shrimper wrote:Trying to make sense of it all....
I said after their first goal that was the time to put Hunter or Stanners on (I'd have taken Drummy off then - as I think Vinny has said in another thread, we were needing someone to hassle their midfilders a bit more as we were getting over-run). Drummy had had a good first half, contributing to our attacks but when we saw how they were lining up in the second half, we needed someone busier and more 'all-action' in there.
I also said I could see Duffy coming on as well just to give us more energy and occupy their midfield a bit more (probably for Craney who was looking a bit leg-weary, he was all over the park in the first half).
But hindsight's wonderful. The thing was they HAD to change things, it was forced on them. It worked - and good for them, but it might not have done.
We didn't have to change anything at half time, we were well on top and knew they would have to come out attacking and that would give us options to get another.
We had a side that had gone 3-0 up and looked capable of scoring more, so I wouldn't have taken Jevons off any sooner and, personally, I wouldn't have gone to playing Mullin on his own up front.
But I would have put Gary on sooner.
Some tough games coming up, as we always knew, and the pressure on everyone could grow if we don't get a few unexpectedly positive results.
I felt sorry for Twissy being left out of the starting line-up but liked the partnership that Mullin and Jevons started and can't argue with the selection now. Twissy looked good as well when he came on.
Maybe Sammy will look at the side, energy levels etc and make changes automatically in future - giving certain players a set amount of time on the pitch, to be replaced by fresh legs, whatever the state of the game score-wise.
Spot on. Bringing Garry on when he did, and on the right of midfield, was suicide. I think he wanted to give Moss more protection in light of Rochdale's changes and, in that sense, removing Craney was a good decision because he doesn't get too involved in a defensive capacity. However, we had two players on the bench in Duffy and Wainwright capable of playing in Craney's role and, particularly in Wainwright's case, offering better defensive cover than Craney.
Hunter was needed in the middle of the park (much earlier than he was introduced) and, when he finally did come on, this left Stewart Drummond clearly as bemused as the rest of us. First, he seemed to walk over to the bench expecting to be the one who'd make way for Hunter and then, once he’d ascertained Craney was to be subbed instead, he began to head to the right hand side himself, fully expecting Hunter to be tucked in a central midfield role. It was a completely mental decision by Sammy and one that ultimately cost us, I think. He must take sole responsibility.
It does bring forward another interesting issue though: Sammy’s substitutions. In my view, he has never maximised his options from the bench as well as he ought to. For years, he would make just one substitution on or around 85 minutes giving the substitute little chance to make any impact. Newby and O’Carroll were famous victims of this policy, of course. More so, however, the issue is more important this season than previously. We now have a huge squad at our disposal now with various types of player to cover most eventualities. Given that we are now allowed to name seven substitutes, I think Sammy needs to re-appraise his attitude towards the substitutes bench if we are to fully utilise it.