Babylon Posted 6 April 2013 Share Posted 6 April 2013 Truth be told he did not need to make any bloody substitutions you want to close the game out you do not bring on two forward players? Clueless, useless, subs cost us again one win in thirteen games and people are estatic we draw at bloody Brighton jees I give up! So the subs that didn't pass the ball badly out from the back cost us the game, subs that didn't miss control in the middle cost us the game, defenders not closing others down lost us the game!!??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 6 April 2013 Share Posted 6 April 2013 Really don't know why he didn't bring Knockaert on. Wood didn't do to bad in my opinion, far better than some of the stuff we've seen recently, but Harry Kane is a major problem, what does he actually bring to the side, he really should of kept possession better late on, but failed to do so. Simply not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADK Posted 6 April 2013 Share Posted 6 April 2013 I don't know why we keep playing Kane either. Knockaert would have been 10 times as effective. Dyer would have been better too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adster Posted 6 April 2013 Share Posted 6 April 2013 Nugent didn't have much impact on the game though? He didn't give us width, no making runs! All i'm saying is when he's been up front and also once behind the striker (cardiff away) he's been good. It's like putting wood on the wing and expecting him to perform when he's a target man You seriously attempting to defend Kane? I'd fully expect Wood to be able to play a simple pass, control a simple ball even if playing midfield yet alone on the wing. What position he plays has no impact on a professional footballer doing the basic fundamental aspects of playing the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 is waghorn inured? one thing waghorn is good at is ball control and holding the ball up, yet he is never brought on at end of games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dickov22 Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 I'm Pearson's biggest fan but his use of subs late on and tinkering is costing us. It reminds me of Micky Adams, he used to do the same thing. Makes no sense to me to tinker with a team late on, just creates confusion, breaks concentration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dickov22 Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 And Waghorn is not good at all at holding the ball up! His close control is one of his worst attributes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.Lisemore Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 What the hell do we see in this Kane lad? ..comes on for a whole 10 minutes and plays with his hair, money well earned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cropwellfox Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 Wood did Ok, It's just not worked here for Kane and we should cut the loan short. He's not being played in his natural position and not getting enough game time to play into form. Not surprised we replaced Schlupp he ran himself into the ground, great effort leading from the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theessexfox Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 I understand why he changed things, defending from the front, fresh legs, etc, but why Kane instead of a winger? He has no hunger, no desire, no interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 If Pearson brought on defenders people would accuse him of being too negative (as we've seen before). He brought on two strikers. That, to me, is not a defensive move. He didn't sit back on the lead with his subs. This just smacks of slating Pearson for anything. Blame the fact we didn't put our chances away from the players he originally picked. I say again.. God knows why he brought on Kane. Firstly, from what I've seen of him he's pants at the moment. Secondly, I'd have brought on Knocky and let him run it into the corners. It's not so much that Pearson made subs, but not Kane for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmer Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 And If Kanes thunderbolt of a shot had gone in you would have all been sucking him off right now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooseBreath Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 And If Kanes thunderbolt of a shot had gone in you would have all been sucking him off right now! True enough, if he did something good, people would indeed support him. But he hasn't, so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breadandcheese Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 The Kane substitution would have made more sense at 86 mins, before they scored, when we wanted to slow down the game and disrupt Brighton's rhythm. Using tactics to our advantage, like managers do. I still support Pearson, but hope he sits with his coaches and assistants to assess if the subs and timing of them were the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 Wood for Schlupp I can understand but De Laet should have replaced Moore and Knockaert should have replaced Marshall, said it the time ands stand by it. Moore was losing the battle and it was a nice open game, perfect for Knockaert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzell Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 Wood for Schlupp I can understand but De Laet should have replaced Moore and Knockaert should have replaced Marshall, said it the time ands stand by it. Moore was losing the battle and it was a nice open game, perfect for Knockaert. Absolutely spot on there Ricey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettsj2 Posted 7 April 2013 Share Posted 7 April 2013 Absolutely spot on there Ricey Hmmm not sure about Knocky. I was fearing him coming on. Could see him just trying to take a load of people on and losing it. Kane was the right sub but the wrong time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 8 April 2013 Share Posted 8 April 2013 People act like they didn't have chances before the subs were made, they had a couple of piss easy chances missed prior to these players coming on. The flow of the game didn't change that much from there I was sitting, the attacking subs played little part in a goal that came about from poor play between defence and midfield and two defenders not bothering to close down a player before he got into the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seenitall Posted 8 April 2013 Share Posted 8 April 2013 Blimey - so was that because they are crap players, badly coached, tactically unaware or unfit? I would say all of that points to the manager but according to this board, he cannot shoulder any of the blame for spending 88 minutes watching Moore being skinned by LuaLua and then lo and behold scoring......we should be kind to Nigel I know, but the substitutions were supposedly being made because the strike force he had selected had drawn blanks (again) until James did the unthinkable and scored - at that point NP appeared clueless as to what to do, bringing on two strikers WE HAD JUST SCORED!!!! he didn't need them - arguably another midfielder would have been best and putting the very energetic RDL (bear in mind we don't need to attack now) back into his natural position and bringing Moore (who must have been knackered trying and struggling to keep up with LL for so long) off would have been sensible. Even the commentator on Bet365 said it was a strange substitution and that Leicester where vulnerable if they got any injuries in the last 15 mins as they now had a lead to protect. But otherwise Nige did OK - he seems to respond best when his job is under threat in the papers - you'd think £1m a year would be motivation enough wouldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.