Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why didn't Isla play?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why didn't Isla play?

    Does anyone know? It seemed really strange to me to play Onouha at RB instead of him, and lose that vital link between Isla and Vargas. I saw Isla was on the bench, so surely he was fit enough to play?

  • #2
    really dont understand that decision hubble

    Comment


    • #3
      Tactically I think it an ok idea. HR had set out to defend and Ned is more defensive then Isla. Would have left too many gaps had Isla been playing. Their winger Montero destroyed Callum Chambers last week so it was a good move imo, despite the result and performance. But the way HR wanted us to play, Ned was the better option.

      Comment


      • #4
        Okay, I get the reasoning, but I think breaking the link between Isla and Vargas was not outweighed by Nedum's better defensive instincts. I think Harry got that wrong, IMO of course.

        Comment


        • #5
          A totally wrong decision. Ned plays RB at Newcastle,we lose. Isla at home to Leicester, we win. Ned yesterday.... Harry obviously hasn't got the memo telling him Ned can't play RB. How come idiots like us know that?

          Comment


          • #6
            In that case we need another RB to come in for games like this, it would be nice if we can find someone who can play at both RB/CB positions in case of injuries.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jeems View Post
              Tactically I think it an ok idea. HR had set out to defend and Ned is more defensive then Isla. Would have left too many gaps had Isla been playing. Their winger Montero destroyed Callum Chambers last week so it was a good move imo, despite the result and performance. But the way HR wanted us to play, Ned was the better option.
              Good move to sit back and defend for 90 mins trying to nick a draw?

              Sorry, but that failed to work in the previous 6 away games, so why would it work at Swansea?

              It reminds me of that Blackadder Goes Forth battle plan scene. the one where the plan was to go over the top....again. "it failed 17 time times before" to which the response was "exactly. They wont be expecting us to try that again" or something along those lines.
              Last edited by stanistheman; 03-12-2014, 02:04 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Ned is not good enough to play RB in prem.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by stanistheman View Post
                  Good move to sit back and defend for 90 mins trying to nick a draw?

                  Sorry, but that failed to work in the previous 6 away games, so why would it work at Swansea?
                  If we're going to lose anyway, why not try to play to win instead of play to draw?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MYU View Post
                    If we're going to lose anyway, why not try to play to win instead of play to draw?
                    hopefully you don't think I wasn't advocating playing for a draw. I was questioning why Jeems thought that was a good move to play the more defensive Onuoha out of position ahead of Isla.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by stanistheman View Post
                      Good move to sit back and defend for 90 mins trying to nick a draw?

                      Sorry, but that failed to work in the previous 6 away games, so why would it work at Swansea?

                      It reminds me of that Blackadder Goes Forth battle plan scene. the one where the plan was to go over the top....again. "it failed 17 time times before" to which the response was "exactly. They wont be expecting us to try that again" or something along those lines.
                      A brilliant comedy Black Adder (apart from the first series)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by CroydonCaptainJack View Post
                        A brilliant comedy Black Adder (apart from the first series)
                        The 1st series had it's moments though.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by stanistheman View Post
                          Good move to sit back and defend for 90 mins trying to nick a draw?

                          Sorry, but that failed to work in the previous 6 away games, so why would it work at Swansea?

                          It reminds me of that Blackadder Goes Forth battle plan scene. the one where the plan was to go over the top....again. "it failed 17 time times before" to which the response was "exactly. They wont be expecting us to try that again" or something along those lines.
                          Agree completely, but HR obviously wanted a defensive set up so for this reason alone, Ned was the better option. I didnt like the way we set up at all btw.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by MYU View Post
                            In that case we need another RB to come in for games like this, it would be nice if we can find someone who can play at both RB/CB positions in case of injuries.
                            Danny Simpson?....... Oh no, we sold him to be in Leicester's reserves with only Ned as backup

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Hove Ranger View Post
                              Danny Simpson?....... Oh no, we sold him to be in Leicester's reserves with only Ned as backup
                              He wanted to go and was toilet anyway.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X