One team makes tactical subs

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

3 hours ago, yellowrider120 said:

He is mentally jaded

Is he? How do you know this? He’s just had two weeks off. I’m going to try that one at work after my next 2 week holiday. “Boss, I’m feeling mentally jaded, I can’t work today, or maybe I can work for a bit but definitely not the whole shift”. I’ll let you know how that goes.

If there was any issue with Pukki playing, physically or mentally, I’m sure he wouldn’t be. Strikers have dry spells, he’ll get through it, he’s the best we have by miles.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Fiery Zac

[ged in the onion bag 854]

We did battle so well and the spirit is there for all to see - we should be proud of this team and today's performance.    Football fans across the country seem to appreciate what we serve up.  

But there is no getting away from the fact that a point or 3 were available after 70 mins today.    Despite the overall performance McLean and Rupp were continually making poor decisions, conceding cheap possession and a Liverpool goal looked more inevitable as the game continued.   Zimmermann too was often guilty.    We were crying out for fresh legs and Buendia to retain possession and run at Pool's defence.       Had we started with Godfrey in for McLean and Buendia for Rupp, or even made those substitutions on the hour, we might have given ourselves a better chance.    But we didn't and I fear opportunities for points are passing us by in the finer margins, because of poor team selection and substitutions.... and irony of ironies, Pukki has been passing balls at goal of late instead of leathering them and with half a goal at his mercy he lashes at the strike when a composed pass into the corner probably gets us a point.   

This season is just so against convention, we shouldn't be bottom with these performance levels, the quality and the spirit, it's no wonder we still have hope but we certainly have no luck whatsoever.    Have we had one scrap of fortune this season.... Tettey's strike whether meant or not, it seems nothing falls our way.    I'm usually quite rational but you have to wonder if that push is a free-kick at the other end of the park.

Maybe that luck is about to change, maybe Pukki will find his confidence again.    For certain, we need our best quality on the pitch whenever possible and both Godfrey and Buendia have to start matches.    

[ged in the onion bag 854]

4 hours ago, vos said:

We had absorbed a massive amount of pressure and the defence remained fairly solid. But apart from Cantwell and Tettey the rest of the attacking players were struggling. I am sure most managers would have introduced subs after 60 mins. However it was clear that Farke's theory was that we were not losing - so stick with it. Some fresh legs were clearly needed. I hope I am being fair minded, but I thought Rupp and Duda made little contribution. The latter seems short of pace and energy. I would accept that the two subs when eventually introduced did not exactly impress, but eight mins or so leaves little time to get sorted and make an impact. That kind of timescale is really only suited by bringing on a big guy up front and hopes he gets something on to a cross etc.

Have to agree generally although in those 8 minutes, yet again Buendia engineers a golden opportunity for a point that gets squandered.    No team can afford to leave out such a creative influence when points are so urgent.

[Kanadyan Kanary 121]

3 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Wow - just wow. So you include the time of goals conceded (in brackets) when we concede a goal before  the substitution, but you somehow don't manage to include the time of goals conceded after  we have made substitutions. It's almost as if you're butchering the facts and the truth to try and support your specious argument. 

I'll complete it for you.

• Nor v Spurs (2-2) * (83) Subs at 69, 75 and 86. 
• Nor v Cry Pal (1-1) * (85) Subs at 78, 83 and 90. 

 

 

Wow - you missed the point.  The thread is about late substitutions and when they are made.  I just added the actual goal time fir the three occasions where goals were conceded  to reference similar examples of today's game (i.e it has happened on three separate occasions in the last ten games. Either way, the key point for me (borne out by the stats) is that subs are too late to have any impact. You have proven that for 20% of the games the subs may have had a negative impact because we conceded after the subs ... so what?

[Jim Smith 2,314]

9 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Wow - just wow. So you include the time of goals conceded (in brackets) when we concede a goal before  the substitution, but you somehow don't manage to include the time of goals conceded after  we have made substitutions. It's almost as if you're butchering the facts and the truth to try and support your specious argument. 

I'll complete it for you.

• Nor v Spurs (2-2) * (83) Subs at 69, 75 and 86. 
• Nor v Cry Pal (1-1) * (85) Subs at 78, 83 and 90. 

 

 

Not just about the goals though is it (although I would agree that in general Farke doesn’t like making subs unless we are losing) it’s about the sheer number of games where everyone can see the midfield are exhausted and the momentum is shifting and he doesn’t do anything until it’s too late.

Wolves was one that really wound me up. 
 

We have a big problem with how we start second halves and how Farke simply cannot influence games at all with his substitutions at this level. Bring fair one can also say that in terms of game changers his options on the bench are limited but sometimes we just need fresh legs to replace tired players who are running on empty.

i also worry how it must effect the morale of players on our bench to get such limited opportunities because he never changes the side unless we’ve been stuffed and they never get more than about 5 minutes as a sub.

Great coach, not so great game manager. 

 

 

[Il Pirata 249]

9 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Did you not see the Man U game? I don’t like to criticise players but in that game he was slow, error prone and not aware enough. Yes, sometimes he has been very influential but it will depend on the opposition and what side of the bed he’s got out of.

One game. 

Every player in the starting 11 yesterday has had a very poor game at some point this season. I've not seen many Norwich players run the show like Vrancic did at Burnley in the cup, probably the only other player to do so has been Buendia, another one on the bench yesterday. 

I'm sorry, but the team performance yesterday wasn't that impressive for me. It's an absolute minimum that players run there socks off and play for the shirt. We offered very little quality, and didn't try to take the game to Liverpool. We have players to do so, which leaves me feeling ultimately with the emotion of frustration rather than anything else. 

Bunedia and Vrancic have to play if we're going to win any more games this season. 

[Il Pirata 249]

To add, the atmosphere in the ground sounded electric at times. Definitely  proud of where the club is in regard to support. The flags again looked brilliant - how do we keep this from dying out? I know it started in the Championship, but if (& when) we are relegated, can we keep this up with the same vibrancy? It's really special to see. 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

5 minutes ago, Il Pirata said:

One game. 

Every player in the starting 11 yesterday has had a very poor game at some point this season. I've not seen many Norwich players run the show like Vrancic did at Burnley in the cup, probably the only other player to do so has been Buendia, another one on the bench yesterday. 

I'm sorry, but the team performance yesterday wasn't that impressive for me. It's an absolute minimum that players run there socks off and play for the shirt. We offered very little quality, and didn't try to take the game to Liverpool. We have players to do so, which leaves me feeling ultimately with the emotion of frustration rather than anything else. 

Bunedia and Vrancic have to play if we're going to win any more games this season. 

I agree. It was a good defensive performance but it wasn’t a great performance or a performance to make you “proud” in my book. Our ball retention for most of the second half and latter part of the first half was well below par for us. Obviously the quality of the opposition is some mitigation but draws are not really any use to us now and I think we could have caused them problems in the last 25 minutes had we just been a bit more positive. 

[Nuff Said 5,089]

I’m struggling with posts that seem to be saying “why didn’t we do a better job of testing Liverpool?”. We held them to 0-0 until the 78th minute and spurned chances when we had them. It was close.
 

Yes, we could have made changes, but it’s as likely that they would have made us more defensively vulnerable as more offensively effective.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

So getting a 0-0 draw, albeit against Liverpool is going to change our season? I don't think so. We were told it was a free hit and nothing to lose everything to win game. I have nothing but overall praise for DF and the way he has appraoched this season but don't tell us we are going for it when we clearly didn't.

We opted for a more defensive line up when we need to win. It wouldn't have mattered what a losing score might have been. It isn't our goal difference that matters, its points.

It isn't our call but I agree with Il Pirata that Vrancic seems to get a raw deal after one poor game. Personally I thought he and Emi should have started rather than MacLean and Duda.

[Making Plans 936]

As I posted in another thread.

After 70 minutes yesterday we had a realistic chance of winning that game but after 80 minutes we were always going to lose it.

We had a chance to grasp the nettle and go for it.

We didn't

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

7 minutes ago, Making Plans said:

As I posted in another thread.

After 70 minutes yesterday we had a realistic chance of winning that game but after 80 minutes we were always going to lose it.

We had a chance to grasp the nettle and go for it.

We didn't

Could you provide a little bit more "meat on the bones" to that statement, at the moment it is somewhat lacking in detail, I would be genuinely interested in what you mean by that. 

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

4 minutes ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

Could you provide a little bit more "meat on the bones" to that statement, at the moment it is somewhat lacking in detail, I would be genuinely interested in what you mean by that. 

Farke’s terrible at making substitutions. It makes absolutely no difference what’s going on on the pitch, how the team are performing or the options on the bench to have an influence without disrupting the rhythm. Unless you make a change at least at 60mins, you’re an awful manager. A good coach apparently, but awful manager. If he starts making changes before half time, will he be a genius?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Farke’s terrible at making substitutions. It makes absolutely no difference what’s going on on the pitch, how the team are performing or the options on the bench to have an influence without disrupting the rhythm. Unless you make a change at least at 60mins, you’re an awful manager. A good coach apparently, but awful manager. If he starts making changes before half time, will he be a genius?

That is silly. Nobody means that. What people mean is that he doesn't make them even if it is apparent players are getting tired. And it was there for all to see yesterday. The fresh and fast legs of Mane changed the game even though Liverpool were still the better team, Klopp made the change.

It looked obvious that Duda and Rupp were not in the game 2nd half. Maybe the pace was a bit more than they are used to. But no change was made because we weren't losing, or so it appeared. But we need to win games. And it is of littleconsequence that it was Liverpool. Every team in the division is above us.

[Yellow Fever 3,747]

For what it's worth I thought we played well , did well and nobody can be faulted.

That said - with an hour+ gone and still 0:0 with a draw being of little use and a Liverpool goal certain eventually I would of gambled and gone for it. If we then lost 4:0 (or even 5:3) nobody would of blamed the substitutes or Farke. We would go down swinging.

Then again we might have surprised ourselves and everybody else too.

As it was we lost 1:0. Nothing was really ventured and nothing was gained. 

OTBC.