KjParton Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 (edited) If we had made no substitutes and Fulham had made all 3 of theirs we'd have been played off the park? Players get tired over 90 minutes. If we'd have not made any substitutes today I think we would have lost. How old are you? Has to be the daftest reason ever given for making a substitution. I don't see what age has got to do with it? Neither do I see whats so daft as to thinking players get tired over 90 minutes so you should use substitutes? We are talking about professional athletes here. Prior to the 1960's substitutes didn't even exist. You bring on substitutes when you think they will make a difference, end of. If thats the reason why we use Substitutes, then why is it that Weimann comes off in games when he's working his ass off and doing well? Weimann is usually subbed on about 70-75 minutes because he's running all the time! Surely thats a substitution to combat the tiredness of a player? EDIT: I suppose I should add I don't believe the SOLE reason for using substitutes is to combat tiredness. I believe there are a number of different factors that determine when/whether a substitution should be made. Edited April 13, 2013 by KjParton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 If we had made no substitutes and Fulham had made all 3 of theirs we'd have been played off the park? Players get tired over 90 minutes. If we'd have not made any substitutes today I think we would have lost. How old are you? Has to be the daftest reason ever given for making a substitution. I don't see what age has got to do with it? Neither do I see whats so daft as to thinking players get tired over 90 minutes so you should use substitutes? We are talking about professional athletes here. Prior to the 1960's substitutes didn't even exist. You bring on substitutes when you think they will make a difference, end of. If thats the reason why we use Substitutes, then why is it that Weimann comes off in games when he's working his ass off and doing well? Weimann is usually subbed on about 70-75 minutes because he's running all the time! Surely thats a substitution to combat the tiredness of a player? EDIT: I suppose I should add I don't believe the SOLE reason for using substitutes is to combat tiredness. I believe there are a number of different factors that determine when/whether a substitution should be made. You were advocating making substitutions simply because Fulham were. If Weimann was substituted because he was tired, fair enough. That has nothing to do with Fulhams subs coming on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I was saying we should make substitutions to combat Fulham's substitutions. In my opinion, I feel that if Fulham were on the pitch with 3 fresh players and we had no fresh players that we'd have struggled in the final few minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Most teams use all of their 3 substitutes every game these days because the game is so physically demanding that it's better to use all of the allowed players to keep your team's energy up. Of course tactical changes are a part of it, but even if nothing needs to be changed, a like for like substitution is generally done to bring a fresher player on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I was saying we should make substitutions to combat Fulham's substitutions. In my opinion, I feel that if Fulham were on the pitch with 3 fresh players and we had no fresh players that we'd have struggled in the final few minutes. We'll have to disagree on this one. To me if a player is playing well, he stays on. If he isn't he comes off, simples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I was saying we should make substitutions to combat Fulham's substitutions. In my opinion, I feel that if Fulham were on the pitch with 3 fresh players and we had no fresh players that we'd have struggled in the final few minutes. We'll have to disagree on this one. To me if a player is playing well, he stays on. If he isn't he comes off, simples. I'd agree that if a player is playing well he should stay on the pitch. However I believe Weimann is essential in our attacking play, but he usually always comes off at 70 minutes, this has to be due to tiredness? Surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I thought the subs were ok . Holman played well as did Sylla and by bents standards he was an absolute workhorse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I thought the subs were ok . Holman played well as did Sylla and by bents standards he was an absolute workhorse I agree I thought they were Okay, not fantastically attacking and we seemed to fall apart in an attacking sense after Zog and Weimann came off. However if Gabby was fit today, I feel he would have started and say Zoggy would have been on the bench, which meant Zoggy would have come on and offered more at about 70 minutes. (In fairness thats a poor example because if Zog was on the bench he wouldn't have scored our goal) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I was saying we should make substitutions to combat Fulham's substitutions. In my opinion, I feel that if Fulham were on the pitch with 3 fresh players and we had no fresh players that we'd have struggled in the final few minutes. We'll have to disagree on this one. To me if a player is playing well, he stays on. If he isn't he comes off, simples. I'd agree that if a player is playing well he should stay on the pitch. However I believe Weimann is essential in our attacking play, but he usually always comes off at 70 minutes, this has to be due to tiredness? Surely? I believe that you lost the argument right at the start when you came out with the gem quote: "Because Gabby was out it meant we had to use someone shit" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I was saying we should make substitutions to combat Fulham's substitutions. In my opinion, I feel that if Fulham were on the pitch with 3 fresh players and we had no fresh players that we'd have struggled in the final few minutes. We'll have to disagree on this one. To me if a player is playing well, he stays on. If he isn't he comes off, simples. I'd agree that if a player is playing well he should stay on the pitch. However I believe Weimann is essential in our attacking play, but he usually always comes off at 70 minutes, this has to be due to tiredness? Surely? I believe that you lost the argument right at the start when you came out with the gem quote: "Because Gabby was out it meant we had to use someone shit" Well yes I'll explain it to you. Gabby was injured. If he wasn't injured he'd have started (I would imagine), thus meaning that either N'zogbia, or Bowery would have been on the bench. I consider N'zogbia and Bowery as players that could potentially make something happen in an attacking sense. Because Agbonlahor was out it meant that both these players started. Therefore we didn't have REAL quality on the bench to bring on (IMO i don't rate Holman and he was really the only attacking player to bring on). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I would like to see more of dawkins since I don`t really know if he is bad or just proper shit. I just have no idea, seemed okay from what I have seen but it`s so minuscule. But I have to agree, I feel like we barely have any players at all, which leaves us with bad options on the bench. As we saw today, none of the subs made any difference. Actually I thought they made it worse. Sylla had his worst game so far. Holman is...holman. Squad player at best. And it`s just ridiculous to see how Bent played today, he was used so wrong it`s an insult. He needs to get the ball within their goal, he can`t be making crosses as a wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 (edited) I would like to see more of dawkins since I don`t really know if he is bad or just proper shit. I just have no idea, seemed okay from what I have seen but it`s so minuscule. But I have to agree, I feel like we barely have any players at all, which leaves us with bad options on the bench. As we saw today, none of the subs made any difference. Actually I thought they made it worse. Sylla had his worst game so far. Holman is...holman. Squad player at best. And it`s just ridiculous to see how Bent played today, he was used so wrong it`s an insult. He needs to get the ball within their goal, he can`t be making crosses as a wing. I too would like to see Dawkins, but for some reason Lambert isn't using him as often. Maybe he see's more in training? Our subs are poor - we have no game changers to bring on. (When Gabby's not fit) Edited April 13, 2013 by KjParton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_eristic Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 And it`s just ridiculous to see how Bent played today, he was used so wrong it`s an insult. He needs to get the ball within their goal, he can`t be making crosses as a wing. Bent did make a couple threatening moves through the middle, one of which left him essentially with an open goal, but Benteke didn't look up and blasted it into the side netting. Wish Lambert would've handled the subs differently. Essentially brought on the right players out of what was available, but in the wrong order/for the wrong people. Sylla for Bowery to reinforce the midfield, then Bent for N'Zogbia with Weimann staying on to maintain our attacking presence, Holman for whoever was most shattered when/if we'd taken the lead again. The particular way in which our subs were made left nobody to play creator for two forwards who are both on the selfish side and one of which relies entirely on supply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 The thing is who the fok do we bring on? Because Gabby was out it meant we had to use someone shit. You don't have to make an excuse for every single little decision the man makes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicMushroom Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Cant understand why we did not go one-on-one with Berbatov. And did zoggy have a knock, because if not, i cant fathom the decison to sub him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Why play Bowery as a winger when we have Dawkins ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutherland Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Why play Bowery as a winger when we have Dawkins ? Prob explains why he was 9th choice at spuds mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Dont think can really fault Lambert yesterday. We created so many chances and if Benteke or Delph had of scored them great chances it would be different story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Dont think can really fault Lambert yesterday. We created so many chances and if Benteke or Delph had of scored them great chances it would be different story Only problem i have was the Sylla sub. At 1-0 Sylla was ready to come on, can understand that. But Fulham equalise and Lambert continues to make the change. That was a mistake IMO. We were looking the better team, we'd scored and Fulham's equaliser was a mistake from one of our players. Changing an important attacking player for a defensive player didn't make sense at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutherland Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Still tactically inept, Proved yet again yesterday along with zonal marking and baffling subs! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts