there's an eligibility rules thread for this discussion.
Please stay on topic.
there's an eligibility rules thread for this discussion.
Please stay on topic.
Kenny obviously doesn't rate Clark - one of those now rare Irish species, a regular EPL performer over a number of seasons. The experienced Clark would have been the obvious replacement for O'Shea. As it was, young Omobamidele did well but IMO (numerous replays, camera angles) he was all over the place for the second goal. Again, I'm unashamedly pushing Clark's case here, his ridiculous omission cost Ireland a draw at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trequartista20
You cannot say that, not to a certainty. Not even to a definite maybe in fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
Of course I can't be certain. But I can say it, have said it, believe it and stand by it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraftyToePoke
I think for balance it's fair to point out that Ciaran has been a bit-part EPL performer in a pretty shyte Newcastle team for the past 2/3 seasons, regularly dropping out when the squad has fully-fit status, and coming back with injury or form dictates. that would be my perception anyway. But bit-part performer is still ahead of promising but no-part performer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
On your last line, Ciaran has been rash a few times in his own right - Belgium in Euro 2016 in a run and lunge that should be meme-tastic (that act definitely cost Ireland the chance of a draw), and if memory serves me right, he was criticised for his role in either the second (the lob) or the third goal in Belgrade.
I was wondering if Clark was the player who hasn't been vaccinated (https://www.independent.ie/sport/soc...-40790591.html) , but a search online shows that he is (https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/citylif...united-matches)
Dan McDonnell in this morning's Indo (Online) is stating that Robinson is back in contention for the Azeri and Serbian games, and that Doherty is fine and likely to be in contention to play. Wonder did he have a touch of the Linekars?
Alan Browne less likely to be involved as he was carrying a knock while a close contact.
If Robinson is fit, then he's a great chance of starting. Personally, i'd play Himself, Parrott and Connolly behind Idah, with McGrath and Cullen behind.
This mornings Mirror saying that Shamrock Rovers are picking up a six figure fee from Manchester City for every appearance by Bazunu up to an additional 1 million.
Good to see some money coming into the league, he deserves to keep his place based on the Portugal game.
If Robinson is fit its a no brainer he starts, we have zero chance of qualifying at this stage but we need to back up a decent performance against Portugal with a win Saturday, Beat Serbia and you would start to think maybe we are going somewhere
Ah it's not as if Clark hasn't drawn the ire of many here with lapses in concentration and silly errors. Omobamidele did brilliantly in my book. There's no basis for being confident Clark would have done better. Maybe instead of McClean, but that's a different debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
Is Stephen Kenny on a small commission ? Only kidding !Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
The Belgium lunge has been a versatile rod for his back ever since. Egan, Duffy, O'Shea, Doherty and even Coleman have had their lapses too. Kenny has effectively told Clark to retire. This is a player with 274 EPL, Cup plus C'ship (34) games. I watched from Holte End in his early Villa days, delighted when he declared for us. Terrific bloke, friendly, approachable and proud of his Irish heritage. So OK, I'm a fan and biased, but no matter which way I look at it he's better than fifth, sixth or seventh choice CB. I'll end it there - with respect for the alternative views aired above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Alluded to this on another chat, cant say definitively but the subs were poor, molumby couldnt judge the tempo of the game, with 10 mins to go and not looking remotely interested in attacking(everytime we got the ball we messed about up top like 2 mins were left)brining on another defender to sit in in front of the defence seemed like the sensible option and to just hold on to what we had, im sure with time everyone will see how poor portgual were on the night and how desperate they became that a draw was the least we should have achieved. Certainly I also believe having Clark in there would have made a difference too, Andrew was playing the hoofball which is funny how everyone ignores that because it suits the agenda of young blood coming in and building for a "future" campaign - that said his general defending was good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
It’s always possible that Kenny is not around that much longer as Ireland’s manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
I like Clark too but just think it’s wildly speculative that we’d have held out if he’d come on instead of Omobamidele. As said before, every goal can be picked to pieces.
As for the claim Portugal were poor. Yeah they were. So what? A poor Portugal is still miles better than most teams we’ll play. What a miserable way to look at a game.
(Edit: Sorry just saw snapshot’s “I’ll end it there”. I’m typing while travelling so I should have left it too).
Not to bang on but...: D What happens if duffy or egan get injured? I don't rate scales. We're very light in the centre now, doherty was great the last day i dont want to see him play in a makeshift back 3.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
"Defenders Dara O'Shea and Nathan Collins have both been ruled out of the next two games through injury, the former having to be helped off the pitch after a collision half an hour into Ireland's game against Portugal in Faro on Wednesday night."
Was it too late to call up Clark? Surely his inclusion is more merited than Scales?
It certainly is, but I thought he was a bit of a passenger next to Egan and Duffy. No shame in that - they gave big performances - but it's not unreasonable to speculate either. Backs to the wall defending is far from unfamiliar to a Newcastle defender too! I hope to see more of Omobamidele, and Collins too, but Portugal away wasn't the best match to be introducing a young player. O'Shea has been given time to bed in and has been very good, and the others should get that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Robinson could be a good enhancement. Could we sacrifice McGrath for Robinson and have a front 3 i.e. 3-4-3? Or do we remove Connolly for Robinson? Omobamidele for O'Shea should be an obvious one. I hope there aren't wholesale changes as a little momentum would be nice after a decent performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I've offered up Connolly and McGrath as sacrificial lambs for Robinson but I don't know which I'd prefer to see play. Connolly needs minutes and games. And a goal. I think he has a lot to offer us going forward and could be worth the investment. McGrath doesn't need minutes and games but he probably does need them at international level and I'd like to see him become a part of the side or a starting option for the side based on how he fared the other night. Looks to have much more guile than Browne in that role.
I really don't know!
I tend to agree alright. It seems like Kenny is happier working with players he's coached at underage level. Which makes sense to an extent - there was a fear at the start of Kenny's reign that players wouldn't respond to a low-profile manager like Kenny, but Portugal away dispelled that - but when you've Darragh Lenihan starting for Blackburn every match, then I hope we're not cutting off our nose to spite our face. We've lost a centre-half through injury and while Scales can play there, he's got his transfer on the basis of being a left wingback.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Against that, it may be an indication we don't plan on going 3-5-2 for the remaining two games, so we don't mind being down a centre-half.
Obviously as a UCD fan I'm delighted for Scales, particularly given the way he was messed around on his transfer in 2019.
Robinson in for O'Shea - the forwards provide width rather than the wing-backs, who play a little further back - is the minimalist approach. I'd like to see what the new and improved Idah can do now to bring the wide forwards into play against a weaker team. McGrath, too, could have a little more liberty against players no better than he plays every week. He's a very productive attacking mid in Scotland, so those two factors might be enough to start to see evidence of an Irish attack worth a damn again.
Someone suggested Parrott in for a midfielder too, which feels maybe too incautious to me. He could be very dangerous as a late sub though, as Azerbaijan should have to work hard against us and will tire.
It's funny seeing Clark being elevated to an Irish version of Virgil Van Dijk in here.
When MON & McCarthy kept picking the "old guard" a lot of people were complaining the youngster were being ignored.
When Kenny finally drops Hendrick, I wonder how long it will take before the calls for his inclusion start?
I don't think anyone's saying he's an Irish van Dijk.
But he's an experienced Premier League player and a seasoned international. Liam Scales is neither, by contrast.
This post is hysterical. By which I mean, it exhibits hysteria, rather than being very funny. It is kind of funny too. Care to quote any of those posts, or are you just strawmanning to troll?Quote:
Originally Posted by MylesNotMiley
We've Coleman, Duffy, Egan, Omabamidele, Manning and Doherty who have all in the past 12 months played as part of a 3 man centre defence at club or international level. That's before mention of Clark or Scales. We're fine for cover. If someone extraordinary happens and we lose two of those options during the game, then the option of going to a back 4 exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Clark - now - should only be considered as the left of a 2 man central defence, or as the centre or left of a three man defence. He is not the best option at left back, and has never been a LWB. Neither Clark or Scales was going to play in either game unless in incredible exceptional situation. I wouldn't be surprised if Omabamidele doesn't start tomorrow either to be honest. I think we could easily see us employing a very aggressive 343 with Cullen dropping deep allowing the rcb and lcb to take the ball further upfield.
We don't know if Scales is going to be international standard, we know what Clark is capable of, and rightly or wrongly (lets move on), he's not in the manager's thoughts for one of the starting 3 CB positions, or first replacement. In that regard, given his age, surely it's a fair call to give Scales a taste of the international setup, given he's proven at his current level, that he is capable of excelling (in what is a problematic position for us going back more than 10 years at this stage) and seeing what he is about? Surely that is (if not good management) prudent management?
As Stu mentions, maybe it's not going to be a 3 at the back, or certainly not a straight 3 cb back 3.
Its not hysterical as such, polarised and funny that he needed to "join" just to post that. There is validity in the post but its just reactionary.
On the reactionary stuff the forum has been much more focused and straight down the line the last few games, evidence based opinions and fairly similar analysis, some might say boring but its been well measured.
Hes not proven though, he was very poor in two legs against Flora. Thats nothing near this levelQuote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
Apologies for this though, I absolutely hate when posters pull out and quote like this from the main point being made, and then act like some one upmanship or that theyve completely nullified your post. Just wanted to say that scales is nowhere near international standard - and I'm not sure he ever will be(but on the evidence ive seen so far hes not.
I've heard about him through a friend who had dealings with him, and I've only heard good things about Clark. He's one of my favourite internationals of the past 10 yrs to be honest and have said it a few times on this forum as well. There could be an element of considering his injury record too over the past few years. In terms of availability/dependability on that front, it is an area he's weaker than duffy egan and o'shea for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
Not sure I fully agree with that. We have to play 4/5 of those players (depending on if we're going 3-5-2 or 4-3-3). Manning hasn't really shown enough to suggest he's at international level yet. Nor has Omabamidele or Scales*. We ended Wednesday with no other centre-half options in the squad I think. We had four, started three, and brought the fourth on through injury. We're not overflowing with options there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
Yes, bring the younger players through. We have no choice, given where we're at. But I don't think we should exclusively gamble on young prospects while ignoring solid options. And a 31-year-old with 200+ Premier League starts and 30 caps is a solid option. Ditto a 27-year-old with 200 Championship appearances.
Has Kenny discarded them? Maybe he has; maybe there's some other reason they're not in the squad. Those are the sort of decisions Kenny will survive or not by, ultimately. But I'm not sure we can really conclude that it's "prudent management". It could equally be a misjudgment by a manager biased towards players he's worked with at underage, for example.
* - Also, Scales is not proven at his current level given he's only after moving up a level. And (with reference to the Jack Byrne thread to avoid rehashing the same arguments all over) I don't think being proven at LoI level justifies inclusion in the national squad over players like Clark/Lenihan.
It was me.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
It's the one thing I'm expectant of to be honest, that Parrott is going to start. He looks like he is in the process of finding himself. his last two internationals were good (awaits the standard retorts) and he is scoring and making goals. Away to Portugal, in the formation we used and the tactics we utilised, keeping him in reserve was prudent. Space between the lines could be at a premium, and the one thing that Moldova and Georgia (similar styles and personnel to the Azeri's) struggled with was McGoldrick and ODowda running directly at an angle. Parrott gives you that, and has given every team he's been successful with from what I can see. Putting Connolly and Robinson slightly withdrawn from Idah allows them to use the fb/cb channel or (in the case below) the wb/cb or rcb/cb & lcb/cb channels.
Azerbaijan mixed it up against Luxembourg. They certainly look to be defending in lines of threes, and in the following clip they are at set up as 532, 3331, 352 more so than the suggested 3-4-3 from the clips i saw earlier.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A33-DwjXmMY
They look susceptible to good movement.
McGrath had more about him in the middle with regard to the more defensive side than I expected the other night. I don't think the suggestion of him and Cullen playing as a 2 (traditionally flat) or in a split holding, and distributing pair.
if we are expecting a tougher time of it vs Serbia, with less of the ball, and more pressing for longer, then it makes sense to let the ball do a lot of our work tomorrow, and leave the athletes (Hendrick, McClean) the night off against Azerbaijan.
Is gung-ho more reckless than incautious btw?
No retorts. We don't have many players with international goals to their names, and it's not like Azerbaijan are world beaters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
This is an important point. Squad management over the window is a little tricky.Quote:
if we are expecting a tougher time of it vs Serbia, with less of the ball, and more pressing for longer, then it makes sense to let the ball do a lot of our work tomorrow, and leave the athletes (Hendrick, McClean) the night off against Azerbaijan.
Yes, but more deliberate. :)Quote:
Is gung-ho more reckless than incautious btw?
I would love to see an Irish team with the skills and set-up to go for the jugular, but I fear it'd look awfully like the 5-2 Cyprus game. Even in moderation, it could look like the Luxembourg game. Azerbaijan are a decent team defensively - they really don't get thumped - and I could see us spending an hour getting frustrated against them before compromising our own defence to seek out a winner. Maybe we should: Kenny certainly won't get any plaudits for a 0-0.
Sigh. Don't worry Paul, I'm not concerned so no need to apologise. No different to you not caring that I vehemently disagree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I don't doubt that Clark is a solid option - that much is clear. But you're right, they are accumulatively decisions that will define his reign along with the results. Of course we can't judge if it's prudent management, just like we can't judge that it's mismanagement either. I don't know if he's in the discarding game so to speak. I may have said in another post, or possibly on twitter, that if O'Shea was out, and Clark wasn't called in, then there might be something more to it. I don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by PStu
LWB and LB are problem positions for us. Stevens is good, and was excellent for a number of seasons for the Blades, but Doherty showed how good someone can be in that position, while allegedly crocked from 60 mins on. Who is proven there outside of those? Manning, Cunningham, nobody!
James McClean proved the other night that he's weak as an option at LWB. There was a point in time where I thought it could be the best position possible for him, but it's been shown.
On Darragh Lenihan, and sure for the craic we may as well throw in Derrick Williams while we're at it, they've been around squads for nearly 4 years now, and amounted a grand total of what, 8 caps? 3 managers have concluded that they are currently in fact not international standard, and better options exist. Scales absolutely may not be international standard. I don't disagree with that all. it would be churlish to say otherwise. But for a number of years now, I have expressed concern that when we had the opportunity to examine options for problem positions that we've not done so and persisted with players who have never made the jump.
I think most people reading my post would have assumed that by current level, I was of course referring to what he's demonstrated for Shamrock Rovers, where he's been the standout left back/left wing back in the league. Of course i should have clearly differentiated that instead of alluding to what he's demonstrated in all those games he's played for Celtic since signing 2 days ago. I should have known better, how silly of me.Quote:
* - Also, Scales is not proven at his current level given he's only after moving up a level. And (with reference to the Jack Byrne thread to avoid rehashing the same arguments all over) I don't think being proven at LoI level justifies inclusion in the national squad over players like Clark/Lenihan.
This is pertinent, and I'm not debating it for the craic, but really to try and underline that up to now there aren't gambles, they are necessities. It's a necessity because the last half generation has produced nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pstu
Take O'Shea, Idah, Connolly, they aren't gambles.
What is the alternative to Idah and Connolly? James Collins isn't at that level. Shane Long isn't playing football, has never been prolific, and is nearing the end of his career.
Take Bazunu, Travers & Kelleher. That happened out of necessity. The alternatives were McDermott, Colin Doyle, Kieran O'hara, James Talbot. It's not a gamble, it's a necessity.
Take Scales. What are the alternatives available right now? Doherty, McClean, Manning, Williams, Cunningham. One player has shown something positive in that position. Is Clark an option there? No.
The risks or gambles I would agree that Kenny has taken, have been Knight, Molumby, and Parrott. Knight was absolutely worthwhile. the other two, I think both were worth the risk, for differing reasons - Molumby out of desperation to try and get something from an area of the pitch that we've been void of any drive or ambition for at least a campaign and a half (being generous there), and Parrott because we need some imagination.
Similar to an earlier poster, I'll stop now, to not distract further.
And the Dutch would have won the Euros if Van Dijk wasn't injured.....:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshot
Clark is well used to be playing hoofball with Ireland in the past - he was quite good at it, if I remember correctly. He's also fond of 'hoofing' when he occasionally gets in the Newcastle team under Steve Bruce.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Sorry, I didn't realize I needed a certain amount of posts to comment in a thread with all the "real" fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I actually agree with most of what you've said there - though you've misinterpreted a couple of things I said. I absolutely accept our gambles aren't really that (beggars can't be choosers), I don't think we should exclusively look to them.
Yes, we don't have alternative keepers, so we're stuck with Kelleher/Travers/Bazunu and hoping they learn on the job. But the alternative to Scales/Omadamibele is established players in Lenihan/Clark. Centre-back is an active problem for us in that we only have three (Duffy, Egan, Omadamibele) in the squad, and if we need another choice (like we did on Wednesday), we're shoe-horning players into positions that maybe they've played before, but it's not their usual or most effective ones. So why not call up both Scales and Clark? Best of both worlds as I see it.
(I figured you were talking about Scales at Rovers rather than Celtic, btw, which is why I tried to hedge my bets by covering both levels in my reply. I don't think excelling with Rovers de facto justifies an international call-up over players established at a higher level)
The other thing people are forgetting is 3 games in 9 days is an awful lot, we cant be expected to have all the same players starting, or perhaps even all the back 5/4 starting either, even if they are our strongest line in our 11. I'd much preter Clark coming on against Serbia than say Manning or Scales and I think most would.
3 games in 7 days as it happens.
It all suits the stronger Nations with Big Panels of a decent quality to choose from. It will be a really big surprise if a bigger football Nations do not qualify with the way it is now.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Is this not just because covid compressed the available time for qualifying? Or is 3 games in a week to be s regular thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
it goes back to 2 after this set of games.
And won't come back next campaign?
(10 games is 3/3/2/2, so it had to change - but hopefully 5 double-headers for next campaign)
Just on Scales, he’s had a near-flawless domestic season and has been almost ever-present for Rovers I think. He’s a really classy footballer and at U21 level looked better than the much heralded (at the time) Masterson in my opinion. Sure he was poor against Flora Tallinn as were all of Rovers’ defenders really. Hard to see why one wouldn’t rate him. That’s not to say he’s ready for this level of football and of course he may never be, but he has literally been outstanding this season. He’s one to keep an interested eye on I’d say.
That wouldn't make any sense to me and is a major concern. He has to pick the best players available to him, that will help him win matches.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
He's an international manager, not a club manager! No hiding behind picking younger players.
He needs to learn faster in the job. Playing out back from the back at ALL times, as opposed to at the RIGHT times was a disaster waiting to happen esp when Bazunu doesn't look comfortable with ball at feet.
Plus I feel we are too open in midfield and to easy to play through
I want minimum 4 points from next 2 games and 2 strong petformances. These games are more important than Portugal as that was a shot to nothing.