Substitutions.....or lack of.

[Gavlar]

Frustrating one in the end tonight. They were far more organised than I expected and made life difficult, we struggled to open them up and when they went down to 10 we should surely have tried something different like some of the new lads from the bench? Lundstrum looked tired, as did Duffy and Fleck had taken a shocking knock on his leg from Wallace who obviously should have walked.

Also no place for Billy and was outplaced by Wilson who hasnt kicked a ball for over a year competitively.
Strange one.

Still, we could have lost and Moore made a top drawer save at the end.

Onwards and upwards.

 

[wavy-blade]

Donaldson should have stopped on , we held on to the ball to much , and should have crossed the ball a lot more ffs .

 

[bakeblade]

Once loovens went off he should have left Donaldson on then possibly but Billy on if need be. To put Wilson on was bizarre.

 

[ZoneManWilf]

Agree about Billy. Don't know why Wilson was the sub ahead of him.

 

[Agreasychipbutty]

Should have gone for Leonard instead of Wilson, and possibly Lavery on for lundstram, Leonard isn't scared to shoot from a way out which is what we needed, if you're gonna loose the ball over playing it in the corner you might as well have a pop. Lundstram seemed tired second half and I think we could have benefited from Laverys pace

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Should have gone for Leonard instead of Wilson, and possibly Lavery on for lundstram, Leonard isn't scared to shoot from a way out which is what we needed, if you're gonna loose the ball over playing it in the corner you might as well have a pop. Lundstram seemed tired second half and I think we could have benefited from Laverys pace

I’d have swopped Lundstram for Leonard last 20 mins. The game was crying out for someone to have a bloody shot and Leonard is good at that.

When a team has 10 players in defence you have to get around the back of them, take them on, one on one, go through the middle. Or have a bloody pop from outside the box.

 

[Digger]

I was surprised that Thomas wasn't on the bench after last week. With them down to 10 he would have been ideal tonight.
Hindsight eh?.
Anyways, let them celebres snatching a point at their pub league little neighbours.

 

[Bladesman]

Sharp may as well go. It is clear he is no longer wanted here.

Don't know what the fuck Wilder was playing at tonight.

 

[LJBlade]

Should have gone for Leonard instead of Wilson, and possibly Lavery on for lundstram, Leonard isn't scared to shoot from a way out which is what we needed, if you're gonna loose the ball over playing it in the corner you might as well have a pop. Lundstram seemed tired second half and I think we could have benefited from Laverys pace

Lavery wasn’t even on the bench

 

[LJBlade]

Sharp may as well go. It is clear he is no longer wanted here.

Don't know what the fuck Wilder was playing at tonight.

Which is very easy to say in hindsight....

 

[Bladesman]

Which is very easy to say in hindsight....

We were playing against ten men and had the players on the bench to change the game.

 

[YES Blade]

The strange thing was that Donaldson was playing better than both Clarke and Duffy, only reason I can think of for him coming off was injury or tiredness, but he didn’t seem to be either.

 

[LJBlade]

We were playing against ten men and had the players on the bench to change the game.

But Wilder obviously had his reasons for the changes he did or didn’t make. Your argument is based completely on hindsight, which Wilder obviously didn’t have at the time

 

[Bladesman]

But Wilder obviously had his reasons for the changes he did or didn’t make. Your argument is based completely on hindsight, which Wilder obviously didn’t have at the time

You have 3 subs and the game was going no where. Another match where we could have played til fucking midnight and not hit a cows arse with a banjo.

 

[LJBlade]

You have 3 subs and the game was going no where. Another match where we could have played til fucking midnight and not hit a cows arse with a banjo.

But again Wilder obviously had his reasons for not making the changes. I thought it was ‘in Wilder we trust’? Unless you think he wasn’t interested in winning the game tonight.

 

[robbiez666]

I'm not sure what bringing on Billy would have achieved as we weren't creating any chances. I'd have taken a defender off and added another midfielder. I thought we were brave and didn't play for draws. Tonight seemed like a cop-out. To be fair though, if we'd have gone for it and lost, everyone would be pissed off.

 

[Bladesman]

But again Wilder obviously had his reasons for not making the changes. I thought it was ‘in Wilder we trust’? Unless you think he wasn’t interested in winning the game tonight.

He isn't immune from criticism you know? Bassett and Warnock were not the messiah either they got things wrong and Wilder got it wrong tonight.

 

[LJBlade]

He isn't immune from criticism you know? Bassett and Warnock were not the messiah either they got things wrong and Wilder got it wrong tonight.

Did I say he was?

You’re saying he got it wrong. That might be correct but as I’ve said you’ve got the benefit of hindsight, Wilder didn’t.

 

[FinchleyBlade]

Wilson was brought on because he has pace whilst Billy is as quick as a three legged dog. I would think that much is obvious.

The only change that would have made any difference would be Brookes and he is still ill.

 

[Bladesman]

Did I say he was?

You’re saying he got it wrong. That might be correct but as I’ve said you’ve got the benefit of hindsight, Wilder didn’t.

Wilder was blind to what was unfolding in front of him then. Up against ten men and he did little to try and change the game.

 

[YES Blade]

But Wilder obviously had his reasons for the changes he did or didn’t make. Your argument is based completely on hindsight, which Wilder obviously didn’t have at the time

It wasn’t hindsight, it was clear we weren’t playing well and not creating chances.

It just seemed odd that an attacking manager like Wilder only made one sub.

 

[LJBlade]

It wasn’t hindsight, it was clear we were playing well and not creating chances.

It just seemed odd that an attacking manager like Wilder only made one sub.

Yep I agree that it was odd. I didn’t realise until after the game that we had only made the 1 sub. However I’m sure Wilder wanted to win the game just as much as we did and he obviously had his reasons for the changes he made

 

[YES Blade]

Yep I agree that it was odd. I didn’t realise until after the game that we had only made the 1 sub. However I’m sure Wilder wanted to win the game just as much as we did and he obviously had his reasons for the changes he made

It was possible that he didn’t want to risk losing the match by going more attacking. Maybe against any other team in the division he would have gone for it?

 

[LJBlade]

It was possible that he didn’t want to risk losing the match by going more attacking. Maybe against any other team in the division he would have gone for it?

Quite possibly

 

[shrubbery]

Obviously Wilder wants to win the game but that doesn’t mean we can’t critise his decisions.

The game was crying out for more creativity up top and we had players on the bench who ‘could’ have offered that. We will obviously never know though as he decided to leave two subs on the bench which is his prerogative.

 

[Bladesman]

It wasn’t hindsight, it was clear we were playing well and not creating chances.

It just seemed odd that an attacking manager like Wilder only made one sub.

Exactly especially against ten men.

 

[AWetFlannel]

Agree it wouldn't have made a difference as we didn't make any more chances, but I was desperate for Billy to come.
Come to think of it, I was desperate for him to start, play amazing and score a handball.
This is why I'm not a manager.

 

[Gavlar]

We were playing against ten men and had the players on the bench to change the game.

This.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

It wasn’t hindsight, it was clear we weren’t playing well and not creating chances.

It just seemed odd that an attacking manager like Wilder only made one sub.

Any other game, against any other opposition and I have zero doubt he'd have yanked Lundstram and Stearman and thrown on two attackers.

However, he was acutely aware that a 0-0 and moral victory was much more important than conceding a late winner because we lost shape...

 

[Tunstall Fred]

Any other game, against any other opposition and I have zero doubt he'd have yanked Lundstram and Stearman and thrown on two attackers.

However, he was acutely aware that a 0-0 and moral victory was much more important than conceding a late winner because we lost shape...

Exactly,he has been slaughtered on here for doing exactly that against Bristol