Subs

[Dig Dig]

Although we're agreeing on essentially every point I still feel you're mocking me!

 

I ain't saying it for any other team selection, but I reckon on this particular occassion NC was like "I've signed this sweet player, but I had to promise he'd get a go against United."

 

NA rolled his eyes, but was like "Ok Nicolas, but I wish you'd check with me first. What if we're doing really good and I don't want to disrupt the team balance? Cvnt!" (he added the last bit under his breath as he was walking away)

 

I never mock! This is serious business.

 

I'm sure your little extract above is exactly how it went down. Same with Rodriguez and Guly. Actually, I remember reading on here that Guly actually has it written into his contract that he has to play when fit. It's a wonder why the other players don't kick off about this but we keep getting told there is a great team spirit so I guess they are all ok with it as well!

[saint_sinner]

2-1 up with 10 minutes to go? Hmm, what should I do? Put on 3 strikers and take off our 3 best players.....or should I get Dan Seabourne on to protect the back 4/man mark Van Persie/Scholes and give additional aerial presence and see the game out? Get 3 points or at least 1.

 

That's what Fergie would have done and every other manager in the league

 

What do I know??

[Minty]

That's what Fergie would have done and every other manager in the league

 

If it was that simple, you'd be a manager. It's not. You're not.

 

All this is getting a bit OTT now. Adkins subs did not lose us the match. Poor defending lost us the match. The personnel on the pitch at the time *may* have contributed to that, or it may have happened anyway if the subs hadn't been made. I happen to agree that Adkins made incorrect decisions about the subs, but poor marking of Ferdinand and RVP (twice) were not directly the fault of Adkins.

 

It's a shame that so many people seem to need a scapegoat.

[Dig Dig]

If it was that simple, you'd be a manager. It's not. You're not.

 

All this is getting a bit OTT now. Adkins subs did not lose us the match. Poor defending lost us the match. The personnel on the pitch at the time *may* have contributed to that, or it may have happened anyway if the subs hadn't been made. I happen to agree that Adkins made incorrect decisions about the subs, but poor marking of Ferdinand and RVP (twice) were not directly the fault of Adkins.

 

It's a shame that so many people seem to need a scapegoat.

 

Wrong Minty. NA has been found out at this level, Fonte deserves to be shot, we've wasted 12M on one player, the CB we have bought isn't up to it, Mayuka is another Ali Dia, NC is picking transfers and dictating subsitutions, why did we sign Rodriguez?, we'll be bottom and out of it come Xmas.

 

I've read this all on here over the last 24 hours, doesn't look like we're in very good shape at all.

[Minty]

I do apologise Dig Dig. Clearly I'm also not up to it, and therefore offer my resignation as a Saints fan.

[Frank's cousin]

Wrong Minty. NA has been found out at this level, Fonte deserves to be shot, we've wasted 12M on one player, the CB we have bought isn't up to it, Mayuka is another Ali Dia, NC is picking transfers and dictating subsitutions, why did we sign Rodriguez?, we'll be bottom and out of it come Xmas.

 

I've read this all on here over the last 24 hours, doesn't look like we're in very good shape at all.

 

We are all better than Adkins didn't you know that?

[david in sweden]

It seems that despite spending £7M we still don't yet have an adequate replacement for Rickie Lambert.

 

until he plays a few games INSTEAD of RL, we won't know. (NO I'm not advocating dropping RL,)

.....but if Jay Rod is his eventual replacement ....he has to take the role and not play " somewhere else "... Playing out on the left he seems a bit stranded ...

 

(If Luke Shaw is the likely replacement for Fox...it's not such a good idea to give him some games at CB !)

[Barry the Badger]

Whilst in hindsight the changes clearly didn't come off. I could see Adkins thinking....

 

Get fresh legs on up the pitch, give them something to worry about, get Mayuka on running the channels and giving us an outball. It was actually a very positive change and I'd much rather that than he bring on Richardson and Seaborne as many other managers might've done.

 

Now ultimately it didn't work out and he will accept responsibility for that, but people acting as though it was the worst decision in the history of football are being a bit over the top I think.

[Avenue Saint]

Whilst in hindsight the changes clearly didn't come off. I could see Adkins thinking....

 

Get fresh legs on up the pitch, give them something to worry about, get Mayuka on running the channels and giving us an outball. It was actually a very positive change and I'd much rather that than he bring on Richardson and Seaborne as many other managers might've done.

 

Now ultimately it didn't work out and he will accept responsibility for that, but people acting as though it was the worst decision in the history of football are being a bit over the top I think.

 

Sometimes you make calls, they bear fruit a la city, and you get the plaudits! Other times, with hindsight, they're shown to be flawed. Unfortunately on this occasion, the changes weren't productive.

 

All managers have been in the same boat at different stages, including the best. Part and parcel of the game BUT Adkins does not strike me as someone who will fail to grasp the opportunity with both hands to learn from his fledgling experiences in the top flight.

 

Patience and support, Rome wasn't built in a day.

[Noodles34]

Whilst in hindsight the changes clearly didn't come off. I could see Adkins thinking....

 

Get fresh legs on up the pitch, give them something to worry about, get Mayuka on running the channels and giving us an outball. It was actually a very positive change and I'd much rather that than he bring on Richardson and Seaborne as many other managers might've done.

 

Now ultimately it didn't work out and he will accept responsibility for that, but people acting as though it was the worst decision in the history of football are being a bit over the top I think.

 

it was on par with Sir Alf taking off Boby Charlton in the 70 WC against the Germans, thats how bad it was.

 

Jesus, it lost us the game FFS. You can talk about bad marking, Davis etc. but the fact is that Utd werent getting near us, we didnt need to mark them because we were running the show, i think if we had left all 3 on we would have rolled out 3 or 4-1 winners. That would have taken marking RVP out of the equation.

Edited 3 September, 2012 by Noodles34

[Roger]

Adkins messed up big time yesterday. I believe in him tho for now!

[Olallana]

Whilst in hindsight the changes clearly didn't come off. I could see Adkins thinking....

 

Get fresh legs on up the pitch, give them something to worry about, get Mayuka on running the channels and giving us an outball. It was actually a very positive change and I'd much rather that than he bring on Richardson and Seaborne as many other managers might've done.

 

Now ultimately it didn't work out and he will accept responsibility for that, but people acting as though it was the worst decision in the history of football are being a bit over the top I think.

 

I agree about the fresh legs. Unfortunately the other players continued playing if he was Lambert and put the ball on him instead of putting it in spaces behind the Man U defenders. You could see in one or two occasions how much faster he was but we didn´t use that weapon against them.

[Barry the Badger]

Jesus, it lost us the game FFS. You can talk about bad marking, Davis etc. but the fact is that Utd werent getting near us, we didnt need to mark them because we were running the show, i think if we had left all 3 on we would have rolled out 3 or 4-1 winners. That would have taken marking RVP out of the equation.

 

Did you record the game? Go back and watch it. Having read your comment I thought "well maybe I had it wrong" so I just went back and watched from 64 to 74, which is when Adkins made the first changes.

 

Seriously, we were not running the show, not even close. We had started to drop deeper, concede possession and chances.

 

If you look from 67.00, we start to come under pressure, Kelvin gives the ball away the defence panic and concede the penalty.

From the resulting corner there's a United shot at 68.30.

They have another shot at 70.45, a good chance for Van Persie that on another day he could easily have scored.

Scholes is getting more and more into the game.

Lambert barely touches the ball after the penalty.

Valencia gets dangerous crosses in down the right 2 or 3 times.

Most of the possesion is in our half, we are dropping very deep other than Lambert who is starting to get isolated.

 

Clearly the substitutions didn't work, to try and claim anything else would be ridiculous. What ****es me off though is the re-writing of the game "we were running the show" etc.... We weren't, we were going to concede, Adkins had to change something and Lambert was barely in the game anymore.

 

Nigel will have to remember not to react so quickly in future to what was a clear change in the momentum of the game. He will have to wait for the fans to catch up and accept things are going downhill.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Did you record the game? Go back and watch it. Having read your comment I thought "well maybe I had it wrong" so I just went back and watched from 64 to 74, which is when Adkins made the first changes.

 

Seriously, we were not running the show, not even close. We had started to drop deeper, concede possession and chances.

 

If you look from 67.00, we start to come under pressure, Kelvin gives the ball away the defence panic and concede the penalty.

From the resulting corner there's a United shot at 68.30.

They have another shot at 70.45, a good chance for Van Persie that on another day he could easily have scored.

Scholes is getting more and more into the game.

Lambert barely touches the ball after the penalty.

Valencia gets dangerous crosses in down the right 2 or 3 times.

Most of the possesion is in our half, we are dropping very deep other than Lambert who is starting to get isolated.

 

Clearly the substitutions didn't work, to try and claim anything else would be ridiculous. What ****es me off though is the re-writing of the game "we were running the show" etc.... We weren't, we were going to concede, Adkins had to change something and Lambert was barely in the game anymore.

 

Nigel will have to remember not to react so quickly in future to what was a clear change in the momentum of the game. He will have to wait for the fans to catch up and accept things are going downhill.

 

Great post. Love it when someone does their homework.

[Noodles34]

Did you record the game? Go back and watch it. Having read your comment I thought "well maybe I had it wrong" so I just went back and watched from 64 to 74, which is when Adkins made the first changes.

 

Seriously, we were not running the show, not even close. We had started to drop deeper, concede possession and chances.

 

If you look from 67.00, we start to come under pressure, Kelvin gives the ball away the defence panic and concede the penalty.

From the resulting corner there's a United shot at 68.30.

They have another shot at 70.45, a good chance for Van Persie that on another day he could easily have scored.

Scholes is getting more and more into the game.

Lambert barely touches the ball after the penalty.

Valencia gets dangerous crosses in down the right 2 or 3 times.

Most of the possesion is in our half, we are dropping very deep other than Lambert who is starting to get isolated.

 

Clearly the substitutions didn't work, to try and claim anything else would be ridiculous. What ****es me off though is the re-writing of the game "we were running the show" etc.... We weren't, we were going to concede, Adkins had to change something and Lambert was barely in the game anymore.

 

Nigel will have to remember not to react so quickly in future to what was a clear change in the momentum of the game. He will have to wait for the fans to catch up and accept things are going downhill.

 

Fine, you have gone and gotten the facts, fair play for that. But why does everyone who I have spoken to, Sainst and non Saints say atthe very first instance, "what was Adkins doing with those subs?", and I mean literally everyone! From during the game, to straight after to days later, its the same openong gambit on the match. i could understand it if MOTD2 had highlighted that aspect, and everyone just jumped on the back of Hansen and Co etc.

Maybe running the show was an exageration, but clearly we were getting forward, Puncheons shot, Lamberts left sided run, there could have been more to come.

I am not daying NA should be sacked or anything like that, but I was ridiculed when I mooted the fact that when Capello left England, what about sacking NA and bringing him in. Purely based on the fact that if you dont think footballers are going to make it, ala Billy Sharp in the EPL, what makes you think that inexperienced managers would make it. Would you swap RL for RVP, of course you would. Would Capello or even Martinez and have made those substition calls, dont thinks so?

[Wopper]

Adkins is not as good as he thinks he is.

[Frank's cousin]

Adkins is not as good as he thinks he is.

 

Bolox - Adkins knows his curent need to LEARN and as he get more experience at this level he will make less of these errors - He has shown that he can learn quickly, but all managers even the best still make mistakes form time to time. Adkins knows he still has a long way to go - probably why he seemed 'worried' when we were promoted - a recognition that its probably just a little early in his development having gained back to back promotions and being ahead of the plan - I daresay that Cortese has put that added pressure on him as a result because if you achieve good things you dont suddenly say, hold on we will wait for everyone to catch up and learn, you either have to learn very rapidly or it will need someone else who has that knowledge already.

 

In an ideal world, Adkins would be given all the time he needs as consistency and keeping a manager has been shown to achieve results - if those manager shave the intelligence and innovative thinking to learn all the time - I believe Adkins does have those qualities.... but the issue is the the huge financial divide between the prem and the rest and what that does to a squad and the financial model if relegated - you either make modest investment to give yourself a chance, but without altering the financial model like Blackpool (who used the prem cash to invest in infrastructure improvements) or you invest heavily and make a go of it - higher risk, but more chance of a decent reward - Will Adkins learn quickly enough for Cortese's ambition? I hope so, but I believe he is FULLY aware of where he currently is and what he still has to learn.

[Mowgli]

Fine, you have gone and gotten the facts, fair play for that. But why does everyone who I have spoken to, Sainst and non Saints say atthe very first instance, "what was Adkins doing with those subs?", and I mean literally everyone! From during the game, to straight after to days later, its the same openong gambit on the match. i could understand it if MOTD2 had highlighted that aspect, and everyone just jumped on the back of Hansen and Co etc.

Maybe running the show was an exageration, but clearly we were getting forward, Puncheons shot, Lamberts left sided run, there could have been more to come.

I am not daying NA should be sacked or anything like that, but I was ridiculed when I mooted the fact that when Capello left England, what about sacking NA and bringing him in. Purely based on the fact that if you dont think footballers are going to make it, ala Billy Sharp in the EPL, what makes you think that inexperienced managers would make it. Would you swap RL for RVP, of course you would. Would Capello or even Martinez and have made those substition calls, dont thinks so?

 

Take a look at the match day thread. No one crucufied NA at the time - only after the final whistle. Most people could see what he was trying to do. In this instance it did not work. It does not instantly make him a crap manager It's as silly as saying those inspired subs against Man City make him the best manager in th world. MOTD2 and Sky pundits both generally felt Scholes was the difference - along with the obvious class of Van Persie. On balance we may just have to concede that Manchester United are a decent premiership outfit who might just be capable of turning a game in the last few minutes - irrespective of who they are playing and irrespective of subs. Fergie time has got to the point where it actually gives them a psychological edge.

 

Try enjoying the game for what it is - a beautiful game. Sunday was a match we could only dream about two years ago. If we continue to play as we did Sunday and in Manchester, we will be fine this season.

[surrey1saint]

Take a look at the match day thread. No one crucufied NA at the time - only after the final whistle. Most people could see what he was trying to do. In this instance it did not work. It does not instantly make him a crap manager It's as silly as saying those inspired subs against Man City make him the best manager in th world. MOTD2 and Sky pundits both generally felt Scholes was the difference - along with the obvious class of Van Persie. On balance we may just have to concede that Manchester United are a decent premiership outfit who might just be capable of turning a game in the last few minutes - irrespective of who they are playing and irrespective of subs. Fergie time has got to the point where it actually gives them a psychological edge.

 

Try enjoying the game for what it is - a beautiful game. Sunday was a match we could only dream about two years ago. If we continue to play as we did Sunday and in Manchester, we will be fine this season.

 

Great post!

[Wes Tender]

Still bickering about those substitutions, eh? To my mind, he didn't get the substitutions wrong, the distinction is that they didn't work. Adkins wasn't on the pitch himself to implement the tactics and the players let him down by not getting the ball forward and being pressed too deep. I don't think that there was much that was flawed in the reasoning behind the changes, as on numerous occasions very able managers have introduced fresh legs into a match later on as an effective tactic. Some say that it should have been done in stages, but that is debateable and it wasn't as if much time remained anyway and there might equally have been debate as to why the introductions had not been made earlier. I also don't accept necessarily that Lambert, Lallana and Puncheon were our best players at that stage of the game when they were tired. And as I pointed out before, I just love the irony of Puncheon being classified as one of our best players when he was potentially hounded out of the club by all those who considered him a waste of space only weeks before. OK, he had a good game on Sunday and I hope that he continues to show promise.

 

The fact remains that for the majority of the match, we were better than Man Utd. If SAF's tactics eventually won the match for them, he has had rather longer to perfect them than Adkins. Adkins will learn and fast, I'm sure of that.

[notnowcato]

Still bickering about those substitutions, eh? To my mind, he didn't get the substitutions wrong, the distinction is that they didn't work. Adkins wasn't on the pitch himself to implement the tactics and the players let him down by not getting the ball forward and being pressed too deep. I don't think that there was much that was flawed in the reasoning behind the changes, as on numerous occasions very able managers have introduced fresh legs into a match later on as an effective tactic. Some say that it should have been done in stages, but that is debateable and it wasn't as if much time remained anyway and there might equally have been debate as to why the introductions had not been made earlier. I also don't accept necessarily that Lambert, Lallana and Puncheon were our best players at that stage of the game when they were tired. And as I pointed out before, I just love the irony of Puncheon being classified as one of our best players when he was potentially hounded out of the club by all those who considered him a waste of space only weeks before. OK, he had a good game on Sunday and I hope that he continues to show promise.

 

The fact remains that for the majority of the match, we were better than Man Utd. If SAF's tactics eventually won the match for them, he has had rather longer to perfect them than Adkins. Adkins will learn and fast, I'm sure of that.

 

If Hammond was available on the bench, would you have brought him on for the final 20 minutes?

[saint_sinner]

If Hammond was available on the bench, would you have brought him on for the final 20 minutes?

Yes 100%

With the personnel on the bench, would you have brought on Seabourne to sit infront of the back 4? or man mark RVP? Provide additional 'aerial' cover?

 

or Guly?

[Noodles34]

Take a look at the match day thread. No one crucufied NA at the time - only after the final whistle. Most people could see what he was trying to do. In this instance it did not work. It does not instantly make him a crap manager It's as silly as saying those inspired subs against Man City make him the best manager in th world. MOTD2 and Sky pundits both generally felt Scholes was the difference - along with the obvious class of Van Persie. On balance we may just have to concede that Manchester United are a decent premiership outfit who might just be capable of turning a game in the last few minutes - irrespective of who they are playing and irrespective of subs. Fergie time has got to the point where it actually gives them a psychological edge.

 

Try enjoying the game for what it is - a beautiful game. Sunday was a match we could only dream about two years ago. If we continue to play as we did Sunday and in Manchester, we will be fine this season.

 

two points; the subs against City werent inspired, we were one down so we bring on our top goalscorer and an a more attacking midfielder, thats just plain simple, not inspired. It much more to make the right substitutions when you are winning with 20 mins to go, thats when you have to call it right.

 

Secondly, if we play like that.... yeah, we have played three games whereby we have played well and lost, God help us when we play badly then!

[notnowcato]

Yes 100%

With the personnel on the bench, would you have brought on Seabourne to sit infront of the back 4? or man mark RVP? Provide additional 'aerial' cover?

 

or Guly?

 

Scholes was running the game in between our midfield and the front 3. We needed fresh chasing legs in the middle, NA didn't have that option. At least dropping Seaborne in front of Jose and Jos would have allowed JWP to push on to Scholes.

 

The decision to move Hammond on was too hasty in my opinion, can only hope that Cork is back in training soon.

[CanadaSaint]

There's not too much of this but it's worth a read:

 

http://www.epltalk.com/a-tactical-look-at-southampton-man-united-and-liverpool-arsenal-46561?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EPLTalk+%28EPL+Talk%29

 

Extract: "But it was the introduction of Hernandez that helped facilitate the space for Scholes to work in. With the Mexican’s pace stretching the Southampton defense, it allowed Scholes the time to dictate the game alongside Carrick."

 

I'm not sure we had the players on the bench to counter this - almost as though we expected to be trying to come back from behind rather than trying to stay ahead.

Edited 4 September, 2012 by CanadaSaint
Afterthought