Our best XI?

true but i don't agree with ireland dropping back beside carsley. i think it has to be either keane or ireland in this formation - assuming doyle plays. as we saw on sat ireland can not do the wide mans job and we need 2 of duff, mcgeady or hunt to play as wingers. the wingers need to be pacy, skillful and willing to support the attacker. the 2 deep midfielders have to be good defensively and i thought carsley and to a lesser extent kilbane were effective yesterday. possibly with the return of both joey o'brien and steven reid one of these will be a better partner for carsley. leaving keane/ireland behind doyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeilMcD

I said before these 2 games that we should go for a 4 5 1 as it covers up our lack of players in central midfield. I dont think we have a central midfield pairing at the moment that can play together. Carsley is half a top class midfielder and Stephen Ireland is another half of that top class midfielder. As a result we need somebody in there beside them. On Saturday it was Douglas and last night it was Kilbane. Both tireless workers who are limited in their ability to keep the ball.

In future we have a few options. We could replace these guys with Stephen Reid or Andy Reid or even drop Keane back to where Ireland plays and put Ireland beside Carsley.

What is clear is that defensively this formation suits and we have looked very solid over the last 2 games. I think we should play Robbie Keane in the position where Ireland plays as he played here against Sweden and was top class. It is where he plays for Spurs a lot of the time and it suits his tendancy to go look for the ball in different areas of the pitch.

Hunt and Duff should start on the wings and the back four cannot be changed as it has performed very well over the last 2 games.

All in all we look like we have a game plan now and I think the 4 5 1 suits us and it has a flexibilty to it that suits substitutes coming into the game in a number of positions. So far this formation has been used against Sweden Czech Rep, Wales and Slovakia. 3 wins and 1 draw. So I think we should pursue this for future games.

---

I agree, said much the same meself. I'd start with Carsley and Steven Reid with one other and the choices there are Stephen Ireland, Andy Reid and Robbie Keane. I'm not sure if Keane should just stroll back in as he is really more of a forward than a midfielder and Ireland is a more functional player but this set up gives us plenty of options and sets us up to get the best out of our wide players Duff, Hunt and McGeady with A.Reid and S.Quinn as other options there.

Would be very careful about playing 4-5-1. In fairness the Slovakia coach was very slow last night with his tactics. Every man and his dog knew we would play 4-5-1 yet he only sorted his team out at half time. This led to them having the better of the second half but at that stage it was too late

I'd agree with that. Depending on the opposition we could play Keane or an out-and-out midfielder in that position according to the kind of game we're expecting.

I hate 4-5-1. We can't keep the ball up front and defend too deep. We should be defending from the front and we almost paid for it in the 2nd half with the midfield falling back on the defence.

With McGeady (Hunt) and Duff on the wings and two front men of the quality of Doyle and Keane up front, we should be attacking teams. Admittedly we have a poor central midfield but the return of at least one Reid should strenghten us in that department. A number of good crosses went in to the box but the absence of the 2nd striker at the end of them was notable.

Where that leaves Ireland I am not sure.

Was pleased with the back 4, even O'Shea, in both games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeilMcD

I said before these 2 games that we should go for a 4 5 1 as it covers up our lack of players in central midfield.

---

I agree totally with this. A 4-5-1 with 2 natural wingers and just 1 natural striker is the way to go. Look at Northern Ireland.

Keane must be dropped for good. His performances for Ireland and for his club leave a lot to be desired. Until his injury Doyle has been one of the best all round strikers in England's top division. Also, I think the team plays better without Keane in it. He wastes an awful lot of possession and he drops way too deep for a striker. Drop Kilbane for Hunt and swap the full backs and that is as good as it will get for Ireland although the incompetency of the manager still means Ireland will not qualify for anything.

The 4-5-1 system's advantages can be seen with the belfast team who are top oof their group ahead of Sweden, Denmark, Spain etc. If thats not proof nothing is. Its obvious what they do. Once they loose the ball they get everyone behind the ball. So when you don't have the ball the opposition have to produce something special to break you down. When you break you have the space to do so. All you need is a speedy striker who only needs his speed and a good finish. The problem is of course that if the striker stops scoring due to out of form the team stops scoring. Only 1 player in the team will score - the striker. :ball:

We did defend from the front last night Doyle put them under pressure and Ireland never gave their sitting player a chance. Ireland tired and was carrying and knock and when we made the change to put Mc Geady there he did the same and Long also added energy to the team when Doyle ran out of steam. We have got our best results and performances with the 4 5 1 and have not been cut open whereas with 4 4 2 we dont have 2 central midfield players who are good enough to paly against decent teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

I hate 4-5-1. We can't keep the ball up front and defend too deep.

---

1. You should be in control of midfield protecting your back four and holding more possession.

2. You don't need to keep the ball up front. You counter attack at speed. You will produce less scoring chances but more quality scoring opportunities.

3. You will concede very very few goals using the system. It is usually quite boring to watch but its a good system for an inferior side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeilMcD

We have got our best results and performances with the 4 5 1 and have not been cut open whereas with 4 4 2 we dont have 2 central midfield players who are good enough to paly against decent teams.

---

Exactly. But it means dropping robbie keane as he does not suit this system. I agree with that anyway but half the country does not and Stan seems to think the sun shines out his backside. IMO his reputation is on past goals scored for Ireland. He has failed to produce at both club level and international level in recent years.

You just don't know what to get with Stan. The formation, positions, selections etc change not only every single match but also a number of times during the match. I don't see this team improving much until a settled structure and sytem are implemented.

I think the system can suit Keane but he must play where Ireland played last night. Keane is not a striker. He is a link man. This system could get the best out of Keane but he must play in his right position. Just look at Shane Horgan in rugby, out in the wing, top class, put him in the centre, he is rubbish. The same with Keane, he should not play the lone striker role. Keane has class and it is up to him and the manager to get the best out of his talents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

I hate 4-5-1. We can't keep the ball up front and defend too deep. We should be defending from the front and we almost paid for it in the 2nd half with the midfield falling back on the defence.

With McGeady (Hunt) and Duff on the wings and two front men of the quality of Doyle and Keane up front, we should be attacking teams. Admittedly we have a poor central midfield but the return of at least one Reid should strenghten us in that department. A number of good crosses went in to the box but the absence of the 2nd striker at the end of them was notable.

---

in fairness to staunton i reckon that the reason we have played the 4-5-1 is due to the lack of a midfielder to play along side carsley.

people get bogged down in formations. with keane playing behing doyle in a 4-5-1 when we have possession he can slot along side him becoming a 4-4-2. it is about having the personal to adapt and make the correct moves and runs. formations are not and should not be as rigid as people think.

although i agree with you the midfield dropped way too deep in the second half and invited them onto us i think this is the individual players doing and not the formations fault. i remember when we played portugal at landsdowne and we were doing the same. roy keane won the ball and ran 60 yards with the ball, stopped and turned as if to invite the other players to come up and join him. that is individual players taking the responsibility of bringing out the defenders and midfielders and not just blindly clearing the ball up the pitch when no-one is up there.

last night there were times when we got the ball in wide positions, as you said, and had only one or even no players in the box. here the midfielders have to make the runs into the box to support the attacker. again it is about the players knowing what is required of them in the system and not just thinking i am a third midfielder and will stay in midfield.

i would have no problem with the following team come september - fitness and form permitting - especially as the 2 games are away against decent teams:

......................given...................

finnan....mcshane....dunne...o'shea

............carsley........s.reid............

mcgeady...............................duff
......................keane..................
......................doyle..................

you can swap mcgeady with hunt and i'm still happy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

I hate 4-5-1. We can't keep the ball up front and defend too deep. We should be defending from the front and we almost paid for it in the 2nd half with the midfield falling back on the defence.

With McGeady (Hunt) and Duff on the wings and two front men of the quality of Doyle and Keane up front, we should be attacking teams. Admittedly we have a poor central midfield but the return of at least one Reid should strenghten us in that department. A number of good crosses went in to the box but the absence of the 2nd striker at the end of them was notable.

---

cant understand that. when robbie plays in a 442 its effectively a 451. i'd be happy to see him occupy ireland's role and be the missing link in the delightful full back - defensive midfielder - attacking midfielder - striker/winger passing movement that will work for us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galwayhoop

i would have no problem with the following team come september - fitness and form permitting - especially as the 2 games are away against decent teams:

......................given...................

finnan....mcshane....dunne...o'shea

............carsley........s.reid............

mcgeady...............................duff
......................keane..................
......................doyle..................

you can swap mcgeady with hunt and i'm still happy

---

Yup, I'd agree with that, I think S. Reid (when available) would slot in nicely beside Carsley in that formation. Would deffo add a bit of steel to the midfield. And on the plus side, as shown last night, we actually have a few options from the bench...Hunt, Long, Stokes, Ireland, A. Reid could all slot in nicely into that system...

To those advocates of 442, I'll just point your attention nicely in the direction of Nicosia and Rimini and say no more....

it is the old chicken and egg scenario. get players to play your perfered system (no problem at club level where you can buy players) or get a system that suits your players (more common at international level). we do not have 2 CM's who are capable enough for a 4-4-2 so i reckon the system to suit our players is what is needed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galwayhoop

it is the old chicken and egg scenario. get players to play your perfered system (no problem at club level where you can buy players) or get a system that suits your players (more common at international level). we do not have 2 CM's who are capable enough for a 4-4-2 so i reckon the system to suit our players is what is needed

---

Spot on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galwayhoop

i would have no problem with the following team come september - fitness and form permitting - especially as the 2 games are away against decent teams:

......................given...................

finnan....mcshane....dunne...o'shea

............carsley........s.reid............

mcgeady...............................duff
......................keane..................
......................doyle..................

you can swap mcgeady with hunt and i'm still happy

---

Thats a 4-4-2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finnpark

Thats a 4-4-2.

---

Not with the way Keane plays it isn't. You can either ask him to play off Doyle or drop deeper to pick things up off the midfield which is what he'll do if left to his own devices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finnpark

Thats a 4-4-2.

---

read my post above about formations and the ridgidness (is that a word?) of them. it is actually neither 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 but a 4-4-1-1 if you are being pedantic. instead of both strikers playing beside each other you have one behind the other. providing a link between midfield and attack. imo it is a position more suitable to keanes & s.irelands game.

if you play this system you can easily convert to a 3-4-1-2 formation if chasing a game or against a weaker opposition. the midfielders have the same roles and therefore it doesn't disrupt the team too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nailer77

Not with the way Keane plays it isn't. You can either ask him to play off Doyle or drop deeper to pick things up off the midfield which is what he'll do if left to his own devices.

---

If hes left to his own devices he wil drop deep get a pass dribble a little before wasting it.