Last Night's Substitutions

[SussexYellow]

I was not overly impressed with the use of tactical substitutions yesterday.

As has been mentioned in other threads it looked as though Neil thought he could win it with the players on the pitch, so no early substitutions. Having gone with this tactic possibly he should have stuck with it and let it play out. Sometimes not making substitutions is the best use of them.

Also the substitutions made were not really much of a change up. Howson and Loza were like for like, the opposition were already set up to deal with that. Josh is a change up but even in the far flung outposts of this division that rely on pigeon post surely they are aware that this will be coming at some point and have made plans for it.

Having gone for late substitutions how about going for just one but give a different look? Say Howson for Whittaker. Go three at the back and give Charlton and extra creative midfielder to contend with.

 

[morty]

Ach, no win situation there, damned if he did, damned if he didn't.

Howson almost made an immediate impact. And I have to say, at the time, I liked the substitutions. But did consider they were maybe a bit late, but I think Adams, like most of us, saw us dominate, and thought it was only a matter of time before we scored.

Unfortunately the long and skinny of it is that Charlton played very well for their win.

 

[Din]

I can't fault Adams substitutions tbh. Hoolahan was clearly tiring by the time he was taken off, hence why he was bought off for Murphy. Howson impressed when he came on, and was an attacking improvement over Tettey. I probably wouldn't have bought Loza on for Grabban, but it's just adding a bit more energy to our attack really.

 

[Yellow Fever]

I agree with Morty. If the subs produce a win then it's genius. If they don't they're all wrong. 

 

[CJRV2014]

I can understand why he left it so late because we were on top and creating chances but i think he should of done it earlier just to add something different. And getting Howson on earlier would have been a must. As much as Tettey & Johnson are good at what they do i think sometimes a bit of drive and moving the baller forward quicker would have been better.

Definately get Howson in for Rotherham, either for Johnson who for the 1st time this season looked a little off or Tettey who took a knock and came off vs Charlton.

 

[GJP]

I don't think Johnson was any worse against Charlton than he has been against anyone else recently. BUT I also don't think he's been as great as has been made out.

Take away those couple of goals from him very early on in the campaign and he not been really great since - though he's been doing well enough. I thought he was a passenger in the first half against Birmingham only to up his game in the second half. And similarly against Charlton I thought he came to life a bit more in the second half - though he did tire a bit near the end.

Thing is though, when you're looking to break down a defensively minded side you need people who can move the ball quickly and can inject some pace into things. I don't think that's so much in Johnson's locker but it is certainly in Howson's.

 

[Salopian]

The substitutions were redolent of those of Hughton, and my immediate reaction was "Why so late, it's not as if we are not creating chances?" They were also too late to give Josh much time to influence events and Howson to get many minutes of play.

In retrospect, my comment is that we have yet to hear the manager's explanation. Did the presence of Josh and Loza indicate a tactical change, albeit late? Was he trying an approach with greater pace? Was somebody, perhaps Wes, tiring or feeling a knock?

NA has adept with his substitutions this season, so there may be an element of delay while the new situation was worked out, or it may be a matter of human miscalculation. We may learn in time.

 

[ZLF]

on top, creating, playing well but not able to make it count - so delaying the subs made sense to me.   Taking Tettey and Wes off did not.

With the lack of threat from charlton would we have been better going three at the back removing johnson and whittaker to replace them with Murphy and Howson,  this would have matched up their 5 in midfield and kept two strikers while adding width?

 

[Agent Dale Cooper]

Making three substitutions at once (or near as dammit, anyway) is usually the province of the desperate. As we were comfortably on top, I felt a triple substitution disrupted the rhythm. I felt the first substitution at least should have happened at least 10 minutes earlier – whether that was Howson for Tettey, or Murphy for Hoolahan, or indeed Loza for Grabban. Right players on, right players off, but very questionable timing IMO. I know it was a long-range deflected shot and all, but the down side of 'fresh legs' is it takes the brain and body a few minutes to adapt to the match situation, and in that time they scored on the break. Easy with hindsight I know, and Adams has made plenty of early (and excellent!) substitutions this season already. First time he's really got it wrong IMO.

 

[Paul Handscombe]

The substitutions were pathetic and the first time Neil has really shown his naivety leaving it til 10 mins from time.

Grabban was woeful and I mean really really poor.

For Neil to say that we we played really well is laughable, we had no pace, no cutting edge, sat back too deep and didn't press high enough up the field.

It is the worst we have played since Wolves

 

[Dubai Mark]

You know, this season to date I feel like we have been watching a rookie manager learn his trade.........and sometimes it feels a bit like a computer game we are being part of.........oh, and he is definitely learning his trade relatively quickly and certainly has a fantastic tool box to select from.....

 

[Fenway Frank]

I see Paul has forgotten to take his happy pills today

 

[SussexYellow]

Making three substitutions at once (or near as dammit, anyway) is usually the province of the desperate. As we were comfortably on top, I felt a triple substitution disrupted the rhythm. I felt the first substitution at least should have happened at least 10 minutes earlier – whether that was Howson for Tettey, or Murphy for Hoolahan, or indeed Loza for Grabban. Right players on, right players off, but very questionable timing IMO. I know it was a long-range deflected shot and all, but the down side of 'fresh legs' is it takes the brain and body a few minutes to adapt to the match situation, and in that time they scored on the break. Easy with hindsight I know, and Adams has made plenty of early (and excellent!) substitutions this season already. First time he's really got it wrong IMO.

Agree re 3 substitutions in quick succession being somewhat drastic. Not a lot needed fixing all that was missing was the elusive goal.

Howson was good to bring on and agree it could and should have been earlier. For me it should have been for a defender. Three at the back would not have been much of a risk and 5 in midfield plus 2 strikers probably would have pushed Charlton even deeper rather than opening up to them. Plus would have given us another option to open them up.

Not sure this was a game for Josh. It was quite a physical game so possibly one to protect him from, and in any case it is an easily anticipated move.

 

[Din]

The substitutions were pathetic and the first time Neil has really shown his naivety leaving it til 10 mins from time.

Grabban was woeful and I mean really really poor.

For Neil to say that we we played really well is laughable, we had no pace, no cutting edge, sat back too deep and didn't press high enough up the field.

It is the worst we have played since Wolves

Really?

 

[Surgeryman]

The substitutions were pathetic and the first time Neil has really shown his naivety leaving it til 10 mins from time.

Grabban was woeful and I mean really really poor.

For Neil to say that we we played really well is laughable, we had no pace, no cutting edge, sat back too deep and didn't press high enough up the field.

It is the worst we have played since Wolves

I can't agree with a lot of this. Tuesday was more frustrating than anything and we simply did not take our chances.
Cannot see where you say we were not pressing enough or sitting deep especially second half.

If anything it was the choices made in the final third and overplaying when the better option was a shot on target, especially first half.

Earlier substitutions is fair enough and your Grabban comnent is interesting, I find his first touch poor and his is not clinical enough, yet he has 6 goals! Although apart from the headers, his goals have gotten deflections or needed two attempts!!

I would be considering Hooper up front with Jerome. Also Howson for Johnson and contraversially, I would bring Bassong in alongside Turner with Russ going to RB.

Ruddy

Martin, Bassong, Turner, Olssen

Tettey Howson

Redmond Hooper Hoolahan

Jerome

 

[Boyerboy]

Paul has happy pills??!!!!!????

 

[SussexYellow]

I can't agree with a lot of this. Tuesday was more frustrating than anything and we simply did not take our chances.

Cannot see where you say we were not pressing enough or sitting deep especially second half.

If anything it was the choices made in the final third and overplaying when the better option was a shot on target, especially first half.

Earlier substitutions is fair enough and your Grabban comnent is interesting, I find his first touch poor and his is not clinical enough, yet he has 6 goals! Although apart from the headers, his goals have gotten deflections or needed two attempts!!

I would be considering Hooper up front with Jerome. Also Howson for Johnson and contraversially, I would bring Bassong in alongside Turner with Russ going to RB.

Ruddy

Martin, Bassong, Turner, Olssen

Tettey Howson

Redmond Hooper Hoolahan

Jerome

A motivated and fit Bassong would be a huge plus defensively. Only watched about 15 minutes of the stream on Monday but he did look, shall we say, interested when playing for the U21s. Hooper on the other hand did not look as though he was yet ready to push Grabban for his place.

For 4231 Wes needs to be in the middle of the three. So maybe time to revert to Lafferty on the left, or possibly even VOO who has been used on the left in at least some of the games he has played.

 

[Paul Handscombe]

I see Paul has forgotten to take his happy pills today

I travelled up from London and got home at 1am after being up at 6am, so yeah I was over the moon how we played and the result

 

[Paul Handscombe]

OK so you don't agree with me but you cannot deny the following:

Charlton had a lot of the ball and passed it around a lot at the back and midfield - hence the comment why we didn't close down or press higher up the pitch.

The tempo was awful, apart from the first 10 minutes it was slow.  Redmond offered the only pace, and playing Hoolahan as a winger makes us disjointed as he drifts into the centre too much and leaves Olson all on his on.

Tettey was playing as a sweeper and picking up the ball sometimes in the centre back role he needs to be higher up the pitch in midfield.

Grabban has yes scored 6 goals and I totally agree with Surgeryman that he needs 3 goes to score a goal, I don't know if he is tired and needs a rest, but yes when Hooper is fit it would be Jerome and Hooper for me.

We only created about 4 decent chances with Redmond missing the best one, the rest of the time we huffed and puffed.  Turner was man of the match by a mile and shows how poor we were.

 

[The Ghost of Michael Theo]

The substitutions were pathetic and the first time Neil has really shown his naivety leaving it til 10 mins from time.

Grabban was woeful and I mean really really poor.

For Neil to say that we we played really well is laughable, we had no pace, no cutting edge, sat back too deep and didn't press high enough up the field.

It is the worst we have played since Wolves

I find this a very odd criticism for a team that - according to BBC - had 61% of possession. Charlton hardly had their foot on the ball the entire 2nd half. The only kick they had, they scored from a lucky deflection.

I can agree that we perhaps lacked a cutting edge - maybe that little bit of quality was needed, which we have been able to find at the right time in previous games. But I think the rest of your observations are pretty wide of the mark.