Originally Posted by
DeLorean
I thought he excelled in the win against Germany as well, albeit a different kind of performance. I said I'd answer this here because I'm about to ramble on a bit and it's all pretty specific to the McCarthy/Whelan conundrum, if it can be called that.
I got a text off a buddy at home during half time in the Sweden game giving out about how poor McCarthy had been. It was at complete odds with what I had thought myself. I felt he was an integral part of the tempo we set with his energetic pressing. We had dominated the Swedes by giving them no time on the ball and I thought he probably did more than anybody in this regard. It probably wouldn't show in his tackle, interception, possession or passing stats but I felt he was playing very well.
I haven't watched the game back yet and maybe I was totally deluded but I couldn't really believe the criticism he seemed to be getting back home. That said, his second half performance was pretty subdued, possibly as a result of picking up a yellow card late in the first half. He also had a moment very similar to what he was eventually punished for against Belgium, as he tried to win a tackle when shielding the opposing player away from the danger area should have been the routine thing to do.
There's no defending his second half performance against Belgium really, it was pretty awful unfortunately.
Whelan did play well against Sweden, but I think he's getting credit for stuff now that he never used before. Have we become so acceptant of his limitations that once his performs his own (perhaps specialised but I would say undemanding) role in the side with a degree of efficiency then that is enough? Don't get me wrong, I know Whelan has taken plenty of stick himself, nobody's taken more, but I think the job that McCarthy is expected to carry out is a far more challenging one.
Whelan has two basic jobs, sit in front and protect the back four and organise what's around him. The problem is that I think Whelan himself needs protecting because he doesn't have the legs to deal with pacy attacks. He's only capable of patrolling a fairly small area, he doesn't really press well outside of this little section and he doesn't want the ball. McCarthy is found wanting when it comes to the latter also but is capable of covering far more ground, presses very well, is normally just as clued in tactically and has a better all round physical presence. Crucially, I don't think McCarthy needs protecting to the same degree Whelan does so in a sense it's like a waste of a player having them both.
The diamond in the Sweden game confused me I must say. Obviously Whelan was at the foot of it and Hoolahan was at the peak. Hendrick played the left side of it to perfection, covering Brady and attacking with purpose. I couldn't really understand what was going on with the right hand side of it though as McCarthy appeared to do a lot, if not most, of his work centrally. Was he supposed to be covering Coleman in the same way Hendrick covered Brady? Or was this Walters' job, as you couldn't really say we had two up top? Maybe McClean's introduction for Walters confused things but whatever was supposed to be happening didn't anyway in the second half, and we ended up making Marcus Olsson look like Roberto Carlos.
Bookmarks