Carole.......was he injured?

[Scotty Mac]

or did mcghee just decided to use the 'draw a players name from the hat' system to take someone off

 

[sir danny cullip]

or did mcghee just decided to use the 'draw a players name from the hat' system to take someone off

Looked like the draw a player system! He should have put carole to right wing and taken chippy/hammond off and moved reid to centre midfield imho.

 

[¡Cereal Killer!]

i thought Carole was playnig really well, just no-one was getting anywhere near the end of his crosses. I thought it was a strange sub but I guess he wanted to use the height of CKR

 

[fatboy]

Perhaps he was knackered playing up front.

And as it was a like for like substitution it was the right move.

 

[Scotty Mac]

carole might have been able to unlock hull though, and apart from frutos and ckr we have no-one else who can do so

surely one of the central midfielders, who were wank tonight, could of gone off, move reid inside and put carole back in a wide position

 

[trueblue]

Re: Re: Carole.......was he injured?

Looked like the draw a player system! He should have put carole to right wing and taken chippy/hammond off and moved reid to centre midfield imho.

And then with our completely untried midfield combination we could have given Jon Harley the freedom of the left wing, got over-run in the centre and chucked away the point that we did get.

 

[sir danny cullip]

Bit off point like but how did you get on at the weekend scotty?

 

[Basil Fawlty]

I was so pissed off with Magoo discision tonight, surely he should of brought off Reid, and then put Carole on the wing.

 

[Silent Bob]

Can't understand why he was taken off, surely dropping him to the wing and taking Reid or El-abd off made far more sense?

 

[Scotty Mac]

youd think so. el abd off would have meant we would have reid and carole down the right, both of whom would of been quite happy to push on. and with burnely only have one up-front that would not have been a problem

 

[trueblue]

youd think so. el abd off would have meant we would have reid and carole down the right, both of whom would of been quite happy to push on. and with burnely only have one up-front that would not have been a problem

Don't you think Burnley might have seen that as their chance to exploit the gaps we'd be leaving down that wing and nick a win? They're allowed to change tactics too.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

Reid was left on because he can go forward and defend, I think that is the reason Carole is playing up front at the moment because it enables us to accomodate him and Frutos without having our central midfield overrun because our two wingers get caught out up the pitch.

CKR can have an impact as sub but he didn't tonight because quite simply Burnley stifled the game and we couldn't break them down. By the end it was better to keep the point rather than lose it.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

youd think so. el abd off would have meant we would have reid and carole down the right, both of whom would of been quite happy to push on. and with burnely only have one up-front that would not have been a problem

But in a 4-5-1 combination you usually rely on your wide players to get forward quickly to support the lone striker, so by weakening our defence we give them the chance to get back into the game.

 

[Withdean Wanderer]

Im lost for reasons why he keeps making bizzare subs

 

[London Irish]

Perhaps he was knackered playing up front.

And as it was a like for like substitution it was the right move.

I agree, I think the idea was to ensure we weren't overwhelmed in midfield by the Burnley 5, Frutos and Carole as a pairing are very progressive but they are not cut out for a trench warfare battle in midfield, Reid is in good form and it would have been as hard a call to sacrifice him as Carole.

After the switch, I felt we had the edge in the second half and we created the best chance, alas, we didn't take it, as we did with OGH against Leeds.

 

[Redhead]

Wasn't he taken off so he could get up to Reading to sign before midnight?

 

[Silent Bob]

Reid was left on because he can go forward and defend, I think that is the reason Carole is playing up front at the moment because it enables us to accomodate him and Frutos without having our central midfield overrun because our two wingers get caught out up the pitch.

CKR can have an impact as sub but he didn't tonight because quite simply Burnley stifled the game and we couldn't break them down. By the end it was better to keep the point rather than lose it.

Do you ever disagree with anything?

 

[London Irish]

edit

....at this point, I made my feelings known about floating such bizarre theories about racism, but I am now editing them as WW has admitted he went over the top. I hope he now removes them from this board totally.

 

[London Irish]

Reid was left on because he can go forward and defend, I think that is the reason Carole is playing up front at the moment because it enables us to accomodate him and Frutos without having our central midfield overrun because our two wingers get caught out up the pitch.

CKR can have an impact as sub but he didn't tonight because quite simply Burnley stifled the game and we couldn't break them down. By the end it was better to keep the point rather than lose it.

Sorry, I didn't see your post before I wrote mine, I agree 100%.

 

[Withdean Wanderer]

You are a f***ing idiot who if I had my way would be banned for f***ing idiotic shit like that.

Post edited, bit over the top