Substitutions

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

Saw the discussion on subs on the Spurs thread and I''ve just skimmed the chapter in "The Numbers Game" on subs.  An area where Lambert and Hughton have always seemed to me to have different approaches so here goes.

 

In TNG they cite research into making subs and how effective it is.  Basically if you''re losing, it improves your chances of getting a draw or a win if you make changes, with the optimum time being before the 59th minute for the first, before 70 mins for the second and before 78 mins for the 3rd.  Can''t remember the exact times but they were then or thereabouts.

If you''re winning or drawing, making subs doesn''t improve your chances (they say).

 

As always with Football there are questions about how they''ve worked the stats etc and obviously we''re purely talking about tactical substitutions here.  Also of course there''s no guarantee making subs will mean you get back into a game, it just means that your chances are improved if you do.

 

Looking back to the Lambert years, in away games we were often losing coming up to 60 mins and he would invariably make two changes at 60 minutes and if we were still losing, a 3rd change coming up to 80 minutes, which ties in with the analysis above as the best approach.  I always liked his approach - always found it frustrating to be losing and have the first change made after 80 minutes, giving the player hardly any time to get into the game, also making 2 subs together gives you a real chance to change the team setup and approach.

 

There is no doubt Hughton is more reticent about making changes.  But part of this I think is because we''re not losing coming up to 60 minutes as often as we used to be under Lambert (not checked the numbers but this is my perception).  Take for example last year at Spurs, it was 0-0 at 60 minutes but Dembele scored for them on 68 mins or so.  Hughton then made a change to bring on Morison about 5 minutes later, which would make sense on the above stats.  But he didn''t make any further changes - I guess one would have to look at the players available for him to bring on, it would be simplistic to say he should have made a second change regardless, but that is my feeling.  We certainly went for it in that game and of course Snoddy finally did equalise with 5 mins to go.

 

The research does also support my long held belief that if you''re going to make a change when you''re losing, don''t leave it until the 85th minute - get the players on and give them a chance to chage the game.  The fact that using subs has little benefit when you are drawing or winning supports Hughton''s typical approach of not changing the team in that situation unless forced to.  And I have noticed that since the back end of last season he has been more willing to make changes when we were behind, e.g. at Hull away he made the first substitution at half time and had made his 3rd change with plenty of time left - at Hull we certainly gave it a decent go to get back into the game it was just that we didn''t gel going forward so failed to create many chances despite having decent possession.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

Interesting post. I have always been frustrated by managers who do not try to effect a change in a game early on when it is clear it is not working. More often than not, when you''re losing, you''re being outplayed. I have no problem with not changing the team if you''re losing, if the chance are coming and you''re looking like scoring - but in games when things are clearly wrong and you''re second best, or the chances arent coming - to allow it to persist without trying to change it is criminal management in my eyes - a failure to recognise the situation and act. I remember Lambert starting with a back 3 at Chelsea, and after 30 minutes, it was clear it wasnt working well. He was bold to try a new approach, astute enough to identify it hadnt worked and bold enough to change it early on. I hate watching a game when you''re not in it and the manager making no attempt to improve things but for a token effort late on when its all too late for a player to get into the game. Bruch Rioch was the absolute worst for this. He would NEVER make a change and we often finished the game with no subs used, regardless of the result. It was almost as if he was too pig-headed to admit his first team sheet hadnt been effective. Players need at least 20 minutes usually to have an impact on the game