The little risk that may have huge payback

MARTIN SKRTEL was unmoved. After Slovakia’s visit to Dublin in September, the defender declared Ireland “predictable”. And Estonian midfielder Martin Vunk echoed those sentiments yesterday. Having studied Ireland’s matches, he revealed the main threat they deciphered was wingers crossing.

Of course, the offset of all that is neither Skrtel nor any of his more creative team-mates managed to score in Dublin. And, tonight, Estonia will be hoping to become only the second team to breach Ireland’s backline in 10 matches.

That apparent conflict between mean defence and moderate attack, however, has occasionally threatened to consume Ireland’s campaign. Indeed, it’s given rise to the most fractious tactical debate in this country since Eamon Dunphy threw a pen across an RTÉ studio 21 years ago.

For some, Trapattoni is only doing what he must with a limited pool of players that haven’t qualified for anything in a decade. For others, it’s unnecessarily austere football at a time when the international game has never been more open. Whatever the merit of either argument, Trapattoni certainly seems to be proving Johan Cruyff’s dictum that Italians don’t actually beat you... but you can lose to them.

There are two levels of irony to this escalating debate.

The first is that there is a much deeper contradiction within Trapattoni’s entire Irish set-up than there is between the two sides of the debate. The second is that such a major argument can probably be solved with a few minor tweaks rather than the sea change some want.

Looking at the manager’s philosophy first, Trapattoni has often inferred — and even outright declared — the reason he plays such a cautious, rigid system is because he does not trust the technique of the Irish players enough to keep possession. As such, the formation is designed to protect first and put as many men behind the ball as possible at all times.

But this almost creates a paradox. Ireland’s positions are so fixed they actually ensure the team will lose possession anyway — regardless of technique. Look at it this way. Keeping possession is all about creating triangles and alternative angles — evading interception.

IRELAND’S full-backs, however, are generally prohibited from overlapping for fear of a quick break. The two midfielders rarely stray from strict central positions. Out wide, the wingers almost appear as if they are moving on set tracks. And, up front, Trapattoni has worked hard to ensure his strikers work in tight tandem.

In that context, it’s little wonder that opposition teams say Ireland are predictable. No-one breaks position to offer a different option. Other than Damien Duff’s occasional forays inside, Ireland’s path of passing is generally easy to identify. As such, the entire attacking approach is easily spotted and easier to prepare for. The likes of Keith Andrews will look limited because his passing options are.

It’s even less of a surprise that the majority of Ireland’s goals under Trapattoni have come through long punts, set-pieces and — as Estonian midfielder Vunk inferred — the occasional “undefendable cross”.

But that’s also why Simon Cox was such a revelation in his last few games. Almost as mobile as Robbie Keane was in 2002, the West Brom forward was willing to drop back and offer an alternative option. Occasionally playing as an attacking midfielder, he allowed Ireland to seamlessly switch from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 during games and thereby confused defences much more. It was also notable that, in the first 10 minutes of the second half against Armenia, that movement (as well as, it must be admitted, the opposition’s red card) allowed Andrews to look more dynamic.

That in itself illustrates Trapattoni does not need to hugely deviate from that admirable defence. Nor does he need the elevated “unpredictability of a Platini or Messi” he often cites. He just needs to allow his players a touch more freedom of movement. Even a 5% concession could radically alter the perception of the team — and punish opposition defences much more readily. Indeed, a do-or-die occasion like a play-off might even demand it. Against an Estonian side that have been beaten four times in this campaign and have the worst defence of any team that finished in the top two of their group (14 goals conceded in 10 games), why take the chance of sitting back rather than taking your game up the tiniest of notches? It could, after all, go a lot further than settling a debate.