60 Minute Double Sub

[Gartsherriederry 81]

5 hours 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.

Advocaat was never scared to make a sub mind he brung Ian Ferguson on and then took him back off again hahaha ffs ?

[Smile 26,600]

24 minutes ago, Gartsherriederry said:

Advocaat was never scared to make a sub mind he brung Ian Ferguson on and then took him back off again hahaha ffs ?

He did remember he subbed Ricksen after 20 minutes.

[Gartsherriederry 81]

3 minutes ago, Smile said:

He did remember he subbed Ricksen after 20 minutes.

Fuck that's right forgot about that 

[Ozblue 4,331]

For me the timing of the subs isn't an issue at all; Our biggest problem is the quality of the sub when we are chasing a goal,such as today when our top scorer is taken off and we pin our hopes on Nicky Clark getting us out of jail.We have got attacking players who can interchange positions and play all over the park, but we don't possess ONE player who is an out and out goal poacher in the mould of a McCoist or Boyd who will just about guarantee you a goal when the ball is in that penalty area.

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

6 hours ago, Ozblue said:

For me the timing of the subs isn't an issue at all; Our biggest problem is the quality of the sub when we are chasing a goal,such as today when our top scorer is taken off and we pin our hopes on Nicky Clark getting us out of jail.We have got attacking players who can interchange positions and play all over the park, but we don't possess ONE player who is an out and out goal poacher in the mould of a McCoist or Boyd who will just about guarantee you a goal when the ball is in that penalty area.

Would like to see Waghorn and MOH through the middle.  Both are strong with a good touch plus MOH lhas the speed of a greyhound.    

[Ozblue 4,331]

1 hour ago, siddiqi_drinker said:

Would like to see Waghorn and MOH through the middle.  Both are strong with a good touch plus MOH lhas the speed of a greyhound.    

I will have to take your word for it about O'Halloran,mate, for the simple reason I don't think I've watched a SPL game since we got shafted in 2011-12,unless we played against a team from the top flight in a cup/ play-off game, so the only time I seen him play was against us when St.Johnstone knocked us out of the LC.

Your suggestion is probably a good shout because I would like to see Waghorn with a goal poacher beside him, but I think we both know that is never going to happen UNLESS Mark Warburton changes his entire system, which to me will never happen in this league as he is pedantic about playing a 4-3-3 with the front 3 being interchangable and having 2 men wide at all times.

Will he change the entire system when we get promoted and play against "better teams"? or will he remain predictable and keep his favourite formation and change substitutes around the 60th minute and 72 minute mark???? we will have to wait and see.

As we all know; proven goalscorers are worth a fortune these days and almost definitely outside our spending ability, so Frank McParland will probably have to earn his salary and find us a young one with potential. One thing that has been very noticeable is that we seem to be stockpiling players with bags of pace, such as O'Halloran, King, Forrester, McKay, then we have the younger ones like Hardie who is very quick and the young lad Mehki Leacock-McLeod who is an absolute flying machine who both hopefully progress; so perhaps MW has a plan to change the shape of the team in the future.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I don't think The 60 min substitutions are purely tactical - they are strategic - in that even if we are dominating a game the 60min subs are made - I think they are strategic in that it gives good game time to the subs used keeping more of the squad match fit and sharp, and bringing on fresh legs early, and on the day who gets subbed can be either tactical or just a version of of squad rotation. I don't see any other manager consistently doing a double sub on 60 min ( or any other set time ) and I think that strategy is quite innovative but the strategic element is lost to many who only think of subs as tactical or for injury . 

[Fred H Crawford 1,182]

6 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said:

I don't think The 60 min substitutions are purely tactical - they are strategic - in that even if we are dominating a game the 60min subs are made - I think they are strategic in that it gives good game time to the subs used keeping more of the squad match fit and sharp, and bringing on fresh legs early, and on the day who gets subbed can be either tactical or just a version of of squad rotation. I don't see any other manager consistently doing a double sub on 60 min ( or any other set time ) and I think that strategy is quite innovative but the strategic element is lost to many who only think of subs as tactical or for injury . 

Agree with this , must be better for a substitute to come on knowing he has a chance to get involved and perhaps influence the game rather than get thrown on after 80 minutes when in all likelihood they will struggle to get any significant amount of touches & possession . When we're on top it must play on the mindset of the opposition , knowing that 2 fresh players are coming on trying to show they should have been in the starting line up.

[GOAT 30,449]

22 hours 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.

McCoist made 60 minute subs?  When?

I remember sitting week in, week out screaming for someone else to be brought on, only for it to happen with 15 or 10 minutes to go.  I must have missed these McCoist 60 minute subs.

[cushynumber 25,178]

I fail to why MW needs to wait till 60 mins. Martyn Waghorn was having a 'mare - everybody could see it. The sooner he was subbed, the better                          - for me he shouldn't have re-appeared for eh 2nd half - yet we give him another 15 mins. I just dont know what possible benefit it is to wait .

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

3 hours ago, GOAT said:

McCoist made 60 minute subs?  When?

I remember sitting week in, week out screaming for someone else to be brought on, only for it to happen with 15 or 10 minutes to go.  I must have missed these McCoist 60 minute subs.

He made his 60 minute substituions in the 85th minute to trick the opposition.  He was a very creative manager.

[Bad Robot 21,148]

On 14 February 2016 at 8:50 AM, Bluepeter9 said:

I don't think The 60 min substitutions are purely tactical - they are strategic - in that even if we are dominating a game the 60min subs are made - I think they are strategic in that it gives good game time to the subs used keeping more of the squad match fit and sharp, and bringing on fresh legs early, and on the day who gets subbed can be either tactical or just a version of of squad rotation. I don't see any other manager consistently doing a double sub on 60 min ( or any other set time ) and I think that strategy is quite innovative but the strategic element is lost to many who only think of subs as tactical or for injury . 

I agree with this regarding why and how we are using subs and although a sub ended up us winning the game, I thought yesterday it took the momentum out our play and let st mirren get back onto their game.

Against most teams we play there's always going to be that short time period when we're on top and relentlessly attacking in the oppositions third and to me the change broke this up.

I also believe the ref was wrong to allow their sub (MW then followed) at the time he did (58/59 mins) but this was a tactic by AR and IMO it worked for a good period after the subs. 

I really like the 60 min double sub and  believe it works 90% of the time but I think it's too rigid at times and there's other stages of a game we either should or shouldn't be making a change.

 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

1 hour ago, Bad Robot said:

I agree with this regarding why and how we are using subs and although a sub ended up us winning the game, I thought yesterday it took the momentum out our play and let st mirren get back onto their game.

Against most teams we play there's always going to be that short time period when we're on top and relentlessly attacking in the oppositions third and to me the change broke this up.

I also believe the ref was wrong to allow their sub (MW then followed) at the time he did (58/59 mins) but this was a tactic by AR and IMO it worked for a good period after the subs. 

I really like the 60 min double sub and  believe it works 90% of the time but I think it's too rigid at times and there's other stages of a game we either should or shouldn't be making a change.

 

On the whole it's working - and a decent case can be made that it worked again yesterday but a wee bit of flexibility might be good - I note that MW has ( probably with SDW's input) tightened our defence and we played a bit of keep ball / see the game out at the end which is ( slightly) against what MW said at start of season about never changing the way we play.

[Inigo 32,526]

Clearly MW likes the 60 minute sub. Maybe because he wants to let the players have 15 minutes to respond after the half time talk, maybe because he feels the subs will have more impact a little later, when the opposition are slowing down a bit. Maybe something else.

Either way, whether you agree with it or not, and whether or not you would do it differently, it can be justified and there is a valid argument for it. 

And lets face it, it's been working in that we've been scoring late goals, and the subs have been effective.

[WishartsAshes 1,137]

I've often wondered why 60mins is used for substitutions and not half time.

My guess, for what it's worth, is this:

MW sends the team out at the start of the game in his preferred formation with certain instructions.

At half time if this is not working, and maybe even if it is, he changes the formation and instructions with a view to making further changes at 60 mins if these changes are not working.

This gives him three rolls of the dice in terms of tactics. If he makes the substitutions at half time then he only has two rolls of the dice.

 

[kelvd1873 7,159]

On 13 February 2016 at 6:51 AM, Gartsherriederry said:

Fuck that's right forgot about that 

He also subbed Craig Moore in the first half and gave him rattling on the sidelines on his way to the change room. It was the first game of the season against kilmarnock iirc!!

[bluenoz 30,832]

I like it since our bench is very strong now and it worked to great effect yesterday.

[Bad Robot 21,148]

His team and his 60min single sub was all with an eye on Dundee. Well played gaffer.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715]

8 hours ago, Bad Robot said:

His team and his 60min single sub was all with an eye on Dundee. Well played gaffer.

That's disrespectful.

With all due respect it's all about us. We can't look ahead and take our eye off the ball, it's about this game. Always.

Say it in a MW accent then retract your post immediately. 

 

[Bad Robot 21,148]

Bumped due to other thread and the gaffer was spot on again yesterday.