60 Minute Double Sub

[Bad Robot 21,128]

I'm all for this as I think players are given a good 60 mins to give they're all but surely if someone isnt performing then you make the sub at the earliest opportunity. 

It's good to have systems and stats but sometimes you need to break from the norm as Waghorn should have been subbed at HT. 

This single minded approach isn't a good road to go down.

[ritchieshearercaldow 22,109]

Subs should have been on earlier, Waghorn is off form and should have been hooked h/t 

Sometimes it takes longer tha 30 min to turn things round.

[murzo 7,446]

Okay gaffer.

 

Didn't see the game the day but would agree. Advocaat wasn't shy in making a sub at anytime during a game if he thought it was needed but Warburton calls the shots and you can't really complain about what he has achieved to date with the team,style and tactics.

[NeoGeo7 10,371]

I slagged McCoist for his predictable 60 min subs and being able to predict it and it seems Warburton is doing the same which worries me a bit.

if I were in charge I'd have no problem in taking a player off before half time if they were bad enough.

[Ryju84 3,170]

3 minutes ago, NeoGeo7 said:

I slagged McCoist for his predictable 60 min subs and being able to predict it and it seems Warburton is doing the same which worries me a bit.

if I were in charge I'd have no problem in taking a player off before half time if they were bad enough.

The problem s McCoist would wait until 80 mins to make a sub sometimes - even when we were poor. Warburton always does 60 minute subs which I have always agreed with as a good tactic until today. Half time should have been Waghorn off 

[Bad Robot 21,128]

14 minutes ago, murzo said:

Okay gaffer.

 

Didn't see the game the day but would agree. Advocaat wasn't shy in making a sub at anytime during a game if he thought it was needed but Warburton calls the shots and you can't really complain about what he has achieved to date with the team,style and tactics.

and Walter waited until 70 minutes, the difference is MW has won fuck all. I think it's great what he's doing and think we will win the league but he just needs to adapt and evolve his game plan. subbing Waghorn at HT would have been a smarter time for a sub 

Like me, I think he also thought Alloa was going to be a walkover and maybe he was thinking too much about Tuesday as I don't think his bench and subs were a good choice.

[Reformation Bear 6,453]

It's as though there is only one tool in the timing of substation toolbox.  Or a paining by numbers approach to timing of substitutions.  A stubbornness of 'there is no other way'.  Or more to the point, there is another way but I just refuse to do it......regardless of circumstances. 

This sort of rigid predictable sort of formulaic approach begins to look no better than a ritual.  Its what you do when you get to 60 mins.  Bit like making a cup of tea at 11am, or taking lunch at 1pm.  Or carrying out your trades as a certain time of the day because that's when you've concluded the market is at its best for what you want to do.

But in football, especially this season when promotion is so vital, playing a ritualistic tune may not be hitting the mark.   If players are plainly not delivering or off their game and you have confidence in your bench why not substitute earlier.  The primarly objective is to win the game not give players a certain amount of playing time.   Just because you hold on against hope for 60 mins then make a change hoping that fresh hope can be generated for the last 30 mins when it might have  been better or wiser to change earlier does not strike me as necessarily having the best pulse on what is happening in a game.   MW is there to lead and to gt the best out of the team in each game - ie to win the game.   Sometimes that means taking decisive action quicker and not simply hoping that something will turn around in that fist 60 mins.     

 

[murzo 7,446]

17 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

and Walter waited until 70 minutes, the difference is MW has won fuck all. I think it's great what he's doing and think we will win the league but he just needs to adapt and evolve his game plan. subbing Waghorn at HT would have been a smarter time for a sub 

Like me, I think he also thought Alloa was going to be a walkover and maybe he was thinking too much about Tuesday as I don't think his bench and subs were a good choice.

If Warburton was thinking about Tuesday then surely he would have taken Waghorn off at h/t as he's a definite starter against Killie as players are cup-tied, or even start with Clarkand give Waghorn a bit of a rest. IMO we're short of a centre forward and rely on Waghorn too much as a result.

[Clemdog 39,389]

Again, this isn't the problem. Thirty minutes is more than long enough to effect the game and it did. 

The problem today, and other games, is us not taking our chances. 

[Jamie0202 12,195]

I missed the game today but going by the comments I'm assuming Waghorn had a poor first half. I can understand wanting to sub a player after a poor 45 but how many times have we seen players coming out after a half time team talk and playing a lot better? 15 minutes more to up their game seems reasonable so 60 minute subs sound just about right.

[theclothmonster 1,702]

2 hours ago, Rangers_no1 said:

At least Mark finally took Waghorn off after another poor performance.

Biggest surprise for me was our in form striker was last to come on.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

I'd have rather had Forrester stay on and McKay come off. Today wasn't one of Barrie's better games. Forrester looked the player most likely to score a goal at times.

[Teddy bear 1873 57]

Defo striker needed two good quality midfielders acquire King and a defender and were good tae go depending on who goes and who stays fill those positions adding quality and bit of depth. Waggy will come good in the end needs a bit of rest , n haha hivs

[Ivybank 4,557]

Clark?what the hell was he on for ,controlled the ball in the box then fell on his Arse,why bring him on at all

useless

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

27 minutes ago, Turnberry18 said:

I'd have rather had Forrester stay on and McKay come off. Today wasn't one of Barrie's better games. Forrester looked the player most likely to score a goal at times.

Think you are being too kind, McKay was shite today and had Oduwa given the ball away as often there would have been multiple threads on RM.  Forrester, MOH and King all offered more of a threat.  In front of goals we really struggle hen Waghorn doesn't score and Clark is certainly not the answer.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

2 minutes ago, siddiqi_drinker said:

Think you are being too kind, McKay was shite today and had Oduwa given the ball away as often there would have been multiple threads on RM.  Forrester, MOH and King all offered more of a threat.  In front of goals we really struggle hen Waghorn doesn't score and Clark is certainly not the answer.

Hopefully Waghorn comes good some time soon. I was impressed by MOH; it look as if he upped a gear in the latter stages. Clark should have finished that chance where MOH made his way through their defence. 

[bluewhitevanman 1,619]

MW always does the 60 min subs which Is fair enough as more often than not he has been right but the only thing which pisses me off is the fact we constantly try and walk the ball in2 the net, against the shite in this league we should be doing everything and anything to score the goals to get us the victory,if that means crossing in2 the box or whatever then we should mix it up a bit. I don't mean going back to mccoist style but just do anything to win this league, we got away with it today with the hibs  result but who's to say that would be the case again should we drop points? Us staying in this league would be a total disaster as well as embarrassing,we need out this league at all costs. We have everything to be the best in the country again but not in this league. Come on rangers get the heads  up and get this done and no more slip ups 

[mclovin9091 1,388]

60 min double subs for me are a great way to dishearten the opposition, IF you bring on two fresh wingers, as their full backs are (at most levels) getting tired and may have picked up a booking already. Fresh blokes constantly running at them will lead to either more crosses into the box, bookings from lazy tackles.

We do need someone who can score from crosses. Our corners are fucking depressing, not one person attacking the ball and today fucked me right off with no one sitting deep on the chance of an over hit corner. 

 

This was one of the things that made me passable as a player, i could keep going at the same rate for the 90 mins compared to the civvies i was playing against. I always said to our full back, if in doubt hoof it down the pitch and i'll chase it, more often than not (quite proud of this) the full back marking me was yanked more times than not. Then the manager had a great idea to play me as a wing back and fucked things up, as i'd have to hoof it to myself.

[kaiser1041 9,088]

The subs brought on gave us a bit more urgency so I can't complain 

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,638]

We are playin fuck awe we shouldnae even need tae bring oan subs, in fact we should make a habit gettin someboady sent off on 60 minutes and still fuck them with glee !

[7troop 187]

Walter Smith used to frustrate the hell out of me with his procrastinating over substitutions. More often than not he took far too long to make a change.

60 minutes into the game is generally a good time for fresh legs to come on but I think it's now a bit too predictable. Each game should be assessed as it develops and not necessarily pre determined when you will make changes.

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

25 minutes ago, kaiser1041 said:

The subs brought on gave us a bit more urgency so I can't complain 

The subs added to the urgency however the catalyst for that urgency was Alloa scoring.  My question is why we don't play with that sense of urgency for 90 minutes.  Urgency and passing football are not mutually incompatible.  Up to the manager to convey that message to the players.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

Just now, siddiqi_drinker said:

The subs added to the urgency however the catalyst for that urgency was Alloa scoring.  My question is why we don't play with that sense of urgency for 90 minutes.  Urgency and passing football are not mutually incompatible.  Up to the manager to convey that message to the players.

I agree. There were periods at the end of that first half where we looked a bit too casual. A first half goal could have led to more goals. Towards the end of that first half and for the beginning of the second half our temp should have been higher. 

[B1872 20,625]

Thought King made a difference when came on no so much Clarke. That was the kind of game that Oduwa would've made a difference. We definitely need a plan B when we are struggling to break teams down. Possibly a number 9.

[murzo 7,446]

38 minutes ago, siddiqi_drinker said:

The subs added to the urgency however the catalyst for that urgency was Alloa scoring.  My question is why we don't play with that sense of urgency for 90 minutes.  Urgency and passing football are not mutually incompatible.  Up to the manager to convey that message to the players.

You see this happening all the time with teams. Teams chasing a game last 10mins or pull a goal back to give themselves a chance, all of a sudden up their game. Come out at the first whistle with that attitude and urgency and most games we'd be out of sight by half time.