Serbia V Republic of Ireland - Wednesday, 24th March 2021 - World Cup 2022 Qualifier

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

10/03/2021, 1:50 PM
Snapshot

Quote:

Originally Posted by John83

I completely disagree. We have a very capable Premiership left back in Stevens, and several good options at centre half. That either Doherty or Coleman playing out of position is better than any of those is far from clear. Neither of them has shown they're an option in midfield. I'd also question the idea that a critical qualifier is the best spot to go experimenting. There's an argument to be made, sure, but "absurd" is itself quite absurd.

Who's saying anything about dropping Stevens or playing Coleman or Doherty at CB?

Several good CB options? Realistically we have two - Clark and O'Shea. Duffy is very droppable - Kenny axed Coleman for less.

But I think I know what has you flapping like a bat in a belfry. Here goes - Doherty is very capable of playing (and scoring) from midfield or wing back in 442 or 352. He'd definitely be better than Cullen, Browne, Molumby or Curtis et al in such a crucial game. That's not experimenting - it's setting out your team to suit your best players.
10/03/2021, 2:18 PM
pineapple stu

Changing your formation really is experimenting.
10/03/2021, 2:39 PM
Eminence Grise

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapshot

Who's saying anything about dropping Stevens or playing Coleman or Doherty at CB?

Several good CB options? Realistically we have two - Clark and O'Shea. Duffy is very droppable - Kenny axed Coleman for less.

But I think I know what has you flapping like a big blouse. Here goes - Doherty is very capable of playing (and scoring) from midfield or wing back in 442 or 352. He'd definitely be better than Cullen, Browne, Molumby or Curtis et al in such a crucial game. That's not experimenting - it's setting out your team to suit your best players.

Stats on games and goals please.

If playing a wide player centrally isn't the very definition of experimenting, how do you frame it?
10/03/2021, 2:45 PM
Eminence Grise

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

We are not playing 433 attractively or effectively. I dont know that we have the players to play the roles needed and we seem to operate better with a clearly defined #10 in the team. The more i look at things over the last year the more convinced i am the 352 is a better overall system for us. I know it wont happen (by March or perhaps ever under Kenny) but i do think it merits a deeper discussion.

While i know not all the players in this example are available, this is an example of how it could look and there are clear replacements for each position. I have McGeady in there to basically be the #10 - a bit of a free role. He is in lethal form at the moment and could be worthy of a call up. But it could equally be another combination of two of the players called out earlier in the thread.

-------------------------Randolph

----------- O'Shea-------Egan-------Clark

Coleman----------------------------------------Stevens

-------------Molumby-------------------- Cullen
------------------------ Hendrick -----------------------

-------------------McGeady--------Long

No harm having the talk. I'd go Doherty for Coleman, and if you go with a free(ish) 10, are you running the risk of slipping into a 5-4-1? McGeady's best days (few enough, imo) are behind him at this level. Still, I'll grant you that he could offer more than our default setting of a targetman and little lad upfront.
10/03/2021, 3:28 PM
kennedmc

I thought Egan is out injured?
And playing Molumby ahead of Browne, while Molumby can't even get his game ahead of him at club level and is far less experienced? This is a competitive (Forget friendlies which are no real indicator) game against a good Serbian side - Molumby is not ready for this yet especially in such a crucial position where mistakes are punished. There's only 4 years age between him and Browne anyway so Browne is till a younish player himself - just far more experience.

I'd go 4-5-1 (Assuming all below are fit
------------------Randolplh----------------------
Coleman----------Clark------O'Shea-----------------------=Stevens

------Brady---------Browne-----McCarthy(Cullen)----Hendrick
--------------------Hourihane----------------------

-------------------Connolly------------------------------------

- 5 in midfield helps reduce space and keep it tight with Hourihane central - advanced midfield role
- the real width is actually coming from the full backs with Brady / Hendrick slightly narrow so hopefully we can create some overlaps
- deliberately playing BRady on right (Hendrick on left) so Brady can cut inside and do some damage with left peg etc.
- Hourihane gets nod as he is in very good goal scoring form and can shoot from distance
- Connolly pace upfront will give them something to worry about
- Bring on Knight with 20 to go to replace Hourihane. Great energy levels and seems to have an eye for goal
- playing Oshea is a bit of a risk but not sure who else there is

If we play a 433 in this game I think we'll get killed - especially with our current squad
10/03/2021, 3:57 PM
zero

kenny appears to not really rate cullen at all for whatever reason - molumby and knight look to be ahead of him. i expect him to make a point of sticking to his principles.

Randolph
Doherty Clark Duffy Stevens
Molumby Hendrick Hourihane
Connolly Idah Brady

not sure about clark from the above as it feels like he's not a kenny player. he'll hardly go with parrott given his lack of success in senior football to date - though i wouldn't rule it out.

brady might drop back a line to get horgan involved, leaving one of hourihane or molumby on the bench.
10/03/2021, 4:50 PM
SkStu

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennedmc

I thought Egan is out injured?
And playing Molumby ahead of Browne, while Molumby can't even get his game ahead of him at club level and is far less experienced?

If that was regarding my post, sorry I wasn�t suggesting they should start in the upcoming games just an illustration in support of a 352.

And I agree that we can�t just implement a change in formation without some friendlies to try it in.

EG - generally I just think a floating 10 would suit us. It mightn�t be McGeady as it is definitely debatable whether he could still do a job for us at an international level (he�s playing really well atm though). With McGoldrick out of the reckoning it�s not really easy to see who�d naturally fit in that role out of what�s left (Parrott?). If you played a more traditional two up top though, your wing backs would need to be given a greater license to get forward aggressively.

I just have a hard time seeing what advantages our current approach to 433 gives us.
10/03/2021, 5:10 PM
SkStu

Out of what is available for Qatar game (if Kenny were to want to experiment with formation)...

---------------------------Randolph-----------------------

------------O'Shea---------Duffy---------Clark-----------

Coleman-----------------------------------------Stevens

-------------Molumby------------------Cullen------------

--------------------------Hendrick------------------------

-------------------Connolly--------Long------------------

or

---------------------------Kelleher------------------------

------------O'Shea---------Long----------Clark----------

Doherty------------------------------------------Stevens

-------------McCarthy------------------Knight------------

--------------------------Hourihane-----------------------

-------------------Connolly--------Idah------------------

or any combination of the above based on the final squad...
10/03/2021, 5:11 PM
Razors left peg

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkStu

We are not playing 433 attractively or effectively. I dont know that we have the players to play the roles needed and we seem to operate better with a clearly defined #10 in the team. The more i look at things over the last year the more convinced i am the 352 is a better overall system for us. I know it wont happen (by March or perhaps ever under Kenny) but i do think it merits a deeper discussion.

While i know not all the players in this example are available, this is an example of how it could look and there are clear replacements for each position. I have McGeady in there to basically be the #10 - a bit of a free role. He is in lethal form at the moment and could be worthy of a call up. But it could equally be another combination of two of the players called out earlier in the thread.

-------------------------Randolph

----------- O'Shea-------Egan-------Clark

Coleman----------------------------------------Stevens

-------------Molumby-------------------- Cullen
------------------------ Hendrick -----------------------

-------------------McGeady--------Long

McGeady is not a bad shout actually. Not sure Id start him but he could add a bit of creativity to the squad.
10/03/2021, 5:43 PM
kennedmc

Kenny said before (As Ireland manager) on Off The Ball ( I think) that he isn't fixed to 433 and will be flexible. I don't think we have a good enough midfield 3 to play that system yet / or who are well enough suited to it. It takes alot of energy - look at Liverpool - most effective with Henderson, Wijnaldum and Fabinhno in there.

Plus professional players can handle different systems. I just feel for Serbia we need to keep it tight - we can still try and pass the ball though :)
10/03/2021, 5:45 PM
geysir

As it stands now Connolly is our future and McGeady is past his promise, at least as a starting player.
10/03/2021, 5:49 PM
Razors left peg

Quote:

Originally Posted by geysir

As it stands now Connolly is our future and McGeady is past his promise, at least as a starting player.

Id agree, but they are not necessarily comparable players I think. Id look at McGeady as a 10 these days. Would have his as a bench option to give us something a bit different if needed. To be fair Id never have thought of him until SkStu posted that
10/03/2021, 8:19 PM
geysir

Quote:

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Changing your formation really is experimenting.

It's a tactical adjustment to the circumstance of the task ahead, vis a vis the opposition.
I doubt there's a successful one formation size which suits all irish games. But whatever change be made, it should be practised on the training ground to the nth degree, until everybody understands their role.
10/03/2021, 9:07 PM
DCWA

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennedmc

Kenny said before (As Ireland manager) on Off The Ball ( I think) that he isn't fixed to 433 and will be flexible.

I don�t believe that to be true despite him saying it. He regularly went 4-4-2 during first spell at Derry but never since and definitely won�t go there with Ireland imo therefore we will grt 433/451 from Kenny. I would say always, he may surprise but it would certainly be a surprise.
10/03/2021, 11:36 PM
Snapshot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eminence Grise

Stats on games and goals please.

If playing a wide player centrally isn't the very definition of experimenting, how do you frame it?

8 games, 1 goal, 7 dismal performances.
10/03/2021, 11:40 PM
Snapshot

Quote:

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Changing your formation really is experimenting.

So the past eight games have been an experiment?
11/03/2021, 7:26 AM
Eminence Grise

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapshot

8 games, 1 goal, 7 dismal performances.

60 posts, three months, one dismal performer.

Please supply stats on right back Matt Doherty's goal scoring performances from central midfield to back up your assertion that he's better than in that position than our central midfielders.

It's not a complicated request. No deflection, no wumming, no self-righteous guff in response, please. Just stats. Put up or shut up.
11/03/2021, 7:50 AM
pineapple stu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snapshot

So the past eight games have been an experiment?

The past 8 games have been a new manager putting in place his way of playing.

If he were to change that now, it would be an experiment.
11/03/2021, 8:00 AM
Snapshot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eminence Grise

60 posts, three months, one dismal performer.

Please supply stats on right back Matt Doherty's goal scoring performances from central midfield to back up your assertion that he's better than in that position than our central midfielders.

It's not a complicated request. No deflection, no wumming, no self-righteous guff in response, please. Just stats. Put up or shut up.

It's an opinion on a football forum - surprisingly enough about a footballer. Do you supply stats for every opinion you offer on a footballer, team or manager? If I accused you of the above (emboldened), I'd probably be red-carded - but, hey, feel free.
11/03/2021, 8:04 AM
pineapple stu

It's an opinion that's entitled to be challenged in fairness.

You know, cos it's a discussion forum, why shouldn't we discuss it? It's what we're here for after all.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page