:top marks
Printable View
He never made the subs at Perth because we were hammering them. He then made them at the perfect time and it won us the game. Not quite sure how this is a negative. Rangers game is completely different - game was in the balance and while hindsight the subs may have helped, on another day they don’t get the penalty and we get a point at least and we go home satisfied. If we make the subs and they go and score then folk would go nuts about changing it when comfortable.
I’d have taken a point, absolutely. I just don’t think a positive change would have hindered our chances of getting it and would also have increased our chances of getting more. There seems to be an assumption any such change would have left us wide open but that happened when they broke on us anyway.
You could say the same about Rangers. If they’d lost would their fans have complained? They tried to be positive & got the rewards. SA also brought in late at Ross County, again after we lost a goal. We have a negative approach to how we try & win games if they’re in the balance. Happy to plod on & collect a point.
No point he’s not for moving on his view and to slag someone else saying the obviously don’t have a clue about football 😂. Hibs were trying to win the game and as an offshoot of that we were getting hit on the counter which for the most part we were coping with. To make changes and bring on the players mentioned compromises the whole structure of a team tjay for 80m made rangers look average.
And for the comments about the St J game it’s like he’s having a moan about everything I.e we only won as they had 10 men apart from the fact we we’re the better side 11v11.
I’m guessing he’s in the wanting on JR out camp
Why try and go for it when you are already behind reacting to a situation? Just go for it in the first place?
A point that is under estimated is the number of games we have and making late changes really makes no sense.
We were trying to win the game, I’d agree.
But we were lacking any quality to make it happen. The most common argument for not making any changes was that it’d leave us more open but, as you say, there was a risk of that happening anyway. Why not have someone that might actually make something happen? It might actually have gave them something and prevented them countering?
Am I missing something here?
We LOST v Rangers & your still saying it was correct to plod on?
We were better team v Saints 11 v 11. We were LOSING the game.
Never said I wanted JR out, I’m saying we have a negative approach to games in the balance. Don’t make positive changes until we are chasing the game.,
Based on our previous form of 3 points out of 18, and how the game went during the first 70 minutes, I'd have been happy with a point against the current league champions. Wasn't as if we were under the cosh the whole game and clinging on. Game was decided by a marginal call where if Porto had pulled his foot back 0.25 seconds sooner we'd have probably got a point.
I still stand by the call that the subs were too late and reactive. We needed fresh legs about the time Rangers brought on Arfield. Last 15 minutes before their goal they were starting to apply more pressure and our heavy schedule was starting to take its toll.
Not saying that would have won us the game or even got a point but Allan and Murph helped win the game at the weekend. Wrong call to save them and only to bring them on reactively as soon as we were chasing the game.
FWIW I agree with you, it was a missed opportunity on Wednesday night to show initiative and try and win the game by having a go at Rangers with 25 mins to go onwards.
I just hope it's not the same timid pragmatic performance in the final where its a close game that we ultimately lose. We have seen that before in the 2013 final, a very tame performance. I fear we will see a repeat of that, hopefully not though.
I agree with you, the fact he made the two attack minded changes after we lost the goal suggests to me he thought the players he brought on gave us a better chance of getting one back ourselves. Your last sentence is telling for me. Last season we were 2-1 up against Celtic, they made attacking changes to try and get an equaliser, we made defensive ones, sat back and they scored. Had we made a more attack minded one that may have given them something to think about.
Well, the next best thing is to listen to the radio, read the match reports, look at the stats and to read Johnny's excellent summaries and testimony from people on here.
All theses told me we did more than enough to win the game, and would have been good value for the win even if Saints had kept 11 men on the pitch.
Do I still not count?