Terry Venables

**carloz** · 01/02/2008, 3:44 PM

In fairness to Venables, he wanted to play Rio Ferdinand at the centre of the 3-5-2 against Croatia. McClaren overruled him and put Terry at the centre of the 3 man defence. Having Terry at the centre of a three man defence is beyond stupid

**Stuttgart88** · 01/02/2008, 3:49 PM

They lost to a better team though and mainly because of dreadful or unlucky goalkeeping for both goals. They also lost in Russia, drew with Israel away and Macedonia at home and lost at home to Croatia using 442.

Like Neil and I were exchanging views earlier on another thread there are several good permutations on paper using our better non-defenders.

We have 2 good wide players in a 4 man midfield. We have players who can play the "1" in a 4312. We prefer to have 2 upfront because 433/451 exposes us to Portugal's problem - lack of a really reliable goalscorer which places emphasis on goals from midfield. Hence if we had the players to play 3 at the back then it could work. I've long advocated considering it at home to weaker teams intent on defending, I wouldn't be so convinced away from home. I also think that if left back is such a problem for us then maybe we shouldn't play with one.

If we were to tinker with the shape my belief is that 4231 is most likely to yield results but realistically a good manager, one who can quickly identify the flaws and stengths of our best XI, ought to be able to pick a balanced team and allocate roles within a straightforward shape.

A few years back I heard the much derided Ranieri asking why not, if even just for 10 minutes at a time, alter your team's shape to gain a tactical advantage over your opponent?

I personally don't support the theory that we can only play 442 but I'm convinced that whatever formation you play you should only ask players to perform roles they understand and have the attributes to execute.

**Noelys Guitar** · 01/02/2008, 4:02 PM

Venables the player tried some innovative free kicks. He was the first player in England to lift the ball off the ground from a free kick using both feet so a team mate could volley a shot on goal. This was later banned so Venables started lifting the ball with one foot so a team mate could volley on goal. That was also banned because it was felt the foot touched the ball more than once. Free kicks and set pieces are something we must improve on if we are going to get out of this group. Hopefully Venables will work on those.

**eirebhoy** · 01/02/2008, 4:02 PM

3-5-2 is really just an attacking version of 5-3-2. If your wing backs aren't good enough to play full back then they're probably not going to be good enough wing backs.

**jmurphyc** · 01/02/2008, 4:24 PM

Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar

Free kicks and set pieces are something we must improve on if we are going to get out of this group. Hopefully Venables will work on those.

Agreed. Our set pieces under both Kerr and Staunton (can't remember what it was like under McCarthy) were quite poor. Hopefully a good manager will be able to identify both our strengths and weaknesses and the opposition's as it could definitely help us to win tight games. Too many managers underestimate the importance of set pieces, although it does seem as though this is starting to change.

**eekers** · 01/02/2008, 4:35 PM

Originally Posted by eirebhoy

3-5-2 is really just an attacking version of 5-3-2. If your wing backs aren't good enough to play full back then they're probably not going to be good enough wing backs.

not venables 352 at euro 96 he had mcmanaman and anderton as wing backs (definately not good enough for fullbacks) and played two full backs (pearce and neville) as centre backs

**Stuttgart88** · 01/02/2008, 4:41 PM

Even though Mourinho's gone have you noticed how many points Chelsea has picked up recently from set pieces? Set pieces are crucial and are one of the few things a manager can actually perfect with the limited amount of time he'd have with international players. The value of a goal doesn't increase because of artistic merit.

**ken foree** · 01/02/2008, 5:29 PM

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

The value of a goal doesn't increase because of artistic merit.

a great point that should be drilled into robbie's head!

**eekers** · 01/02/2008, 5:46 PM

Originally Posted by ken foree

a great point that should be drilled into robbie's head!

not really relevant to him anymore is it? top scorer in 2007 in the premiership and all

**ken foree** · 01/02/2008, 5:49 PM

Originally Posted by eekers

not really relevant to him anymore is it? top scorer in 2007 in the premiership and all

this being the ireland forum i'm afraid it's all-too relevant. at least for now.

**Stuttgart88** · 01/02/2008, 5:54 PM

In the Premiership Robbie has been able to score those ugly poacher's goals for a year or two at least now. Look at his goal at OT on Sunday. He doesn't have the weight of the world on his shoulders at Spurs and doesn't feel he has to muck in 30 yards from his own goal at Spurs. He also gets great wide service at Spurs at times, and we've had Duff missing for ages now. In fact I remember Robbie getting stick on this site for his tap in (well, more for the celebration) after Duff beat 54 players setting up Robbie for a tap in against the Faroes at home under Kerr. Poor guy can't win!

If Ireland had a more functional midfield Robbie's international form could match his club form in my opinion.

**eekers** · 01/02/2008, 5:58 PM

Originally Posted by ken foree

this being the ireland forum i'm afraid it's all-too relevant. at least for now.

well i seem to remember him scoring in the last game

**tetsujin1979** · 01/02/2008, 7:13 PM

Originally Posted by carloz

In fairness to Venables, he wanted to play Rio Ferdinand at the centre of the 3-5-2 against Croatia. McClaren overruled him and put Terry at the centre of the 3 man defence. Having Terry at the centre of a three man defence is beyond stupid

Putting him in either of the outside 2 centre halves would have been suicide, his pace would have been drastically exposed, leaving the other 2 defenders to cover for him.

Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar

Venables the player tried some innovative free kicks. He was the first player in England to lift the ball off the ground from a free kick using both feet so a team mate could volley a shot on goal. This was later banned so Venables started lifting the ball with one foot so a team mate could volley on goal. That was also banned because it was felt the foot touched the ball more than once. Free kicks and set pieces are something we must improve on if we are going to get out of this group. Hopefully Venables will work on those.

Fantastic, but has he done anything with free kicks since the 70's then? How were England's free kicks in the last qualifiers?

**Paddy Garcia** · 01/02/2008, 7:45 PM

Originally Posted by ken foree

this being the ireland forum i'm afraid it's all-too relevant. at least for now.

We should either thank Robbie for dropping back to fill in for a non-existent midfield or apologise for him having to do so.

Or as some suggest we can blame him, then again I also thought he was our top scorer ?

He (who is) may not be perfect, but I believe he cares & has always given his best. And frankly that has been more than good enough for us. The way we whinge - I'm not at all sure we deserve him.

**Paddy Garcia** · 01/02/2008, 7:54 PM

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

On that point, from today's Independent: [url]http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/duff-on-1277860.html[/url
Duff On Terry Venables?I've asked a few of the players, like Alan Smith, ]about him and he gave rave reviews. Steve Round, our assistant, was with him at England and said I'd love him as well. I've heard nothing but good reports so if he gets it, then it'd be brilliant.

That's hardly a banal response. More a ringing endorsement.

**tetsujin1979** · 01/02/2008, 8:39 PM

Originally Posted by Paddy Garcia

That's hardly a banal response. More a ringing endorsement.

Stutts had pointed out that no Irish player in the current squad, other than Keane, has played under Venables, so all they've got to go on is their club mates views on Venables. Duff spoke to Alan Smith about him, and he gave Venables a rave review. Given that Leeds under Venables were dire, I'm not taking that as anything.

I checked out Smith's record under Venables, 8 goals, 12 bookings ans 2 sendings of. 4 of those goals came in one game against Hapoel Tel Aviv, 1 was against Metalurg! doesn't look like he got the best out of Smith does it?

Come to think of it, if Robbie Keane is the only player in the squad to play under Venables, why hasn't any reporter asked him what he thinks of Venables, and what kind of job he'd do for Ireland??

I reckon some of the other views on the forum, that noone wants to say anything bad about Venables in case he does become manager and it affects their chances of a place in the squad are right on the money.

**Paddy Garcia** · 01/02/2008, 8:49 PM

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

Stutts had pointed out that no Irish player in the current squad, other than Keane, has played under Venables, so all they've got to go on is their club mates views on Venables. Duff spoke to Alan Smith about him, and he gave Venables a rave review. Given that Leeds under Venables were dire, I'm not taking that as anything.

I checked out Smith's record under Venables, 8 goals, 12 bookings ans 2 sendings of. 4 of those goals came in one game against Hapoel Tel Aviv, 1 was against Metalurg! doesn't look like he got the best out of Smith does it?

Come to think of it, if Robbie Keane is the only player in the squad to play under Venables, why hasn't any reporter asked him what he thinks of Venables, and what kind of job he'd do for Ireland??

I reckon some of the other views on the forum, that noone wants to say anything bad about Venables in case he does become manager and it affects their chances of a place in the squad are right on the money.

Whilst they may not have played under him, I'd like to think that they have at least as good an insight as us. And we are not short of opinions. So no need to write them off cos they have not played for him directly - it's a very very very small world for these guys.

The point I was making was that Duff could have avoided offending Venables yet still fallen well short of calling his potential appointment "brilliant".

**Stuttgart88** · 01/02/2008, 9:37 PM

But was Duff asked at any point in time what he'd think of playing for Coppell, Hodgson (again in Duff's case), Houllier or even bloody Trappatoni?

That's the whole point here Paddy. Nickey Shorey who was once in England's squad in their last campaign told Hunt that Venables was good so it gets printed that Hunt wants Venables. Doyle was asked something similarly banal and gave an equally meaningless response. Then we get Duff. At least Chris Hughton qualified his endorsement saying Venables is good but he can't comment on any other candidaes.

It's like an election in some tinpot 3rd world democracy where there's only one candidate to vote for.

**Bondvillain** · 01/02/2008, 9:54 PM

Jose was "Brilliant"

("He’s been brilliant with the lads going away for international matches")

Mick was "Brilliant"

("I had a great time under Mick and he did brilliant for Ireland.")

Keegan is "Brilliant"

("The gaffer has been brilliant, even though we haven’t won a game")

Newcastle is "Brilliant"

("Everyone here has been brilliant while I was injured. Absolutely everyone. Brilliant." )

My fitness is "Brilliant"

("I feel brilliant at the moment and I could run all day for the team.")

I think some people may be giving a little bit too much credit to what is one of Duffer's favourite all-purpose throwaway words.

He's not going to pronounce Venables as King of the gimps. He could be his boss next week.