Gibraltar (H) - Sat, 11th Oct. / Germany (A) - Tues, 14th Oct.

[Kingdom]

I've just realised I haven't even considered the possibility of Robbie Keane starting against Germany. Does anyone think he will be picked, and should he be picked?

[Stuttgart88]

If Keane struggled to be in the game away to Georgia I think it's hard to see how he'll have any impact in Germany. He is on great form in MLS but his team are usually at least as good as the teams they play, usually better. There's going to be a lot of donkey work required in Germany and younger legs will be required I reckon, plus someone strong in the air. It's going to suit Long and/or Doyle more, with Murphy a wild card to play some role based on club form.

I probably sound like a broken record, but the Italy friendly set the scene for this game. Long, Hoolahan advance, McGeady and AN Other wide. Pilkington started in London but I'd go with McClean.

I have a feeling MON might pick McGeady in the free role rather than a wide role.

[zero]

i don't think hoolahan has any real role to play in the bigger games. he gives the ball away too easily and is not able to win it back. for every 1 good ball there's a ball lost.

i'd start him against gibraltar and georgia home and come off the bench for scotland/poland for the last 30 mins if it's a tight game. he just is not good enough in my opinion - we can justify semi carrying robbie because of his goals. wes doesn't offer enough.

i get particularly riled by people who claim we should drop whelan in favour of hoolahan. don't even know where to start with that one.

[Charlie Darwin]

Of all the criticisms I've heard of Hoolahan, I'd say giving the ball away too much would be at the very bottom. Then again, we live in a country where people criticise Robbie Keane for not scoring enough goals, so anything's possible.

[zero]

i'd say i'm not alone but you'd probably want to ask norwich fans. googled it - sky sports classify his major weakness as not holding on to the ball:

http://www1.skysports.com/football/p...9/wes-hoolahan

that's probably based on statistics not some punter's view. in case of confusion i classify 'giving the ball away' to be equivalent to 'not holding on to the ball'.

edit: yes, those characteristics are based on stats. or anyone who isn't blinkered.

[Charlie Darwin]

I can only base it on my own observations and in any game I've seen him in he's the tidiest player in possession on the pitch. When he gives it away, it's usually because he's attempting a risky pass around the opposition penalty area, which is his main function on the pitch.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Personally I think Glenn Whelan gets too tough a time of it. He carries out the orders of his manager. He is, and has been for some considerable time, Stoke's MVP. He has been consistently excellent for them.

Has he had some stinkers for us- yes there are times he hasn't played effectively, but I would say a few of those performances can be attributed to absolutely prehistoric tactics.

I would definitely say that Glenn Whelan in theory should be phased out of our first eleven, if Mac is allowed to play in his withdrawn pivot as he does for Everton, alongside Gibson. McCarthy offers all that Whelan does, but with better quality when he receives the ball or breaks with it.

The only flaws in otherwise the best analysis of our playing system on here, are that personally feel Whelan hasn't really done much in any Ireland game (exc.maybe Sweden in Stockholm*) in any game since we qualified for the Euros so unless we are really desperate, feel he no longer justifies a place.
Realise his role in the side, but he's just too slow and one-dimensional in the main, these last 3 years. And a total liabity in possession.

*He didn't play, doh. But backs-up my point. We do better without.

Ideally central midfield would be Gibson & McCarthy, with Meyler/Noble back-up IMO.
Assuming Hendrick would be considered more a left-sided player along with Quinn.

I disagree totally here though....Gibraltar is the opportunity to try something different out, without the result really being in doubt. Germany is the same: this is the game where MON's credentials are put on show. It's where he should have been trying to gain an upper hand on Poland and Scotland by coming up with a formula or strategy that gives us wiggle room for our games against our rivals. MON's attitude to the Germany game, and if there was any dividend, has a direct implication on our matches with the other two. A point from Germany forces Scotland to be either more gung-ho against us, or more gung-ho against Poland. If they have to go more gung-ho against Poland, they'll lose, meaning they'll have to come to Dublin in 2015 having to win. These are the small details that generally get glossed over in the press, nevermind on forums, and they have a huge impact on groups such as ours.

Realise you are rather more optimistic, but knowing and admired MO'N since his Celtic days, really don't see what he's going to produce with these players in terms of any dividend next Tuesday or wriggle-room, sadly. Those 6 games involving us, Alba & Polska are going to decide the also-rans...
If Germany drop one point v.us 3, it'll more because they've relaxed for some strange, unquantifiable reason which is probably inexplicable.
And next Tues, all other factors considered, is just too soon I reckon.

[DeLorean]

Whelan was injured for Stockholm. Why would Hendrick be considered a more left sided player?

[Charlie Darwin]

Henrick is a right-sided player.

[harry crumb]

i don't think hoolahan has any real role to play in the bigger games. he gives the ball away too easily and is not able to win it back. for every 1 good ball there's a ball lost.

i'd start him against gibraltar and georgia home and come off the bench for scotland/poland for the last 30 mins if it's a tight game. he just is not good enough in my opinion - we can justify semi carrying robbie because of his goals. wes doesn't offer enough.

i get particularly riled by people who claim we should drop whelan in favour of hoolahan. don't even know where to start with that one.

I think he has added an extra dimension to our play when he has got some game time. He wants to get on the ball and dictate play.

He can be guilty of giving up possession but he is usually doing so in a forward area.

As for not winning it back I think that is a fallacy as he has shown he is well able to do that side of the game as well.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Whelan was injured for Stockholm. Why would Hendrick be considered a more left sided player?

Henrick is a right-sided player.

Good point about Whelan, as for Hendrick, pal did a piece for the Italy programme and my Derby mate said he's better on the left cutting in from midfield so going with what he says.

[Charlie Darwin]

From what I've seen of him with Derby (admittedly only 5 or 6 games), Hendrick plays more on the right side of the centre and rotates out wide right when another player comes in. Derby play with five central midfielders, though. I think they're all right-footed, so maybe he does push out on the left, but I'd imagine that'd be somewhat negated by having two-footed McGeady and left-footed Hoolahan and/or Quinn in the team.

[zero]

I think he has added an extra dimension to our play when he has got some game time. He wants to get on the ball and dictate play.

He can be guilty of giving up possession but he is usually doing so in a forward area.

As for not winning it back I think that is a fallacy as he has shown he is well able to do that side of the game as well.

he is more creative than our other midfielders, partially because he takes more risks but it's true he has a better eye for a through ball than our other options bar andy reid and stephen ireland (theoretical options included!).

unfortunately (in my view) that's not enough. mourinho for example focuses very heavily on reclaiming possession (in any area of the pitch) and counter attacking with pace. this is what the germans do to great effect. it's pointless hoolahan having the ball in the final third unless the rest of the team comes up to support him - bringing players forward like that leaves a team defensively vulnerable so as soon as the opposition regains possession danger is imminent regardless of where on the park that happens. 2 or 3 passes and it's a goal scoring chance.

our best chance against germany in my view is to have 7/8 players sitting deep when we don't have the ball - which wll be probably 70% of the time - with one or two pacey players high up the pitch. germany play an incredibly high line and scotland caught them out on this more than once. i would go with mcgeady and long as those two.

[tricky_colour]

Delaney should be in there without doubt. He'd be a nailed-on starter for many; not merely a squad member. He's had a few run-ins with Roy throughout his career - once turning up late to training at Ipswich due to being caught speeding and then blaming his "unreasonable boss" for his speeding in court - but you'd imagine the management would be professional enough to see past such things now if it would be in the best interests of the team to have Delaney there?

If McCarthy doesn't recover in time for Germany, it'll be a big blow, although we do have competent cover in Gibson.

Strictness is a flaw in Keane's make up, he has to accept that not everyone share his strict ideals, no point in
having a squad which gets to training on time but loses week in week out, yes disipline is important but I think
you can go over the top.

Remember we also have competent cover for McCarthy in Stephen Ward .

[Stuttgart88]

I have never once heard anyone suggesting we drop Whelan in favour of Hoolahan. That'd be ridiculous.

I too would prefer Whelan be replaced but with McCarthy out and Meyler not getting games and probably starting RB anyway, I think he should start.

Zero, did you see Hoolahan against Italy? Probably the biggest compliment of his performance was from Paul O'Shea who thought he was rubbish but when he saw the game again on telly he changed his mind. I mean that just never happens

He was aggressive in pursuit of the ball, aggressive in his tackling, he even won an aerial duel with an Italian CB, and his use of the ball was excellent. He and Long seem to have a good understanding. I think he is by far our best user of the ball in our opponents' half - but he is an opposition half player, whereas someone like Whelan would typically see more of the ball in our own half, Gibson a bit more of both. My only worry is Hoolahan's club form, but he excelled at times for us last year and he wasn't playing at all.

AB, picking Hendrick on the left would be a Trap like decision Square peg, round hole. He's a central player, and an athletic one at that, something we lack.

For those who continue to bash Paul Green (he's less popular than David Drumm I feel) he was superb that night in Stockholm alongside JMcC, our best collective central midfield showing in a long long time. Trap then picked Whelan again against Austria a few days later.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Hear what you say about Hendrick, but see him a replacement/stand-in for Hoolahan, not a main central midfielder v. a team like Germany, or even Scotland?
Maybe as a sub...

[paul_oshea]

He was great for 27 mins in slovakia as well too Stutts.

I do feel Hoolahan does concede possesion and for a team like Ireland lacking in pace, he leaves us susceptible to counter attacks or fast paced movements from the opposition half, teams can move the ball so quick now, that you cant afford to lose the ball anywhere in the field and not be left open - especially as I said with our lack of pace. I concede though he did well against Italy in that regard.

[DeLorean]

From what I've seen of him with Derby (admittedly only 5 or 6 games), Hendrick plays more on the right side of the centre and rotates out wide right when another player comes in. Derby play with five central midfielders, though. I think they're all right-footed, so maybe he does push out on the left, but I'd imagine that'd be somewhat negated by having two-footed McGeady and left-footed Hoolahan and/or Quinn in the team.

I've never seen or heard about Hendrick playing on the left. He actually came on wide right on Saturday, even that was unusual and he had little or no impact by all accounts. Will Hughes is left footed but also plays centrally, usually alongside Hendrick with a more deep lying midfield like Thorne or Eustace giving them both a licence to roam. Obviously on a team sheet Hendrick might be slightly right of centre but himself and Hughes are fully interchangeable. I don't think you could say that Derby play with five central midfielders to be honest, they generally have natural width on one side at least with Ward, Ibe or Dawkins. Johnny Russell (also left footed) tends to play a wider role than he would probably like, to leave Martin as the focal point in attack.

Hendrick and Hoolahan both started Stutts favourite game (v Italy) and both played exceptionally well, think Hendrick might have even got motm?

Coming back to that Stockhom game, I fully agree that it was probably our best midfield pairing and performance in a long time, since Paris anyway which was a bit of a one off. That Italian game was probably next on the list, second only because of it's friendly status. Both games... no Whelan. It's amazing what a difference a bit of mobility, energy and willingness to get on the ball can make. In the interest of balance, I suppose Whelan could point to our biggest capitulations being when he was out of the team also, notably the Germany 1-6.

[Kingdom]

Is Hendrick only coming back from injury - I thought he was, and that's why I hadn't given him much consideration for the German game. I've seen him less than Whelan McCarthy or Gibson, but I really rate McClaren as a coach, and this can only have helped Hendrick develop his game.

He always appears to have plenty of energy to spare in games, and he is very useful with the ball. He definitely has a big role to play for us this campaign, and in fact would be really suitable for the type of tactics I'd hope we'd employ against Germany which would require plenty of running.

He in theory would be better for us in a midfield two, rather than a midfield three whereby generally you have one sitting midfielder, and two distributors or offensive players.

Where I feel sorry for the management, and while acknowledging that every country has to contend with injuries, is that we've a select group that the managers appear to be allowing themselves to choose from, and invariably there is always 2/3 crucial injuries in critical parts of the team. Midfield is a prime example. I would love to see what the management do when we get a clean bill of health.
Arguably they have limited themselves to picking 2/3 from McCarthy, Whelan, Gibson, Hendrick, Quinn, Meyler and at a push Reid and Hoolahan. Gibson has had horrid luck with inopportune injuries. Club form has really killed momentum here. I think Gibson can be pivotal for us, his range of passing is better than any of our midfield options, he carries well, he has a good shot, and he is vocal. He isn't hugely mobile, but closes space really well, and is better at intercepting than outright tackling.
I would hope that Glenn Whelan will be phased out of being a first team starter by the end of this campaign, as I think in a two-man McCarthy and Gibson offer more, and in a three-man McCarthy Gibson and Hendrick has a nice look to it. Given that three in midfield is becoming almost essential if you play a team outside of Britain and Scandanavia, then it's always going to be three that the focus should be on.

While it's never too clever to be comparing midfield players to peers, those who have seen him such as Delorean and CD, would Hendrick be the Jordan Henderson prototype - athletic, good engine, and a combative game?

[DeLorean]

He's had two sub appearances for Derby and an U21 game. He wasn't out for very long so he's surely a starting possibility at least. Why do you think he would be better in a midfield two?

Edit- Only saw your question about the two Hendo's after posting. I suppose they're not a million miles apart in terms of box to box midfielders but I think Hendrick's primary role is an offensive one, whereas I think Henderson's is probably a bit more defensive i.e. don't leave poor Stevie G isolated but join in with the attack when you can. Henderson is definitely more combative I would say but Hendrick arguably has a bit more guile, but hard to compare when Henderson is playing at a vastly higher level.

Short interview here-