Todays substitutions..

[cambridgeshire canary 6,756]

Sargent off in the 60th and Sainz in the 89th.

 

What we thinking?

[Capt. Pants 4,262]

Yes that's what happened.

Clear to elaborate?

Go on CC jump off the fence...

[Indy 3,307]

What we all know is that we lose more points than we gain when Sargent goes off and we try to play Barnes on his own up top!

If Sargent comes off the pull Barnes too and try something else because playing that carthorse on his own never works! 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,756]

Just now, Capt. Pants said:

Yes that's what happened.

Clear to elaborate?

Go on CC jump off the fence...

Wagners no tactical mastermind (At least away from home..)

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

I have no idea what Wagner was thinking unless Sargeant was injured. Maybe Sainz as he was being targeted 

[SwindonCanary 455]

when he made those subs were 2-0 up!

[Virtual reality 712]

It really shows how much of a failure the January window was. Idah would have replaced Sargent and offered a decent outlet. Instead his replacement is sat on his **** on the bench and doesn’t even look capable 

[norfolkngood 1,087]

1 minute ago, Indy said:

What we all know is that we lose more points than we gain when Sargent goes off and we try to play Barnes on his own up top!

If Sargent comes off the pull Barnes too and try something else because playing that carthorse on his own never works! 

with Sarge he has Energy to press and he is a threat to CB's 

Barnes on his own is not , without Sarge CB's can relax and push up pick passes automatically putting us under pressure 

SVH should not of been signed if he was that bad  he had to replace Idah who was scoring goals off the bench 

[Ian 1,131]

7 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Sargent off in the 60th and Sainz in the 89th.

 

What we thinking?

We had at least two absolutely clear opportunities after that and god knows how many before. Not sure the subs can be blamed for not winning the match today.

[Satriales 670]

Gibbs getting an injury after about 10 seconds was unlucky though. He would have brought running and energy. 

[Indy 3,307]

If VH isn’t good enough then send him back, just sitting him on the bench when we were crying out for a replacement striker up top!

I can’t see why we haven’t replaced Idah, it just looks like we didn’t really think we’d be in the mix in January, lack of investment and belief by the board? Who knows.

[Branston Pickle 3,669]

There was nothing particularly wrong in either of those subs - but it’s horribly telling that SVH hasn’t been brought on recently. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

1 minute ago, Satriales said:

Gibbs getting an injury after about 10 seconds was unlucky though. He would have brought running and energy. 

Fair point. Never known a team rely so much on one person. Pray he keeps fit

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

It’s weird- I wonder if it’s partly money related because he seemed ok - not wonderful but ok- in cameos where he played 

[Mason 47 1,388]

For a long time I thought the message was 'Barnes elevates Sargent' but I've come to see it's the other way around. Barnes needs Sarge in order to be effective, whenever the former is playing up front alone we just get shut down.

We should have won the game under our own initiative with the chances we made; we don't have a very deep squad so I get that it's difficult. Even seeing the first sub instantly get injured, horrible turn of luck. However this is a very familiar away game pattern which can't just be unlucky again and again. The two headers were practically on the same spot too.

Result has really **** on my sandcastle tbh.

 

[Indy 3,307]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

There was nothing particularly wrong in either of those subs - but it’s horribly telling that SVH hasn’t been brought on recently. 

That’s the trouble Branston, Barnes doesn’t do enough on his own as Norfolk correctly said once Sargent goes off the pressure goes from the press and we get utterly bullied!

If VH isn’t the answer Barnes on his own certainly isn’t so why not try a youngster with high energy! 

[Ward 3 372]

Look at the Wednesday subs. Wasn't it 4 at HT and it worked wonders for them... maybe wagner will be that ballsy  doubt it tho

[king canary 7,637]

It's a huge concern that Wagner seems to have faith in about 14 players in the entire squad.

If I squint I can understand the Gibbs one. He's generally energetic, can press from the front. When he went off though...

There is nothing in Ashley Barnes game that suggests he can play the lone frontman role. He needs someone next to him to be effective and allow him to drop off a bit. 

The biggest frustration is Wagner seems to refuse to learn from his errors.

[Capt. Pants 4,262]

Think we can safely assume we won't be buying SVH.

Problem is we don't have a striker we can bring on in place of Sargent.

You can't blame Wagner for players missing chances but he thought the game was in the bag far too soon and at 2-0 you have to make sure you score the next goal, not the opposition.

 

 

[repman 635]

4 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

There was nothing particularly wrong in either of those subs - but it’s horribly telling that SVH hasn’t been brought on recently. 

Is it though?

That logic only works if you think that Wagner is infallible in his player choices, but this is a guy who played Nunez up front for months and kept Sainz on the bench for a good 2 months before giving him a start. Even now he seems to rather use Gibbs in any position other than his natural one.

[Thirsty Lizard 3,169]

14 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Sargent off in the 60th and Sainz in the 89th.

 

What we thinking?

That we're down to the absolute bare bones and running on fumes - and that it was terrible luck for Gibbs to get injured when he'd only been on for a few minutes.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

3 minutes ago, Indy said:

If VH isn’t good enough then send him back, just sitting him on the bench when we were crying out for a replacement striker up top!

I can’t see why we haven’t replaced Idah, it just looks like we didn’t really think we’d be in the mix in January, lack of investment and belief by the board? Who knows.

what i can not understand he is polar opposite from Sarge ,

Why we did not sign someone who has a bit of pace with Energy someone who maybe not as be as good as Sarge but same style ,

plays the same way as Sarge so we could like for like replacement even without sarges goals would have been better than someone not playing 

[Ulfotto 640]

It’s not the players going off it’s that we have literally no options off the bench.

[king canary 7,637]

1 minute ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

That we're down to the absolute bare bones and running on fumes - and that it was terrible luck for Gibbs to get injured when he'd only been on for a few minutes.

Bare bones? We were missing 4 players, two of whom are defenders tonight. 

 

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,791]

The local press need to push Wagner for answers on Van Hooijdonk in the next press conference ahead of Saturdays game

[yellow 63 23]

2 minutes ago, Indy said:

If VH isn’t good enough then send him back, just sitting him on the bench when we were crying out for a replacement striker up top!

I can’t see why we haven’t replaced Idah, it just looks like we didn’t really think we’d be in the mix in January, lack of investment and belief by the board? Who knows.

This, i agree some of Wagners subs and tatics are baffling,but the lack of squad depth is now telling, he's doing his best with what's available,and who knows what was said to him when Knapper arrived, as for tonight can't blame him for players not scoring.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,435]

The substitutions don’t affect not defending two identical in swinging corners . Maybe we have seen why Bathh hasn’t been playing ? 

Sargent playing half of his game with his back to goal is going to get knackered. Looked like a 60 min sub. 
 

Sainz was taking time out of the game .

Feel for Gibbs - he looked devastated. 
 

 

[Indy 3,307]

1 minute ago, norfolkngood said:

what i can not understand he is polar opposite from Sarge ,

Why we did not sign someone who has a bit of pace with Energy someone who maybe not as be as good as Sarge but same style ,

plays the same way as Sarge so we could like for like replacement even without sarges goals would have been better than someone not playing 

I can only assume we didn’t have the budget or pull for that type of player, Idah must have wanted the move and VH was possibly the only option? I don’t know just making assumptions! But even the Binners bought in two decent strikers in January!

[Grando 263]

13 minutes ago, Virtual reality said:

It really shows how much of a failure the January window was. Idah would have replaced Sargent and offered a decent outlet. Instead his replacement is sat on his **** on the bench and doesn’t even look capable 

This. 

[repman 635]

4 minutes ago, Indy said:

I can only assume we didn’t have the budget or pull for that type of player, Idah must have wanted the move and VH was possibly the only option? I don’t know just making assumptions! But even the Binners bought in two decent strikers in January!

It's not like there's a plethora of options in the last few days of January to start with. The club were never going to spend on someone to be backup so it had to be a loan. SVH is basically the same mould as Kieffer Moore but he's significantly cheaper.

Edited April 9 by repman