Subs cost us the game

[1964FOX]

Stubborn, simple as that. It's been 442 for months but even when the formation is changed and we perform better he's bringing Vardy on when it is blatant to everyone else it's the wrong move. Bringing those pair on would have been a great boost for Cardiff. At that point they can throw everything forward because any threat we had was gone, we'd have been better off adding another midfielder to help see the game out. Maybe having 5 in midfield at that point would have stopped the cross that led to the goal, who knows.

He won't let it go though he'll continue to try justify signing him and it'll continue to cost us.

I would take him proving us wrong by one of them scoring a last minute winner at Wembley though.

[smudgerfox]

I wasn't talking about last night. I'm saying all season you could look at a bench with Waghorn, Vardy, Futacs, Dyer on it and say why? Not because they're useless although it's true they all have their flaws but because it's hard to see why we need all of them and what wd happen if we had injuries/sendings off/or changes of tactics which required more than one extra defensive option. Dyer on for Konchesky was the result of that lack of cover.

On the loans, I wasn't defending DJ - he epitomises all that is wrong with modern football to me - but we did let him go and he did play a major part in getting Blackpool promoted. FACT. And while I understand the rationale for loaning Moore - I assumed he'd be able to come back at a second's notice should we need him, but I read somewhere it's 28 days. To me Moore is a vital member of the squad and a very useful sub because he can play right across the back four, something Whitbread cannot do. And like many I'm bemused by the Schlupp deal - if he's good enough for ManUre why has he never been worth a go in his primary position for us. We've signed Vardy, Futacs, Kane and Wood and yet JS has barely been given a sniff of a chance to solve our problems up front.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Waghorn and Vardy are not the greatest strikers, given, but no one can fault them for getting stuck in. Nugent and Woods are far less likely to harrass the opposition and track back (I'm not faulting them there - their job is to get on to the end of other people's work and stick it in the net.) Pearson wanted to defend from the front and it should have worked, but guess what ; nothing in life is gauranteed.

[deep blue]

You can't make such bald statements about individual subs changing games - there are just so many complexities & what-ifs.

I don't think Vardy is an ideal sub for the situation - he lacks ball-retention skills and the experience to make the right decisions at this level, even though he does put in the effort. But who else would be guaranteed to see out the job?

One of the few games I saw this season was Burnley at the KP. We came back from a goal down to win 2-1. We had Knocky on as a sub. For the last 5 mins he took the game by the scruff of the neck and took the ball down to the corner flag. Several others cottoned on & joined him. They played out time with pass-ball, confidently; Burnley never got a sniff and it was clear to everyone that they had no chance of an equaliser.

But if Knocky had come on instead last night he might just have well have forgotten to track his man or made a stupid tackle.

The Cardiff fan AJ1927 in thread "One point closer..." hits it on the head for me. I think our overbearing problem is lack of confidence in every thing we do - can't take chances, can't hang onto the ball when we need to, can't keep up the defensive discipline. In a "last 10 mins" situation like last night our players don't look confidentof hanging on, and this transmits to the supporters.

What it would have done for our confidence if we could have taken all 3 points. Maybe if our players can take the positive from the performance, and the away point, we can still get our confidence back for the run-in.

[dynamark]

Have to think that Knocky albeit under very strict instructions would have been a better option than either 'striker'.he knows how to keep possession and is never going to shy away from the ball which he would go looking for it rather than chasing =if that makes sense.we wil never know

[marbelladave]

Waghorn and Vardy are not the greatest strikers, given, but no one can fault them for getting stuck in. Nugent and Woods are far less likely to harrass the opposition and track back (I'm not faulting them there - their job is to get on to the end of other people's work and stick it in the net.) Pearson wanted to defend from the front and it should have worked, but guess what ; nothing in life is gauranteed.

This would be a good point, if it were true, which it is not.......

Wood and Nugent may not run about as much but they defend well enough and give the opposition far more to worry about than Waghorn or Vardy. We were defending from the front until the last two subs were made, then we had no one at the front as everyone pretty much dropped deep.......

[Bob Weasel Fox]

it was just unlucky really, i think from the lads and lasses who went to the game it would appear we played well but just fell 30 seconds short of a deserved victory - no one to blame really

[marbelladave]

it was just unlucky really, i think from the lads and lasses who went to the game it would appear we played well but just fell 30 seconds short of a deserved victory - no one to blame really

No we did not play well, nowhere near the performances from early in the season........

What we did do though is work hard and put in a battling performance and against a very poor Cardiff, had we played well, with the firepower we know have available we would have stuffed then 2 or 3.......

[smudgerfox]

I'm wondering how many times - despite the fact that it's always full of strikers and despite the fact that three of them usually get on - I'm wondering how often a sub has scored after coming off the bench this season. Lesds than five, would be my guess.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

No we did not play well, nowhere near the performances from early in the season........

What we did do though is work hard and put in a battling performance and against a very poor Cardiff, had we played well, with the firepower we know have available we would have stuffed then 2 or 3.......

Yeah i take your points Marbs, i wasnt at the game (i was working a night shift last night and tonight) and initially i was gutted we only drew in the end but now on reflection i hope its the turning point and our results pick up again now

[Babylon]

I'm wondering how many times - despite the fact that it's always full of strikers and despite the fact that three of them usually get on - I'm wondering how often a sub has scored after coming off the bench this season. Lesds than five, would be my guess.

Futacs v Ipswich

Waghorn v Huddersfield

King v Peterborough

King v Charlton

Dyer v Boro

Marshall v Brum

Vardy v Barsnley

After a quick look.

[smudgerfox]

6 goals in about 120 substitutions (40x3?)

[Bettsj2]

Its all just speculative what would or wouldnt have happened had the subs not been made. I'm inclined to think that seeing as Cardiff have had the season they've had, they surely woild have eventually put us under pressure anyway?

It doesnt really matter. The fact is we were about a minute from victory and couldnt hold on. The conceding of late goals is worrying me. Before Peterborough, we hadnt conceded beyond 72 minutes (or something similar) but now, when the clock hits 80 I really start to panic. If I do, other fans surely feel the same and the players will too.

I think thats why Wellens was included last night. Maybe what we're lacking is an older head in the midfield? By all accounts he sounds like he had a good game. Once upon a time he was a decent player so if we can squeeze some minutes out of him at the quality he showed last night, maybe that will see us right for the rest of the season?

Fvck knows.

Anyway, It wasnt Vardy's fault for the equaliser

[smudgerfox]

Its all just speculative what would or wouldnt have happened had the subs not been made. I'm inclined to think that seeing as Cardiff have had the season they've had, they surely woild have eventually put us under pressure anyway?

It doesnt really matter. The fact is we were about a minute from victory and couldnt hold on. The conceding of late goals is worrying me. Before Peterborough, we hadnt conceded beyond 72 minutes (or something similar) but now, when the clock hits 80 I really start to panic. If I do, other fans surely feel the same and the players will too.

Anyway, It wasnt Vardy's fault for the equaliser

Agreed - but my point is that we don't have defensive options on the bench to help us withstand late pressure and the bench is full of forwards who don't have much of an impact when they come on anyway. Amongst many unjustified criticisms of NFP and individuals on the bench, I think that is a valid point.

[Swiss_tony]

Unfortunately, it seems to be a modern disease amongst managers and not just pearson that they make a bunch of subs towards the end of a game for no reason. if you're 4-0 up fair enough, but in a tight game that'sa no-no in my book. you don't waste time, as the ref adds 30 seconds on. The only thing where it's worth while is if you're under pressure, sometimes the break in play can upset the momentum, so if you're on the back foot it gives you a breather. but the fact is we shouldn't have been on the back foot, we were playing well, and the subs buggered up our momentum.

[Father Ted]

Nugent went off for Vardy because he did very little anyway all game and was on a booking.

Wood, imo was replaced by Waghorn to run the clock down.

For me, the biggest mistake was bringing on Kane for Wellens, should have brought Marshall on and kept the midfield 5 similarly unchanged.

[Babylon]

6 goals in about 120 substitutions (40x3?)

If you counted only second half performances we'd be top apparently.

So whilst 7 might not be that impressive, clearly we are doing something right after half time.

[cc_star]

Agreed - but my point is that we don't have defensive options on the bench to help us withstand late pressure and the bench is full of forwards who don't have much of an impact when they come on anyway. Amongst many unjustified criticisms of NFP and individuals on the bench, I think that is a valid point.

Barring RDL's injury - The bench has SSL, Whitbread, Shclupp/Konch and Moore can be recalled, there are plenty of options.

The point about last night's games was that the defence was perfectly sound & handling everything anyway. there was absolutely no way you were going to make a defensive substitute.

So if you wanted a defensive sub, who would you take off:

A defender and mess up the balance that had been achieved all game

A midfielder and be over-ran?

A forward and concede the ability to retain the ball in the opposition half and just invite waves of attacks.

Putting on forwards knows for a workrate should have meant a better ability to work for the ball in their half, which in turn equals weaker & fewer attacks.

The injury time last minute lofted ball in the box could have been closed down with more effort, similarly the defender could have been stronger when the ball arrived in the box - We could say the same/opposite thing when we ourselves benefited from injury time goal last week.

IMO the reasons for the subs were sound and Nuge & Wood who were contributing almost nothing by that point would be all the fresher for Saturday's match... this whole charade is little more than looking for something to beat Pearson around the head with.

[cc_star]

6 goals in about 120 substitutions (40x3?)

Make a league table of second halves only & we'd be top.

The second halves almost always includes the substitutes, so whatever Nige is doing in the second halves to bring the points home including making subs, is about as successful as it's possible to be.

What's your point?

[Swiss_tony]

Barring RDL's injury - The bench has SSL, Whitbread, Shclupp/Konch and Moore can be recalled, there are plenty of options.

we can't recall moore until march 20th under the fl loan rules. he was loaned to the bees on feb 20th, and you can't recall a loan player within the first 28 days.

[Spiritwalker]

I'm being objective when I say this, but looking at the goal Vardy really should have got out to the crosser quicker. He definitely shoulders some of the blame for the equaliser.

This

I can't believe Vardy is considered blameless by the majority on here.

Watch the goal again, Vardy runs over to close down, then stops as if to say **** it, then just turns his back.

If I was NP I would have kicked his arse.

[Simmo86]

You can't make such bald statements about individual subs changing games - there are just so many complexities & what-ifs.

I don't think Vardy is an ideal sub for the situation - he lacks ball-retention skills and the experience to make the right decisions at this level, even though he does put in the effort. But who else would be guaranteed to see out the job?

One of the few games I saw this season was Burnley at the KP. We came back from a goal down to win 2-1. We had Knocky on as a sub. For the last 5 mins he took the game by the scruff of the neck and took the ball down to the corner flag. Several others cottoned on & joined him. They played out time with pass-ball, confidently; Burnley never got a sniff and it was clear to everyone that they had no chance of an equaliser.

But if Knocky had come on instead last night he might just have well have forgotten to track his man or made a stupid tackle.

The Cardiff fan AJ1927 in thread "One point closer..." hits it on the head for me. I think our overbearing problem is lack of confidence in every thing we do - can't take chances, can't hang onto the ball when we need to, can't keep up the defensive discipline. In a "last 10 mins" situation like last night our players don't look confidentof hanging on, and this transmits to the supporters.

What it would have done for our confidence if we could have taken all 3 points. Maybe if our players can take the positive from the performance, and the away point, we can still get our confidence back for the run-in.

You must have forgotten the one on one Burnley missed in injury time then!

[inckley fox]

This

I can't believe Vardy is considered blameless by the majority on here.

Watch the goal again, Vardy runs over to close down, then stops as if to say **** it, then just turns his back.

If I was NP I would have kicked his arse.

Well Nige said 'we failed to cut out the cross and that cost us', so he would appear to be unhappy with Vardy even if some of us wish to defend him!

[smudgerfox]

Make a league table of second halves only & we'd be top.

The second halves almost always includes the substitutes, so whatever Nige is doing in the second halves to bring the points home including making subs, is about as successful as it's possible to be.

What's your point?

My point is we tend to have a lot of forwards on the bench but they don't tend to have the most obvious impact they could have which is to get us the odd goal. At least they do get the odd goal but not much more than that. So while I'm happy to accept the stat that we're very good in the second half I'm struggling to recall a true impact substitution this season - one that changed the game - despite the bench being full of forwards. And I'm not suggesting that we should have changed the back four but maybe an option to reinforce it with another defender or defensive midfielder would have been useful.

[Guest]

I'm wondering how many times - despite the fact that it's always full of strikers and despite the fact that three of them usually get on - I'm wondering how often a sub has scored after coming off the bench this season. Lesds than five, would be my guess.

Are you really trying to argue that the only reason to bring on a sub is for that guy to score and if he doesn't then the substitution is wrong?

You're Bonkers!