| Why no subs? 17:15 - Dec 29 with 5499 views | sevenhoop |
As much as I admire what McClaren has done, that was a poor performance from him today.. we had tired, underperforming players, and the game was crying out for early fresh legs and pace, but nothing was done. Oteh and Bright were stripped off on 55 mins but he bottled it |  | | |  |
| Why no subs? on 17:21 - Dec 29 with 3819 views | London_Pride |
It was just bizarre, particularly with another game on Tuesday. |  | | |
| Why no subs? on 17:26 - Dec 29 with 3772 views | traininvain |
Bright was about to come on after 75 mins but we had our best spell of the game so the sub wasn’t made. We were unlucky not to get a win in the end. It was our first half performance which let us down today.
I’m sure I’ll take pelters for this but I can see why McClaren didn’t make changes in the end. |  | | |
| Why no subs? on 17:31 - Dec 29 with 3727 views | plasmahoop |
| Why no subs? on 17:26 - Dec 29 by traininvain |
Bright was about to come on after 75 mins but we had our best spell of the game so the sub wasn’t made. We were unlucky not to get a win in the end. It was our first half performance which let us down today.
I’m sure I’ll take pelters for this but I can see why McClaren didn’t make changes in the end. |
Fair point, but it means he's probably going to play the same team on Tuesday again, I think it would be better to give bright more match time now rather than have to start him when others are injured. But, overall he is doing a grand job. It's just this that is a bit frustrating |  | | |
| Why no subs? on 17:44 - Dec 29 with 3647 views | BrianMcCarthy |
I was calling for him to make changes early at 55 minutes. He warmed up two players to be fair. But, but, we did start to play our best football at that point. From there on in we dominated chances and possession and, while we looked tired, Reading looked shot.
I've only managed at a much lower level - I'm honestly not claiming I was a genius - but I've had games where I had subs ready to go but sat them down again as the team on the pitch clicked. So I can see that it was a hard call, and I can see why McClaren chose to stick.
But....when Reading brought on the two forwards I thought the momentum changed again, and we have another game on Monday.
Hard one to call. |  |
| |
| Why no subs? on 18:55 - Dec 29 with 3416 views | CiderwithRsie |
| Why no subs? on 17:26 - Dec 29 by traininvain |
Bright was about to come on after 75 mins but we had our best spell of the game so the sub wasn’t made. We were unlucky not to get a win in the end. It was our first half performance which let us down today.
I’m sure I’ll take pelters for this but I can see why McClaren didn’t make changes in the end. |
That's well put and leaves me feeling happier. Unfortunately it still leaves us with the issue of why we started so poorly ad the nagging suspicion that it's due to running players into the ground rather than make changes.
On the whole I think it's working so let's not start bitching too much. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 18:57 - Dec 29 with 3404 views | qprd |
| Why no subs? on 17:44 - Dec 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I was calling for him to make changes early at 55 minutes. He warmed up two players to be fair. But, but, we did start to play our best football at that point. From there on in we dominated chances and possession and, while we looked tired, Reading looked shot.
I've only managed at a much lower level - I'm honestly not claiming I was a genius - but I've had games where I had subs ready to go but sat them down again as the team on the pitch clicked. So I can see that it was a hard call, and I can see why McClaren chose to stick.
But....when Reading brought on the two forwards I thought the momentum changed again, and we have another game on Monday.
Hard one to call. |
its funny how no one wants to sound like a negative fan in light of our decent results, so we all caveat our criticism of mclarens in game management
he made some good changes today, but for the most part his in game management was poor
in the first half, we were unable to generate any possession through our midfield, as scowen and cousins both were poor on the ball (cousins in particular). reading applied pressure on goal kicks forcing Lumley to go long often. wells had no chance against oshea and when wells did win the odd ball, eze never won the second ball. reading continued to retain the ball and push us deeper, often to a de facto back 5 and even to a back 6... we got so deep that every time we won the ball back, we had no out ball and had to clear to no one and reading came on to us more and more
McLaren had two tactical subs he could have made at the half. he could've tried to control the midfield a bit, which he could have accomplished by shifting freeman to central mid or bringing on a player like chair who can recycle the ball from midfield. alternatively, he could've continued to let reading play the possession game, and brought bright on as a counterattacking sub. he did neither at the half
in the first 10 mins of the second half, we were terrible. he was about to bring on someone, but changed his mind as we started to play well. this was a function of two in game changes he made, which were to his credit. first, on readings goal kicks, we pressured the first pass from the keeper....reading weren't keen to pass out of the back under pressure, which forced them to go long... leistner and lynch are great in the air, and their headed clearances created opportunities for us to spring on the counterattack, as our pressing forwards were in a position to spring into attack. in possession, eze and freeman also started to drop a bit deeper to collect the ball and slowly win back control of the midfield
having said all of that, McLaren made three horrible mistakes.
first, reading were there to be had on the counter. we were winning the ball back and creating chances on the counter. yet for some reason, our fastest most explosive player in bright stayed on the bench. wells was troubling o shea in the channels in the 2nd half and its a shame we couldn't see bright take advantage of that
second, after a dangerous spell from 55 mins to about 85 mins, you could see we were starting to flag and reading were creating chances. eze and pav were clearly tiring, yet McLaren left them on. you need to get fresh legs in to spell the danger. its unacceptable to make your first change in the 90th minute
third, McLaren has to understand that a season is a campaign. its not just about getting a result today. its about rotating the squad so that vital players like pav wells freeman and eze can be fresh for future fixtures. its about ensuring that guys like chair and bright get enough minutes to be useful when they finally do play. its about ensuring the kids' long term development. how fresh does he expect wells and freeman to be against villa? and we all see the signs that its going to be an experimental xi against leeds
finally, ... steve mclarens usage of matt smith is pathetic. he was basically brought in for one corner. this is such an uncreative, inefficient use of the resource that is a sub. are we that bereft of ideas that we have to save matt smith for literally one set piece? McLaren did the same with matt smith against villa, where he made a 30 second cameo just for one corner. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 19:00 - Dec 29 with 3380 views | bosh67 |
| Why no subs? on 18:57 - Dec 29 by qprd |
its funny how no one wants to sound like a negative fan in light of our decent results, so we all caveat our criticism of mclarens in game management
he made some good changes today, but for the most part his in game management was poor
in the first half, we were unable to generate any possession through our midfield, as scowen and cousins both were poor on the ball (cousins in particular). reading applied pressure on goal kicks forcing Lumley to go long often. wells had no chance against oshea and when wells did win the odd ball, eze never won the second ball. reading continued to retain the ball and push us deeper, often to a de facto back 5 and even to a back 6... we got so deep that every time we won the ball back, we had no out ball and had to clear to no one and reading came on to us more and more
McLaren had two tactical subs he could have made at the half. he could've tried to control the midfield a bit, which he could have accomplished by shifting freeman to central mid or bringing on a player like chair who can recycle the ball from midfield. alternatively, he could've continued to let reading play the possession game, and brought bright on as a counterattacking sub. he did neither at the half
in the first 10 mins of the second half, we were terrible. he was about to bring on someone, but changed his mind as we started to play well. this was a function of two in game changes he made, which were to his credit. first, on readings goal kicks, we pressured the first pass from the keeper....reading weren't keen to pass out of the back under pressure, which forced them to go long... leistner and lynch are great in the air, and their headed clearances created opportunities for us to spring on the counterattack, as our pressing forwards were in a position to spring into attack. in possession, eze and freeman also started to drop a bit deeper to collect the ball and slowly win back control of the midfield
having said all of that, McLaren made three horrible mistakes.
first, reading were there to be had on the counter. we were winning the ball back and creating chances on the counter. yet for some reason, our fastest most explosive player in bright stayed on the bench. wells was troubling o shea in the channels in the 2nd half and its a shame we couldn't see bright take advantage of that
second, after a dangerous spell from 55 mins to about 85 mins, you could see we were starting to flag and reading were creating chances. eze and pav were clearly tiring, yet McLaren left them on. you need to get fresh legs in to spell the danger. its unacceptable to make your first change in the 90th minute
third, McLaren has to understand that a season is a campaign. its not just about getting a result today. its about rotating the squad so that vital players like pav wells freeman and eze can be fresh for future fixtures. its about ensuring that guys like chair and bright get enough minutes to be useful when they finally do play. its about ensuring the kids' long term development. how fresh does he expect wells and freeman to be against villa? and we all see the signs that its going to be an experimental xi against leeds
finally, ... steve mclarens usage of matt smith is pathetic. he was basically brought in for one corner. this is such an uncreative, inefficient use of the resource that is a sub. are we that bereft of ideas that we have to save matt smith for literally one set piece? McLaren did the same with matt smith against villa, where he made a 30 second cameo just for one corner. |
I do feel for Smith. Everyone seems to have forgotten how many goals he scored last season and how many assists. Very frustrating for him. |  |
| |
| Why no subs? on 19:02 - Dec 29 with 3367 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
No activity after a month of good form then two posts after a frustrating draw. One to slag McLaren and one to slag Cousins. [Post edited 29 Dec 2018 23:32]
|  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Why no subs? on 19:21 - Dec 29 with 3304 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Why no subs? on 18:57 - Dec 29 by qprd |
its funny how no one wants to sound like a negative fan in light of our decent results, so we all caveat our criticism of mclarens in game management
he made some good changes today, but for the most part his in game management was poor
in the first half, we were unable to generate any possession through our midfield, as scowen and cousins both were poor on the ball (cousins in particular). reading applied pressure on goal kicks forcing Lumley to go long often. wells had no chance against oshea and when wells did win the odd ball, eze never won the second ball. reading continued to retain the ball and push us deeper, often to a de facto back 5 and even to a back 6... we got so deep that every time we won the ball back, we had no out ball and had to clear to no one and reading came on to us more and more
McLaren had two tactical subs he could have made at the half. he could've tried to control the midfield a bit, which he could have accomplished by shifting freeman to central mid or bringing on a player like chair who can recycle the ball from midfield. alternatively, he could've continued to let reading play the possession game, and brought bright on as a counterattacking sub. he did neither at the half
in the first 10 mins of the second half, we were terrible. he was about to bring on someone, but changed his mind as we started to play well. this was a function of two in game changes he made, which were to his credit. first, on readings goal kicks, we pressured the first pass from the keeper....reading weren't keen to pass out of the back under pressure, which forced them to go long... leistner and lynch are great in the air, and their headed clearances created opportunities for us to spring on the counterattack, as our pressing forwards were in a position to spring into attack. in possession, eze and freeman also started to drop a bit deeper to collect the ball and slowly win back control of the midfield
having said all of that, McLaren made three horrible mistakes.
first, reading were there to be had on the counter. we were winning the ball back and creating chances on the counter. yet for some reason, our fastest most explosive player in bright stayed on the bench. wells was troubling o shea in the channels in the 2nd half and its a shame we couldn't see bright take advantage of that
second, after a dangerous spell from 55 mins to about 85 mins, you could see we were starting to flag and reading were creating chances. eze and pav were clearly tiring, yet McLaren left them on. you need to get fresh legs in to spell the danger. its unacceptable to make your first change in the 90th minute
third, McLaren has to understand that a season is a campaign. its not just about getting a result today. its about rotating the squad so that vital players like pav wells freeman and eze can be fresh for future fixtures. its about ensuring that guys like chair and bright get enough minutes to be useful when they finally do play. its about ensuring the kids' long term development. how fresh does he expect wells and freeman to be against villa? and we all see the signs that its going to be an experimental xi against leeds
finally, ... steve mclarens usage of matt smith is pathetic. he was basically brought in for one corner. this is such an uncreative, inefficient use of the resource that is a sub. are we that bereft of ideas that we have to save matt smith for literally one set piece? McLaren did the same with matt smith against villa, where he made a 30 second cameo just for one corner. |
qprd,
I think that's a very good analytical post and I agree with lots of it.
As for you opening comment - "its funny how no one wants to sound like a negative fan in light of our decent results, so we all caveat our criticism of mclarens in game management" - I would hope that you don't think that that applies to me, as it sounds apologetic. I wouldn't caveat anything, I hope. In the match thread I made many of the same comments as you have above.
Afterwards, in another thread, I tried to understand McClaren's thinking. To be fair we were playing better from 35-45 minutes (not hard) and better again from 45-55 minutes (again, not hard) but in the match thread I opined that subs were needed nonetheless. And he had two warmed up and ready to go on 55. Whether he intended to use them or (as Sinton suggested) wake up the 11 with them, we won't ever know. Either way, we hit our best patch thereafter for twenty-five minutes. But, on balance, my thought afterwards was that they should have been brought in when Reading introduced the two forwards on 82 mins and we sunk back. That would have given us, maybe... another spurt.
Either way, McClaren's recent results are good and he deserves to be analysed with depth and thought and that's all anyone's trying to do, including yourself.
I enjoy your posts. Illuminating. | |
| |
| Why no subs? on 19:21 - Dec 29 with 3300 views | Esox_Lucius |
| Why no subs? on 19:02 - Dec 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
No activity after a month of good form then two posts after a frustrating draw. One to slag McLaren and one to slag Cousins. [Post edited 29 Dec 2018 23:32]
|
Yep, I noticed that too. Some "fans" only seem to exist to have a pop at the club. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| Why no subs? on 19:31 - Dec 29 with 3262 views | GloryHunter |
McClaren doesn't do subs. He just doesn't know how to do it. Maybe the club needs a substitutions coach, to go with the striking coach and the defending coach. [Post edited 29 Dec 2018 19:35]
|  | | |
| Why no subs? on 19:33 - Dec 29 with 3254 views | thehat |
For me Chair for Eze at half time was the sub to make.
Eve looks tired and needs a rest Chair is chomping at the bit and would of injected some energy into the hole.
Lumley, Furlong and BFG all excellent today and deserved the clean sheet. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 19:44 - Dec 29 with 3191 views | CamberleyR |
| Why no subs? on 19:02 - Dec 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
No activity after a month of good form then two posts after a frustrating draw. One to slag McLaren and one to slag Cousins. [Post edited 29 Dec 2018 23:32]
|
And if you're going to slag him off at least spell his name right... |  |
| |
| Why no subs? on 19:46 - Dec 29 with 3182 views | traininvain |
| Why no subs? on 19:31 - Dec 29 by GloryHunter |
McClaren doesn't do subs. He just doesn't know how to do it. Maybe the club needs a substitutions coach, to go with the striking coach and the defending coach. [Post edited 29 Dec 2018 19:35]
|
His decisions seem to have worked out quite well so far. Or were you expecting us to be a point off the playoffs going into the New Year? | | | |
| Why no subs? on 19:54 - Dec 29 with 3141 views | jonno |
| Why no subs? on 19:33 - Dec 29 by thehat |
For me Chair for Eze at half time was the sub to make.
Eve looks tired and needs a rest Chair is chomping at the bit and would of injected some energy into the hole.
Lumley, Furlong and BFG all excellent today and deserved the clean sheet. |
Yes, have to say I was surprised there were no subs at half time given the way the first half went and I did say on the match thread at half time that I wouldn't have been surprised to have seen Eze replaced. Then to make no changes at all until very late seemed very odd considering we were playing one of the teams we should be beating at home. |  | | |
| Why no subs? on 20:27 - Dec 29 with 3032 views | londonscottish |
| Why no subs? on 19:33 - Dec 29 by thehat |
For me Chair for Eze at half time was the sub to make.
Eve looks tired and needs a rest Chair is chomping at the bit and would of injected some energy into the hole.
Lumley, Furlong and BFG all excellent today and deserved the clean sheet. |
Chair's energy when he came on was really noticeable. Shame it was just a short cameo. |  |
| |
| Why no subs? on 20:42 - Dec 29 with 2948 views | oldmisery |
| Why no subs? on 19:54 - Dec 29 by jonno |
Yes, have to say I was surprised there were no subs at half time given the way the first half went and I did say on the match thread at half time that I wouldn't have been surprised to have seen Eze replaced. Then to make no changes at all until very late seemed very odd considering we were playing one of the teams we should be beating at home. |
Perhaps McClaren couldn't decide who to replace. There were so many poor performances in the first half he would have had to toss a coin. Perhaps he spent fifteen minutes (plus the additional five that we kept Reading waiting for the re-start) chucking teacups around or utilising all the hair dryers in the home changing room?
Whatever he did had no effect for the first ten minutes of the second period though as we were even more ineffective than we had been in the first half. All in all a performance to forget (despite a 20 minute resurgence from the 55th - 75th minute) and just to be thankful we weren't playing one of the division's stronger teams methinks. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 20:42 - Dec 29 with 2944 views | DejR_vu |
I really can’t see the point of making a substitution in the 89th minute. Personally, I thought Eze was a total passenger; would have hooked him at half time to give Chair a chance, or move Freeman inside and put BOS on. | |
| |
| Why no subs? on 21:00 - Dec 29 with 2884 views | traininvain |
| Why no subs? on 20:42 - Dec 29 by oldmisery |
Perhaps McClaren couldn't decide who to replace. There were so many poor performances in the first half he would have had to toss a coin. Perhaps he spent fifteen minutes (plus the additional five that we kept Reading waiting for the re-start) chucking teacups around or utilising all the hair dryers in the home changing room?
Whatever he did had no effect for the first ten minutes of the second period though as we were even more ineffective than we had been in the first half. All in all a performance to forget (despite a 20 minute resurgence from the 55th - 75th minute) and just to be thankful we weren't playing one of the division's stronger teams methinks. |
This all sounds a bit self entitled and we’d do well to remember what was expected at the start of the season. We’re not exactly Liverpool steamrolling teams every week.
Reading made it difficult for us today as they’re fighting for their lives. There’s not a great deal between the top and bottom teams in this league. How many of the division’s stronger teams won today? | | | |
| Why no subs? on 21:24 - Dec 29 with 2806 views | Watford_Ranger |
I’ve no idea which of Reading’s players have been playing a lot recently but surely we were crying out for the pace of BOS.
We barely troubled O’Shea at all and he can barely run. Wouldn’t have hurt to give Oteh a chance there either as it wasn’t Wells’ best day. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 21:46 - Dec 29 with 2736 views | smegma |
| Why no subs? on 17:26 - Dec 29 by traininvain |
Bright was about to come on after 75 mins but we had our best spell of the game so the sub wasn’t made. We were unlucky not to get a win in the end. It was our first half performance which let us down today.
I’m sure I’ll take pelters for this but I can see why McClaren didn’t make changes in the end. |
We did bring on subs. But they were at ridiculous times. Matt Smith was on the pitch for 91 seconds. I thought Chair should have replaced Cousins on about the hour and Oteh for Eze with at least 20 mins to go. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 21:55 - Dec 29 with 2700 views | easthertsr |
As we go into the new year we are eighth, four points off the play-offs. At the end of August who wouldn't have thought that was a brilliant response to our poor start? Just accept that sometimes results like this happen, come on u r'ssssssss!!!!!! | | | |
| Why no subs? on 22:33 - Dec 29 with 2626 views | ParkRoyalR |
| Why no subs? on 20:42 - Dec 29 by DejR_vu |
I really can’t see the point of making a substitution in the 89th minute. Personally, I thought Eze was a total passenger; would have hooked him at half time to give Chair a chance, or move Freeman inside and put BOS on. |
Thought Eze was excellent in 2nd Half, sublime pass to put Wzolek clean through and drawing 3 players in before creating a goal scoring opportunity for Cousins late on plus that sublime piece of control without breaking stride was worth my entrance money. | | | |
| Why no subs? on 22:59 - Dec 29 with 2558 views | DejR_vu |
| Why no subs? on 22:33 - Dec 29 by ParkRoyalR |
Thought Eze was excellent in 2nd Half, sublime pass to put Wzolek clean through and drawing 3 players in before creating a goal scoring opportunity for Cousins late on plus that sublime piece of control without breaking stride was worth my entrance money. |
I think we’re carrying Eze at the moment. I don’t think we can afford to have him in the side for what he’s producing. By way of comparison, Freeman’s easily our most creative player but he’s still everywhere closing down and doing a job for the team, then getting forward trying to open up the opposition. Eze offers mothing defensively and has gone off the boil at the top end. I think he could go with a break and Chair deserves a chance. | |
| |
| Why no subs? on 23:55 - Dec 29 with 2448 views | davman |
| Why no subs? on 21:00 - Dec 29 by traininvain |
This all sounds a bit self entitled and we’d do well to remember what was expected at the start of the season. We’re not exactly Liverpool steamrolling teams every week.
Reading made it difficult for us today as they’re fighting for their lives. There’s not a great deal between the top and bottom teams in this league. How many of the division’s stronger teams won today? |
If that was Reading "fighting for their lives", they are truly fckd this season. We were there for the taking in that first half and they failed to show anything in that final third.
We just sat off them. I said to my mate who was with me that if QPR got anything out of that today, it would be due mainly to how poor Reading were rather than how well we played.
All that possession, but they had no clue what to do with it... |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
