Substitutions (1 Viewer)

Greggs

Well-Known Member
Their subs changed them for the better, ours made us worse. Why take Cody a nd Baker off? Thorn never ceases to amaze me......:jerkit:
 

Nick

Administrator
Baker was playing quite well! He only ever makes like for like changes :

Their manager changes it about and they get back in the game :)
 

Greggs

Well-Known Member
I don't think Elliott offered much more, only prospering from Codys movement and link up play. When Cody went off Elliott became non existent. Cody is our '20 goal a season man' so why take him off after an hour?
Baker looked upto standard for once, was silly to replace him.
We need better fullbacks if we are to continue with this fuckin' diamond IMO
 

speedie87

Well-Known Member
It the timing of Subs that never fails to annoy me always waits till the opposition scores.

Hasn't got a clue on how to change momentum in matches
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
70 minute sub club :D

only time its worked where he didn't make subs was against Leeds 2-1 on 14th feb :D
 

Nick

Administrator
Does he always make like for like subs too? Has he ever brought off a defender to put on a striker?
 

StevieM

Well-Known Member
Thorn should have taken Kilbane off because his contribution today was nought, and with his penchant for like for like subs then McSheffrey should have been his replacement.
That would have left us better positioned, at that point 2-2, to go on and win the game without upsetting the shape of the team.
Baker was doing well before he was taken off, and as a prime example of a so called "confidence player" taking him off at a time when he was doing alright must have knocked him somewhat.
Are all the coaching staff spineless and dare not say "hang on a minute AT", it is plain to see these things from the terraces.
Or are they all as inept as AT.....or do they think if they "give him enough rope" as they say?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top