Andy Reid(b 1982)

[Jicked]

For what its worth Andy Reid is 49 points in Fantasy Football midfielders at the moment (4 points off 3rd position) while Darren Gibson has a grand total of 1. Even taking into account that Fantasy Football isn't the gospel according to football, this alone tells you all anyone needs to know about how both players are getting on at the moment.

My God, someone using fantasy football stats to argue a players case, must be a new low.

I don't understand the relevance of talking about Gibson in relation to Reid. Andy Reid by his own admission isn't a central midfield player, he certainly isn't a big defensive strong midfield player in the mold of Gibson, so of course Gibson will be in ahead of him, it's like arguing that Reid should be in ahead of Kieran Westwood in the squad.

It might be nice to play with a central midfielder who could spread passes around with the class Reid occasionally does, however it would mean changing our system considerably to allow a central midfieleder that sort of time and protection, as opposed to the way we play now with the two centre mids basically playing as centre halfs when we don't have the ball. Reid wouldn't be able to play both roles. So is Reid worth changing the system for? In my view not at all. He's been in before for us and hardly set the world alight, and though he's doing well for Sunderland at the moment he hasn't had an illustrious club career and is probably not good enough to boss the midfield against France in a couple of weeks. For that reason I would keep the defensive system and play more technically limited players in his place.

Could he play in either of the wide spots? Well it would be a possibility, unlike him playing centre mid. However because of the way we play I wouldn't go with him. With two defensive central midfield players, we need to play with pacey wingers who will get up and down the line a lot more than Reid would. Reid would be able to play the ball around from deep better than say McGeady, and is certainly a better passer of the ball.

But if Reid isn't the energetic winger up and down the line in the way Lawrence, Hunt or McGeady, then we'd have a big problem. With two defensive players in the middle the front two would be compeletly isolated by the lack of width. Yes Reid could supply them with better balls from deeper positions, but in international football with only two isolated front men to watch their chances would surely be limited even with that better supply.
By having two industrious wingers willing to get up and down the line all day we make up for the fact we don't have anything coming offensively from the middle two (because our defensive problems we need their defensive powers a lot more). Play Reid as one of the wide players and you effectively are hoping he can pick balls through an international defence for two strikers against four defenders not being challenged or moved around by other offensive players. It wouldn't work. For Reid to work in that position you'd need to have more creativity in the middle to offer some other options for the front men and to trouble the opposition defence, which means you'd have to sacrifice playing two defensive players sitting deep, which means sacrificing the system that finally has us getting results.

Tl;dr: Andy Reid isn't a central midfield player so comparing him to Gibson is pointless, and if you want to play him as a wide player you'd have to change the system hugely to make up for the fact he would play deeper and slower than other potential wingers, meaning we'd have to have a more adventourous central midfield.

Oh, and being a top manager means recognising that it's not always about putting out the 11 most talented individuals or finding a way to shoehorn a creative player in to starting line up.

[paul_oshea]

Jicked, they are all valid points, well constructed and descriptive, however even if hunt and lawrence got injured, can you see him bringing Andy in then, as we dont, and I stress we dont, have anyone else in that mould you described above. I still wouldn't see him bringing reid in.

[Jicked]

No I don't think he would. I think he'd play Andy Keogh wide or even someone like Anto Stokes. Both would be able to get up and down the line in the way Trap wants and would stop the front two being isolated. If you brought Andy Reid in to one of the wide spots you'd have to change the two in the middle and the tactics in general, a big change to make in two play-off games. I think he'll have a look at Andy Reid/playing a different way in the new year, though I'd be surprised if its as effective as we currently are.

[paul_oshea]

No I don't think he would. I think he'd play Andy Keogh wide or even someone like Anto Stokes. Both would be able to get up and down the line in the way Trap wants and would stop the front two being isolated. If you brought Andy Reid in to one of the wide spots you'd have to change the two in the middle and the tactics in general, a big change to make in two play-off games. I think he'll have a look at Andy Reid/playing a different way in the new year, though I'd be surprised if its as effective as we currently are.

I meant to put in andy keogh above too. The point i was making is, if the system is unplayable given the fact that those players are not available, would he plaster over the cracks with someone else? I think he would, even to the detriment of the team.

Even changing things around slightly given all of the above, with injuries etc, he could accomodate reid playing, but I dont think he would.

Time will only tell if he will experiment with Andy in a friendly. He has a great opportunity to put all of this to bed and stop the conspirators, by doing this in the new year. Lets hope he does it, as there is a lot of build up of negativity in the media at the moment(smoewhat justified given his strange hypocritical decisions at times) when it should be all positive looking forward to the play-offs optimistically.

[Greenbod]

Jicked your argument would hold some weight if our current midfield options, Whelan, Andrews, Gibson or Miller were particularly good at the roles set out for them.......they're not. In my opinion they're all relatively mediocre at what they do. In fact Andy Reid could do at least as good a job in that role if instructed to. (It would be a waste of his talent but he could do it.)

Now the added advantage you would get with Reid is, should the ball somehow fall to his feet, as it does occasionally with Whelan and Andrews, he would more often than not find an irish shirt with a pass, as opposed to our current midfield who more often than not find the opposition. The other impact of this is of course that Whelan/Andrews are required to do more defending than Reid would because the opposition have the ball more often than they would if we had a midfielder passing to green shirts!

[SuperDave]

Jicked your argument would hold some weight if our current midfield options, Whelan, Andrews, Gibson or Miller were particularly good at the roles set out for them.......they're not. In my opinion they're all relatively mediocre at what they do. In fact Andy Reid could do at least as good a job in that role if instructed to. (It would be a waste of his talent but he could do it.)

Now the added advantage you would get with Reid is, should the ball somehow fall to his feet, as it does occasionally with Whelan and Andrews, he would more often than not find an irish shirt with a pass, as opposed to our current midfield who more often than not find the opposition. The other impact of this is of course that Whelan/Andrews are required to do more defending than Reid would because the opposition have the ball more often than they would if we had a midfielder passing to green shirts!

Whelan and Andrews aren't the only ones who give the ball away you know... just because you have one player who doesn't give the ball away isn't suddenly going to turn your team into Hungary 54 Mk II (and see how it worked for them, anyway)

[Den Perry]

Jicked your argument would hold some weight if our current midfield options, Whelan, Andrews, Gibson or Miller were particularly good at the roles set out for them.......they're not. In my opinion they're all relatively mediocre at what they do. In fact Andy Reid could do at least as good a job in that role if instructed to. (It would be a waste of his talent but he could do it.)

Now the added advantage you would get with Reid is, should the ball somehow fall to his feet, as it does occasionally with Whelan and Andrews, he would more often than not find an irish shirt with a pass, as opposed to our current midfield who more often than not find the opposition. The other impact of this is of course that Whelan/Andrews are required to do more defending than Reid would because the opposition have the ball more often than they would if we had a midfielder passing to green shirts!

I'm a big fan of Trap.However, I just cannot understand how Andy can be left out of the SQUAD?As Greenbod said above, its not as if Whelan and Andrews are that good at playing "defensively". How many clean shhets have we kept in the campaign when those two have been playing together?

Nonetheless, if Trap wants to start with the midfielders he has been using, fair enough. However, if we need a goal desperately against France, not having the option of bringing Reid on to change the game could be the rock our qualification bid perishes on.

[Colbert Report]

I don't understand why Trap does not see Reid as a "central midfield" player. Centre mid is his best position! I get the point about having to sacrifice having two defensive midfielders in order to accomodate him playing left wing, in order to make up for his lack of speed.

Andy Reid's greatest advantage is his passing vision, especially with long diagonal balls out to the wingers. Why not have him on the bench, then when we need a goal in the away leg we can bring him on either in the hole behind Keane and Doyle or just make a straight swap for either Andrews or Gibson?

[LFCSixty/Eighty]

My God, someone using fantasy football stats to argue a players case, must be a new low.

I don't understand the relevance of talking about Gibson in relation to Reid. Andy Reid by his own admission isn't a central midfield player, he certainly isn't a big defensive strong midfield player in the mold of Gibson, so of course Gibson will be in ahead of him, it's like arguing that Reid should be in ahead of Kieran Westwood in the squad

Firstly I stated that Fantasy Football stats aren't gospel but they can give you an accurate enough guide to how well a player is playing over an extended period, as they record how he is contributing to his team, whether that be by time spent on the pitch, assists and goals etc.

Regardless of whether you want to judge him using this method, watching him playing or using the signs of the zodiac, Andy Reid is doing very nicely indeed.

Darren Gibson on the other hand is not, and I don't care if he's in the Man Utd or Grimsby squad, if he's not playing first team football, he's not ready to play international football. By Trappatoni including him in the squad he thinks he is.

It would be doing Gibson a disservice to ask play him in the next 2 matches given his would not be match fit and whatever his reasoning (loyalty, systems formation etc) this definitely falls into the 'little details' that Trappatoni keeps reminding us that are so vital and which could ultimately cost us qualification.

By the way, your point that asking for him to be put in ahead of Gibson would be like arguing that he should be in ahead of Kieran Westwood in the squad is laughable. Andy Reid HAS played centre midfield during his career, even for us against Germany at home, where, if I remember correctly he did very well. At the very least own up to that being a ridiculous comment.

[Stuttgart88]

I see Reid as being just as good in the middle as out wide, but Reid himself said recently that he doesn't see himself as central midfielder.

I'd have him in the squad any day of the week myself. Is he really any worse than Duffer or McGeady at tracking back?

[geysir]

It's kinda ironic that two vital players in the next games are Whelan and Andrews.
I would not have any hope should one of them get injured and was replaced by Gibson or Miller.

[paul_oshea]

It's kinda ironic that two vital players in the next games are Whelan and Andrews.
I would not have any hope should one of them get injured and was replaced by Gibson or what's his name.

Andy Reid?

[Noelys Guitar]

Reid switched from the left to central midfield for Sunderland after Jones got sent off on Saturday. And he dominated in a game of 10 against 11.

[osarusan]

Jicked your argument would hold some weight if our current midfield options, Whelan, Andrews, Gibson or Miller were particularly good at the roles set out for them.......they're not. In my opinion they're all relatively mediocre at what they do. In fact Andy Reid could do at least as good a job in that role if instructed to. (It would be a waste of his talent but he could do it.)

This, for me, is the main reason against the argument that Reid will disrupt the balance of the team. Keith Andrews does little but watch the game pass him by. Whelan does get involved, but Andrews produces nothing (and more to the point, fails to stifle anything). So if Reid were in his place, he could not do the job Andrews doesn't do, but he can actually pass the ball well too.

I keep thinking about this scenario - we draw 0-0 in Dublin, but concede early in Paris. With 15 mins to go, the French have retreated and we have a lot of the ball, and the territory up to about 40 yards from their goal (Now I don't think it is an impossible situation, one of the more likely scenarios tbh).
This is a situation where we need a player who can put deliveries into the box. And I think Reid can do that better than anybody else available to us at the moment.

I think that Trapattoni's tactics and squad selection (relatively successful though they have been) suggest that he can envisage no situation in which he wants a passer of the ball on the field. And I think that is a mistake.

[LFCSixty/Eighty]

Jicked you obviously have forgotten the night Ireland played Germany in October 2007 so I thought I'd remind you of a selection of some of the comments people from Foot.ie posted in review of the match...

Let me state again just in case you weren't listening, that Andy Reid played in centre midfield that night.....

Andy Reid was nothing short of brilliant tonight. Controlled the entire field of play, everything we had went through him. Why didn't he play against Slovakia again?

Like watching Liam Brady in his prime. Brilliant performance from Reid.

Reid 10 - absolutely unreal. he looked knackered by the end but he played the best game of any player i've seen for ireland since one Roy Keane left town.

Although Reid was good I think the only reason he seemed so earth shattering is that we have had a lack of a good midfielder for so long.

reids passing was great tonite but it always is.

Anyway, there were 3 or 4 passes in a row from Reid out to the right wing that were simply amazing.

reid was excellent tonight. he ran himself ragged which was clear when they showed a close up of him at the end of the match.

Andy Reid was excellent

Andy Reid was immense

Andy Reid was top class tonight really showed his passing ability.

Well Andy Reid should from now on be one of the first names on the teamsheet. He's the only player in midfield than can pass the ball and be creative with it. Hopefully get Duff back for the WC qualifiers.

Reid was exellent - his passing was top class

Reid was excellent

Reid carried the midfield going forward as we had two wingers who couldn't beat snow off a rope and a midfield partner who can't pass the ball longer than 5 yards.

Andy Reid was awesome, first touch brilliant and he lifts the head to see what is around him. Man of the match by a mile!

Reid aside, our midfield is full of hoofers and cloggers, our defence is not much better.......

Okay, maybe thats more than a 'selection' I got a bit carried away seeing all the positive comments that had been left for his performance.

Anyway, I hope that clarifies it for you that he CAN play centre midfield

[geysir]

Andy Reid?

Miller.

[paul_oshea]

Miller.

I know

[eaststand85]

Andy Reid's Dad was on Pat Kenny's radio show this morning. Thought he came across very well as he spoke of how patriotic Andy was and how disappointed he was not to be playing etc.

Edit: Sorry, should point out he was on talking about something else entirely (some scheme he's involved in to help residents of Fatima Mansions) and wasn't doing a Stephen Ireland's Dad on it, Kenny just felt obliged to ask him about his son and the ongoing issue of his omission from the Ireland squad.

[DeLorean]

Andy Reid by his own admission isn't a central midfield player

Reid himself said recently that he doesn't see himself as central midfielder

I hadn't heard this at all. It's a kind of strange thing for him to say. I knew he did his best work down the left for Forest alright, where he was outstanding by all accounts.

[Jicked]

Jicked you obviously have forgotten the night Ireland played Germany in October 2007 so I thought I'd remind you of a selection of some of the comments people from Foot.ie posted in review of the match...

Let me state again just in case you weren't listening, that Andy Reid played in centre midfield that night.....

That's great, but again you've missed my point (also, that game was a effectively a friendly, played over two years ago). Even if you do want to put Andy Reid in the centre midfield spot in this current Irish side, he would play in a very different way to how Gisbon/Andrews/Whelan do now. We don't look to them for creativity, we look for one to be a screen in front of the defence shadowing whoever has the ball, the other one drops back and almost plays as a centre half. Is Andy Reid really that type of player?

No, he's clearly not (interestingly that game against Germany was played out like a friendly, and a few of those comments note how knackered Reid was after it, would he be able to harry and hustle for 90 mins closing down everything). Yes he's very good with the ball at his feet, and that is a great attribute to have. However we've tried using that attribute of his in the past and went through a terrible run of form. Now we're sacrificing that instead opting for two defensive central midfield players and putting all our offence in giving the ball out wide and hoping Duff/McGeady/Hunt/Lawrence can hassle defences enough to create one or two chances a game for the front two.

And it works.

I'd be all for Andy Reid in to centre mid or out wide if he could play either role (the dogged, defensive, all-action centre mid or the up-and-down the line winger, constantly looking to beat men and get up to support the front two). He doesn't play either role. So we then have the choice of playing him anyway and changing the system (and go back to the type of football we played in the previous 6 years) or play Andy Reid anyway in the current system, and watch him spray beautiful balls from deep for 90 minutes to a very isolated front two getting no offensive support from the two centre mids doing their effective job by holding their positions defensively and keeping our shape.