McCarthy: An appraisal of the international football manager and his tactics

Thought it might be enlightening to list some comments about McCarthy when he was twice manager of Ireland.

Ireland during the 2002 World Cup were described like this: "...overall very combative and excellent in the air, good team spirit, discipline and a compact and well-organised unit".

Weakness were: "They encountered problems when forced to dictate the tempo of the game; little variation when attacking; physically-draining game plan". Only one tactical change was identified but it was successful. (From a FIFA report).

Despite the plaudits for Jack Charlton, McCarthy has been hailed as the best manager Ireland has had. This, despite inheriting an ageing team that had to be dismantled and re-developed. He had a public spat with Roy Keane which, even if he could have dealt with it differently, at least showed that he feared no-one - or their reputation.

McCarthy also significantly developed Ireland’s style of football. While he was not averse to using a Niall Quinn or a Tony Cascarino-type figure as a target man when necessary, he also ensured Ireland were a team capable of playing attractive, attacking, passing football, even against some of the best sides in the world. In the 2002 World Cup, Ireland had 58% possession in comparison to Germany’s 42% over the duration of the 90 minutes. Against Spain in the last-16, they had 55% of the ball. Ireland have not played better football arguably before or since.

He had a second spell as Ireland's manager replacing Martin O'Neill. This was one appraisal: 'Ireland had a more identifiable tactical approach and more of a willingness to have a go than we had seen towards the end of O’Neill’s reign.

Even allowing for the fact that Ireland had home advantage and something tangible to play for, the marked difference in statistics between two meetings with Age Hareide’s Danish side a year apart were telling. The end result might have been the same but the difference in mood among the players and the public when you know a team is trying to win rather than escape with a draw should not be underestimated.'

His football philosophy at the time was summed up by one critic as: " McCarthy apparently wants to get through the game for as long as he can at 0-0 and the thinking is that it simplifies the task - score one goal and go for it for a shorter period where it's less likely that they'll punish you for opening up. But it's also less likely you'll score with less time. The fundamental principle though is to make sure you only have one goal to score. To do that, you have to make sure they don't score. To do that, you have to play the guys you can trust to do that dog work."

Before a match against the Swiss in 2019, McCarthy said, "(I) no apology for the aggressive style that the Republic of Ireland will employ in tonight's Euro 2020 qualifier with Switzerland.....if it's good enough for Manchester City and Liverpool, it will be good enough for (me)...(my) team will seek to press high and make life difficult for the visitors."

A smart and detailed appraisal, 100 views and not one response. You're wasted on here, Cyclops. They don't deserve you.

One major difference between his job with Ireland and his current post is the fact that on the international stage Ireland had to compete with national teams that were often far superior to his team in terms of ability and the resources they had (so it's no surprise that he adopted defensive approach).
With City he is competing on a more even level and such a parsimonious approach is not necessary.
'Orses for courses' perhaps.
Let's wait and see.

Like a lot of others I think, I misjudged Mick McCarthy's management record when he was appointed our manager and thought of him as another defensive, long ball, set piece orientated merchant. Articles like the one the OP refers to show that this is unfair. However, what I feel isn't unfair is that a case could be built for claiming that he has morphed into that sort of manager in recent years.

McCarthy's Ipswich sides seemed to me to be direct, physical and lacking in x factor and that was a constant criticism he attracted from their supporters while he was with that club. In his second spell with the Republic of Ireland, the side seemed to be built entirely around keeping things as tight at the back as possible (as set out by the "critic" in the OP and by TBG above.

Now at Cardiff, he has, in my opinion, tweaked things and, for now at least, it looks like for the better. Where Neil Harris and, to a lesser extent, Neil Warnock failed to get three centrebacks to work effectively, McCarthy is doing so at the moment and, in doing so, is creating an "extra man" for us further up the pitch. I used to think that a successfully applied three man defence could enable us to play with two forwards and three in central midfield, but, McCarthy has been more adventurous, by using what could be called two number tens that are ensuring that our striker isn't as isolated as he has been in the past. The downside of this is that it puts a very big burden on two central midfielders, but, after this was emphasised against Coventry, Pack and Vaulks coped well on Tuesday.

So, up to now, I'd say McCarthy has improved us at either end of the pitch, but our way of playing is still certainly a lot more like Warnockball than the sort of progressive, passing approach that many were saying would give us an "identity" and would lead to less boring football.

However, I think if he wanted to, Mick McCarthy could defend himself by saying that, rather than being another version of the two Neils, who both had the transfer windows to build something different if they were so minded, he has had to make the best of the hand he has been dealt at both Cardiff and Ireland ("orses for courses to be quote TBG) and it would also be reasonable in my book for him to claim that financial constraints always meant that he was restricted in what he could do at Ipswich.

Finally, it's worth saying that our manager has claimed on more than one occasion that what he has been left with at Cardiff is as good a s et of players as he has experienced at a new club in his managerial experience. I look at that and think that , if he is genuine in thinking that, does it mean that the transformation needed to make us a more enjoyable side to what we've have to put up with for nearly a decade would not be as drastic as many of us think it would be?

It seems to me that if Mick McCarthy steers us to a top half finish he'll be offered a longer contract and it is only then that the question as to whether he has changed his approach as a manager from his days with Millwall, Sunderland, Wolves and his first spell with Ireland will be answered. Anyone watching the Under 23s lately can see that there are a talented group of youngsters coming through who are comfortable playing a more possession based game than we've grown used to seeing from the first team and, although it it's, rightly, pointed out that our spending power will be lessened this summer, there is a positive in that better players should be available for cheaper fees in the Covid, no gates receipts era, so will Mick McCarthy be bold or decide to stick with what he's got?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colonel Cærdiffi

A smart and detailed appraisal, 100 views and not one response. You're wasted on here, Cyclops. They don't deserve you.

---

Obviously a man of little patience :hehe:

Very interesting stuff. I must admit that I had remembered Mick as a manager of Ireland and Ipswich whose favourite score was 0-0 or 1-0. But I think that he made the point with us of playing people in the best positions and playing to the players strengths. I think also that he has been amazed by the quality of the squad. I remember the Boxing Day game with Millwall (2019) which was the last game I saw live and commenting how we seemed to have no pattern to our play and just were running around a lot with no obvious objective in mind. This also appeared to be one of the faults with Harris's teams and tactics this season. It also meant players got tired. Mick has obviously simplified things a lot and I know it is a funny comparison but we have sort of ended up with a sort of Man City set-up (without the high skill level of course). We have solid 3 centre-backs with two defensive midfielders sitting (pack and Vaulks look like they have been reborn). This allow our wing-backs to get forward without too much worry. Up front although the 3 work hard, they do it all in the opponents half and are mainly concentrating on attacking and scoring goals. In other words, all the players are working in very specific areas of the pitch playing to their specific skills. They are looking less tired, playing passes quicker and seem to mostly know where their teammates are. Long may it continue and well done to Mick, Terry and the players.

Good stuff. An honesty with Mick, doesn't try to dress things up or make excuses, or see things that don't exist, like Warnock and Harris towards the end. I'm not sure that he's the answer, but fans can be more sympathetic and understanding if they're not being mugged off.

Think we're measuring different formats of the sport that appear very different in their style and make up , Mick only had specific tools at his disposal , so he could only apply a limited tactics and drew on team spirit and blunt tactics , he did very well proving he has man managing skills.