Sidwell

[tomfitz12]

Why was Bruno subbed?

He was sitting on the turf when they brought bong on so presume some sort of injury

 

[ewe2]

I was wrong ! Crofts is a far better bet than Sidwell,and yet he has gone out on loan........!

 

[goldstone]

Let's face it, anyone would have been a better sub than Sidwell. He has done absolutely nothing of note since coming back. Oh, OK, he cleared the ball off the line today, but if that goal had gone in we would have had more time to get a winner. He should not even be on the bench. Towell must be a better bet.

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

Oh, OK, he cleared the ball off the line today, but if that goal had gone in we would have had more time to get a winner. He should not even be on the bench.

You're right, he should have helped it on its way over the line so that we'd have an extra 90 seconds to score the winner.

#NSClogic

I agree that he probably wasn't the right substitute to make, but that's a very odd point to call a player out on.

 

[tigertim68]

Sorry Sidwell not the player he was

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Bit harsh to make him the scapegoat. Hemed missed a sitter, Murphy failed to square to unmarked Wilson to lock up the game, Dunk gave away a stupid foul leading to the goal etc etc. But apparently we drew because Sidwell didn't do much in his five minutes at the end of the game (except incidentally the goal line clearance for that disallowed goal)?

When Hemed came off Burnley advanced 20 yards, the ball out to Wilson was hopeless, Sidwell was chasing shadows. With Hemed on the pitch we were comfortable, we invited pressure and paid the price.

 

[Munkfish]

Crofts is a better player. But he is out of contract at the end of the season and can see why he has gone out on loan. Sidwell has been poor. Im personal suprised at how poor he has been. Not even a glimpse of magic.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

When Hemed came off Burnley advanced 20 yards, the ball out to Wilson was hopeless, Sidwell was chasing shadows. With Hemed on the pitch we were comfortable, we invited pressure and paid the price.

All correct a poor substitution. I would also add that we had no 'out' ball after Hemed went off...... KLL would have been better.

 

[Sheebo]

Would much rather have had Crofts here coming on tbh - would have put himself about much more and did OK when he played this season!

 

[biddles911]

All correct a poor substitution. I would also add that we had no 'out' ball after Hemed went off...... KLL would have been better.

Much as I love Kaz, he loses the ball too often and is crap at defending, so I don't think he would have been the right substitution at that late stage.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Much as I love Kaz, he loses the ball too often and is crap at defending, so I don't think he would have been the right substitution at that late stage.

But that's the problem, Sidwell was brought on to help defend, which means we sit back and Burnley pile forward, if you put Kaz on then Burnley have to worry about him, they sit deeper and we have more breathing space. Don't get me wrong, I love Hughton and everything that he's done/doing for us, but that, IMO, was the wrong substitution today, we were comfortable when we had the ball, we handed Burnley the impetus and paid the price accordingly.

 

[Stat Brother]

Poor decision from Hughton. Said at the time that would cost us.

And for Hemed? Who was looking fantastic.

This , not Sidwelks fault but the CH who took Hemed off and brought him on

Burnley looked no threat until that substitution

Puzzling substitution.

Hemed was out for the count, he was coming off irrespective who came on.

Hindsight, and in fairness recent history, says either a winger and Murphy through the middle or Skalak straight into that position, was the move.
But nevertheless Hemed was being subbed off.


Amazingly even a 'dead on his feet' Tomer was still able to set Murphy up, while he was laying on the floor.

The match should have been put to bed long before Sidwell's substitution, at which point I'd have had every faith in him being able to 'see out the game'.

 

[symyjym]

Hemed was knackered , I think Greer would of been a better sub than Sidwell , at least we would of had more height at the back to combat all the crosses that were coming in

This is what I was thinking, making it a fluid back 3/5.

 

[chaileyjem]

Why was Bruno subbed?

Cramp. Will be ok for Tuesday.

 

[TottonSeagull]

Hemed was out for the count, he was coming off irrespective who came on.

Hindsight, and in fairness recent history, says either a winger and Murphy through the middle or Skalak straight into that position, was the move.
But nevertheless Hemed was being subbed off.


Amazingly even a 'dead on his feet' Tomer was still able to set Murphy up, while he was laying on the floor.

The match should have been put to bed long before Sidwell's substitution, at which point I'd have had every faith in him being able to 'see out the game'.

This is exactly right. Hemed was dead on his feet. We were under pressure before Sidwell came on. I agree that Sidwell has hardly impressed but this game should have been put to bed way before he came on.

 

[trueblue]

Given that Burnley's only real threat was from corners and free-kicks, maybe the substitution Poyet used frequently would have been a better bet for the last 10 mins. Greer on as a 3rd CB. But even more negative - so who knows. I'd have preferred that we just kept 4-4-2 as we seemed to be so much in control of the game. But that's not the same as blaming Sidwell even though, so far, he's been a big disappointment. I'd rather have seen Crofts sticking around for that shoring up role tbh.

 

[biddles911]

But that's the problem, Sidwell was brought on to help defend, which means we sit back and Burnley pile forward, if you put Kaz on then Burnley have to worry about him, they sit deeper and we have more breathing space. Don't get me wrong, I love Hughton and everything that he's done/doing for us, but that, IMO, was the wrong substitution today, we were comfortable when we had the ball, we handed Burnley the impetus and paid the price accordingly.

I didn't say that Sidwell was the right substitution just that KLL was the wrong one!

Personally, I don't like sitting back on a one goal lead though it's been pretty effective most of the season. Perhaps Skalak would have been a better option though I didn't see the game just listened to it on radio so find it difficult to judge.....

 

[BUTTERBALL]

But that's the problem, Sidwell was brought on to help defend, which means we sit back and Burnley pile forward, if you put Kaz on then Burnley have to worry about him, they sit deeper and we have more breathing space. Don't get me wrong, I love Hughton and everything that he's done/doing for us, but that, IMO, was the wrong substitution today, we were comfortable when we had the ball, we handed Burnley the impetus and paid the price accordingly.

Exactly this.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

But that's the problem, Sidwell was brought on to help defend, which means we sit back and Burnley pile forward, if you put Kaz on then Burnley have to worry about him, they sit deeper and we have more breathing space. Don't get me wrong, I love Hughton and everything that he's done/doing for us, but that, IMO, was the wrong substitution today, we were comfortable when we had the ball, we handed Burnley the impetus and paid the price accordingly.

Quite. Every time we cleared it, it came back, KLL would have offered pace if nothing else.

 

[One Love]

Unfortunately Sidwell is our only midfield alternative in the match day squad.

That is a big weakness as we seem to be awful when he's playing.