Subs cost us that game

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:24 pm

Just walked home pondering what we could have done there different.

The subs absolutely killed the game. Especially sticking the angry side show Bob on the right wing. He’s never a right winger. I’m in two minds if he’s a footballer or just someone who likes to give stupid free kicks away.

Not too disappointed with the result as we were by far the stronger team in shocking conditions . But we lack a creative spark (benson esc) to trouble teams coming off the bench. Fleming isn’t a striker. Completely disjointed after a really good 60-70 mins on top.

Another 2 points dropped in my eyes but we keep moving forward .

BurnleyFC
Posts: 6810
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:51 am
Been Liked: 2125 times
Has Liked: 1061 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by BurnleyFC » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:27 pm

They did - Hannibal was awful and Flemming put more effort in berating the pitch invader than he did trying to play football - but I was happy with a point given the worsening conditions in the second half. First half we created lots of decent chances.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

ElectroClaret
Posts: 20579
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:07 pm
Been Liked: 4537 times
Has Liked: 2046 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by ElectroClaret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:28 pm

The poor final balls from several players cost us the game, opting to shoot rather than pass to a teammate in a better position.
These 2 users liked this post: Quicknick gawthorpe_view

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:29 pm

ElectroClaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:28 pm
The poor final balls from several players cost us the game, opting to shoot rather than pass to a teammate in a better position.
That also. But we were way on top most of the game there. More positives than negatives.

Why don’t our strikers play on the shoulder either?? Winds me up. 2 or 3 times we would have been in if someone gambled

Goliath
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2023 10:08 pm
Been Liked: 779 times
Has Liked: 289 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Goliath » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:37 pm

No surprise that we lost all initiative when we took our only striker off along with our only creative threat (although he was injured)
These 2 users liked this post: blatherwickstattoos Claret Till I Die

Dark Cloud
Posts: 7582
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
Been Liked: 2301 times
Has Liked: 4081 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Dark Cloud » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:39 pm

Parker is usually pretty good with his substitutions, but today he was way off it. They definitely took away our momentum.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

randomclaret2
Posts: 7830
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm
Been Liked: 3107 times
Has Liked: 4865 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by randomclaret2 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:43 pm

I mentioned it on the Hannibal thread, but Parker's options to change things up creatively wouldnt half be improved if he had Foster, Redmond, Tresor, Benson and Ramsey available...
These 2 users liked this post: blatherwickstattoos mybloodisclaret

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:43 pm

Just imagine a nippy striker who plays on the shoulder in those conditions. 💯 need to find one in the window to push for promotion.
These 2 users liked this post: randomclaret2 mybloodisclaret

Vegas Claret
Posts: 34812
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 12690 times
Has Liked: 6314 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:44 pm

Taking Sarmiento off was an awful decision and it looked like he told Parker exactly that. Brilliant first hall, crap second.
These 2 users liked this post: blatherwickstattoos MG70

dermotdermot
Posts: 3735
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 696 times
Has Liked: 207 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by dermotdermot » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:44 pm

Totally agree.Terrible substitutions. Lucky to get a point.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

Ampth7
Posts: 1370
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 5:12 pm
Been Liked: 307 times
Has Liked: 275 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Ampth7 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:48 pm

Somewhat lucky to get a point in the end because they had some real chances second half as we seemed to lose our way and intensity.

Stayingup
Posts: 5949
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 985 times
Has Liked: 2986 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Stayingup » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:50 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:44 pm
Taking Sarmiento off was an awful decision and it looked like he told Parker exactly that. Brilliant first hall, crap second.
Unless he was injured yes taking off our best player Sarmiento seemed a ludicrous decision.

xxmunkyennuixx
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:38 am
Been Liked: 138 times
Has Liked: 377 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by xxmunkyennuixx » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:51 pm

They were running through the centre of our midfield on the counter. Luca was being thick with the ball in our own half. We were playing ourselves into trouble. The subs were largely pragmatic. Laurent was called right. He was decent. Jay's legs had gone so no choice but Flemming. Blame our owners for that ****. Pires created when coming on and bizarrely Doak was less involved. The issue then lies with Hannibal who is always playing out of position. He's a centre midfielder. I would have been tempted to swap Browny wide and sit Hannibal in CM.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

Vegas Claret
Posts: 34812
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 12690 times
Has Liked: 6314 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:55 pm

Stayingup wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:50 pm
Unless he was injured yes taking off our best player Sarmiento seemed a ludicrous decision.
I thought he might have been but the conversation between the two of them and Sarmiento throwing his arms about looked like he agreed with everyone in the crowd. Dreadful decision, they couldn't live with him.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

mybloodisclaret
Posts: 2975
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 8:04 pm
Been Liked: 945 times
Has Liked: 5856 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by mybloodisclaret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:58 pm

Sarmiento was definitely injured. Limped for the last 5 mins he was on. Redmond would have been an ideal replacement if / when fit.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 34812
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 12690 times
Has Liked: 6314 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Vegas Claret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:59 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:58 pm
Sarmiento was definitely injured. Limped for the last 5 mins he was on. Redmond would have been an ideal replacement if / when fit.
He deffo got a kick but his reaction didn't match that, weird one - agree totally about Redmond though
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

warksclaret
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
Been Liked: 2321 times
Has Liked: 1287 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by warksclaret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:03 pm

Disagree though I may have considered Koleosho coming off first and Sarmiento going in his place. Jay did nothing and should have been off at Half time. Egan got injured and Laurent added some stability. Koleosho was giving the ball away too much. Having said that Pires played well

Sheedyclaret
Posts: 1164
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:44 am
Been Liked: 199 times
Has Liked: 48 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Sheedyclaret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:03 pm

blatherwickstattoos wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:43 pm
Just imagine a nippy striker who plays on the shoulder in those conditions. 💯 need to find one in the window to push for promotion.
And then what get relegated again shudder at the thought of this team in the premier league
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

beddie
Posts: 6352
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:10 pm
Been Liked: 1780 times
Has Liked: 670 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by beddie » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:04 pm

The conditions didn’t help but to be honest I thought we got lucky, second half they had three really good chances and should have scored at least two of them. In the short time he was on the pitch Latte Lath looks exactly what we’re short of.

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:05 pm

Sheedyclaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:03 pm
And then what get relegated again shudder at the thought of this team in the premier league
Facts hahaha.

jlup1980
Posts: 2606
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:01 pm
Been Liked: 1028 times
Has Liked: 635 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by jlup1980 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:12 pm

Should have been Laurent for Sarmiento if he was crocked. Hannibal was the wrong choice.
Similarly, it should have been Hountondji for Jay. Flemming isn't striker and doesn't look close to the level required.
Pires should have come on for Koleosho as well, IMO. There was no need to change the CB's over. Just try Pires on the LW for 10 minutes, see what happens. He produced more from full back in his cameo than Luca did from the wing all night!

Georgiaclaret
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 4:26 am
Been Liked: 5 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Georgiaclaret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:14 pm

Absolutely agree with previous posters. Surely Sarmiento had to stay on the pitch. Koleosho was the one to make way. Sarmiento out wide, Flemming, Jay, and Anthony. One of Cullen/Brownhill for Laurent. Just can’t believe Scott didn’t see it like we do.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

boatshed bill
Posts: 17337
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3563 times
Has Liked: 7816 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by boatshed bill » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:18 pm

How did the subs manage to cost s a game? We didn't lose it.

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:19 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:18 pm
How did the subs manage to cost s a game? We didn't lose it.
Cost us the win * edit

boatshed bill
Posts: 17337
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3563 times
Has Liked: 7816 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by boatshed bill » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:21 pm

blatherwickstattoos wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:19 pm
Cost us the win * edit
Draw was a fair result. Simple as that.
This user liked this post: Darnhill Claret

Burnleyareback2
Posts: 2998
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:07 pm
Been Liked: 891 times
Has Liked: 1680 times
Location: Mostly Europe

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Burnleyareback2 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:24 pm

That was the best did we have played at home this season and we were the better team.

The best I have seen us play this season.

Take and move on.
This user liked this post: blatherwickstattoos

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:26 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:21 pm
Draw was a fair result. Simple as that.
I agree but think with a little bit more creativity off the bench they were there for the taking.

Hbclaret007
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:42 pm
Been Liked: 195 times
Has Liked: 54 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Hbclaret007 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:27 pm

Georgiaclaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:14 pm
Absolutely agree with previous posters. Surely Sarmiento had to stay on the pitch. Koleosho was the one to make way. Sarmiento out wide, Flemming, Jay, and Anthony. One of Cullen/Brownhill for Laurent. Just can’t believe Scott didn’t see it like we do.
That's why we are all managers and he isn't.
🤨
Oh wait a minute 😳

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:29 pm

Hbclaret007 wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:27 pm
That's why we are all managers and he isn't.
🤨
Oh wait a minute 😳
Can’t fault him so far this season really with the hand he’s been dealt and the injuries… but to put hanibal on the right wing was a mistake. No getting away from that

DCWat
Posts: 9966
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:04 am
Been Liked: 4497 times
Has Liked: 3913 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by DCWat » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:29 pm

The use of Hannibal, before tonight, baffles me. Tonight was just bizarre, moving him out to the wing. For me, he must be played further back. He’s reasonably technical, but doesn't seem to me to have the nouse for a more advanced midfield role.

If Sarmiento was injured, it left Parker with a bit of a quandary. If he wasn’t and it was a tactical change, it was a mistake.

Koleosho was on one of his properly frustrating to watch evenings. Only once did he go on the outside of their winger (second half, won a corner). In the first half, he was constantly coming inside and running into trouble - so frustrating when there’s acres of grass for him to run into, if he goes on the outside.

He had to be hooked after that period in the second half when he was defending and gave them the ball back four times in quick succession, instead of taking a safer option.

All in all, we will hopefully look back on this as a good point earned.

Must admit, I was surprised to see Worrall and Ekdal on the bench and no Redmond (unless he’s had a bit of a setback)?
This user liked this post: xxmunkyennuixx

claretspice
Posts: 6435
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 3179 times
Has Liked: 151 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by claretspice » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:36 pm

Unless Sarmiento was injured taking him off was an odd call. He was more effective than either winger (although I thought Koleosho was more effective than Anthony tonight) and those first two changes didn't work.

Jay was ineffective but was also increasingly isolated as the weather pinned us back. The reluctance to use Flemming in his preferred number 10 role is curious - given conditions, his physicality would have seemed we suited in that role to conditions and I thought bringing him on to play that role with Jay, with Sarmiento replacing either winger, would've been worth 15 minutes.

In fairness, the second set of changes did improve us although Hannibal is clearly not a right winger.

ClaretPete001
Posts: 3270
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:39 am
Been Liked: 548 times
Has Liked: 189 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by ClaretPete001 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:37 pm

After half time, the game began to runaway from us Boro had several good chances and and he had to make substitutions.

We ended the game more strongly than they did but if you miss so many chances you aren't going to win games. So, many players are snatching at shots in the final third and choosing the wrong options when others are free in the box it's hard to blame anyone but the players.
This user liked this post: xxmunkyennuixx

claretspice
Posts: 6435
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 3179 times
Has Liked: 151 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by claretspice » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:38 pm

DCWat wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:29 pm
The use of Hannibal, before tonight, baffles me. Tonight was just bizarre, moving him out to the wing. For me, he must be played further back. He’s reasonably technical, but doesn't seem to me to have the nouse for a more advanced midfield role.

If Sarmiento was injured, it left Parker with a bit of a quandary. If he wasn’t and it was a tactical change, it was a mistake.

Koleosho was on one of his properly frustrating to watch evenings. Only once did he go on the outside of their winger (second half, won a corner). In the first half, he was constantly coming inside and running into trouble - so frustrating when there’s acres of grass for him to run into, if he goes on the outside.

He had to be hooked after that period in the second half when he was defending and gave them the ball back four times in quick succession, instead of taking a safer option.

All in all, we will hopefully look back on this as a good point earned.

Must admit, I was surprised to see Worrall and Ekdal on the bench and no Redmond (unless he’s had a bit of a setback)?
Not sure that's fair of Koleosho. They doubled up and denied him space outside and I didn't think Humphrys took defenders away from him. Anthony did have space but didn't greatly use it.

DCWat
Posts: 9966
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:04 am
Been Liked: 4497 times
Has Liked: 3913 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by DCWat » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:46 pm

In the first half there were numerous times that he had huge swathes of grass to run into on the outside, he didn’t once take that option, instead coming inside and running into trouble.

If he’s doubled up on and that option isn’t available, fair enough, but when the option is available, he needs to start taking it occasionally.

It becomes too predictable and makes the full back’s job easier.
This user liked this post: bobinho

claretspice
Posts: 6435
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 3179 times
Has Liked: 151 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by claretspice » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:48 pm

DCWat wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:46 pm
In the first half there were numerous times that he had huge swathes of grass to run into on the outside, he didn’t once take that option, instead coming inside and running into trouble.

If he’s doubled up on and that option isn’t available, fair enough, but when the option is available, he needs to start taking it occasionally.

It becomes too predictable and makes the full back’s job easier.
It's a blind alley when there's two men inviting him to go that way though, which there were, and the left back wasn't underlapping or positioning himself to draw one away. He's quick but he'd have to be an Olympic sprinter to get round the outside in that situation.

Goalposts
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:36 pm
Been Liked: 650 times
Has Liked: 155 times
Location: the ghost in the atom

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Goalposts » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:50 pm

blatherwickstattoos wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:24 pm
Just walked home pondering what we could have done there different.

The subs absolutely killed the game. Especially sticking the angry side show Bob on the right wing. He’s never a right winger. I’m in two minds if he’s a footballer or just someone who likes to give stupid free kicks away.

Not too disappointed with the result as we were by far the stronger team in shocking conditions . But we lack a creative spark (benson esc) to trouble teams coming off the bench. Fleming isn’t a striker. Completely disjointed after a really good 60-70 mins on top.

Another 2 points dropped in my eyes but we keep moving forward .
Utter ********

helmclaret
Posts: 1773
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:37 am
Been Liked: 628 times
Has Liked: 443 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by helmclaret » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:51 pm

claretspice wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:36 pm
Unless Sarmiento was injured taking him off was an odd call. He was more effective than either winger (although I thought Koleosho was more effective than Anthony tonight) and those first two changes didn't work.

Jay was ineffective but was also increasingly isolated as the weather pinned us back. The reluctance to use Flemming in his preferred number 10 role is curious - given conditions, his physicality would have seemed we suited in that role to conditions and I thought bringing him on to play that role with Jay, with Sarmiento replacing either winger, would've been worth 15 minutes.

In fairness, the second set of changes did improve us although Hannibal is clearly not a right winger.
All this talk about Flemming being a number 10. What type of number 10? He doesn’t drop into the hole and link the play. He doesn’t drop in a switch the play. He doesn’t drop in and turn.

No idea what he’s going to offer to this set up.

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:54 pm

Goalposts wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:50 pm
Utter ********
So you’re happy with Hannibal out wide ? Fair play mate.

blatherwickstattoos
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
Been Liked: 454 times
Has Liked: 641 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by blatherwickstattoos » Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:55 pm

helmclaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:51 pm
All this talk about Flemming being a number 10. What type of number 10? He doesn’t drop into the hole and link the play. He doesn’t drop in a switch the play. He doesn’t drop in and turn.

No idea what he’s going to offer to this set up.
Luckily he’s only on loan ( I hope)

DCWat
Posts: 9966
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:04 am
Been Liked: 4497 times
Has Liked: 3913 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by DCWat » Sat Dec 07, 2024 12:03 am

claretspice wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:48 pm
It's a blind alley when there's two men inviting him to go that way though, which there were, and the left back wasn't underlapping or positioning himself to draw one away. He's quick but he'd have to be an Olympic sprinter to get round the outside in that situation.
I have to disagree, Spice.

There were, in the first half, occasions where he had opportunity to take the full back on the outside - unless their full back himself was on Olympic sprinter, there was no reason that he couldn’t have taken that option, when presented, rather than bringing the ball back inside to where it was congested.

It’s not a blind alley if you’ve a clear run to the byline by taking on the full back. It’s a blinder alley coming inside to an area that’s more congested.

He has both the pace and the trickery to take that option more regularly than he does, and by doing so, it sows that seed of doubt into the fullbacks mind.
This user liked this post: xxmunkyennuixx

123EasyasBFC
Posts: 6776
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 330 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Sat Dec 07, 2024 12:24 am

Can’t believe the stick Flemming is getting, he was much more affective tonight in his 30 minutes than Jay Rod, for me this game always suited Flemming up top rather than Jay

Cirrus_Minor
Posts: 4901
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:20 pm
Been Liked: 1251 times
Has Liked: 1485 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Cirrus_Minor » Sat Dec 07, 2024 1:01 am

I can only think that Sarmiento was injured because he was causing Middlesbrough alsorts of problems in the first half.
Not really surprised Koleosho was eventually hooked, as I said on his thread, the lad has oodles of talent but is like an uncontrolled bottle of pop, really needs a decent one-to-one coach to get his talents optimised for this level.

MG70
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:39 am
Been Liked: 92 times
Has Liked: 452 times
Location: Australia

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by MG70 » Sat Dec 07, 2024 5:27 am

Sheedyclaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:03 pm
And then what get relegated again shudder at the thought of this team in the premier league
That’s the spirit :roll:

Clive 1960
Posts: 2042
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2022 10:15 am
Been Liked: 299 times
Has Liked: 563 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Clive 1960 » Sat Dec 07, 2024 6:12 am

Burnleyareback2 wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:24 pm
That was the best did we have played at home this season and we were the better team.

The best I have seen us play this season.

Take and move on.
Think we were better in first half the way we reacted to going behind but second half they pushed on a little more and just shaded it and could have won with chances they created but fair result in awful conditions..

Sproggy
Posts: 1611
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:41 pm
Been Liked: 715 times
Has Liked: 156 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Sproggy » Sat Dec 07, 2024 6:54 am

They had 3 absolute sitters in the 2nd half. The subs were made to try and shore things up a bit but we could have been 3-1 down before any of them were made.

Happy to come away with a point, just need to win on Tuesday.
This user liked this post: xxmunkyennuixx

Woodleyclaret
Posts: 8700
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:25 pm
Been Liked: 1874 times
Has Liked: 2236 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by Woodleyclaret » Sat Dec 07, 2024 7:19 am

Another 2 points lost but conditions were absolutely shite. Lauren should have started after his mom performance at Stoke.But why do we insist on playing down the left? Antony was in acres of space unmarked wide right and yet consistently ignored.A box finisher in January is an absolute must though.Again too many passes outside the box when attacking and it took a full back to show the rest how it's done. Great goal but, sorry Connor the dodgy car salesman look does nothing for you.

123EasyasBFC
Posts: 6776
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 330 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Sat Dec 07, 2024 8:16 am

helmclaret wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2024 11:51 pm
All this talk about Flemming being a number 10. What type of number 10? He doesn’t drop into the hole and link the play. He doesn’t drop in a switch the play. He doesn’t drop in and turn.

No idea what he’s going to offer to this set up.
When he came on last night Flemming should plenty of linking the play, slightly over hit pass that nearly played Laurent in, him and brownhill had a nice link up that greeted a chance.

Against stoke Flemming dropped in switched the play to Anthony who played the ball into the box that resulted in us winning a pen

The Shire Claret
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2023 11:17 am
Been Liked: 364 times
Has Liked: 279 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by The Shire Claret » Sat Dec 07, 2024 8:17 am

Just wait till our Subs also have Redmond and Benson

Tonight we didn’t have the backup to make a creative difference but SP needed to take the players off that he did cause they were either dead on their feet of injured

Having to juggle the back line and put Hannibal on the left worried me but happy with a point

3 points on Tuesday

UTC

123EasyasBFC
Posts: 6776
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 1282 times
Has Liked: 330 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Sat Dec 07, 2024 8:18 am

I can’t get behind the subs costing us the game, until the subs we were second best in the second half and Boro should have been 3-1 up. 3 then had 2 massive chances to play Anthony and brownhill in and didn’t both times, I think people are clutching for something to moan about Parker because we didn’t win
This user liked this post: xxmunkyennuixx

claretspice
Posts: 6435
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
Been Liked: 3179 times
Has Liked: 151 times

Re: Subs cost us that game

Post by claretspice » Sat Dec 07, 2024 8:47 am

DCWat wrote:
Sat Dec 07, 2024 12:03 am
I have to disagree, Spice.

There were, in the first half, occasions where he had opportunity to take the full back on the outside - unless their full back himself was on Olympic sprinter, there was no reason that he couldn’t have taken that option, when presented, rather than bringing the ball back inside to where it was congested.

It’s not a blind alley if you’ve a clear run to the byline by taking on the full back. It’s a blinder alley coming inside to an area that’s more congested.

He has both the pace and the trickery to take that option more regularly than he does, and by doing so, it sows that seed of doubt into the fullbacks mind.
Each to their own opinion. But Dijksteel is very quick, and he was dropping off slightly with Barlaser engaging Koleosho. That gave Dijksteel a head start if Koleosho went outside. He did a couple of times in the first half and he won a corner and a throw. But we didn't help him enough by dragging Barlaser away from him. In the end Koleosho tended to try coming inside because if he beat Barlaser he was running into space and towards team mates.

He didn't have a good game but he wasn't awful either.

Post Reply