James McCarthy M Celtic b.1990

**jbyrne** · 08/02/2011, 3:25 PM

Originally Posted by an_ceannaire

Really..........?? Andorra......Really............?

Paul Green over JMc.........Really.....??!!

green turned up to the may friendlies, played well and got in the team. mccarthy didnt so didnt.

i think the last time he was available for a friendly was this time last year when he played against brazil. he may have been available for Argentina but with it being so close to a competitive match he was never going to get a look in after not being available in may.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 3:27 PM

Originally Posted by SkStu

The merit argument (if that is what you are referring to) is valid, in fact it is the number one argument in relation to McCarthy in my opinion. On ability he deserves to be there ahead of any other centre mid in the squad.

In the bigger picture however it seems that what used to be the Irish way of fast-tracking (like MickMac did, not Stan) the major Irish talents (Duff, Keane etc etc) seems to have been forgotten or left behind by this management team. The conservatism and delay in getting new talent into the squad is just tiring and disappointing to me.

Yes Fasttracking on ability not on the lets give him a cap just for the sake of it. Thats what your original point above sounded like.

I said in a previous post it takes a strong and brave manager to show the confidence in youth, if they are capable, like Mick did with keane, duff etc. They will adapt quick enough.

**tricky_colour** · 08/02/2011, 3:32 PM

Originally Posted by an_ceannaire

are these celtic nations cup games "competetive" or friendly

I think they come under the category 'big p1ss-up"

**Supreme feet** · 08/02/2011, 3:35 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Yes Fasttracking on ability not on the lets give him a cap just for the sake of it. Thats what your original point above sounded like.

I said in a previous post it takes a strong and brave manager to show the confidence in youth, if they are capable, like Mick did with keane, duff etc. They will adapt quick enough.

After we failed to qualify for Euro 2000, Mick was criticized in many sections of the press - particularly the Indo - for not fast tracking Stephen McPhail, Jason Gavin, Alan Mahon, Michael Reddy and Barry Quinn. He was slated for keeping faith in Steve Staunton, Matt Holland, Gary Breen and Lee Carsley. Look how that one turned out.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 3:35 PM

or Big p!ss-off depending on who you are.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 3:36 PM

Originally Posted by Supreme feet

After we failed to qualify for Euro 2000, Mick was criticized in many sections of the press - particularly the Indo - for not fast tracking Stephen McPhail, Jason Gavin, Alan Mahon, Michael Reddy and Barry Quinn. He was slated for keeping faith in Matt Holland, Gary Breen and Lee Carsley. Look how that one turned out.

Ya we qualified for the next World cup, 2 years later.

**Supreme feet** · 08/02/2011, 3:40 PM

Indeed. Without any of the young players touted by the press in 1999, bar Dunne. Duff and Keane were already established.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 3:54 PM

Originally Posted by Supreme feet

Indeed. Without any of the young players touted by the press in 1999, bar Dunne. Duff and Keane were already established.

In fairness we had missed out on 2 previous qualifications by the skin of our teeth, i think at that stage we were due one, and the experience stood to all involved. Granted we did come through a very difficult campaign. Anyway thats being very selective to be honest.

**Supreme feet** · 08/02/2011, 3:59 PM

Point was, Mick's eventual success was built on experienced players rather than youth. He resisted wholesale changes in that last campaign and kept faith with Holland, Kinsella, Breen and Staunton, who were quite unpopular with journalists and (some) fans, when there was a clamour for young blood. He was rewarded with good performances from the experienced players that he was faithful to.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 4:04 PM

Originally Posted by Supreme feet

Point was, Mick's eventual success was built on experienced players rather than youth. He resisted wholesale changes in that last campaign and kept faith with Holland, Kinsella, Breen and Staunton, who were quite unpopular with journalists and (some) fans, when there was a clamour for young blood. He was rewarded with good performances from the experienced players that he was faithful to.

Im aware of your point, but there is never a way of knowing looking back, whether or not some players not being there, it was so tight, might have actually helped or those who could have been called up could have got a point either way. LIke last campaign with Kilbane he definitely cost us points against bulgaria home and away. Had he not played, for example we might have topped the group. If he is replaced now then its proof that Trap sees the same but has left it too late - yes jigging it around we could have played without kilbane.

My point being is its hard to say that it wasn't the experience of the other players already there along with the emergence of finnan(given/keane/keane/duff/kilbane/finnan etc) and the likes that got us there or more that holland/stuanton/kinsella got us there. Kinsella was only half in half out really when keane and holland were both available. By 2002 a lot of these players had more than 1 qualifying campaign under their belts, had the experience of losing out, being so close, jelled together as a team etc.

**Charlie Darwin** · 08/02/2011, 4:09 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Im aware of your point, but there is never a way of knowing looking back, whether or not some players not being there, it was so tight, might have actually helped or those who could have been called up could have got a point either way. LIke last campaign with Kilbane he definitely cost us points against bulgaria home and away. Had he not played, for example we might have topped the group. If he is replaced now then its proof that Trap sees the same but has left it too late - yes jigging it around we could have played without kilbane.

O'Shea cost us points in both Italy games. St. Ledger cost us a clean sheet at home against France. Overall, we were very good defensively the last campaign, particularly given the amount of time we spent without the ball.

**Supreme feet** · 08/02/2011, 4:12 PM

By 2002 a lot of these players had more than 1 qualifying campaign under their belts, had the experience of losing out, being so close, jelled together as a team etc.

Which goes to show that continuity is all-important in a competitive international team.

Relating that principle to the present day, and the concerns in this thread, we do need to bring in the young lads, definitely, as many of them play in positions where we're deficient at the moment. But it has to be gradual, and fans need to be patient. After the Macedonia home game, we have three friendlies. We saw Cunningham against Norway, we'll see Clark, Coleman and probably Wilson tonight, and we'll see McCarthy against Uruguay. Probably Meyler then in May. Have a pint and relax, everyone.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 4:13 PM

Oshea got us a chance by getting an italian sent off. so he is level on that.
St ledger got us a couple of goals, and he got us 2 - 1 up against italy at home

The point is that you cant necessarily say that those individual players back then got us there when we had already just missed out on 2 previous occasions.

Kilbane though certainly cost us more overall CD.

**paul_oshea** · 08/02/2011, 4:17 PM

Originally Posted by Supreme feet

Which goes to show that continuity is all-important in a competitive international team.

Yes continuity not necessarily your original point sticking with the old and trusted. Its not like for like, carsley, holland, kinsale were all decent stable players, we would gladly have them involved now when we look at the alternatives. But now we are seriouslly deficient in key areas and there ARE alternatives. Continuity is great, you can still have continuity by making changes. Continuity isn't all encompassing but its not narrowly defined to picking the same 11 in the same formation game after game. If we have better players, better alternatives then bringing these players in, is showing continuity, continuity for change when its required.

**Supreme feet** · 08/02/2011, 4:25 PM

In my opinion, Green is the only player in the current squad who urgently needs dropping and international banishment. Whelan still has something to offer in the future if he gets his club situation sorted out, as does Andrews and possibly Gibson. McCarthy has been very unlucky with the timing of his injuries. When I heard that he limped off against Blackburn, I feared the worst, and glumly anticipated the hysteria that would unfold on here. Trap is giving a shot to two uncapped lads tonight, and I'm happy enough with that.

**Charlie Darwin** · 08/02/2011, 4:47 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Oshea got us a chance by getting an italian sent off. so he is level on that.
St ledger got us a couple of goals, and he got us 2 - 1 up against italy at home

The point is that you cant necessarily say that those individual players back then got us there when we had already just missed out on 2 previous occasions.

Kilbane though certainly cost us more overall CD.

I'm not saying anybody "cost us more" - just that each of the defenders' contributions outweigh the errors they made. We were forced to defend for large parts of every game in the last campaign and it's inevitable that mistakes will be made. I wouldn't blame Kilbane for his own goal, either - it was a great cross and he was forced to make some sort of intervention, and it only came about because Bulgaria were being allowed put constant pressure on the defence.

**rebelmusic** · 08/02/2011, 4:49 PM

If you read back you'll notice i posted about McCarthy getting a knock in Wigan's last match. It really did look painful and the second i saw it i knew he was gone for tonight. And because of that, i'm paying no attention to all the hysteria.

Wigan have been back on form from the day James came back. I don't think you can really blame them for not wanting to release him and he's young and impressionable.

Martinez should just pick up the phone, explain the situation to Trap and that be the end of it. From Trap's demeanour, he doesn't seem too ****ed off which suggests he understands the situation. It's only a fecking friendly and we have 2 debuts. James probably wouldn't have started anyway!

**Noelys Guitar** · 08/02/2011, 5:20 PM

Originally Posted by rebelmusic

If you read back you'll notice i posted about McCarthy getting a knock in Wigan's last match. It really did look painful and the second i saw it i knew he was gone for tonight. And because of that, i'm paying no attention to all the hysteria.

Wigan have been back on form from the day James came back. I don't think you can really blame them for not wanting to release him and he's young and impressionable.

Martinez should just pick up the phone, explain the situation to Trap and that be the end of it. From Trap's demeanour, he doesn't seem too ****ed off which suggests he understands the situation. It's only a fecking friendly and we have 2 debuts. James probably wouldn't have started anyway!

Your last sentence sums it up and I believe is at the heart of the problem. I agree with you that Trap was not going to start McCarthy tonight or possibly even play him (He showed us that already by leaving him out of the original 29)and you don't seem to have a problem with that which is fair enough. I do have a problem with it. McCarthy has already played for us against Brazil (and acquited himself well). Proved himself an outstanding player in the SPL. Showed some real promise for Wigan last season. And has been outstanding for Wigan in his last two games. Whelan, Green and Gibson have shown little or nothing in recent times for club or country.

**EalingGreen** · 08/02/2011, 5:22 PM

Originally Posted by Supreme feet

Which goes to show that continuity is all-important in a competitive international team.

Do not be deceived by the value of continuity for its own sake. (Otherwise you risk persisting with players or managers even after it becomes evident that they are not up to the mark)

Continuity is not an end in itself imo, rather it is a means to an end. In the context of team selection, continuity allows players to acquire experience of the manager's methods and playing instructions etc, and put them into practice in competitive games. (Remember, with international teams only playing around 8 games per year, one season's experience in club football is roughly equivalent to five seasons with the international team, without the disruptive breaks in between).

In the context of this present thread, the need for continuity of selection can eventually lead to a paradox. For a new international manager coming in may decide that his young players need all the international experience they can get, so that he "fast-tracks" them into the national team. However, 4 or 5 years later, he will often be reluctant to select the next generation of young prospects, since he does not want to dispense with their predecessors. I'm open to correction, but wasn't that the case with Mick McCarthy?

I do know that Billy Bingham has that problem with NI during the 80's. From the late 70's, he gave caps to some (admittedly exceptional) youngsters, who gained enough valuable experience together to qualify for the 1982 World Cup, ahead of more obviously talented opponents. That team went on to reach their peak around 1983/4 (imo), when they beat the mighty W.Germany home and away in the European Qualifiers.

Anyhow, after those Euro Qualifiers, Bingham had a difficult choice. The likes of Jennings, Armstrong and McIlroy were now past their best and should be being replaced, but had bags of invaluable experience. Whereas their likely replacements were too callow to be thrown in en masse. In the end, Bingham stuck with the Old Guard, who still had enough left in the tank to get us to Mexico, which probably justified his call.

Unfortunately, however, they ran out of gas by the time they got there, performing only moderately. Worse, following the subsequent clear-out, he was forced to select far more inexperienced youngsters in his team than he would normally like, and they never quite reached former heights.

In the context of Trappatoni, I suspect his present conservatism of selection is informed by the fact that he'll likely be leaving after 2012. Therefore some other bugger can worry about integrating youngsters like McCarthy into the team, in order to qualify for Brazil 2014 etc.

**Stuttgart88** · 08/02/2011, 5:29 PM

The whole thing is a man-management & communications / PR fiasco. Trap, his advisors and the FAI have to share the blame. The Irish press likes nothing more than to undermine the team and its chances. The FAI should be aware of this and give the press no opportunity whatsoever. Instead they seem blissfully ignorant of the sensitivities of this issue and its potential to create instability and they have given the press and the rumour mongers carte blanche to stir things up.

I honestly think that if the FAI was in any way concerned McCarthy could jump ship they would have been cynical enough to have him capped properly by now, notwithstanding Liam Brady's ignorance of the rules in Febraury 2010.