Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Felt monk's substitutes were poor tonight... needed forestieri on pitch to take the pressure of our defence... monk's doing a great job though ..

  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far hes a very negative manager but I do think he'll do well for us. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can understand Nuhiu, can’t understand taking Bannan off

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were subs to grind out a 0-1.  Once we were pegged back, we were screwed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nut said:

So far hes a very negative manager but I do think he'll do well for us. 

I wouldn’t say that, he wants us to be solid, and we were for an hour, but then we stopped trying to play football

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never take Bannan off. 

  • Disagree 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he was always going to keep FF for the two upcoming home games.

His subs didn’t work but we were under the cosh for 20 mins beforehand, so he had to change it. 
I’m not yet convinced about Monk...I thought his tactics at Hull were awful...but tonight I blame the players who again showed a soft centre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nut said:

So far hes a very negative manager but I do think he'll do well for us. 

Being solid and difficult to break down away from home isn't negative. You could maybe argue the decision to not put Forestieri on was 'negative' but the overall performance was far from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We took off the 2 most creative players on the night  !.

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking off a midfielder for a striker is hardly negative.

 

 

having said that I would have taken Reach (nondescript) or Hutch (tiring and booked) off before Bannan. 

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, sage owl said:

We took off the 2 most creative players on the night  !.

 

because they are creative players and needed for other matches...

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, slinger208b said:

 

because they are creative players and needed for other matches...

 

Which point do you disagree with @Lawrie’s Left Peg?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, slinger208b said:

 

Which point do you disagree with @Lawrie’s Left Peg?


That we took them off as they’re needed for other matches. Could accept this if the game was won (3 up) but we needed to win this match. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have taken Reach off for Murphy, not Harris , and done a straight swap with Fletch off for Dave . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:


That we took them off as they’re needed for other matches. Could accept this if the game was won (3 up) but we needed to win this match. 

 

We need to gain points from matches over the course of a season, I don't see what's special about this match.

 

The manager must make gambles, we played out 2/3 of the match and he tried to shore it up. Win some, lose some.

 

I believe he made a call to aid recovery of players to increase availability in future matches...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, slinger208b said:

 

We need to gain points from matches over the course of a season, I don't see what's special about this match.

 

The manager must make gambles, we played out 2/3 of the match and he tried to shore it up. Win some, lose some.

 

I believe he made a call to aid recovery of players to increase availability in future matches...


Then why not take off Fletcher or Hutch who have ongoing fitness issues, or Luongo who is apparently carrying a knock, or Borner who’s played the most minutes this season or Palmer who played twice in the international break. Rather than Bannan or Harris who have good injury records? 
 

Not trying to be argumentative Slinger but I’m really struggling to understand your point that Bannan and Harris should have been substituted tonight because they are creative players who we might need more in other matches this season ....

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:


Then why not take off Fletcher or Hutch who have ongoing fitness issues, or Luongo who is apparently carrying a knock, or Borner who’s played the most minutes this season or Palmer who played twice in the international break. Rather than Bannan or Harris who have good injury records? 
 

Not trying to be argumentative Slinger but I’m really struggling to understand your point that Bannan and Harris should have been substituted tonight because they are creative players who we might need more in other matches this season ....

 

I was alluding to fitness, not necessarily sustaining injuries.

 

Maybe the selections were based on players whose absences are difficult to cover so help with their availability and energy for other matches.

 

I'm sure the manager has a good idea of who he feels can be rotated within positions...

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, slinger208b said:

 

I was alluding to fitness, not necessarily sustaining injuries.

 

Maybe the selections were based on players whose absences are difficult to cover so help with their availability and energy for other matches.

 

I'm sure the manager has a good idea of who he feels can be rotated within positions...

 

Why the confused face @Lawrie’s Left Peg?

 

Spelled out;

 

Maybe players are being rested as they can't be replaced...

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Took off 2 of our better players and replaced them with 2 of our poorer ones.....don’t be surprised if that has a negative impact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...