Guest samowl Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Fletcher substitution was a master stroke. He was Leeds best defender. Winnall should have been the man for me. Reach is awful choose where CC plays him. And as for Sasso OMG. Loovens must be on tablets playing alongside him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando_Trustful Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 CC is going to ruin Winnall. A player bang in form, scores his first goal and not can't get a look in. I bet he wishes he never joined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsbornowl Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 abdi & rhodes were upto much anyhow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnssweetshop Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 (edited) As Tinkerbell said in another thread. Carlos isn't looking like the man who can do this. These haven't been one off substitution WTF's, They have been happening all season..... all season. The games we SHOULD have won, are becoming an embarrassment. A substitution is supposed to shake up the opposition, the team are supposed to be aware of it, and also alter their structure for what should be the better. How many times have we seen these decisions by him, and the team look round and think WTF. He's too cautious, and negative with his substitutions. You cannot do that in this division, or you are going to finally come a cropper And we have the past two games. Edited February 25, 2017 by quinnssweetshop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nevthelodgemoorowl Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Only change I am baffled by is taking Nando off spot duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 36 minutes ago, S36 OWL said: We needed some pace and power up front, yet Carlos brings on Fletch instead of Winnall. He takes off Abdi who was our best player in the first half . Baffling decisions . totally bizarre. I thought Abdi was anonymous first half. Shows how people see games differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiamK2292 Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 No attacking intent with the subs made, all like for like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Past Member Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 56 minutes ago, Daavies; said: Feel for Rhodes. Misses the penalty then gets brought off. His confidence must be at an all time low. Should never have brought of Rhodes, after the pen miss. Would have been desperate to make amends. Poor decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Centre mid off - centre mid on Striker off - striker on What's changed. Very little. Same system , same tactics, same formation. It's all the same, only the names that change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagmeister Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Substitutions are mere symptoms. Our average/ poor performance problems run deeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holmowl Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said: Centre mid off - centre mid on Striker off - striker on What's changed. Very little. Same system , same tactics, same formation. It's all the same, only the names that change. Correct. Bannan was no better or worse than Abdi, and Fletch no better than Rhodes. We were toothless all 90 minutes. The substitution had to be FF left and Fletch or Winnall to give Rhodes a partner. Hopeless today Carlos. You bought 10m pounds worth of striker and you are flushing it down the bog the way you are using him. Edited February 25, 2017 by Holmowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beholder Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Owl_in_Oz said: We were completely dominating and obviously in need of a goal. CC then takes off Rhodes and Abdi and then we lose control of the game and don't even look like scoring. And Winnall was arguably MotM vs Birmingham and now can't get a game. Why not bring him on? I just can't work it out. And I bet the players can't either. Totally baffling. Should have brought Winnall and Macca on for Wallace and Reach. Bannan and Fletcher made us worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanningtonowl Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said: Centre mid off - centre mid on Striker off - striker on What's changed. Very little. Same system , same tactics, same formation. It's all the same, only the names that change. Ticks Carlos' box. Bannan back on. Fletcher a big wage signing on so keeps Chansiri off his back...oh wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shawie99 Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 8 minutes ago, Dagmeister said: Substitutions are mere symptoms. Our average/ poor performance problems run deeper. Bang on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Tom Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, alanharper said: Rhodes wasn't having a good game, but I'd have kept him on, he's proven to have the ability to score if that one chance drops to him. Whereas Fletcher has never looked like scoring, ever. Should have had Winnall on for Wallace, FF to the left and McManaman to the right. That would've been my preference, dropping FF back into att mid would've meant we got to shove an *additional* striker on, not just swap like for like up front. We needed numbers going forward, not flick-ons - if there's nobody behind Fletch to pick them up, it's pointless; he needs to play as the deeper of two strikers if he's coming on late in a game where we're pushing against a physical but not overly quick defence. I get the role CC was hoping Fletch could play, but it's only half the puzzle - he needed a partner playing off him. If you're only gonna bring on one striker and take one off, Winnall would've been far more effective around the edge of the box, which is as far forward as we ever really got in last 20min. Edited February 25, 2017 by Mr. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19owl08 Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Fox should have stayed on, it should have been Reach making way for McManaman. I would have brought Bannan on & Winnall. But it would have been Abdi & Wallace coming off. Abdi played well but looked to be tiring. I would then have gone 433... Have FF & Winnall chasing their defence & running the lines leaving Rhodes in the middle. McManaman & Bannan in midfield able to make bursts forward, supported by Hunt & Fox supplying the crosses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SallyCinnamon Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 Second game in a row his subs have cost us getting back into the game in my eyes. Rhodes had a point to prove after missing the pen, he should have stayed on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgmetcalf Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 It's all a conspiracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robdylan Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 5 hours ago, Owl_in_Oz said: We were completely dominating and obviously in need of a goal. CC then takes off Rhodes and Abdi and then we lose control of the game and don't even look like scoring. And Winnall was arguably MotM vs Birmingham and now can't get a game. Why not bring him on? I just can't work it out. And I bet the players can't either. I love Carlos, but what the hell is happening? Seriously? Is there something happening behind the scenes that we don't know about? His tactics, formations and substitutions, have baffled me for a long time now. Apparently, he's had books published regarding tactics etc. Yet look what's happening. I went to the Brentford game, and I couldn't believe that he didn't bring McManaman on at half time. And when he did bring him on, he played him on the left instead of on the right. There were spells in that second half where McManaman and Fernando were both on the left, Winnall looked like a central midfielder playing in the middle, and Wallace was stood next to him, leaving Palmer with nobody to pass to. There was no shape, nothing. Why on earth has he not persevered with Rhodes and Winnall as a partnership? They should be starting every week. McManaman should be given a run out on the right wing, where he can whip balls in at pace, for TWO forwards to attack. If he wants to persist with Wallace, he could play him on the left. Alternatively, he can play Fernando on the left, or even try him on the right. He has many options to choose from. Yet against Brentford, he played Bannan there. Why? If he starts Rhodes and Fernando up front against Norwich, with Wallace on the right, I'll lose it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RocketOwl Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 5 hours ago, alanharper said: Rhodes wasn't having a good game, but I'd have kept him on, he's proven to have the ability to score if that one chance drops to him. Whereas Fletcher has never looked like scoring, ever. Should have had Winnall on for Wallace, FF to the left and McManaman to the right. He did have that one chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now