Originally Posted by
Emmet7
Despite the fact you cannot post something without throwing in an insult, which seems to stem from some insecurity or other you have, I will respond, although I won't the next time if you continue with immature baiting.
I just don't understand where you Den Perry and your fellow Andy Reid lovers would put him in the side? However, you and your fellow Dunphyites would I believe take off either Whelan or Andrews and put in Andy Reid.
This would completely imbalance the team in the following way. The three creative midfielders would spend most of the match not attacking but tracking back, doubling up, covering and so on and so forth. Two creative midfielders would be required to defend where one defensive midfielder would do.
Our creative players would be in our own half the whole match, their energy wasted defending and doing the job Andrews and Whelan now do.
The sad thing is that some supporters have only interest in the creative players. They have no interest in the players who actually put in the tackles, win the ball back and give it to the creative players. It's sad really. They want samba football from all 11 players, which just isn't possible in any team. Even Brazil have Lucios and the type who tackle and win the ball back, making it available to the Ronaldinhos.
If we all had our way we'd have a team of 11 Messi's. Unfortunately that team would get thrashed because no-one would defend, win the ball back, tackle, etc etc.
Whelan and Andrews provide cover for our creative wide players who don't have to worry about tracking back. Stick Andy Reid in to replace these two central midfielders and that's what all Andy Reid fans suggest and you end up with our creative players spending all their time defending and none of their time attacking.
I really don't think we would have gotten draws against the Italians if Reid was in the side, and I am sure we would have lost. The Italians would have ran all over us in both games and banged in lots of goals.
It's amazing with some Irish supporters. When you draw against the Italians, they say we should have thrashed them. When we beat the Italians as in 94 they say we should have beaten them more.
Can you not just accept it was a good result, the best possible result and it's likely had Reid been in the side for the reasons I state we would have lost, because just like in the Stan era, the balance was all wrong.