Ireland V Germany(A) 11th October & Kazakhstan(H) 15th October 2013 - World Cup '14 Q

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

Apologies for the plug, but balls.ie asked me to write an article on King v RTE, so here it is

http://balls.ie/football/dunphy-rant/

---

Really enjoyed this piece. Nice one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

Really enjoyed this piece. Nice one.

---

Yeah +1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

Cathal Dervan is probably the worst journalist in the history of the whole world.

Even thinking about the abomination that was The Title makes me shiver.

---

Yeah. Dunphy is a clown, but Dervan is equally an idiot of the highest order. The two of them deserve to be tied together and left somewhere.

Dunphy & Dervan, they define the '2 sides to the same coin' phrase.

Won't anyone please think of Roy Curtis...

I wonder what Dunphy would have thought of Everton's 4231 at the weekend with Lukaku flanked by Mirallas and Leon Osman. Mirallas is a central forward and Osman normally a regular midfielder.

Doesn't Dunphy claim to be a La Liga aficionado? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

I wonder what Dunphy would have thought of Everton's 4231 at the weekend with Lukaku flanked by Mirallas and Leon Osman. Mirallas is a central forward and Osman normally a regular midfielder.

---

Interesting, I would have considered Mirallas more of an attacking midfielder or winger but Wikipedia just calls him a forward also.

I wouldn't take my description of him as gospel. I've only ever seen him play for Everton under Moyes where he played more centrally on the few occasions I saw him.

He was played as a striker but he was moved there by Moyes. He's a winger by nature.

He was a striker at Lille and for Belgium, a right winger at St Etienne, a left winger at Olympiacos and now a right winger at Everton.
He's a modern attacker who can play many roles, something Dunphy, Giles etc will have to adapt their ways of thinking to. Cruyff started it years ago.
(Mirallas stats btw, 76 Starts FW, 60 Starts RM, 40 Starts LM, 92 Substitute)(300 odd appearances)

Doyle by contrast, has only played RM or LM 11 times since he moved to England(300 odd apearances). He was regularly used there for Cork City though. And Stokes has started wide on 12 occasions(200 odd appearances)
I'd say criticism of using Stokes and Doyle wide was justified, but Noel Kings prerogative.

Good info, Joe.

Barcelona are the main protagonists of total football in the modern age. No real positions, anyone can play anywhere. Dany Alves used to be a winger, Fabrigas plays as an attacker or conventional midfielder.
If you're good enough you should be able to play virtually anywhere on the field, 10 defenders when required, 10 attackers also when required. Barcelona have it down to a fine art, particularly the 6 second rule of winning the ball back, which starts with the forward players closing down defenders. People often don't notice the amount of work Messi, Iniesta, etc do chasing down the ball when they lose it. It's an essential part of their game, just as important as attacking. I think the 4-2-3-1 system might help with this, certainly the wide players play more advanced, pressuring the full backs. Its all right having creative wingers, but they also need to learn how to close down, pressure and tackle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe_denilson

He was a striker at Lille and for Belgium, a right winger at St Etienne, a left winger at Olympiacos and now a right winger at Everton.
He's a modern attacker who can play many roles, something Dunphy, Giles etc will have to adapt their ways of thinking to. Cruyff started it years ago.
(Mirallas stats btw, 76 Starts FW, 60 Starts RM, 40 Starts LM, 92 Substitute)(300 odd appearances)

Doyle by contrast, has only played RM or LM 11 times since he moved to England(300 odd apearances). He was regularly used there for Cork City though. And Stokes has started wide on 12 occasions(200 odd appearances)
I'd say criticism of using Stokes and Doyle wide was justified, but Noel Kings prerogative.

---

Stokes is at his best as a link player and anybody who has watched Stokes play for Celtic should appreciate that quality to his play, getting on the ball and threading the pass to the out and out striker.
The fact that he can also score plenty of goals himself is a bonus. He regularly plays in from the left side, he was expected to support Keane, not too far wide and not too deep. he's not at his best as a wide midfield player. But no matter where Stokes is played, he will give his all, it's not a square peg role for him.
Apart from that, the situation was never lost and was rectified somewhat by the substitution and the 3rd goal came.
It's another discussion if Stokes was effective on the night, that's where there will always be criticism when something obviously doesn't work as well as could be expected, but anybody could, with a little effort, appreciate what King was trying to achieve and that's where the rte panel collectively sunk below zero, right from beginning to the end of their critiques.

On another matter, it's one thing to play players in their best position but it's a bad sign for us when our players have to be pigeonholed into their favoured narrow roles/specific functions, in order to be effective enough to make the team potent.

Mirallas was quoted in today's papers as saying he prefers his wider position under Martinez than his central role under Moyes!

That said, I agree with Geysir.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emmet7

Barcelona are the main protagonists of total football in the modern age. No real positions, anyone can play anywhere. Dany Alves used to be a winger, Fabrigas plays as an attacker or conventional midfielder.
If you're good enough you should be able to play virtually anywhere on the field, 10 defenders when required, 10 attackers also when required. Barcelona have it down to a fine art, particularly the 6 second rule of winning the ball back, which starts with the forward players closing down defenders. People often don't notice the amount of work Messi, Iniesta, etc do chasing down the ball when they lose it. It's an essential part of their game, just as important as attacking. I think the 4-2-3-1 system might help with this, certainly the wide players play more advanced, pressuring the full backs. Its all right having creative wingers, but they also need to learn how to close down, pressure and tackle.

---

In a very good team playing 4231 pretty much everyone except the 2 CBs, and just maybe one deeper midfielder, comes into the attacking mix. They also need to be industrious and disciplined without the ball. It must be great fun playing in a good team in that 'system'. I say system, but it's far from systematic.

So basically its like american football. You have a defense and offense.Barcelona built their defense after honing in on jack Charlton's game plan for Ireland in the 1990s - "put em under pressure" ....very interesting.

I think there is a fundamental thing missing with that theory. If you are good enough and comfortable enough on the ball then you won't need to spend half as much time trying to win it back.

So although messi/iniesta etc harass and put pressure on the oppositions defenders they don't spend half the time the opposition does doing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Stokes is at his best as a link player and anybody who has watched Stokes play for Celtic should appreciate that quality to his play, getting on the ball and threading the pass to the out and out striker.
The fact that he can also score plenty of goals himself is a bonus. He regularly plays in from the left side, he was expected to support Keane, not too far wide and not too deep. he's not at his best as a wide midfield player. But no matter where Stokes is played, he will give his all, it's not a square peg role for him.
Apart from that, the situation was never lost and was rectified somewhat by the substitution and the 3rd goal came.
It's another discussion if Stokes was effective on the night, that's where there will always be criticism when something obviously doesn't work as well as could be expected, but anybody could, with a little effort, appreciate what King was trying to achieve and that's where the rte panel collectively sunk below zero, right from beginning to the end of their critiques.

On another matter, it's one thing to play players in their best position but it's a bad sign for us when our players have to be pigeonholed into their favoured narrow roles/specific functions, in order to be effective enough to make the team potent.

---

I dunno Geysir. I've not seen Celtic recently but I've watched a bit of Stokes playing wider attacking roles for Sunderland and was not impressed (plus a game for Palace it think it was). I think his supporters have to acknowledge the merrit of his detractors arguments here. If he's recently turned it around, well and good. More power to him. But fans with experience of him playing in wider deeper roles on other platforms had reason to be disenchanted with his selection at the time. I thought it worked better than expected to be honest. I was impressed with him against Kazakhstan but still I think we've more productive options in those roles. I have the feeling he would've started ahead of Pilkington as well as McGeady has Pilkington been fit too.

The squad in it's current guise with evveryone fit and available, I wouldn't make room for Stokes AND Keane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr_peepee

I dunno Geysir. I've not seen Celtic recently but I've watched a bit of Stokes playing wider attacking roles for Sunderland and was not impressed (plus a game for Palace it think it was). I think his supporters have to acknowledge the merrit of his detractors arguments here. If he's recently turned it around, well and good. More power to him. But fans with experience of him playing in wider deeper roles on other platforms had reason to be disenchanted with his selection at the time. I thought it worked better than expected to be honest. I was impressed with him against Kazakhstan but still I think we've more productive options in those roles. I have the feeling he would've started ahead of Pilkington as well as McGeady has Pilkington been fit too.

The squad in it's current guise with evveryone fit and available, I wouldn't make room for Stokes AND Keane.

---

I am only making a point that King had plenty of justification for trying what he did - Stokes on the left side.
Whether Stokes is good enough to start is another matter, right now I think he's good enough for the squad.
He's doing plenty of work for Celtic coming in from the left side tonight and won a penalty - on the left side of course :)

It's hard to tell where Stokes is playing - he's suppose to be central I think but his hairline is popping up everywhere. Samaras has lost the ball unnecessarily 100,000 times so far.