Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Hughton's substitutions



Buzzer

Buzzer

Languidly Clinical
Oct 1, 2006
26,121
Has anyone else been surprised at Hughton's decisions in the last few games re. substitutions? We seem to be leaving them till later and later in the game, there was a time when you knew that the 60th minute would bring some sort of change but now it's getting well past 70 mins and the last 2 games into the 80+ minutes.

I was surprised to see not a single Brighton player even warming up in the last few minutes against Preston when we could have run down the clock down or even have brought Skalak on to run at the defence. And on the subs bench I'm not really sure what kind of scenario would have seen Rohan Ince come on last night. An injury to Dunk or Duffy perhaps but we had Goldson on the bench who can cover that and if defensive cover is a must then I'd have preferred to see Hünemeier.

It's only a very minor annoyance but there are times when I'd like to see a bit more use of what CH has got available to him.
 




B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
The only plus from last night was he didnt bring Ince on. As many have said the killer was replacing SB with Dale Stephens not because of Stephens but we lost the momentum and possession in their half. If the ball is in their half they cannot score very simple. so keep it there.
 


M

Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
16,643
Fiveways
I think the last two games have been due to the shortage of attacking options on the bench. He's always been slow to make changes, and the last two games he's left it later still. At times, I do want him to be bolder with substitutions: Wolves made two at half-time, and their final one 20-odd minutes later. But, at present, there aren't too many options available. That ought to improve over the next few games. Fingers crossed.
 


symyjym

symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually
BensGrandad said:
The only plus from last night was he didnt bring Ince on. As many have said the killer was replacing SB with Dale Stephens not because of Stephens but we lost the momentum and possession in their half. If the ball is in their half they cannot score very simple. so keep it there.
Click to expand...

I think the substitutions were about right. Bruno was forced. Manu could have replaced Baldock, but with Wolves throwing the kitchen sink at us with Sidwell and Norwood tiring in the last 5 mins, Stephens was probably correct option.

Do we have Manu twiddling his thumbs on the halfway line waiting for a free goal during 6 consecutive corners or do we get Stephens to get stuck in? Pocognoliat for AK at 90+1 is probably also about right.
 


Cowfold Seagull

Cowfold Seagull

Fan of the 17 bus
Apr 22, 2009
21,620
Cowfold
Until not so very long ago, CH, (and probably two or three managers before him), would signal our super sub LuaLua to start warming up on about 50 minutes, and would throw him on after an hour in an attempt to liven up the attack and nick a goal.

I know Kaz is injured at the moment, but that doesn't seemed to have happened this season.
 




B

BensGrandad

New member
Jul 13, 2003
72,015
Haywards Heath
symyjym said:
I think the substitutions were about right. Bruno was forced. Manu could have replaced Baldock, but with Wolves throwing the kitchen sink at us with Sidwell and Norwood tiring in the last 5 mins, Stephens was probably correct option.

Do we have Manu twiddling his thumbs on the halfway line waiting for a free goal during 6 consecutive corners or do we get Stephens to get stuck in? Pocognoliat for AK at 90+1 is probably also about right.
Click to expand...

Manu or Murphy for SB and then Stephens for Skalak and as you say Bruno was a forced move so no problem with that.
 


F

fleet

Well-known member
Jul 28, 2003
12,222
He is the manager and I am not - but bringing a fresh striker on for an existing one gives the other side more to worry about and they can't bring everyone (including the keeper) up. I do think we invite pressure by going so deep.
 


studio150

studio150

Well-known member
Jul 30, 2011
29,611
On the Border
Not surprised by the subs in the least.

A lot of managers look to close games out by bringing on more defensive cover, which is logical. In the past when we have done this, we would have brought on one of the flying widemen, to still pose a threat on the break. With th ecurrent make up of the squad due to injuries this is not possible.

As for being bolder with subs unless we are losing this is not going to happen. There is little point making early subs when ahead as injuries can strike at any time.

It also isn't management by the numbers whereby whatever the score 3 subs are made in the hour, just to give players a longer run out.

Assuming we are winning on Saturday with the clock winding down, I fully expect the same sort of cautious subs to see the game out.
 




studio150

studio150

Well-known member
Jul 30, 2011
29,611
On the Border
fleet said:
He is the manager and I am not - but bringing a fresh striker on for an existing one gives the other side more to worry about and they can't bring everyone (including the keeper) up. I do think we invite pressure by going so deep.
Click to expand...

But on the basis we bring everyone back for corners (including your fresh striker) the other team can still throw everyone up.
 


G

goldstone

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
7,115
BensGrandad said:
The only plus from last night was he didnt bring Ince on. As many have said the killer was replacing SB with Dale Stephens not because of Stephens but we lost the momentum and possession in their half. If the ball is in their half they cannot score very simple. so keep it there.
Click to expand...

Agree with that. Taking off a striker (Baldock) just invited them to set up camp in our half and bombard our goal ... which is just what they did. Carbon copy of Saturday, the only difference being that Wolves didn't score ... but they came mighty close with that last kick of the game. Disagree with Hughton's tactics on this one. Keep the forward on when we're defending a one goal lead, or swap forward for forward ... Manu for Baldock.
 


Pavilionaire

Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
30,566
I don't know who is least likely to play for us again - Manu or Ince. You might be forgiven for thinking Houghton is a Citeh fan...
 






Icy Gull

Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
Machiavelli said:
I think the last two games have been due to the shortage of attacking options on the bench. He's always been slow to make changes, and the last two games he's left it later still. At times, I do want him to be bolder with substitutions: Wolves made two at half-time, and their final one 20-odd minutes later. But, at present, there aren't too many options available. That ought to improve over the next few games. Fingers crossed.
Click to expand...

It was very obvious when the window closed that we'd need a miracle to get though to January without going games when we didn't have enough strikers available. We have been lucky so far, quite what we'll do if we lose two of them for a few games who knows. I find the lack of striker options really frustrating and would personally like to have seen Manu replacing Baldock rather than Stephens. I reckon we got away with it last night as Wolves could quite easily have knicked a point with a bit more composure in front of goal. It would have been really disappointing because I thought the whole team played really well even through the backs to the wall defence. The ref also seemed intent on finding a way for Wolves to equalise, some really soft free kicks and odd decisions at the end.

CH is doing a fantastic job but I am not a fan of trying to sit on leads by mass defence in the last 10 minutes and I'm not convinced it's a great tactic. :shrug:
 


Stat Brother

Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,664
West west west Sussex
Icy Gull said:
CH is doing a fantastic job but I am not a fan of trying to sit on leads by mass defence in the last 10 minutes and I'm not convinced it's a great tactic. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I attribute so many points gained to CH, I guess it's still a Sami hangover.
There can be nothing better for your CV than following a complete basket case.
CH is very much the real deal, who is clearly a scholar of the sport.

But like you I take some convincing on a tactic that turns a previously rock solid defensive UNIT, into a bunch of blithering idiots.
From the outside looking in it seems like the players stop taking command of their job, expecting someone else to be able to sort it out.
 


M

Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
16,643
Fiveways
Icy Gull said:
It was very obvious when the window closed that we'd need a miracle to get though to January without going games when we didn't have enough strikers available. We have been lucky so far, quite what we'll do if we lose two of them for a few games who knows. I find the lack of striker options really frustrating and would personally like to have seen Manu replacing Baldock rather than Stephens. I reckon we got away with it last night as Wolves could quite easily have knicked a point with a bit more composure in front of goal. It would have been really disappointing because I thought the whole team played really well even through the backs to the wall defence. The ref also seemed intent on finding a way for Wolves to equalise, some really soft free kicks and odd decisions at the end.

CH is doing a fantastic job but I am not a fan of trying to sit on leads by mass defence in the last 10 minutes and I'm not convinced it's a great tactic. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I agree about bringing Elvis on, even if it was to replace Murray after Baldock had gone off. He's got the pace to exploit any break away, whereas Murray hasn't. Baldock puts in such a shift, we'd wear him out if we kept him on for longer, thereby increasing the likelihood of another injury-plagued season. I think he might also keep Murray on for his defensive strength at corners (which in retrospect looks like a good decision for last night).
I'm not adverse to CH's tactic of defending a lead. It works out far more times than not, and he won't change that, so no point going on about it.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here