amends by winning that header. The lad probably needs a break from football and there's no shame in that.

---

Bingo, and I agree totally. Bulgaria, Finland, Wales, there's three games in the last competition where he (and Egan - equal opportunity critic here) were both turned on the inside for a goal or clear-cut chance. Same happened OShea last night, but he was still ok. Duffy plays last night - I don't see us doing 3 at the back, and like you say, I do see Tadic slicing him open.

I would love - i'd be giddy even - to see the amount of corners and free-kicks we've had in the past 4 campaigns where we've swung ball after ball in to Duffy, and see how many headers have been on target, and how many goals, just to see the ratio (in reference to a liam brady critique I heard about this morning).

For all the whining about not having Duffy in the air - they had what 11 corners? did they get two clean headers? one perhaps?

Super post Kingdom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Isn't it nine competitive games, and ten overall? The England game was a friendly

---

That's what you took from that post? That small and in the scheme of things insignificant error, when you consider that he's had to play 3 times as many games before getting the handy opportunity to get the monkey off his back compared to every manager since Charlton?
Go team!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ontheotherhand

Calls for Duffy to play based on the idea he would have beaten Mitrovic to the header are odd to me. Duffy would have be sliced apart multiple times by Tadic long before he had a chance to make amends by winning that header. The lad probably needs a break from football and there's no shame in that.

---

I'd agree with that. I made the comment about Duffy winning that header (or at least making it way harder for Mitrovic) at the time, and maybe on here too since, but that was disappointment with Clark and O'Shea in that battle and not a suggestion that Duffy should have played.

I read Liam Brady's comments earlier. He didn't seem to think much of Molumby, and I assume he has a fair idea what to look for in a midfielder. But then, he also said Duffy should have started, so I'm not sure what to make of all that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Razors left peg

Connolly has a big summer ahead of him. He needs to get his head down and get fit and get back to what he showed in potential last season, otherwise he'll end up as an average Championship player if hes lucky.

---

There are very few younger strikers getting regular games in the Premiership. I'd love to see him kick on, and until he does there'll be the worry that he might not fulfil his potential, but I think you're being a little harsh.

Quote:

---

I know hes only coming back from injury but to see a 21 year old go down with cramp after an hour was ridiculous. At that age I could run all day and I was far from a professional.

---

That's nonsense. Fitness isn't binary. He went down with cramp because he was playing with an intensity his conditioning wasn't up to sustaining for 90 minutes. Whether that was down to recent injury, or just him failing to pace himself, I don't like seeing a lad who ran so hard he was cramping up being told to "get his head down". I'd bet he could run all day at a pace that would have made you keel over and die at that age.

Did you think he ran himself into the ground John? I thought he was good at closing down for a bit of the 1st half but did very little after that. I didnt notice him working excessively hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Predator

If Kenny persists with 3-5-2, I think Collins should start, maybe with Long. They are two proper out and out strikers capable of playing off each other well as the second goal demonstrated. Connolly cramping up after an hour didn't look good and contentious non-penalty aside I don't think he contributed much overall. He'll be a good option off the bench.

---

I'd agree with you wrt to Collins. I like him. He looks like a guy who knows what he is. A lump of a boy who likes playing centre forward and having seven bells of ****e kicked out of him. And to be fair, i've not seen much of him, but took the words of a few whose opinion i'd respect who didn't really like the look of him, but last night I thought he moved the ball on well more than a few times, and noticeably was very peeved at himself for not getting on the end of one of mcclean's crosses to the near post. He deserves as much credit as Long for doing what a striker should do.
But I think you're a little unfair on Connolly, and by extension Robinson. We put serious pressure on their back three and keeper last night. It never gets mentioned. We didn't do that under Mick and with Mon and Trap we usually just let the opposition advance to a point. And that has an effect on the strikers, particularly if they are feeding off scraps for the most part. So I wouldn't underestimate that effect on Connolly who has been injured recently. That pressing from the two and Browne put the ****s up their keeper, and I've no doubt this helped with the second goal.

Quote:

---

Thinking Kenny would stick with 4-3-3, I initially thought he might go with Parrott as the lone striker the other night, but considering he wasn't even in the matchday 23 it doesn't seem likely that he'll be involved. That said, Kenny can always spring a surprise.

---

Parrott is not a lone striker. Nowhere near it. We've got to start seeing the players that we have and using their skillsets to best suit us. I've a gut feeling that he could start on saturday. If Connolly is injured - it could be a blessing in disguise.

Quote:

---

I don't know why people aren't talking more about the fact that we conceded three very poor goals. They were fairly soft. Midfield issues were a major factor in them, but Liam Brady is right: Clark should have done a lot better with headers for goal 1 and 3 (he probably should've been tighter to Vlahovic or dropped off in the lead-up to 2 too) and though 2 was very much in Travers' remit, O'Shea (who was solid enough otherwise) didn't cover himself in glory there either.

---

Fair point. When I saw the team I wondered if Clark might go into the centre with O'Shea on the left. It's absolutely fair to point out that we could have done better, but we've certainly caused ourselves problems overall defensively for some time now. Duffy being on the pitch doesn't stop the equaliser - he plays on the right so wouldn't have been jumping for the header with Tadic (if that was your thinking?) Your association of clark with blame for the second goal is bizarre frankly., and while O'Shea could have been tighter sure he was loose, his position was fine for cutting out danger. The third goal I've watched a few times now, and it's a really really poxy one to deal with as a defender.
first thing that should be said about it, is that Tadic is a genius with the ball at his feet (he's at Ajax by choice O'Shea, not because he couldn't sign for anyone, but because they are his dream club). I can't add pictures here for some reason, but when he has the ball, the defensive line for a 3 is almost perfect.
There's absolutely no way you expect Tadic given the options he has on, to play the ball that he does. If anything Stevens perhaps has to react a little better and could do a bit more to block his run. But absolutely Clark would be disappointed with the attempt.

Quote:

---

Doherty's crossing last night was actually abysmal as well, even though one of his crosses inadvertently (via deflection/clearance) fell into the path of Browne for our goal. Had he not done so well at RCB, I'd nearly be inclined to put Coleman RWB.

---

If we're sticking with 3 at the back, then you need the two flanking cb's to be able to use the ball effectively, without being compromised defensively. Seamus does that. To be fair to Doherty - against Wales perhaps? - he slotted in to CB and did ok too, so you could possibly invert them. I'd question if it's a good use of Seamus to have him playing as a sole right-sided player for 90 mins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kingdom

No, he didn't - in fairness. Bulgaria were no great shakes absolutely, but this narrative that is getting around, that we're expected to be beating teams like them or from pot 2, 3 and even 4 - I specifically referred to Kenny not having a "gimme" game yet - (to use golf parlance) a gimme is a game that you're expected to win comfortably. Bulgaria away is not a gimme. The rest is not directed towards you BOOMSHAKALAKA, so don't take offence.

For Ireland, for the players that make up our squad, and those within that squad that consider themselves first-team regulars at their clubs, Bulgaria is not a gimme.
Like, we've had far superior Irish teams go to places like Montenegro, Cyprus, Slovakia, Bosnia, Israel, and not win. This team could have done with such a gimme win in the run up to this campaign, but such is life.

Yesterday we selected:
- a novice international and sub at second division Bournemouth;
- a novice international and sub at to-be-relegated West Brom;
- a novice international at underachieving Anderlecht;
- a novice international and sub at second division PNE;
- a novice international playing out of position at PNE;
- a novice international without a senior goal at struggling Brighton;
- a novice international and sub at to-be-relegated West Brom;

- using a formation we've not played in a generation,
- where the highest goalscorer was the returning centre-back - who's been out of favour for two campaigns at least - with two goals.

and it was only when the:
- multiple international capped first team players with international tournament finals experience were subbed on, that we fell apart.

yet I still see the manager being questioned! and brian Kerr - BRIAN KERR!!! having a mini-go at the manager for the formation and this, that and the other, and that there's no time like the present. Why not question yourselves? Somewhere up there ^^^^ there's the suggestion of using this campaign, and the next NL to bed in the players that we're going to be relying on. It's not a suggestion, it's happening, as it has to happen.

It's absolutely infuriating watching, listening and talking to people who like football, but really don't have an absolute clue what they're talking about.
People online, and in the media are looking to hang the manager to dry over his goalkeeper selection - and this is a direct point to you Bielsa: catch yourself on. There must be 5 posts in a row where you talk about using Sean McDermott, or Colin Doyle. We saw Colin Doyle play for Ireland - he was ****e, and not at the level required. Sean Mcdermott as has been pointed out elsewhere, hasn't started back yet in Norway. It would have made as much sense to pick James Talbot as McDermott. - he had a crap hand to pick from, and he made a calculated decision.

"Hmmm do I pick the 3rd choice (debatable) keeper who's been in some of my squads, and has had some recent first team football in the new year that I know - or do I pick the 5th choice keeper that nobody rates, or the newbie who has no big-game experience and no international experience?". If he picks Bazunu and he similar to Travers makes an error, then he's goosed.
Either way - he is goosed. It's not the Italy 98 squad where the choice is Buffon, Toldo or Pagliuca, and if they're damaged we can fall back on Peruzzi, Marchegianni or Bucci!

We need perspective, and a lot of it.

In a years time, we could have quite possibly Kelleher in goals, Nathan Collins, JJ Finn in midfield with Idah, Parrott and Noss leading the line for us. Now, more than ever, we are feeding off scraps in the UK, where it's becoming harder and harder for our better players to feature because competition is so fierce. The emboldened bit is half ****take, half serious - done to underline the seriousness of the situation we're in. We've absolutely no control over what happens to those young seriously talented players that leave Ireland to further their careers. none. Finn and Noss could easily fizzle out, and likewise Parrott and Idah.

---

You've got it all wrong Kingers, all wrong, the players available for selection are an irrelevance in international football. No bearing on it whatsoever.

Comparing those players with those available to our opponents and their respective club career trajectory, also irrelevant.

Doesn't any fool know that ? ;) :)