Republic of Ireland V Norway - Wednesday, 17th November 2010 - Friendly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Predator

Seems I wasn't far wrong. Trap values experience and consistency; when asked about it, Trap said:
“In this moment we had a good balance on the pitch. I thought we had changed many situations. The draw satisfied us because in the second half we played well.

---

The only thing that really bothers me about tonight is this. Usually I don't have a problem with friendly results but the biggest benefit Trap brought to the Irish set-up, in my mind, is a winning mentality - or at least a do-not-lose-at-all-costs-mentality. After the last few results we have to start building momentum to the crucial Macedonian games as quickly as possible. And tonight, despite all the withdrawals, was a great opportunity to do that.

We shouldn't have been satisfied with a draw - that attitude always leads to the sucker punch, the late goal, the hammer blow. We should've been looking to win at home against a very, very mediocre outfit. I'm really quite cheesed off we lost. Long term I think it's bad news to the team mentality. I mean Norn Iron dug out a draw tonight against Morocco with a team they scraped together. A late equalising peno perhaps, but that team headed home feeling chuffed. Our side, with quite a few new faces, could be feeling quite discouraged.

There are positives from tonight, and maybe this is a little dramatic, but I can't help but feel all these missed opportunites and half performances are going to cost us long term.

We're actually quite fortunate to have these Celtic Cup games - fairly competitive fixtures which should be played at a good pace - to fine tune the team and get our confidence and mentality right for the qualifiers. It hasn't been the best half a year but at least we have a few games to get some consistency back.

Lads, anyone record the game who can upload it? In India so the time difference was too much to stay up for it. Would appreciate it! Sounds from the post-match reaction that a Whelan-Fahey midfield could be the future

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rebelmusic

Lads, anyone record the game who can upload it? In India so the time difference was too much to stay up for it. Would appreciate it! Sounds from the post-match reaction that a Whelan-Fahey midfield could be the future

---

Desperate for a recording of the match. Not readily available in Canada, they matches are on at 12:45pm local time for me so I'm always at work when they're on and I have no way to record it as it's not on television here. Thanks.

What have we learned from that game last night?

Cunningham is good enough to start at LB next year.

Shane Long would be in my starting 11 now. I love his enthusiasm, pace and ability to make something out of nothing.

John O'Shea has an obsession with lumping it long, even when under no pressure. STOP ******* GIVING THE BALL AWAY. He needs to be pulled up about this. The team clearly lacks leaders because he keeps doing it and nobody is going ape at him or pointing out to him that every time he does this we lose the ball.

McGeady? Most frustrating player in world football after Nani? Why pass the ball to your mate 5m to your left/right when you can try and dribble past 3 players, lose the ball and then put your team on the back foot.

Whelan/Fahey is a slight improvement on Whelan/Green. Fahey seems to get frustrated too often and will then force a hollywood style forward pass. Whelan did look a lot fitter than when he played against the Ruskies. I still don't think we have enough decen central MF to keep on playing 4-4-2.

Gutted for Coleman and Wilson. The two players I wanted to watch.

My ratings :bigsmile:

Given - 6; Probably a little bit rusty but got the job done.
Cunningham - 7; Some very encouraging signs from a young player growing in confidence. I've certainly change my opinion on him after last night's performance.
JOSH - 7; Comfortable on the ball, leader in defence, a few sloppy long balls but clearly should be played at centre half from now on.
O'Dea - 5; Too slow and laboursome for the international game.
Kelly - 6; Expected more from him as this was his chance to make the RB position his own.
Duff - 6; Little bit off the pace but looked good in the early exchanges.
Whelan - 6; Did what he was told to do.
Fahey - 6; Did what he was told to do. I think he played a few sloppy passes but these passes were forced on him due to our style of play. Otherwise showed some nice touches that allowed a continued flow in our play and helped tidy up loose balls.
Lawrence - 5; He has played better. Thought his touch and general play was quite poor.
Doyle - 6; Wasn't involved enough for my liking.
Long - 7; Another energetic performance from an improving player.

Subs:
McGeady - 6; I think he is improving as a player as he slowly learning how to make better use of the ball. Still a strong tendency to put the head down and dribble when he gets the ball but there are signs he is improving his game.
Walters - 6; Won a few balls in the air and that's why he has been drafted in.
Hunt - 5; He's not fit. I think his crossing of the ball is of a high standard.
Foley - 5; Wasn't really involved tbh. Needs to be given more game time to grow into the RB role and feel he has Trapattoni's trust in his abilities. Only then will we see what he is capable of.


Trapattoni - 4; Our tactics are too static and inflexible. We're too easy to read - teams playing a 4-5-1/ 4-3-3 formation can open us up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Predator

Headline after headline? Surely that's hyperbole? He's played 11 games out of 13 in the Premiership, 4 of which were from the bench and he has played well. Trap said that we needed defenders and not midfielders, hinting that he would rather Clark played defence.
I almost think that Trapattoni's English makes him seem less clued in, but I have no doubt that he is.

---

Fair enough it is exaggerated but Coleman is the only Irish player to collect a man of the match award in a premiership game this season and has been playing exceptional well. He has made the odd headline in the papers and has certainly been making headline after headline on this forum. Game time in a frivolous friendly against Norway was the very least he deserved.

I read in a couple of papers that he said Clark certainly isn't a defensive midfielder, he was a centre back, which I certainly don't think Trap was in a position to comment about considering he had never even met the guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton

Playing Clark at DM was a gamble which worked. If he's a long term DM or not remains to be seen - his CB potential, the position he's played in all his life, is far clearer. Bit of a theatrical comment considering Trap merely saw him as CB long term. If Clark proves a DM option I'm sure everyone, manager included, would be very happy.

---

There are clear parallel's with John O'Shea here. O'Shea was an outstanding centre back (in the Ferdinand mould rather than Vidic) all through his underage and reserve career and was played at full back out of necessity and other positions, but the only position he has excelled in for us has been the 6 months he played CB. It's his main position, the one he's most comfortable in, and the position where he would ideally suit Ireland alongside Dunne. Unfortunately he's been plugging a gap for us the past 18 months and we've been lucky to call on Ledger.
Clark could suffer the same, as he's unlikely to dislodge Dunne and Collins at Villa, but could get utilised elsewhere. I wouldn't fawn at Houllier's idea of where a guy can play either, this is the man that spent some 18m on Salif Diao and the Spitter, as well as plenty of moolah on Sean Dundee etc etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the bear

cunningham did well , but how he merits a place and coleman doesn't is beyond me. and if trap doesn't see coleman as a winger he obviously just doesn't watch the club matches. weather it's his best position i don't know, but he's prooved he can do a good job there

---

I'd say the depth in their respective positions was as much a factor as anything else.. Coleman is competing with Kelly and Foley at RF and McGeady and Lawrence at RM. At RF any one of Kelly Foley and Coleman could justifiably feel aggrieved had they been left out. I would argue that what could possibly have been learned from Lawrence and McGeady at this stage, but Trap has spoken of the importance of balance given the other withdrawels. All in I'm not too bothered about Coleman's omission.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kingdom

was played at full back out of necessity and other positions, but the only position he has excelled in for us has been the 6 months he played CB. It's his main position, the one he's most comfortable in, and the position where he would ideally suit Ireland alongside Dunne. Unfortunately he's been plugging a gap for us the past 18 months and we've been lucky to call on Ledger.

---

Could the emergence of Coleman, Kelly and Foley see O'Shea move back into centre half alongside Dunne?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

My ratings :bigsmile:

McGeady - 6; I think he is improving as a player as he slowly learning how to make better use of the ball. Still a strong tendency to put the head down and dribble when he gets the ball but there are signs he is improving his game.

---

I havent posted on here for ages but read regularly. However when I read the likes of this I dispair.

'improving', 'still learning' ??? Could understand that being said of a player with a half a dozen appearances. Last night was McGeady's 37th cap ffs. If he hasnt learnt by now or improved by now he never will.

IMO the most overrated player ever to wear green, a one trick pony who will never be international class.

Last night was no different to any other night with him. A simple pass on? No, beat 2 or 3 players and lose it. Track back when our attack breaks down? No, doesnt know who he should be picking up.

So frustrating to have to watch that and not get the opportunity to see Coleman or Wilson.

Seriously think after more that 30 years of going to giving it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Could the emergence of Coleman, Kelly and Foley see O'Shea move back into centre half alongside Dunne?

---

Absolutely, and it should. Our centre half options at this stage should be Dunne & O'Shea, with Ledger next followed perhaps by Clark if he proves himself for Villa or ourselves. O'Dea is rusty and wouldn't dole out the last rites for him or anything, but he's a step back again. Kelly is not an option at centre half. Biggest loser last night was Paul McShane, as his squad place really should be gone now, with the emergence of Foley Coleman and Clark.

I dunno whether it's a lack of intelligence or just not really following the game properly, but I can never quite grasp how people struggle the notion of dropping Ledger when there is a better overall option available, yet jizz in their pants when Whelan isn't dropped. You can be dropped from the team for doing little wrong, if it's in the teams best interests.

Kelly and Foley were decent last night, and should have a battle between them over the next 6 months to see who stakes the bigger claim.

If we could uncover another left full (a fully fit Stephen O'Halloran or someone of his ilk) then we really would have good competent options right across the back 4. Ultimately it would be nice to get to a stage where if the right full gets injured or the second Cb gets injured, only one change is made, with a like for like replacement, rather than making 2 changes, and moving an established player across.

3 or 4 Alarming things stick out for me:

Trap only made changes because of injuries.
Trap only brought on Foley because of injury to O'dea.
Trap did not change his style for the sake of a friendly and go with the more attack minded combinations he could have.
Finally as YI said, trap appears not to take note of players playing for their clubs and their positions...does he even read the papers to find out?

Friendlies don't matter in terms of the result, they matter in terms of playing time, and finding potential first teamers for difficult/needed positions. We lost again last night, but yet Trap didn't alter our style, like he said he is willing to do, i think thats the biggest thing. We dont care about losing a friendly, but what matters is that Trap changes things to see if we can play different systems, and adapt appropriately. Did we really learn anything about what we could achieve last night? I dont think so. Other than another loss, and trap says not losing is the most important thing, for confidence, gain momentum etc. Yet we did lose, so Traps objective has not been met, on top of that we haven't altered our system/style of play,for situations where we WILL need to be able, so it has been a lose-lose scenario, a futile outcome.

Whelan impressed me with his passing believe it or not. I liked the power and directness behind some of his passing, we had not seen that before, but it proves he can do it, he also came looking for the ball more, was this against Traps advice? Fahey I thought would have done better with his passing but he hit some poor ones in fairness.

Mcgeady? Always seems to take the wrong option like going into players as opposed to away from them, he also seems to think that if he swarms players around him he creates space(which is true) but invariably he loses possession. There is absolutely no consistency in him, 1 step forward 2 steps back, 2 steps forward 1 step back, 2 steps forward 4 steps back. What did trap gain by bringing him the whole way to dublin midweek for a half?

Cunningham has proved he can pass with both feet, that is enough for me to start playing him ahead of kilbane. That is not a joke, its one attribute more than kilbane.

Long is strong, but i wouldn't be getting carried away with him yet, like some others are. He has a good bit more to prove to be honest.

Hunt/Walters/Lawrence all ok, average really, nothing to write home about apart from a few headers here and there, but never directed to irish players by walters, one cross from lawrence of note. Duff was winning ball, but his lack of pace is begining to prohibit him unfortunately still a great pressure lifter and free winner.

O'Dea/Oshea hopefully we wont see that combination together again. Kelly solid enough, but unspectacular.

Whats worrying is Trap, is getting a lot of criticism, from all angles, a lot of it is merited, thats the real problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superhoops

I havent posted on here for ages but read regularly. However when I read the likes of this I dispair.

---

I'm no fan of McGeady and I wouldn't start him in a competitive game. But I'm willing to give each player the opportunity to change the opinion I've formed on them with each international they play. Like I said I saw signs of improvement but he still takes too much out of the ball. There was a moment right at the end when he had a great opportunity to play a tap in ball to give Long a shot at goal but he chose to dribble. It's frustrating but I thought over the course of the 45 mins he played, he did play some balls that were of a higher standard than what I've come to expect from him. Anyways there no need to go OTT, I don't pick the team. You'd do well to keep your despair for a more opportune time.

OH ya, for those who didn't see sky it was interesting to see what andrews and kilbane were saying about Long. Kinda makes sense to how his last few games have gone.

Btw foley is the only Irish player to start all games this season. Trap has not seen him play once i reckon, coleman has been playing right midfield the last 7 out of 8 games, Clark has been playing midfield. This is the problem with Trap, do we really want a manager who scans a programme or looks up a players profile on the web to find out their position and only sees them in that position? It also smacks of poor training/lack of freedom of expression for players in training, because surely he could see these attributes in training and any old fool(footballing manager or average joe playing junior football) could figure out where his best position is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Could the emergence of Coleman, Kelly and Foley see O'Shea move back into centre half alongside Dunne?

---

Thats what im thinking and hoping. Again will Trap see it that way though? He is like the old dog with new tricks, the old hat always fits best.


IFK101 do you think Mcgeady will be 32 when he has completely improved and is the final product, except he has lost all his pace, and that is the ONLY thing that makes him stand out amongst the rest?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

IFK101 do you think Mcgeady will be 32 when he has completely improved and is the final product, except he has lost all his pace, and that is the ONLY thing that makes him stand out amongst the rest?

---

I'm not a clairvoyant paul_oshea but I think the move to Russia has been positive for his game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Predator

Earlier, in response to outrage over Coleman not getting on, I said:

Seems I wasn't far wrong. Trap values balance and consistency; when asked about it, Trap said:
“In this moment we had a good balance on the pitch. I thought we had changed many situations. The draw satisfied us because in the second half we played well.

“I wish to focus on the team,” he added when pressed again.

“I could also have left out Duff but it’s important on the pitch to have a team with balance. It’s not easy in two days to change a player’s habit. We can play with (Keith) Treacy or Coleman and another team and you could lose two or three-nil."

---

Pat yourself on the back predator!

"circumstances didn't dictate", what circumstances? Because it was raining and coleman would melt in the rain? Or because we had a few injuries, in a non-competitive fixture against a very mediocre side(dont give me world rankings) who were happy to just sit back all game long? Or so we might not lose? Oh wait we did?

Listen, im not that annoyed that coleman didnt play, but when i read these comments and hear what Trap says this is what pees me off and think what are people talking about? Take off traps glasses for a while and think objectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Pat yourself on the back predator!

---

Thanks, I'm great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

"circumstances didn't dictate", what circumstances? Because it was raining and coleman would melt in the rain? Or because we had a few injuries, in a non-competitive fixture against a very mediocre side(dont give me world rankings) who were happy to just sit back all game long? Or so we might not lose? Oh wait we did?

---

The fact that O'Dea got injured. The fact that we conceded. In Trapattoni's mind, these are the circumstances which dictated his not handing Coleman a debut - which was simply my original suspicion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Listen, im not that annoyed that coleman didnt play, but when i read these comments and hear what Trap says this is what pees me off and think what are people talking about? Take off traps glasses for a while and think objectively.

---

All along I've said that I'd have liked Coleman to get a run out; I think he deserves it. All I was saying is that I understood why Trap didn't give him the chance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

OH ya, for those who didn't see sky it was interesting to see what andrews and kilbane were saying about Long. Kinda makes sense to how his last few games have gone.

---

Would be more interesting if you told us what they said?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Btw foley is the only Irish player to start all games this season.

---

Stephen Carr at Birmingham. Also, Foley didn't start against Southend in the League Cup

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Trap has not seen him play once i reckon

---

Objection, conjecture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

, coleman has been playing right midfield the last 7 out of 8 games, Clark has been playing midfield.

---

For the first time in his career, and the manager's was forced to play him out there because of injuries. Also, irrelevant seeing as how FIFA clearance didn't come through in time for the initial squad announcement, and Clark was injured for the game anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

This is the problem with Trap, do we really want a manager who scans a programme or looks up a players profile on the web to find out their position and only sees them in that position? It also smacks of poor training/lack of freedom of expression for players in training, because surely he could see these attributes in training and any old fool(footballing manager or average joe playing junior football) could figure out where his best position is?

---

Like playing O'Shea at centre half and right full? Or Keogh on the wing, and up front? Or Kelly at right full and centre half? Or Fahey on the left and in the middle? Didn't Andrews fill in at right full once for us as well under Trapattoni? Steven Reid in the centre, think he was playing right full at Blackburn at the time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Predator

Thanks, I'm great.

The fact that O'Dea got injured. The fact that we conceded. In Trapattoni's mind, these are the circumstances which dictated his not handing Coleman a debut - which was simply my original suspicion.

All along I've said that I'd have liked Coleman to get a run out; I think he deserves it. All I was saying is that I understood why Trap didn't give him the chance.

---

Yes you are predator, is that what yer mammy told you too :D Only messin!

When you say understand do you mean empathise or sympathise? I mean do you see from a deluded point of view given we lost or what? Do you agree? Do you think it was right, again given we lost, and given we have lost most of our friendlies under trap? Do you really think the objective is being met? Cos I don't understand why Trap says these things given the objective is rarely met.

It's not really fair to argue that 'we lost anyway, so we could have played X, Y and Z.' Had Norway got their goal 4 minutes into the second half rather than 4 minutes from the end, players like Coleman might have featured as we would have been chasing the game. It's all speculation obviously, but the argument that we lost anyway fails to take into account the timing of the goal may well have had on the tactics and personnel employed before it was conceded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Would be more interesting if you told us what they said?

Stephen Carr at Birmingham. Also, Foley didn't start against Southend in the League Cup
Objection, conjecture
For the first time in his career, and the manager's was forced to play him out there because of injuries. Also, irrelevant seeing as how FIFA clearance didn't come through in time for the initial squad announcement, and Clark was injured for the game anyway

Like playing O'Shea at centre half and right full? Or Keogh on the wing, and up front? Or Kelly at right full and centre half? Or Fahey on the left and in the middle? Didn't Andrews fill in at right full once for us as well under Trapattoni? Steven Reid in the centre, think he was playing right full at Blackburn at the time?

---

Basically that Long, has come into the squad a lot more confident and more vocal over hte last 6 months and this is showing with his game time, and his general play. That he has come of age so to speak in the last while. A change in character I suppose.

Sorry Irish International in the premiership, I should have qualified that statement.

Objection over-ruled. Its pretty clear given the evidence.

So do you think that Stephen ward being turned into a left back, means trap should only play him as a Forward?

Playing fahey in midfield appears to have come out of necessity, your point will be valid if he ever plays that position again, when we have players returned especially given he performed at least as good as green has in that position. Kelly was moved centre half because there wasn't any other option, wilson is a DM. Keogh i think has proved one of Traps little pet projects, that has gone fairly awry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

It's not really fair to argue that 'we lost anyway, so we could have played X, Y and Z.' Had Norway got their goal 4 minutes into the second half rather than 4 minutes from the end, players like Coleman might have featured as we would have been chasing the game. It's all speculation obviously, but the argument that we lost anyway fails to take into account the timing of the goal may well have had on the tactics and personnel employed before it was conceded.

---

Somewhat agreed, but when we have been losing most of our friendlies:against winning friendlies, does it really matter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

When you say understand do you mean empathise or sympathise? I mean do you see from a deluded point of view given we lost or what? Do you agree? Do you think it was right, again given we lost, and given we have lost most of our friendlies under trap? Do you really think the objective is being met? Cos I don't understand why Trap says these things given the objective is rarely met.

---

I've always expressed frustration over Trapattoni's selections and his unwillingness to take risks, but that said, I appreciate his reasoning and tend to bow down to his greater experience of management.
Last night, I was happy with the starting lineup and thought we started very well. In the second half, I thought we were very tame in comparison.
Trap went for McGeady and Walters at half time. McGeady was poor and perhaps Coleman would have been a better option, but I can't see Trap favouring Coleman on the wing. He brought on Hunt where I would have given Treacy a run. When O'Dea went off injured, I would have stuck Wilson in at CB and then perhaps have taken Kelly off for Coleman. That way, all the new guys would have got a run out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton

We shouldn't have been satisfied with a draw

---

Agree 100%

"I had a doubt about him in this position, but he played very, very well," said the manager.

Obvious who he is talking about here, but interesting all the same, because again this would not have happened had there not being a serious amount of injuries. How many other players can we say the same for, yet look how long it took this individual to get his chance in his preferred position.

Trap has basically admitted that he got this one wrong. Hopefully now he sees that he might be getting it wrong in other areas too.

It appears now we have to wish for people to get injured to see the players we want to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

So do you think that Stephen ward being turned into a left back, means trap should only play him as a Forward?

---

Stephen Ward has emerged as Prem level LB. Ciaran Clark emerged as Prem level CB who's been pushed into DM out of necessity. They don't compare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Playing fahey in midfield appears to have come out of necessity, your point will be valid if he ever plays that position again, when we have players returned especially given he performed at least as good as green has in that position. Kelly was moved centre half because there wasn't any other option, wilson is a DM. Keogh i think has proved one of Traps little pet projects, that has gone fairly awry.

---

Seems fairly likely Fahey will get more CM opportunities from this.

Also how can you argue in favour of playing Clark at DM but not Wilson at CB? Wilson can play CB at a pinch - rather like Clark's been playing DM for Villa. He certainly has more experience at CB than Kelly.

EDIT - Also you didn't actually address Tets' point. You said Trap sees players in one position. Tets rebuffed your argument with facts. If it's valid for you to say Fahey, Kelly, Keogh or anyone else were simply played in different positions by Trap 'out of necessity' then how can you maintain Clark, that world beating defensive midfielder, has been pushed upfield because it's actually his position?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

"I had a doubt about him in this position, but he played very, very well," said the manager.

Obvious who he is talking about here, but interesting all the same, because again this would not have happened had there not being a serious amount of injuries. How many other players can we say the same for, yet look how long it took this individual to get his chance in his preferred position.

Trap has basically admitted that he got this one wrong. Hopefully now he sees that he might be getting it wrong in other areas too.

It appears now we have to wish for people to get injured to see the players we want to see.

---

Eh? Loads of people had doubts about Fahey at CM - personally I still do. Trap didn't have to play him CM - could've threw Wilson, Lawrence or even O'Shea in - but he did and then praised him. And you use it as a stick to beat him with? Makes no sense.

I disagree that McGeady was poor. We we were poor for a long stretch in the 2nd half. McGeady lost the ball twice around the box when he had a better easier options. That apart, whenever he got on the ball, for the most part he made something happen and a few times good intelligent play.

I was impressed with Huseklepp for Norway, a striker from their domestic league. He is their 3rd choice, he is a tuned in intelligent player with a knack for scoring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

I was impressed with Huseklepp for Norway, a striker from their domestic league. He is their 3rd choice, he is a tuned in intelligent player with a knack for scoring.

---

Was going to mention him but didn't know how to spell it (sounded like 'Whos-a-klep'). Certainly gave O'Dea and Cunningham the run around in the second half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton

Eh? Loads of people had doubts about Fahey at CM - personally I still do. Trap didn't have to play him CM - could've threw Wilson, Lawrence or even O'Shea in - but he did and then praised him. And you use it as a stick to beat him with? Makes no sense.

---

Yep, Trap has come out and played him, yet people had being saying that Faheys preferred position was CM all this time but trap never gave him a chance and proceeded to play the likes of green and gibson ahead without even giving him a go in friendlies. He has now and he has been impressed. Isn't that a bigger problem with Trap?

Wilson has been playing as a Defensive midfielder for Stoke and had been at portsmouth. This appears to be his position, we all know trap doesn't like playing people out of their position as listed. Clark has been playing at DM and not CB also, but for some reason trap only sees him as a CB. Coleman has been playing as a RMF not a FB, yet trap sees him only there. This confuses me too, what exactly is traps logic? He hasn't seen enough of any of them to say their best positions yet he makes the assumptions based on what?

Swan:I did, based on what Trap has been recorded as saying in the press what i covered above in the last paragraph.

Again you used the word emerged? So Ciaran clark cant emerge as a DM? Trap would still see him as CB? Was ward played out of necessity, or was it simply a case of Mccarthy seeing he had a left foot and ousted the current LB at the time? Im going with the same as you suggested for Clark...which is why he also played fahey in CM(again overall balance by lawrence out on the flank).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Yep, Trap has come out and played him, yet people had being saying that Faheys preferred position was CM all this time but trap never gave him a chance and proceeded to play the likes of green and gibson ahead without even giving him a go in friendlies. He has now and he has been impressed. Isn't that a bigger problem with Trap?

---

No I don't see the problem. Regardless of the circumstances Trap played him the position and was impressed. It's happened with quite a few other players and will happen. If the problem was as obvious as you say he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Wilson has been playing as a Defensive midfielder for Stoke and had been at portsmouth. This appears to be his position, we all know trap doesn't like playing people out of their position as listed. Clark has been playing at DM and not CB also, but for some reason trap only sees him as a CB. Coleman has been playing as a RMF not a FB, yet trap sees him only there. This confuses me too, what exactly is traps logic? He hasn't seen enough of any of them to say their best positions yet he makes the assumptions based on what?

---

I want to put this 'Trap only sees Clark as a CB argument to bed.' You are drawing conclusions on a gentle comment Trap made after Clark had played one game in CM, where he was the defensive pivot of a midfield five. He's since gone on to play three games at CM, which is far less than the number's he played at CB. At the time Trap offered a fairly reasonable opinion, since Clark had played ONE game in a midfield vastly different midfield from Ireland's.

Having watched Clark quite a bit, I think he's bang on. Clark's done well and looks accomplished on the ball but his performances for Villa at CM are not as transferable as his performances at CB because the midfield system is so different. And, regardless of what Trap's seen, his view is far more reasonable than simply assuming Clark's a DM based off three games...:rolleyes:

But it's irrelevant - you're drawing a wildly pessimistic conclusion based on a throwaway, and very gentle, comment Trap made about Clark. It doesn't mean Clark can't prove himself a CM or Trap can't change his mind.

It's the same for Coleman. He's a player who's operated from RB most of his career. His recent performances have been very, very fine. But note David Moyes said exactly the same thing about Coleman's long term future just a month or two ago. Does this mean Moyes is inflexible? Absolutely not. And it's the same for Trap, as Tets' examples point out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Swan:I did, based on what Trap has been recorded as saying in the press what i covered above in the last paragraph.

---

See above - your conclusions are wildly assumptive, based on some throwaway light comments in the press and have no statistical basis (as Tets pointed out).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Again you used the word emerged? So Ciaran clark cant emerge as a DM? Trap would still see him as CB? Was ward played out of necessity, or was it simply a case of Mccarthy seeing he had a left foot and ousted the current LB at the time? Im going with the same as you suggested for Clark...which is why he also played fahey in CM(again overall balance by lawrence out on the flank).

---

Of course he can emerge as a DM. Given time. Ward has proved himself, at least to McCarthy, to be a Prem standard left back. Clark hasn't proved to be a Prem standard DM. He surely can yet, but Trap was right to say what he said after Clark had played ONE game at DM. Simple.

If Fahey goes on to operate at CM at Ireland - a real possibility - will you concede Trap is more flexible than you suggest? It doesn't really matter how it came about - Trap clearly does play people in various positions (regardless of whatever he says in the media at various points in time).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Objection over-ruled. Its pretty clear given the evidence.

---

Reinstated, Trapattoni has now seen him in training. Besides, if he has never seen him play, why would he call him into the squad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

So do you think that Stephen ward being turned into a left back, means trap should only play him as a Forward?

---

If he would only play Ward as a striker, then Cunningham would be playing as a striker, where he started his career

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Playing fahey in midfield appears to have come out of necessity, your point will be valid if he ever plays that position again, when we have players returned especially given he performed at least as good as green has in that position. Kelly was moved centre half because there wasn't any other option, wilson is a DM. Keogh i think has proved one of Traps little pet projects, that has gone fairly awry.

---

My point was that he has played players in various positions. Also, McGeady, Duff and Hunt on both wings. McGeady played through the middle at the end of the Russia game as well

That was a dreadful match overall. Norway didn't really turn up but had enough quality to score two excellent goals and go home with a win. It's very frustrating and I'm disappointed neither Coleman nor Wilson got on but I doubt it will scar either man emotionally. They'll both get their chances and become excellent players for us.

I thought Fahey struggled at times in the middle and tried some passes that were never on but nobody who watched Paul Green give the ball away 90 times against Slovakia would be too worried about that. Norway played very deep and the movement of our midfield was poor at times. I did notice that Fahey's default out ball was Cunningham which means he must trust him with the ball - I thought the two of them linked up well, albeit not under much pressure.

McGeady had a smashing 15 minutes when he came on but then faded. I didn't know where he was playing at times - he was collecting the ball from the centre halves at times, which is probably a measure of how hard he found the ball to come by. Duff looked tired and probably should have come off earlier - Doyle the same but he did go off at the right time. Kelly and Cunningham were impressive, Josh and O'Dea a little shaky. Whelan had his best game in a green shirt for some time, although again he wasn't under much pressure. Long looks like a very good player but think he needs to add more to his game to really challenge Robbie for the #10 shirt.

I did notice a distinct lack of harrying in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

I did notice a distinct lack of harrying in the game.

---

Certainly missed Paul Greens customary harrying.

You are purely picking one player here in Clark.

Do not suggest that my comments are assumptions based on "throw away" comments by Trap. You and I and everyone else can only judge on what we see/hear from Trap. It is 100% Fact, a word that so many like to use. WHy would people even quote him then for reference here as we do so often....thats a strange point to make, unless its a weak point to undermine my argument.

Why did it take 18 months or so then for Fahey to be tried in CM "he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM." ?

Unless trap is like Comical Ally, suggesting the allies are nowhere near and we have control or Iraq, then of course Trap is going to have to secede from his normal stubborn stance, re:fahey in midfield. It matters completely how this comes about, of course it does, because had a player been played in that position all along, we might have picked up 3 points instead of 1, and qualified. The old saying rings true, yer best players in their best positions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

I disagree that McGeady was poor. We we were poor for a long stretch in the 2nd half. McGeady lost the ball twice around the box when he had a better easier options. That apart, whenever he got on the ball, for the most part he made something happen and a few times good intelligent play.

I was impressed with Huseklepp for Norway, a striker from their domestic league. He is their 3rd choice, he is a tuned in intelligent player with a knack for scoring.

---

I listened to it on the radio and that would be the synopsis of McGeadys performance that the commentators came to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Reinstated, Trapattoni has now seen him in training. Besides, if he has never seen him play, why would he call him into the squad?

If he would only play Ward as a striker, then Cunningham would be playing as a striker, where he started his career

---

Seeing someone in training is not the same as seeing anyone in a game. People playing at any level(against relative opposition) can look good in training, doing it in a game is completely different.

Ward was bought from bohemians as a striker, 20+ odd goals in over 3-4 appearances up until 21/22, cunningham is a lot younger, and been playing FB since what about 16/17 since 2007 odd? Also i thought he was more a left sided midfielder(which adds more weight) originally and not a striker, but i am open to correction.

Interesting i just saw this: http://sport.scotsman.com/football/G...ham.6628839.jp

Looks like trap might be taking note of what fans/media/pundits have been hoping suggesting he do for a while, and thats experiment and replace those who need replacing. Perhaps we are seeing a change in things. So long as long term doesn't mean after kilbane retires and in the near future rather than medium/long term future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

You are purely picking one player here in Clark.

---

to be fair, so are you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Why did it take 18 months or so then for Fahey to be tried in CM "he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM." ?

---

18 months? You do realise Fahey only made his debut in May?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Unless trap is like Comical Ally

---

Is he Chemical Ali's Scottish cousin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

The old saying rings true, yer best players in their best positions.

---

Then why are you suggesting Clark in CM, when he's excelled at centre half?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

You are purely picking one player here in Clark.

---

Well it was you that kept bringing him up after it was clarified for you...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Do not suggest that my comments are assumptions based on "throw away" comments by Trap. You and I and everyone else can only judge on what we see/hear from Trap. It is 100% Fact, a word that so many like to use.

---

Just because it's all we have to go on doesn't mean you can't take it with 16 pinches of salt...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Why did it take 18 months or so then for Fahey to be tried in CM "he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM." ?

Unless trap is like Comical Ally, suggesting the allies are nowhere near and we have control or Iraq, then of course Trap is going to have to secede from his normal stubborn stance, re:fahey in midfield. It matters completely how this comes about, of course it does, because had a player been played in that position all along, we might have picked up 3 points instead of 1, and qualified.

---

More wild assumtions and guesses. If it's really just about playing Fahey at CM, and you genuinely think we'd have picked up more points with him there, fine. I disagree but that's your view. However you seemed to be holding Fahey (and Clark and Coleman) up as examples of Trap's intransigence in defining where players operate best when, clearly, he's not necessarily that stubborn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

The old saying rings true, yer best players in their best positions.

---

So you're happy to see Clark at CB and Coleman at RB yeah? ;)