Substitutions today

[Baldyboy 0]

Woeful yet again from Irvine! Like for like with no ambition to try to win the game!

With Fulham down to 10, why oh why did he replace Klose with Bennett? Surely he could have gone 3 at the back and put Jerome up top then?

Why is it our management very rarely make a substitution that will change how we play?

I really hope our new Head Coach is a bit more ambitious than the Scottish duo!

[unique 434]

This squad of players are nowhere near good enough to play a formation with one up front and two marauding full-backs - a formation destined to fail when your one forward is not free-scoring and your fullbacks can''t defend for toffee.

Here''s hoping the new manager has a plan ''B'', ''C'' and ''D'', and manages to bring players to the club that will show far more bottle than the current motley crew.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

I think we could have an effective 3-5-2 with Pinto & Dijks out wide- but we would need 3 new centre backs to make it work

[Hairy Canary 667]

How could we go three at the back without bringing Bennett on! Who were you going to play as the other two centre halves alongside Martin?

[Rogue Baboon 0]

I meant next season!

After today I cannot see Bennett or Klose playing for Norwich again

[Baldyboy 0]

Dijks can play as a centre back and why not put Pinto in there? It would be more effective than a player who gave away a penalty without even touching the ball after coming on 😂😂

[Guest]

Not sure what more Irvine could have done with the subs. If Martin, Dijks and Pinto played as a back three that would have left Wes and Jacob at wingback, which would have been interesting.

[Bill 1,788]

" up top"up top ?up top of whatthe South Stand... that is quite high

[7rew 0]

[quote user="Hairy Canary"]How could we go three at the back without bringing Bennett on! Who were you going to play as the other two centre halves alongside Martin?[/quote]

Well, empty space is marginally more effective than Bennett. So we could have gone one at the back.

[Yellowbeagle 0]

[quote user="unique"]This squad of players are nowhere near good enough to play a formation with one up front and two marauding full-backs - a formation destined to fail when your one forward is not free-scoring and your fullbacks can''t defend for toffee.

Here''s hoping the new manager has a plan ''B'', ''C'' and ''D'', and manages to bring players to the club that will show far more bottle than the current motley crew.[/quote]

Plans B, C and D? I''d be happy atm with a half decent plan A first.

[Capt. Pants 4,194]

[quote user="Pyro Pete"]Not sure what more Irvine could have done with the subs. If Martin, Dijks and Pinto played as a back three that would have left Wes and Jacob at wingback, which would have been interesting.[/quote]And there lies the problem, as it has done all season. Playing a combination of marauding fullbacks in Pinto, Olsson/Dijks leaves precious little cover for the central defenders, especially when Murphy and Wes either can''t be bothered or are so weak in defensive duties. It needs to be addressed next season either through a solid back four that sits or wide attackers that can tackle.

[daly 499]

Can''t ever remember Huckerby having to play left back when he was at his prime

Thought the Murphy''s have worked hard in tracking back.

[Hairy Canary 667]

Huckerby had Adam Drury behind him who hardly crossed the half way line but boy could he stop crosses going in and defend!