OPINION/Mark Lawrenson: I hate describing tonight as a "must win" game - for me that description should only apply to the last game of the season when you need to win to avoid relegation.
However, looking at the state of our group, in light of our result in Moscow, not to mention all the "peripherals" surrounding the game, it's just imperative that Ireland win tonight. The dreaded "must win" game, then.
If Mick McCarthy thinks he's getting grief now, imagine what he'd get if the team was to draw or lose against the Swiss? We don't play again until next March so you don't want to be sitting for five months festering on one point, or none, from two games.
Will McCarthy still be here in five months? Will tonight be his last game? Well, I know he was quite close to being offered the Sunderland job but, for different reasons, that offer never manifested itself, but I honestly believe that if another Premiership job became available he would take it. After years of plain sailing, in terms of no outside events taking over from the football, it's all changed now and for that reason I think he will go if the right offer comes along.
You cannot be too choosy, you can't turn a job down in November thinking you might be offered another one in January. There are only 20 Premiership jobs, realistically Mick will only have a chance with half of them.
His statement that he will leave in 2004 was, I think, basically clearing the ground for his departure. I know he says that this wasn't news, that he'd said it before, but the fact is, he said it again. I can understand why he's thinking that way, but I can't understand why he's saying it. It doesn't really help; if anything, it probably puts a little bit more pressure on him now than he needs.
For a section of the media the whole Roy Keane thing is still a massive issue and they will debate it at every available opportunity, but Mick has added fuel to the fire by saying he's leaving in 2004. He's just given the media an excuse to talk about who's going to take over - and the fact that whoever takes over will play Roy Keane, all that kind of thing. And Keane's name as manager will probably be thrown into the frame, too. It will never end.
As for the game, we won't know the team until an hour before the game but the indications are that McCarthy will stick with Gary Breen and Kenny Cunningham in the centre of defence. I understand his loyalty to his players but are you going to play someone, Breen, who's been in and out of the team at West Ham, who are conceding goals, or a guy who has burst on to the scene at Manchester United, John O'Shea, who looks a player? I'm sure Breen thinks I have something against him, I'm always pointing to the fact that, with him there's a mistake in every game. Alright, he's done well for Ireland, had a good World Cup, but the other fella's a better player, end of story. It goes bright in the morning, dark at night, John O'Shea is a better player than Gary Breen, simple as that.
O'Shea's ready, no doubt. He's done really, really well this season. His temperament is good, he looks stronger every time I see him and he's growing in confidence - and he looks more than capable of playing at this level. His ability on the ball is excellent - we'll probably have lots of the ball tonight and O'Shea's passing from back to front is top quality.
In Jason McAteer's absence we're waiting to see who'll fill in on the right side of midfield. There are a few options but Mick has been hinting that Lee Carsley might come in. We know what we'll get from Carsley, he's hard working and industrious, he'll get up and down the right-hand side, but he's not going to get past people and he's not going to be crossing balls in all day. He's basically a central midfield player playing on the right.
"It's a worry because if Carsley and Kevin Kilbane play, and Kilbane has one of those days, we won't really have a lot going forward from midfield to help the front two. If both play that would give us players right across midfield who are much of a muchness, to be honest.
Playing Carsley on the right wouldn't concern me as much if Damien Duff was playing on the left - that's where I would play him, with Clinton Morrison up front. The other three in midfield and the back four are more than good enough to contain the Swiss. Morrison and Robbie Keane both look lively at the moment, if you have Duff cutting in from the left you have to believe that we would create plenty of chances. That's almost like 4-3-3, although Duff understands the game enough to make it 4-4-2 when needs be.
Generally at home we've always used an attacking formation and it's worked for us. I just hope we don't go into the game with a compromise team as a result of the defeat by Russia - I'm of the opinion that that result was a one-off, a poor performance, a bad day at the office, as I said at the time. Time to forget it and move on.
In all our home games we've had a real go at teams, we've used proper wide players, opened up defences, created goals from different areas of the pitch. We just cannot afford to go in against the Swiss with a compromise team, sticking an extra, almost defensive, midfield player in there. I don't think we need it and, anyway, it sends out the wrong signals to the team - i.e. we need to win, but be cautious.
I think we'll do it, though. We have learnt over the years that when we really have a go at teams a lot of them cave in - I think the Swiss could fall into that category. Yes, they're a decent side, but they're not one of Europe's strong nations. It might be a bit scruffy but after a defeat like that in Moscow you'd take a scruffy win. Happily.
