Thorn's Subs (1 Viewer)

Clive Plattini · Nov 21, 2011

Still puzzled by some of AT's substitutions. We are losing 2-1 with 15 minutes to go and he doesn't bring on our only other striker on the bench.

If I were McDonald I would be seriously worried that the manager has lost faith in me already. Surely he would have been a better option to Baker, he could have made runs off Platt and Jukebox.

Nonleagueherewecome · Nov 21, 2011

Bench is the best place for McDonald, TBH. He'd have taken away more than he added.

Nonleagueherewecome · Nov 21, 2011

Plus..Baker played really well as sub!

DH - Sky Blue · Nov 21, 2011

If you wanted to put Macdonald on, then either it would be to come on in midfield (something fans were berating Thorn for a couple of weeks ago) in place of Macca. Or to go upfront and bring either Platt or Juke off, both of whom were playing well and both of whom were more suited to coping with a strong/physical West Ham defence. Just dont think it was a game suitable for Macdonald to come on for. But, I've still got (slimming) faith in him to come good.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Nov 21, 2011

At 1-0, West Ham were starting to push forward more to try to save the game and as a consequence we started to get chances to break away.

A couple of times in quick succession, Sheff was running at a retreating West Hame defence, with Juke and Platt ahead of him.

That was the time to take off either Platt or Juke and bring on Cody to use his pace to run at the tiring defenders.

skyblueshaun · Nov 21, 2011

i was thinkin the same thing why didnt he bring cody on i cant beleive our fans are against him already YOU SHOULD BE THANKFUL SOMEONE ACTUALLY WANTS TO COME ABOARD THE SINKIN SHIP!

zimmerman · Nov 21, 2011

Totally agree cody should of came on mc sheff just droped off and had loads of time and space but no movement ahead at the same r defence was coping well until cole fouled keogh

stupot07 · Nov 21, 2011

Yet how many opportunities came through good play from Baker in the last 20 mins wither threading balls out wide or jinking runs creating space? Most of them, non of which would have been created by Cody. I agree with previous posters, I wasn't the right game for him to come on, in I believe we would have lost some momentum had we brought him on.

oldskyblue58 · Nov 21, 2011

Dont have much of a problem with the subs he made on Saturday. Think he was perhaps a little slow in changing the back four but he did get the change right. Baker looked decent enough when he came on McSheffery had just about run out of steam and his decision making deteriorated because of it (thats not saying he had a bad game). At 2 : 1 down perhaps he could have changed the front two by bringing Cody on ....... he isnt going to improve by sitting on the bench and we played a quicker more forward game saturday which would have suited him better

Sterling Archer · Nov 21, 2011

Nonleagueherewecome said:
Plus..Baker played really well as sub!

I agree with that. Thought Baker did really well when he came on, consistently beating players and looking a threat. Maybe that would be a good role for him, coming off the bench and causing a few problems for the opposition with his direct running?

When he starts, he seems to lose that part of his game.

Otis · Nov 21, 2011

Nowt wrong with the subs on Saturday.

1. Had to be McSheff go off. Already on a yellow and went on to commit two further fouls in the 2nd half. He was on very thin ice.

2. Christie's legs had gone. No other choice other than to remove him.

Platt was playing really well and Juke is our top goal scorer. He could have brought McDonald on for Juke, but no doubt people would then have been slating him for taking off our top goal scorer.

Grendel · Nov 21, 2011

I don't like Baker but he did OK on Saturday, perhaps sub is the best place for him where he can make an impact over a short period of time. When he starts he looks poor.
McDonald has not made an impressive start - he looks unfit and off the pace. I have been very unimpressed with performance and more disturbingly attitude.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Nov 21, 2011

Platt and Juke are both better options than Mcdonald at the moment, Mcdonald and Juke doesn't seem to work as both come out to the wings too much and don't play as a partnership. Juke is a better player than Mcodonald, so the choice was really to bring off a midfielder and go with 3 out and out forwards, he decided not to do and bought Baker on who did well when he came on.

Sterling Archer · Nov 21, 2011

Why his attitude? I haven't seen anything to suggest Cody has a poor attitude.

Clive Plattini · Nov 21, 2011

I was thinking more of bringing McDonald on for Sheffers. Have three up front.

Grendel · Nov 21, 2011

Sterling Archer said:
Why his attitude? I haven't seen anything to suggest Cody has a poor attitude.

He walks round the pitch like he is a Sunday morning stroll.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Nov 21, 2011

Clive Plattini said:
I was thinking more of bringing McDonald on for Sheffers. Have three up front.

He could have done that but I thought Baker looked good and looked like he was going to create a chance everytime he attacked so.....wasn't Thorn right? you would have bought Mcdonald on ahead of Baker?
Everyone has there own opinion.

WillenhallSkyBlues · Nov 21, 2011

Mcdonald couldn't have made an impact even if he was playing against west hams u12's, piss poor striker

sw88 · Nov 21, 2011

I reckon McDonald will start tomorrow! Thorn seems reluctant sometimes to play Platt too much, and has said before they have to careful with him (not sure what he means by that as if anything, Platts fitness seems to be one of the better fitness levels at the club, and certainly looked more athletic over the 90 on Saturday than Juke did.). Maybe its time to try Platt / Cody upfront and give Jutkiewicz a rest?

Nonleagueherewecome · Nov 21, 2011

Sterling Archer said:
I agree with that. Thought Baker did really well when he came on, consistently beating players and looking a threat. Maybe that would be a good role for him, coming off the bench and causing a few problems for the opposition with his direct running?

When he starts, he seems to lose that part of his game.

Completely agree. He's always been good for us as an impact sub, particularly when running at tired defenders. It's when he starts games that he disappoints. If only he could play with that level of confidence from the start of games, we may see the player who was at Stockport-where he was idolised and entirely sure of his own ability.

Grendel · Nov 21, 2011

If McDonald is playing he can still have a rest...for 90 minutes on the pitch like he normally does.

Watcher of the sky blues · Nov 22, 2011

The only thing wrong with the substitutions on Saturday is that they were 15 minutes too late!
McSheffrey was having an average game and should have been replaced after 50 mins. Christie was knackered which helped with their two goals.

I have great faith in AT but he has to wise up (as well as the players) if we are to stay in this division

stupot07 · Nov 22, 2011

Watcher of the sky blues said:
The only thing wrong with the substitutions on Saturday is that they were 15 minutes too late!
McSheffrey was having an average game and should have been replaced after 50 mins. Christie was knackered which helped with their two goals.

I have great faith in AT but he has to wise up (as well as the players) if we are to stay in this division

Mcsheffrey was having an average game? It was by far his beat performance of the season. He was rightly took off because of the booking and the fact he kept fouling.

I think he would have made the Christie sub earlier but Cranie ha taken a knock and I presume he wanted to wait another 5-10 mins to make sure he was ok to continue.

Thorn's Subs (1 Viewer)

Clive Plattini

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Clive Plattini

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Chief Commentator!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency