Republic of Ireland V Finland - Sunday, September 6th - 2020 - UEFA Nations League

I'm usually reluctant to blame formations but I do wonder if the 3/5 in midfield is causing a problem. It effectively means 1 man up front with no support. The Finns and Bulgarians had eyes and could see that Idah is still learning to shave. There was never any prospect of them any space in behind their defence for him to run in to. I suspect if we have played McGoldrick in his place they would have noticed he doesn't look likely to do them for pace, and they would have played a much higher line. In the absence of a midfielder in the mould of Liam Brady or Wes Hoolahan, which we simply don't have right now, we need to find a way to become more difficult to defend against.

Both games were crying out for a playmaker imho. Even in his brief time on the pitch yesterday McGoldrick’s clever football brain added something to our game when he dropped deep (though he did make a couple of infuriating bad decisions). So I think we must now look at 4-3-1-2 , 4-2-3-1 or even 3-4-1-2. We’ve debated 3 at the back before. We have the players. Nobody would be asked to fill a role that doesn’t suit him. My only concern is Coleman as right sided CB, but that concern is dwarfed by all my other concerns!

We have plenty of decent / competent footballers all playing at a high level. But none is a “leading actor” at his club really, they’re all a good cast of supporting actors. The only guys we have who you could say are crucial to their clubs and how they play are Doherty, Stevens, McGoldrick and maybe Coleman. Egan too maybe but at the end of the day he’s just a CB and good CBs are relatively plentiful. If any other of our players were injured for his club, none would really be missed. So let’s say these 4 are our key “alpha” players. Doherty & Stevens play week in / week out as wing backs. McGoldrick plays a weird 9 / false 9 / 10 hybrid. Does our flat 4-3-3 with winger types either side of a 9 suit any of those players? No, only Coleman.

Now, in fairness, rustiness and fitness at this stage of the season are certainly factors. We have often been rubbish in August only to be competitive in October & November. So I’m clinging to that. I’m only saying what I saw last night. Thursday’s best bits were much better than yesterday’s best bits and that to me means changing at least 2, if not all 3 of the midfield.

This isn’t any criticism of Kenny or his grander plans. As said above this is a cultural reboot that will take time and in all likelihood won’t really take hold until some more of the U21s come into the side in due course. But I think a quick fix might be to tweak the shape. I think Kenny is stuck on 4-3-3, so wont shift to 3 at the back, but 4-3-3 has various nuances too, and I’d say 4-3-1-2 / 4-2-3-1 are simply nuanced versions of 4-3-3, just relying on central creativity rather than attaching width.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

We have plenty of decent / competent footballers all playing at a high level. But none is a “leading actor” at his club really, they’re all a good cast of supporting actors.

---

Good analogy.

I agree on tweaking 433. Have it as a default starting formation to create familiarity, but be able to shift the positions (or roles, maybe, is more accurate) as the play dictates.

I forgot to add that I don't think we can ignore Shane Long either. His ability to disrupt is still important. And SK's comments on Obafemi seenm to suggest he is quite firm on a forward 3. I can see Long and Robinson upfront, with McGoldrick just behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bielsa´s irish

we need a system that suits the players. if doherty and stevens they excel as wingbacks, then make it work....working out a back 3 with wingbacks is not hard, because you end up defending with 5.

then work out the midfield, a 3 central mids line. 1 defensive holding mid like Busquets, and two "internos or interior midfielders on the sides box to box", then two attackers on the flanks and a number 9.

---

Your proposed 3-5-3 formation would be very interesting, though I think we would struggle without a goalkeeper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by passinginterest

I think Kenny said himself there was an element of experimentation about the see selection for the two games. It was an opportunity to give young players game time who might be breakout starts in the next few weeks and now will have international experience if he chooses to play them in the playoff game.

---

I think I'd be worried if there weren't gloom merchants on here calling for us to feed everyone who's ever played midfield for us to be feed into a woodchipper and the pulp used to nourish some teenagers who can't get a game in the Championship. It's the natural order when we lose, draw, and frequently when we win too.

Its very hard to find reasoned points on here, people who are slightly more negative the last few days, are making far fair and valid points. This talk of playing like brazil/barcelona overnight as some stick to beat them and others with is just silly really. When the two games are looked at, the formational change, the system employed, the players used, you constructively criticise and analyse on those things.

Forget all the talk of playing great football or anything else, we have to look at what transpired and what positives we take or can take from that, some require assumptions based off it being so early in the season. At the end of the day I think the Finnish had 2 players playing in germany, the majority of players playing in the danish/scandanavian or own leagues. Our players are playing at a much higher level in general. Same as Bulgaria. Now the preseason feel and the talk of the Finnish and Bulgarian leagues being well into their season(10 or so games i think). Its like equating a LOI side playing in Europe when their season is a summer season and saying the likes of Tier 1 league not being able for them and struggling against them. It doesn't happen really. The big teams still get the wins. When you compare like for like our players are still massively under-performing and underwhelming.

Lets call a spade a spade here, they were two very poor performances, regardless of who you expected us to play like. Brazil or Georgia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Both games were crying out for a playmaker imho. Even in his brief time on the pitch yesterday McGoldrick’s clever football brain added something to our game when he dropped deep (though he did make a couple of infuriating bad decisions). So I think we must now look at 4-3-1-2 , 4-2-3-1 or even 3-4-1-2. We’ve debated 3 at the back before. We have the players. Nobody would be asked to fill a role that doesn’t suit him. My only concern is Coleman as right sided CB, but that concern is dwarfed by all my other concerns!

We have plenty of decent / competent footballers all playing at a high level. But none is a “leading actor” at his club really, they’re all a good cast of supporting actors. The only guys we have who you could say are crucial to their clubs and how they play are Doherty, Stevens, McGoldrick and maybe Coleman. Egan too maybe but at the end of the day he’s just a CB and good CBs are relatively plentiful. If any other of our players were injured for his club, none would really be missed. So let’s say these 4 are our key “alpha” players. Doherty & Stevens play week in / week out as wing backs. McGoldrick plays a weird 9 / false 9 / 10 hybrid. Does our flat 4-3-3 with winger types either side of a 9 suit any of those players? No, only Coleman.

Now, in fairness, rustiness and fitness at this stage of the season are certainly factors. We have often been rubbish in August only to be competitive in October & November. So I’m clinging to that. I’m only saying what I saw last night. Thursday’s best bits were much better than yesterday’s best bits and that to me means changing at least 2, if not all 3 of the midfield.

This isn’t any criticism of Kenny or his grander plans. As said above this is a cultural reboot that will take time and in all likelihood won’t really take hold until some more of the U21s come into the side in due course. But I think a quick fix might be to tweak the shape. I think Kenny is stuck on 4-3-3, so wont shift to 3 at the back, but 4-3-3 has various nuances too, and I’d say 4-3-1-2 / 4-2-3-1 are simply nuanced versions of 4-3-3, just relying on central creativity rather than attaching width.

---

I think we've had this discussion already, and someone has mentioned to me that by shoehorning COleman into the side in a 3-5-2 is not really getting out of coleman what we want him in the side for in the first place! And maybe this is what Kenny feels too, by going 3 at the back we are just making room for Coleman in a position that he is unfamiliar and we arent getting the best from him. Perhaps we can still play it with clark and egan either side of Duffy, but then we still havent accommodated Coleman. Which if that is his thinking, i have to say i am coming around to it - it doesnt mean i wouldnt like to see it used just once but against slovakia i dont think so. So lets assume that a variation of 4-3-3 is what we will be seeing from here on in. Kennys favoured approach is a leading strong and athletic centre forward who can hold up the ball if needed and bring others in, but doesnt really drop. At least thats what i remember from his Dundalk days. Playing MCG changes this, and i believe the 4-3-1-2 is what we then end up becoming, the problem is we have kind of always done this in a 4-4-2 but ended up with only 1 other in the box, and yesterday what we saw was a similar issue as the two wide players were staying wide, so in that formation we would need the wide players being much more narrow, or at least one of them being much more narrow like a 1-1 (mcg to centre). So I am not sure if kenny is fully aware or wants this, but i thought we looked better with both McG and Robinson on the pitch as they floated about more, if even sometimes getting too close to eachother. But i think with the players we have we need to go 4-3-1-2, whatever about 3-5-2.

One other thing that really annoyed me over the last 2 days was in the final third on the wings we would bunch 3 players over beside eachother where there was no room, yet trying to build from the back we wouldnt even have 1 support player. I dont know if this was a lack of communication or understanding, but we would end up slowing the ball down, then crossing it and theres no one really in the box, and no one running onto any loose balls coming out from the box. It also happened in Bulgaria, players didnt really seem to know where to be and just bunching in a narrow area of the side of the pitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

This talk of playing like brazil/barcelona overnight as some stick to beat them and others with is just silly really.

---

Who has been saying that?

You thanked a post not too long ago with the exact team mentioned!

Youre nitpicking on everything now stutts, its getting tiresome. I think you need to drop it.

At least put a bit of effort into the general point. :rolleyes:

What exact team?

3-5-3 would be good to look at with Coleman on the right of the 3 with Duffy and Egan.
Stevens and Doherty wing backs and maybe McCarthy, Arter and one of Hourihane/Hendrick/Brady

Then McGoldrick as 10 with Connolly, Long, Obafemi, Parrott, Robinson and Idah vying for the top two spots.

Brady could also do a job at LWB if Stevens injured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eminence Grise

Did anybody really expect Kenny to have a magic wand that could turn us into Brazil overnight?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

You thanked a post not too long ago with the exact team mentioned!

---

You might have misread my post, Paul. I referred to Brazil in metaphor (synecdoche, really I suppose, but who cares for pedantry?) the way others refer to free-flowing silky football. Not literally Brazil. We're definitely more Enniscrone than Copacabana! Not necessarily a bad thing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fixer82

3-5-3 would be good to look at with Coleman on the right of the 3 with Duffy and Egan.
Stevens and Doherty wing backs and maybe McCarthy, Arter and one of Hourihane/Hendrick/Brady

Then McGoldrick as 10 with Connolly, Long, Obafemi, Parrott, Robinson and Idah vying for the top two spots.

Brady could also do a job at LWB if Stevens injured.

---

As mentioned above though, the lack of a goalkeeper is going to cause an issue with this otherwise excellent formation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eminence Grise

You might have misread my post, Paul. I referred to Brazil in metaphor (synecdoche, really I suppose, but who cares for pedantry?) the way others refer to free-flowing silky football. Not literally Brazil. We're definitely more Enniscrone than Copacabana! Not necessarily a bad thing...

---

ah so that was the post. Crikey...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eirambler

As mentioned above though, the lack of a goalkeeper is going to cause an issue with this otherwise excellent formation.

---

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Give this team a try after the playoffs:


GK Randolph
RWB Doherty
CB O'Shea
CB Duffy
CB Egan
LWB Stevens
CM Molumby
CM Hendrick
CM Arter
ST Mc Goldrick
ST Obafemi

Lacking replacements at Centre Back but other than that worth a try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eminence Grise

You might have misread my post, Paul. I referred to Brazil in metaphor (synecdoche, really I suppose, but who cares for pedantry?) the way others refer to free-flowing silky football. Not literally Brazil. We're definitely more Enniscrone than Copacabana! Not necessarily a bad thing...

---

With all due respect your Eminence, it was the allusion to us playing decent passing football in the style of Brazil or other such teams. We weren't even near what Georgia have provided the last few games we've played them.

---‐----‐---------Randy
Coleman Duffy egan Stevens
Doherty cullen McCarthy Connolly
---‐------------ mcgoldrick
‐----‐-------------obafemi

4-5-1
This is our best team guys
If troy turns into a star in the next 3m4 weeks great, but if we are to play Slovakia tomorrow. Imo this team could win the match

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

I think I'd be worried if there weren't gloom merchants on here calling for us to feed everyone who's ever played midfield for us to be feed into a woodchipper and the pulp used to nourish some teenagers who can't get a game in the Championship. It's the natural order when we lose, draw, and frequently when we win too.

---

True enough about the gloom merchants. And to be honest I have been among them for years. But I have a good feeling about Stephen Kenny. Kenny made an excellent point prior to yesterday's game. He said Finland are (in their development) where Ireland wants to be. That is so true. And you can add Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark to that list. All smaller countries who pass and move into space and can transition from defence to attack quickly. Kenny will get it done for Ireland but he needs to be given the time to do it.