- This topic has 10 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just my humble opinion but 2 things:
1) Bobby seemed to wait an eternity to make the change. To keep the same shape in midfield & at the back that was doing relatively well up until that point I’d have made the substitution straight away
2) Bearing in mind how well Lopez played in his last 2 games, I’d have thought that the substitution to make would have been to bring him on for Gomez then it’s a kind of like for like for Figueroa. Bringing McArthur on (as much as I rate him) then (IMO) put us at a bit of a disadvantage (in addition to being down to 10 men) because Latics then had Jones & Beausejour playing out of positionNot saying I know more about the game than Bobby (well maybe
) but that seemed oddOn the plus side it was good to see McManaman getting more than a 23 second run out!! ;)
Well I thought that he should have taken one of the front two off and brought on Lopez. Contrary to popular belief of some on here we did used to play with a lone striker ! That to me would have made more sense but hey it’s all academic now !
Well I thought that he should have taken one of the front two off and brought on Lopez. Contrary to popular belief of some on here we did used to play with a lone striker ! That to me would have made more sense but hey it’s all academic now !Better tell Roberto that Phil. He didn’t think we played with a lone striker and he picked the team!
Just my humble opinion but 2 things:
1) Bobby seemed to wait an eternity to make the change. To keep the same shape in midfield & at the back that was doing relatively well up until that point I’d have made the substitution straight away
2) Bearing in mind how well Lopez played in his last 2 games, I’d have thought that the substitution to make would have been to bring him on for Gomez then it’s a kind of like for like for Figueroa. Bringing McArthur on (as much as I rate him) then (IMO) put us at a bit of a disadvantage (in addition to being down to 10 men) because Latics then had Jones & Beausejour playing out of positionNot saying I know more about the game than Bobby (well maybe
) but that seemed oddOn the plus side it was good to see McManaman getting more than a 23 second run out!! ;)
I thought it was an odd choice too, but I’m not a professional football coach and he is.
I think it took a while to get McArthur on as Jones was going through all sorts of things on a tablet before he actually got on the pitch.
Well I thought that he should have taken one of the front two off and brought on Lopez. Contrary to popular belief of some on here we did used to play with a lone striker ! That to me would have made more sense but hey it’s all academic now !
Better tell Roberto that Phil. He didn’t think we played with a lone striker and he picked the team![/quote]
We wont open that can of worms again eh !
Well I thought that he should have taken one of the front two off and brought on Lopez. Contrary to popular belief of some on here we did used to play with a lone striker ! That to me would have made more sense but hey it’s all academic now !
Better tell Roberto that Phil. He didn’t think we played with a lone striker and he picked the team![/quote]
Better tell Franco Di Santo that coz he says Latics used to play with a lone striker & he was it!! ;)
Just my humble opinion but 2 things:
1) Bobby seemed to wait an eternity to make the change. To keep the same shape in midfield & at the back that was doing relatively well up until that point I’d have made the substitution straight away
2) Bearing in mind how well Lopez played in his last 2 games, I’d have thought that the substitution to make would have been to bring him on for Gomez then it’s a kind of like for like for Figueroa. Bringing McArthur on (as much as I rate him) then (IMO) put us at a bit of a disadvantage (in addition to being down to 10 men) because Latics then had Jones & Beausejour playing out of positionNot saying I know more about the game than Bobby (well maybe
) but that seemed oddOn the plus side it was good to see McManaman getting more than a 23 second run out!! ;)
I thought it was an odd choice too, but I’m not a professional football coach and he is.
I think it took a while to get McArthur on as Jones was going through all sorts of things on a tablet before he actually got on the pitch.[/quote]
Agreed, but I’d love to know what Bobby’s thinking behind that change was
I noticed that about Jones & his Ipad too & can swear at some point I could see Jones moaning that “this f**kin thing never works”!!Well I thought that he should have taken one of the front two off and brought on Lopez. Contrary to popular belief of some on here we did used to play with a lone striker ! That to me would have made more sense but hey it’s all academic now !Although it is academic now……
We needed to have tightened up after the penalty and kept it at 1-0. But I thought in the second half until they got their third that we were on top, and if we had taken our half chances could easily had it back to 2-2. Well dont Bobby to keeping two up with 10 men.
Just my humble opinion but 2 things:
1) Bobby seemed to wait an eternity to make the change. To keep the same shape in midfield & at the back that was doing relatively well up until that point I’d have made the substitution straight away
2) Bearing in mind how well Lopez played in his last 2 games, I’d have thought that the substitution to make would have been to bring him on for Gomez then it’s a kind of like for like for Figueroa. Bringing McArthur on (as much as I rate him) then (IMO) put us at a bit of a disadvantage (in addition to being down to 10 men) because Latics then had Jones & Beausejour playing out of positionNot saying I know more about the game than Bobby (well maybe
) but that seemed oddOn the plus side it was good to see McManaman getting more than a 23 second run out!! ;)
Fair comments. The way he changed things, meant we had a bit of a switch around in more than one position, where as like you say, we could’ve basically brought on a ‘like for like’ defender in Lopez for Gomez.
I’ve never in favour of making a change that alters more than the necessary. This type of thing is his weakness, I think.
Well I thought that he should have taken one of the front two off and brought on Lopez. Contrary to popular belief of some on here we did used to play with a lone striker ! That to me would have made more sense but hey it’s all academic now !
Better tell Roberto that Phil. He didn’t think we played with a lone striker and he picked the team![/quote]
Better tell Franco Di Santo that coz he says Latics used to play with a lone striker & he was it!! ;)[/quote]
The last time that comment was raised I think I suggested it says more about Di Santo’s undertsanding of the tactics than it does about Roberto’s!
Just my humble opinion but 2 things:
1) Bobby seemed to wait an eternity to make the change. To keep the same shape in midfield & at the back that was doing relatively well up until that point I’d have made the substitution straight away
2) Bearing in mind how well Lopez played in his last 2 games, I’d have thought that the substitution to make would have been to bring him on for Gomez then it’s a kind of like for like for Figueroa. Bringing McArthur on (as much as I rate him) then (IMO) put us at a bit of a disadvantage (in addition to being down to 10 men) because Latics then had Jones & Beausejour playing out of positionNot saying I know more about the game than Bobby (well maybe
) but that seemed oddOn the plus side it was good to see McManaman getting more than a 23 second run out!! ;)
I thought it was an odd choice too, but I’m not a professional football coach and he is.
I think it took a while to get McArthur on as Jones was going through all sorts of things on a tablet before he actually got on the pitch.[/quote]
Agreed, but I’d love to know what Bobby’s thinking behind that change was
I noticed that about Jones & his Ipad too & can swear at some point I could see Jones moaning that “this f**kin thing never works”!![/quote]Some of the levels on angry birds are quite difficult.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
