thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
The guy knows the club and they know him having played 60 odd times for them.Who would you think they would go for?
That’s on Robins (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SheafIsGod
- Start date
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
You can kind of see the logic in bringing O’Hare off to keep him fresh but it didn’t work out.
Another pace player like Tavares would have kept Swansea on their toes and put the risk of a breakaway goal on their minds.
Hindsight and all that
I watched the game in Belgium and thought it game over at 3-0 and from then gave the match background attention only. Couldn’t quite believe it when I looked at it 3-3, thought the beer a bit strong and I was seeing things.
Nipping over the border to France to watch the WC in a bar. That’ll be fun.
Another pace player like Tavares would have kept Swansea on their toes and put the risk of a breakaway goal on their minds.
Hindsight and all that
I watched the game in Belgium and thought it game over at 3-0 and from then gave the match background attention only. Couldn’t quite believe it when I looked at it 3-3, thought the beer a bit strong and I was seeing things.
Nipping over the border to France to watch the WC in a bar. That’ll be fun.
Sick Boy
Well-Known Member
I didn’t know the owner was the same as when MR played for them - wow.
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
To be fair, the headline is having a go at him.
If the headline was 'That's all on HarryH' then I'd be thinking someone is blaming me !
I agree that nobody is beyond criticism, just think the title is a bit harsh.
Legia Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Having slept on it am still immensely frustrated, but with a bit more perspective. Once in a while these type of games happen and at this moment in time its probably best to pigeon hole it as a bit of a freak occurrence. For all MR warrants some criticism for poor game management, it is still the case that this kind of instance has been the exception rather than the rule, and after all he managed the team set up well enough to get us 3 up in the first place.
Earlier in the season there have been games where we sat back and soaked up a lot of pressure, but the common denominator there was McFadzean who tends to be like a magnet to every cross in the box, but also is a dominant force and organiser. With him playing yesterday, and still sitting back like we did I'm sure we would have still won, and probably comfortably.
Given the turn around in the game and the absence of McFadzean though I don't think bringing on Kelly was the wrong call. Him replacing O'Hare was the wrong call however, and sent out a message that we weren't interested in scoring any more, which meant they could attack us freely knowing Gyokeres would be completely isolated. Kelly should instead of come on maybe for Allen who had started to tire badly, while this was probably a game for Tavares to replace O'Hare. We could have then countered them by going long with pace, which would have probably yielded realistic chances of us scoring a 4th, and even if not would have meant Swansea having to deploy an extra man at the back and giving them less options going forward.
Earlier in the season there have been games where we sat back and soaked up a lot of pressure, but the common denominator there was McFadzean who tends to be like a magnet to every cross in the box, but also is a dominant force and organiser. With him playing yesterday, and still sitting back like we did I'm sure we would have still won, and probably comfortably.
Given the turn around in the game and the absence of McFadzean though I don't think bringing on Kelly was the wrong call. Him replacing O'Hare was the wrong call however, and sent out a message that we weren't interested in scoring any more, which meant they could attack us freely knowing Gyokeres would be completely isolated. Kelly should instead of come on maybe for Allen who had started to tire badly, while this was probably a game for Tavares to replace O'Hare. We could have then countered them by going long with pace, which would have probably yielded realistic chances of us scoring a 4th, and even if not would have meant Swansea having to deploy an extra man at the back and giving them less options going forward.
Yeah I think this is the main takeaway from yesterday. Sounds like we had multiple injured players on the bench, so the subs were never going to end well whatever he decided to do. (Still think there were less worse options he could have gone for though)
It’s been a problem for Robins since day 1 - people talk a lot about him being ‘bad at substitutions’, but his track record with us suggests he’s just fine at managing games. I think a lot of people just mean ‘he doesn’t bring on loads of strikers when we’re behind’.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Tavares would have been a pointless choice - we needed someone who could hold the ball - we had 30.% possession in the game
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
It was exactly the game Tavares suits. FWIW I don’t think he’s particularly good but would have applied pressure and meant their defence couldn’t push into our half for what seemed like the last 30 mins.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
He wouldn’t apply any pressure - he’s like John Williams without his post bag
Yesterday was an U23s game?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
We just have nothing outside the first 14 maybe and if they’re no fit nothing at all. Compare who we had on the bench to what they brought on. Also even if you add Godden and Walker into that it’s hardly a huge difference.
He works miracles with what he’s got but there’s always going to be limits. Give him a squad of 20 Championship level players and you’d see something totally different IMO. First season up he used subs a lot because generally we had a lot of dross so it didn’t matter if you were bringing Allen on for Shipley or visa versa, or Max on for Baka. In many ways the squad has had to get smaller to get higher quality in and has left it very lumpy.
Londonccfcfan
Well-Known Member
Still fuming
There is zero games manship.
1) ball boys should have been instructed to sit down and not give ball back. Every other team does it. That would have been few mins wasted.
2) Wilson should have wasted 30 to 45 secs every goal kick.
3) We should have gone to ground broke the game up feigning injury!
4) Substitutions. Why did Burroughs run off the pitch! Mind boggling.
This isnt an exhaustive list!! I could carry on!
The games manship.and shit hosiery other teams show is beyond belief.
It's ridiculous how professional players enough experience in the team didnt try to break their momentum, by any means necessary.
Our naivety is indefensible.
There is zero games manship.
1) ball boys should have been instructed to sit down and not give ball back. Every other team does it. That would have been few mins wasted.
2) Wilson should have wasted 30 to 45 secs every goal kick.
3) We should have gone to ground broke the game up feigning injury!
4) Substitutions. Why did Burroughs run off the pitch! Mind boggling.
This isnt an exhaustive list!! I could carry on!
The games manship.and shit hosiery other teams show is beyond belief.
It's ridiculous how professional players enough experience in the team didnt try to break their momentum, by any means necessary.
Our naivety is indefensible.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
None of that really makes a difference, we simply needed to not to a man get caught ball watching for each goal
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Out of the 30 minutes yesterday, that seems the oddest thing to feel really angry about.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Seymour_East
Well-Known Member
You do talk some refuse Grendel. It would not be about increasing ball possession, it would be about making the other side think and maybe change formation to contra any subsitution we made
Grendel
Well-Known Member
yes let’s bring on a rookie with little ability at this level. They’d be suddenly looking to play 6 at the back
oddly we didn’t seem to think at all about the changes they made
Seymour_East
Well-Known Member
As I said, you do speak some exaggerated rubbish sometimes
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
100% (except for getting rid of him) No man (inc Sir Mark) is infallible. He's been great for us for the most part of four seasons but the smoke that has been blown up his arse on some occasions has clearly clouded his judgement.
The (lack of) man management of yesterdays game has to be amongst the worst that this club has ever experienced.
A bit of a Decca - Beatles type senario.
Get a grip, Robins or you'll be Ashley's shoe shine boy next year.
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
'Some' Jesus wept!
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
He kept an attacking line up out there clearly expecting that they'd add another three or four (which in all honesty most of us did) but then somehow missed the clear and obvious that they were rapidly tiring/couldn't be arsed and didn't possess the backbone to defend a slender 3 goal lead!
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
What's very clear is that whenever we're not at or very close to our best, we basically never get away with it. That takes some of the blame off the manager because the margins for error are tight.
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
That was inexcusabe yesterday and the margins for error were (repeatedly) gaping.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Honestly think the team just isn’t used to being three up with half an hour to go
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
As long as we’re run like a plucky lower league club then there’s only so much a manager can do. And now with McF out for basically the whole season we’re left with the greenest defence in the league.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
That was my point when Allen come on we waited twenty minutes before making a change by then they had scored two .The space in the middle of the pitch left by us was immense.As for Kelly should not have been brought on might just as well sat in the stands.We just didn't react .Who ever decided to switch to a back five was a fault and i don't think it was the players
TewkesburySkyBlue
Well-Known Member
What a load of cobblers probably the best manager we’ve ever had
Nick
Administrator
Sadly, being unable to react to changes has always been his weak point. Even in League 2.
I'm not saying sack him, just pointing it out.
Just because people point out where things go wrong doesn't mean to say we want change. However, i could see what was happening almost immediately on Saturday and was watching the bench AND the coaching staff and they sat there not even appearing in my opinion to been aware of what was happening in front of us. The press right from Gyokeres and O'hare stopped and then it spread across the team. That should of been addressed firstly by an experienced head in the side (except Bidwell i don't see one in that side when McFazdean is missing) or the coaching staff. Allen has the captaincy simply to take the toss and that's it. We desperately need some experience brought in January is my initial thoughts.
That back three needs some experience and I'd even contemplate bringing back Moore on Wednesday v WBA to offer some direction?
I don't agree with Robins on the doubling up on our wing backs... i didn't see that myself and if that's the case that would of created more space in the middle for the midfield four?
Players coasting, lack of leadership and the management TEAM allowed Swansea to get back in the game Saturday.
That back three needs some experience and I'd even contemplate bringing back Moore on Wednesday v WBA to offer some direction?
I don't agree with Robins on the doubling up on our wing backs... i didn't see that myself and if that's the case that would of created more space in the middle for the midfield four?
Players coasting, lack of leadership and the management TEAM allowed Swansea to get back in the game Saturday.
