Analysis Day (Substitutions)

[Corky True Legend 2,682]

57 minutes ago, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:

I'm not being sarcastic, I just don't get why people are so concerned about the Falkirk result.  We'll wrap this league up soon enough and automatic promotion will be ours.  The team needs to give one last big effort in the Scottish Cup as Euro football at Ibrox next season will be incredible.  Beyond that, I'm looking forward to the summer and seeing what Warburton does with this squad and getting us ready for a top-tier title push.  In the grand scheme of things the Falkirk result has cost us nothing.

Quite agree that the result cost us nothing. Mr Warburton has said we will learn from it. Good. Hope he has learnt that subs for the sake of it is courting trouble It's too Ally like for me.

[cushynumber 25,178]

I dont think the 60 minute mark is the issue. The issue was against Falkirk we made 3 attacking subs when it was obvious we were starting to struggle in other departments - we started chasing a game we actually didn't need to chase, while not fixing the parts that were starting to creak. It was the wrong subs positionally, not the wrong time that was the issue.

 

[danger ranger 922]

We were losing the midfield battle, he should have replaced King with Forrester as defensive mid right, pulled Halliday into defensive mid left, still keeping his front line intact and still having the ability to attack, and maybe bring on Dean Sheils  to break up their midfield if we were really struggling. I also don't go with argument of taking every chance you get wins every time, If you look at any results on a fixture list most games are won by one or two goals with both side missing chances, tells me you have to manage the game in every department and change to suit the oppositions strengths within the game, now that's a lesson Warburton needs to learn.

[californiadreamin52 339]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. It is time we had a plan B and became more flexible and less predictable especially when a game starts going against us
 

[Zulu 981]

46 minutes ago, danger ranger said:

We were losing the midfield battle, he should have replaced King with Forrester as defensive mid right, pulled Halliday into defensive mid left, still keeping his front line intact and still having the ability to attack, and maybe bring on Dean Sheils  to break up their midfield if we were really struggling. I also don't go with argument of taking every chance you get wins every time, If you look at any results on a fixture list most games are won by one or two goals with both side missing chances, tells me you have to manage the game in every department and change to suit the oppositions strengths within the game, now that's a lesson Warburton needs to learn.

And who does he learn it from he is the boss of RFC he picks the cast and its his way or no way.

[Corky True Legend 2,682]

9 minutes ago, Zulu said:

And who does he learn it from he is the boss of RFC he picks the cast and its his way or no way.

Everyone makes mistakes but a fool makes the same mistake twice. He does not need to learn from someone; only from experience. He will not have the same leeway next season. I believe he can do it but he still has to prove it.

[johanhentze 14,154]

22 minutes ago, Corky True Legend said:

Everyone makes mistakes but a fool makes the same mistake twice. He does not need to learn from someone; only from experience. He will not have the same leeway next season. I believe he can do it but he still has to prove it.

You can only do so much as a manager.. at the end of the day its the players that have to perform. Perhaps they let him down on this occasion? There are many factors here..

[raging blue 1972 894]

I've got a different slant on all these subs threads

 

 

 

[KeyserSoze 14,582]

2 hours ago, cushynumber said:

I dont think the 60 minute mark is the issue. The issue was against Falkirk we made 3 attacking subs when it was obvious we were starting to struggle in other departments - we started chasing a game we actually didn't need to chase, while not fixing the parts that were starting to creak. It was the wrong subs positionally, not the wrong time that was the issue.

 

Good post. But also when you throw three players on in quick succession it's bound to have an overall affect either positively or negatively on the balance of the team 

 Which is why the 60 mark raises its head. 

 

[BlueboyG 5,255]

We can look at stats all day, the facts are we were up 2-0 probably should have been 5-0, we were doing fine until we introduced the subs, everything changed from then on, Gogzy was spot on , if it ain't broken don't fix it.

[glasgow argyle 1,093]

6 hours ago, KeyserSoze said:

 

An ex player has just ordered 12 of these pies.

Kris Boyd

[danger ranger 922]

3 hours ago, Zulu said:

And who does he learn it from he is the boss of RFC he picks the cast and its his way or no way.

When your nose gets rubbed in it, just like Friday night, you would think he would say to himself, Hang on a minute.

[govanblue 16,847]

9 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said:

After the Dundee game Wallace was purring about how enjoyable the analysis was - I bet todays analysis session is slightly less enjoyable!!

Anywas inspired (??) by @OlegKuznetsov (or even by @KeyserSoze ) and @gogzy with their threads on MW substitutions and with far to much time on my hands yesterday I have analysed all the games this season for the 'effect' of these 60 minute substitutions. I have included cup games. 

Of the 38 games we have played -

9 games results have changed after MW's subs.

7 drawn positions have become wins (So I gave them 2 points - difference between a draw and a win)

1 game we were 1-1 and lost 1-2 (to Hibs) after the 60min subs (So I made that minus 2)

1 game we were 0 - 2 and lost 3-2 (Falkirk) after the 60 min subs (So I made that minus 3) 

If the result did not change based on subs I gave that 0 points but if the score changed I noted the goal difference.

Overall we were 9 points better off than our 60 minute position and our goal difference improved  by +34.

Would a different sub policy give different results? I dont know - but it does not seem to be negative at all - all our possesion may lead to these later gaols anyway. What I do like about the policy is the game time is better spread throughout the squad.

(Spreadsheet and image attached)

 

 

Rangers Subs.xlsx

 

What this analysis tells me is that you will be going on a long drive sooner rather than later!

[danger ranger 922]

The lesson was given by Peter Houston, how to manage a game for the full ninety minutes and making the right changes to tactics and subs. When Houston seen our subs. he must have said ya beauty. I mean, taking off our best forward on the night and leaving our back door wide open, and the suggestion that the players let him down, well he is the one who picks and bought them and has seen them make the same mistakes all season and he still hasn't learned from it.

 

[To Be A Ranger 4,032]

10 hours ago, KeyserSoze said:

My thread was shite anyway...................

yours was too easy to understand.

football's a complicated game

[KeyserSoze 14,582]

10 minutes ago, To Be A Ranger said:

yours was too easy to understand.

football's a complicated game

I lowered the tone for all the "hard of hearing" on here. 

[TheRave 4]

13 hours ago, Ryju84 said:

Fuck sake. I take a break from work and looking at spreadsheets to come on here... and be confronted by stats and figures and spreadsheets.

 

I demand that this is broken down into a pie chart to make it easier to read.

 

Other than that, some good stuff which shows that the subs usually make a difference for the positive. Friday was a blip against a decent team. 

I agree. Too much being made of it. We should of won the game but didnt - we'll move on.

I like the 60 min subs, it freshens games up (for the better according to stats) n makes sure we rotate game time around the squad

[gogzy 31,195]

12 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said:

It wasn't meant to really prove anything - it was just for interest - my 'only' conclusion about early subs is my OPINION that it uses the squad better than the odd tactical sub. 

WHile the predictablity of the 60m sub ( double sub most of the time) is a pet peeve of mine, it usually does work out well enough for us. They have to be the right subs and not just for the sake of it,  like others have said, and I said in my other thread..... Barrie and Kenny were two of the most effective players on the park, I don't think taking them off was the right move.  

It's easy enough for me to bitch with the benefit of hindsight I guess.  It is possible I was being overly critical, but it was a terrible result, with pretty ineffective subs, and a serious lack of fight when it got tough ( which is a rarity this season to be fair) I still think it's right that many on here were very ciritical and very anrgy at that performance.

 

Fair play to you for going to the the hassle of that research though bp9. 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

9 hours ago, govanblue said:

 

What this analysis tells me is that you will be going on a long drive sooner rather than later!

Yes my back is nearly normal - I'll get in touch this week. 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

4 hours ago, gogzy said:

WHile the predictablity of the 60m sub ( double sub most of the time) is a pet peeve of mine, it usually does work out well enough for us. They have to be the right subs and not just for the sake of it,  like others have said, and I said in my other thread..... Barrie and Kenny were two of the most effective players on the park, I don't think taking them off was the right move.  

It's easy enough for me to bitch with the benefit of hindsight I guess.  It is possible I was being overly critical, but it was a terrible result, with pretty ineffective subs, and a serious lack of fight when it got tough ( which is a rarity this season to be fair) I still think it's right that many on here were very ciritical and very anrgy at that performance.

 

Fair play to you for going to the the hassle of that research though bp9. 

I didn't do it as a 'argument' winner ( or loser) I was just interested. Friday was an Aweful result and Cristisism deserved ( just some of it was, as usual, ott) 

My critique of MWs philosophy is the attack at all costs - sometimes a game needs closed down to take the points - all good teams can do this - my fear is Results like Friday will crop up from time to time if we don't learn to close games out