Originally posted by paulmason
View Post
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Harrys subs - wrong
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by MYU View PostSWP nearly scored and would have done a few years ago, I think he needs someone like Harry to guide him.
Harry didn't look too upset at the end, I think he knows exactly what to do and how.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hh9 View PostHow much time has Harry to learn
... by the way I have not been drinking - just my opinion - I hope it is OK to have an opinion in here
Comment
-
SWP may have done alright when he came on and hindsight is a great thing but I suspect many of us when we saw that change happening thought, "What the hell is he doing taking off one of our better players this season for one of our worst for over a year?" I did. And still think Hoillet would have been better.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rockandroll View PostTaarabt should have stayed. he should have brought hoilett for cisse .
with taarabt you know something can happen at anytime, created all our chances and kept their mid and defence busy. as soon as he left they were all over us.
PS: His distribution and decision making in the final third were sloppy and schoolboy like, but you can choose to ignore if it you like.Last edited by paulmason; 27-11-2012, 11:57 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hh9 View PostGreen for Cesar forced because of groin injury - Green did well
Park for Diakite - wrong - should have been Derry
SWP for Taarabt - wrong - should have been Hoilett for Mackie
Taarabt just has to be on the field - only one to make something happen
It is obvious that HR does not like Taarabt
He brought on Park instead of Derry because 1. he's abetter player, 2 has more pace and stamina, 3 he's more likely to be a threat going forward wehn we are trying to win a game.
Taarabt didn't have great game as some would suggest, he was ok at best. His passing was often wayward, rarely beat a man as tricks not working and too often when we broke in numbers he cut back and slowed up the play meaning our breaks lost impetus. In the end he was looking out of ideas and slightly disinterested. HE did work hard and put a shift in though, it's just not a night things clicked imo. And he didn't actually make anything happen in the 70 mins he had....
SWP was fine when he came on, quick on the counter and would work back to help preserve at least a point, which Hoilett doesn't do. He also nearly scored.
I think Mackie stayed on as was doing ok and working their LB pretty well and as for SWP could be relied on to work back if needed to preseerve the point.
Comment
-
I thought he chose right and they all done okay, especially Green (apart from his kicking!). Taarabt annoys the f... out of me. Yes he has amazing skill, can pick a pass and aint too slow, but by God he needs to learn to pass quicker. When we break he more often than not holds onto the ball for a few seconds too long meaning defenders get back and the chance is harder.
Mackie ran his socks off but that's it. Great to have that style of player if we need to defend a lead or a point late on, but not from the start. I'll give him credit today though for his workrate.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Del View PostSubs wer right.
He brought on Park instead of Derry because 1. he's abetter player, 2 has more pace and stamina, 3 he's more likely to be a threat going forward wehn we are trying to win a game.
Taarabt didn't have great game as some would suggest, he was ok at best. His passing was often wayward, rarely beat a man as tricks not working and too often when we broke in numbers he cut back and slowed up the play meaning our breaks lost impetus. In the end he was looking out of ideas and slightly disinterested. HE did work hard and put a shift in though, it's just not a night things clicked imo. And he didn't actually make anything happen in the 70 mins he had....
SWP was fine when he came on, quick on the counter and would work back to help preserve at least a point, which Hoilett doesn't do. He also nearly scored.
I think Mackie stayed on as was doing ok and working their LB pretty well and as for SWP could be relied on to work back if needed to preseerve the point.
Comment
-
Originally posted by paulmason View PostAre you referring to the times he lost the ball and they broke and nearly scored ?
PS: His distribution and decision making in the final third were sloppy and schoolboy like, but you can choose to ignore if it you like.
If you're going to criticise a player, at least do it using facts, not making things up.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Marshy View PostBut we didn't break in numbers. There is hardly anyone in front of him making any decent runs off the ball so he cuts back in.
Comment
Comment