Republic of Ireland V Norway - Wednesday, 17th November 2010 - Friendly

[osarusan]

It's not really fair to argue that 'we lost anyway, so we could have played X, Y and Z.' Had Norway got their goal 4 minutes into the second half rather than 4 minutes from the end, players like Coleman might have featured as we would have been chasing the game. It's all speculation obviously, but the argument that we lost anyway fails to take into account the timing of the goal may well have had on the tactics and personnel employed before it was conceded.

[paul_oshea]

Would be more interesting if you told us what they said?

Stephen Carr at Birmingham. Also, Foley didn't start against Southend in the League Cup
Objection, conjecture
For the first time in his career, and the manager's was forced to play him out there because of injuries. Also, irrelevant seeing as how FIFA clearance didn't come through in time for the initial squad announcement, and Clark was injured for the game anyway

Like playing O'Shea at centre half and right full? Or Keogh on the wing, and up front? Or Kelly at right full and centre half? Or Fahey on the left and in the middle? Didn't Andrews fill in at right full once for us as well under Trapattoni? Steven Reid in the centre, think he was playing right full at Blackburn at the time?

Basically that Long, has come into the squad a lot more confident and more vocal over hte last 6 months and this is showing with his game time, and his general play. That he has come of age so to speak in the last while. A change in character I suppose.

Sorry Irish International in the premiership, I should have qualified that statement.

Objection over-ruled. Its pretty clear given the evidence.

So do you think that Stephen ward being turned into a left back, means trap should only play him as a Forward?

Playing fahey in midfield appears to have come out of necessity, your point will be valid if he ever plays that position again, when we have players returned especially given he performed at least as good as green has in that position. Kelly was moved centre half because there wasn't any other option, wilson is a DM. Keogh i think has proved one of Traps little pet projects, that has gone fairly awry.

[paul_oshea]

It's not really fair to argue that 'we lost anyway, so we could have played X, Y and Z.' Had Norway got their goal 4 minutes into the second half rather than 4 minutes from the end, players like Coleman might have featured as we would have been chasing the game. It's all speculation obviously, but the argument that we lost anyway fails to take into account the timing of the goal may well have had on the tactics and personnel employed before it was conceded.

Somewhat agreed, but when we have been losing most of our friendlies:against winning friendlies, does it really matter?

[Predator]

When you say understand do you mean empathise or sympathise? I mean do you see from a deluded point of view given we lost or what? Do you agree? Do you think it was right, again given we lost, and given we have lost most of our friendlies under trap? Do you really think the objective is being met? Cos I don't understand why Trap says these things given the objective is rarely met.

I've always expressed frustration over Trapattoni's selections and his unwillingness to take risks, but that said, I appreciate his reasoning and tend to bow down to his greater experience of management.
Last night, I was happy with the starting lineup and thought we started very well. In the second half, I thought we were very tame in comparison.
Trap went for McGeady and Walters at half time. McGeady was poor and perhaps Coleman would have been a better option, but I can't see Trap favouring Coleman on the wing. He brought on Hunt where I would have given Treacy a run. When O'Dea went off injured, I would have stuck Wilson in at CB and then perhaps have taken Kelly off for Coleman. That way, all the new guys would have got a run out.

[Predator]

We shouldn't have been satisfied with a draw

Agree 100%

[paul_oshea]

"I had a doubt about him in this position, but he played very, very well," said the manager.

Obvious who he is talking about here, but interesting all the same, because again this would not have happened had there not being a serious amount of injuries. How many other players can we say the same for, yet look how long it took this individual to get his chance in his preferred position.

Trap has basically admitted that he got this one wrong. Hopefully now he sees that he might be getting it wrong in other areas too.

It appears now we have to wish for people to get injured to see the players we want to see.

[SwanVsDalton]

So do you think that Stephen ward being turned into a left back, means trap should only play him as a Forward?

Stephen Ward has emerged as Prem level LB. Ciaran Clark emerged as Prem level CB who's been pushed into DM out of necessity. They don't compare.

Playing fahey in midfield appears to have come out of necessity, your point will be valid if he ever plays that position again, when we have players returned especially given he performed at least as good as green has in that position. Kelly was moved centre half because there wasn't any other option, wilson is a DM. Keogh i think has proved one of Traps little pet projects, that has gone fairly awry.

Seems fairly likely Fahey will get more CM opportunities from this.

Also how can you argue in favour of playing Clark at DM but not Wilson at CB? Wilson can play CB at a pinch - rather like Clark's been playing DM for Villa. He certainly has more experience at CB than Kelly.

EDIT - Also you didn't actually address Tets' point. You said Trap sees players in one position. Tets rebuffed your argument with facts. If it's valid for you to say Fahey, Kelly, Keogh or anyone else were simply played in different positions by Trap 'out of necessity' then how can you maintain Clark, that world beating defensive midfielder, has been pushed upfield because it's actually his position?

[SwanVsDalton]

"I had a doubt about him in this position, but he played very, very well," said the manager.

Obvious who he is talking about here, but interesting all the same, because again this would not have happened had there not being a serious amount of injuries. How many other players can we say the same for, yet look how long it took this individual to get his chance in his preferred position.

Trap has basically admitted that he got this one wrong. Hopefully now he sees that he might be getting it wrong in other areas too.

It appears now we have to wish for people to get injured to see the players we want to see.

Eh? Loads of people had doubts about Fahey at CM - personally I still do. Trap didn't have to play him CM - could've threw Wilson, Lawrence or even O'Shea in - but he did and then praised him. And you use it as a stick to beat him with? Makes no sense.

[geysir]

I disagree that McGeady was poor. We we were poor for a long stretch in the 2nd half. McGeady lost the ball twice around the box when he had a better easier options. That apart, whenever he got on the ball, for the most part he made something happen and a few times good intelligent play.

I was impressed with Huseklepp for Norway, a striker from their domestic league. He is their 3rd choice, he is a tuned in intelligent player with a knack for scoring.

[SwanVsDalton]

I was impressed with Huseklepp for Norway, a striker from their domestic league. He is their 3rd choice, he is a tuned in intelligent player with a knack for scoring.

Was going to mention him but didn't know how to spell it (sounded like 'Whos-a-klep'). Certainly gave O'Dea and Cunningham the run around in the second half.

[paul_oshea]

Eh? Loads of people had doubts about Fahey at CM - personally I still do. Trap didn't have to play him CM - could've threw Wilson, Lawrence or even O'Shea in - but he did and then praised him. And you use it as a stick to beat him with? Makes no sense.

Yep, Trap has come out and played him, yet people had being saying that Faheys preferred position was CM all this time but trap never gave him a chance and proceeded to play the likes of green and gibson ahead without even giving him a go in friendlies. He has now and he has been impressed. Isn't that a bigger problem with Trap?

Wilson has been playing as a Defensive midfielder for Stoke and had been at portsmouth. This appears to be his position, we all know trap doesn't like playing people out of their position as listed. Clark has been playing at DM and not CB also, but for some reason trap only sees him as a CB. Coleman has been playing as a RMF not a FB, yet trap sees him only there. This confuses me too, what exactly is traps logic? He hasn't seen enough of any of them to say their best positions yet he makes the assumptions based on what?

Swan:I did, based on what Trap has been recorded as saying in the press what i covered above in the last paragraph.

Again you used the word emerged? So Ciaran clark cant emerge as a DM? Trap would still see him as CB? Was ward played out of necessity, or was it simply a case of Mccarthy seeing he had a left foot and ousted the current LB at the time? Im going with the same as you suggested for Clark...which is why he also played fahey in CM(again overall balance by lawrence out on the flank).

[SwanVsDalton]

Yep, Trap has come out and played him, yet people had being saying that Faheys preferred position was CM all this time but trap never gave him a chance and proceeded to play the likes of green and gibson ahead without even giving him a go in friendlies. He has now and he has been impressed. Isn't that a bigger problem with Trap?

No I don't see the problem. Regardless of the circumstances Trap played him the position and was impressed. It's happened with quite a few other players and will happen. If the problem was as obvious as you say he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM.

Wilson has been playing as a Defensive midfielder for Stoke and had been at portsmouth. This appears to be his position, we all know trap doesn't like playing people out of their position as listed. Clark has been playing at DM and not CB also, but for some reason trap only sees him as a CB. Coleman has been playing as a RMF not a FB, yet trap sees him only there. This confuses me too, what exactly is traps logic? He hasn't seen enough of any of them to say their best positions yet he makes the assumptions based on what?

I want to put this 'Trap only sees Clark as a CB argument to bed.' You are drawing conclusions on a gentle comment Trap made after Clark had played one game in CM, where he was the defensive pivot of a midfield five. He's since gone on to play three games at CM, which is far less than the number's he played at CB. At the time Trap offered a fairly reasonable opinion, since Clark had played ONE game in a midfield vastly different midfield from Ireland's.

Having watched Clark quite a bit, I think he's bang on. Clark's done well and looks accomplished on the ball but his performances for Villa at CM are not as transferable as his performances at CB because the midfield system is so different. And, regardless of what Trap's seen, his view is far more reasonable than simply assuming Clark's a DM based off three games...

But it's irrelevant - you're drawing a wildly pessimistic conclusion based on a throwaway, and very gentle, comment Trap made about Clark. It doesn't mean Clark can't prove himself a CM or Trap can't change his mind.

It's the same for Coleman. He's a player who's operated from RB most of his career. His recent performances have been very, very fine. But note David Moyes said exactly the same thing about Coleman's long term future just a month or two ago. Does this mean Moyes is inflexible? Absolutely not. And it's the same for Trap, as Tets' examples point out.

Swan:I did, based on what Trap has been recorded as saying in the press what i covered above in the last paragraph.

See above - your conclusions are wildly assumptive, based on some throwaway light comments in the press and have no statistical basis (as Tets pointed out).

Again you used the word emerged? So Ciaran clark cant emerge as a DM? Trap would still see him as CB? Was ward played out of necessity, or was it simply a case of Mccarthy seeing he had a left foot and ousted the current LB at the time? Im going with the same as you suggested for Clark...which is why he also played fahey in CM(again overall balance by lawrence out on the flank).

Of course he can emerge as a DM. Given time. Ward has proved himself, at least to McCarthy, to be a Prem standard left back. Clark hasn't proved to be a Prem standard DM. He surely can yet, but Trap was right to say what he said after Clark had played ONE game at DM. Simple.

If Fahey goes on to operate at CM at Ireland - a real possibility - will you concede Trap is more flexible than you suggest? It doesn't really matter how it came about - Trap clearly does play people in various positions (regardless of whatever he says in the media at various points in time).

[tetsujin1979]

Objection over-ruled. Its pretty clear given the evidence.

Reinstated, Trapattoni has now seen him in training. Besides, if he has never seen him play, why would he call him into the squad?

So do you think that Stephen ward being turned into a left back, means trap should only play him as a Forward?

If he would only play Ward as a striker, then Cunningham would be playing as a striker, where he started his career

Playing fahey in midfield appears to have come out of necessity, your point will be valid if he ever plays that position again, when we have players returned especially given he performed at least as good as green has in that position. Kelly was moved centre half because there wasn't any other option, wilson is a DM. Keogh i think has proved one of Traps little pet projects, that has gone fairly awry.

My point was that he has played players in various positions. Also, McGeady, Duff and Hunt on both wings. McGeady played through the middle at the end of the Russia game as well

[Charlie Darwin]

That was a dreadful match overall. Norway didn't really turn up but had enough quality to score two excellent goals and go home with a win. It's very frustrating and I'm disappointed neither Coleman nor Wilson got on but I doubt it will scar either man emotionally. They'll both get their chances and become excellent players for us.

I thought Fahey struggled at times in the middle and tried some passes that were never on but nobody who watched Paul Green give the ball away 90 times against Slovakia would be too worried about that. Norway played very deep and the movement of our midfield was poor at times. I did notice that Fahey's default out ball was Cunningham which means he must trust him with the ball - I thought the two of them linked up well, albeit not under much pressure.

McGeady had a smashing 15 minutes when he came on but then faded. I didn't know where he was playing at times - he was collecting the ball from the centre halves at times, which is probably a measure of how hard he found the ball to come by. Duff looked tired and probably should have come off earlier - Doyle the same but he did go off at the right time. Kelly and Cunningham were impressive, Josh and O'Dea a little shaky. Whelan had his best game in a green shirt for some time, although again he wasn't under much pressure. Long looks like a very good player but think he needs to add more to his game to really challenge Robbie for the #10 shirt.

I did notice a distinct lack of harrying in the game.

[SwanVsDalton]

I did notice a distinct lack of harrying in the game.

Certainly missed Paul Greens customary harrying.

[paul_oshea]

You are purely picking one player here in Clark.

Do not suggest that my comments are assumptions based on "throw away" comments by Trap. You and I and everyone else can only judge on what we see/hear from Trap. It is 100% Fact, a word that so many like to use. WHy would people even quote him then for reference here as we do so often....thats a strange point to make, unless its a weak point to undermine my argument.

Why did it take 18 months or so then for Fahey to be tried in CM "he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM." ?

Unless trap is like Comical Ally, suggesting the allies are nowhere near and we have control or Iraq, then of course Trap is going to have to secede from his normal stubborn stance, re:fahey in midfield. It matters completely how this comes about, of course it does, because had a player been played in that position all along, we might have picked up 3 points instead of 1, and qualified. The old saying rings true, yer best players in their best positions.

[Junior]

I disagree that McGeady was poor. We we were poor for a long stretch in the 2nd half. McGeady lost the ball twice around the box when he had a better easier options. That apart, whenever he got on the ball, for the most part he made something happen and a few times good intelligent play.

I was impressed with Huseklepp for Norway, a striker from their domestic league. He is their 3rd choice, he is a tuned in intelligent player with a knack for scoring.

I listened to it on the radio and that would be the synopsis of McGeadys performance that the commentators came to.

[paul_oshea]

Reinstated, Trapattoni has now seen him in training. Besides, if he has never seen him play, why would he call him into the squad?

If he would only play Ward as a striker, then Cunningham would be playing as a striker, where he started his career

Seeing someone in training is not the same as seeing anyone in a game. People playing at any level(against relative opposition) can look good in training, doing it in a game is completely different.

Ward was bought from bohemians as a striker, 20+ odd goals in over 3-4 appearances up until 21/22, cunningham is a lot younger, and been playing FB since what about 16/17 since 2007 odd? Also i thought he was more a left sided midfielder(which adds more weight) originally and not a striker, but i am open to correction.

Interesting i just saw this: http://sport.scotsman.com/football/G...ham.6628839.jp

Looks like trap might be taking note of what fans/media/pundits have been hoping suggesting he do for a while, and thats experiment and replace those who need replacing. Perhaps we are seeing a change in things. So long as long term doesn't mean after kilbane retires and in the near future rather than medium/long term future.

[tetsujin1979]

You are purely picking one player here in Clark.

to be fair, so are you

Why did it take 18 months or so then for Fahey to be tried in CM "he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM." ?

18 months? You do realise Fahey only made his debut in May?

Unless trap is like Comical Ally

Is he Chemical Ali's Scottish cousin?

The old saying rings true, yer best players in their best positions.

Then why are you suggesting Clark in CM, when he's excelled at centre half?

[SwanVsDalton]

You are purely picking one player here in Clark.

Well it was you that kept bringing him up after it was clarified for you...

Do not suggest that my comments are assumptions based on "throw away" comments by Trap. You and I and everyone else can only judge on what we see/hear from Trap. It is 100% Fact, a word that so many like to use.

Just because it's all we have to go on doesn't mean you can't take it with 16 pinches of salt...

Why did it take 18 months or so then for Fahey to be tried in CM "he wouldn't have played Fahey at CM." ?

Unless trap is like Comical Ally, suggesting the allies are nowhere near and we have control or Iraq, then of course Trap is going to have to secede from his normal stubborn stance, re:fahey in midfield. It matters completely how this comes about, of course it does, because had a player been played in that position all along, we might have picked up 3 points instead of 1, and qualified.

More wild assumtions and guesses. If it's really just about playing Fahey at CM, and you genuinely think we'd have picked up more points with him there, fine. I disagree but that's your view. However you seemed to be holding Fahey (and Clark and Coleman) up as examples of Trap's intransigence in defining where players operate best when, clearly, he's not necessarily that stubborn.

The old saying rings true, yer best players in their best positions.

So you're happy to see Clark at CB and Coleman at RB yeah?