Jon25747 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Without turn this into another Pearson in/out thread, I want to see what people think about the substitutions we make. Or more specifically, when. I was sitting with my uncle and when Palace palace scored, we both agreed that we needed to make subs and quick. We said we'd bring Kramaric and Albrighton on immediately and maybe even Vardy all in one go to try and get in behind Hangelaand and Delaney who are the slowest pairing in the league. My question is if we can see that drastic change was needed fast, why did Pearson, Shakespeare and Phillips feel the need to discuss things for such a long time?! It was over 20 mins until we made the positive changes which by then was too late. Pearson made comment of Vardy getting 2 good chances, maybe if he was on for another 15 mins he would have had a couple more and a goal! The lateness of substitutions is something that really annoys me about Pearson. I don't want to jump on the 'Plan b' bandwagon but after a fairly equal first half, the first team to make positive changes won the match.
Larry_LCFC Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Always makes our subs way too late. Vardy and Kram should have been on much earlier, especially when we're losing!
weller54 Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Always makes our subs way too late. Vardy and Kram should have been on much earlier, especially when we're losing! He gets round to playing our strongest team eventually... Usually when it's all too late and we're chasing the game... It's really quite mind-blowing!
StanSP Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Not too bothered about the subs yesterday, more specifically the timing of them. Ulloa was having a poor game and Kramaric could have had more of an effect on the game if he had more than 20 minutes to do so. ANd I know Vardy had a decent shot but perhaps more than 10 minutes to have an impact. No complaints about the Albrighton sub. As soon as Schlupp skewed that shot that went out for a throw-in he looked down and out. Confidence was shot after that. The bigger problem yesterday was the lack of clinical finishing. We get in the right positions but don't profit from them. I think Pearson sometimes lacks the guts to do something like what Pardew did. Change things at half-time and be a bit ballsy in that respect.
RedSoxUK Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 Would have brought Kram on straight away for Ulloa, and Albrighton for Konchesky / switching Mahrez/Schlupp on left a few minutes later. That's why we needed the first goal, the minute we go behind with 30 or so minutes left vs (and they were) the underdogs, we'll lump it forward because they would get 11 men behind the ball, and we would require Ulloa in the box. Hasn't worked all season.
fleckneymike Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 We all know when Pearson will make his subs so I assume the opposition do too.
cjslcfc Posted 8 February 2015 Posted 8 February 2015 It's hard to make subs when you're constantly creating chances as you don't want to disrupt the team. That said, Ulloa and Schlupp weren't playing well and we've been in that situation far too much this season where we keep missing chances. Surely, from experiencing it so many times before, he had to change it to try and get us to actually put away these chances (Kramaric for Ulloa).
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.