FFS Yogi, it's 3 per game no per ****in' month :grr:
Printable View
FFS Yogi, it's 3 per game no per ****in' month :grr:
why no subs yesterday... except riordan of course !!!
we needed fresh legs in last 15min and we never got any
Perhaps he felt that a change in defence or midfield was unnecessary seeing as they were all committing 100% effort.
It was attacking that let us down yesterday... And after bringing on Deek, I don't know who else he could have brought on up front.
Unless Byrne was on the bench.
Byrne and Galbraith were on the bench.
For me The game was crying out for a change, especially after we hit the post and had them rattled for a bit. I thought the bnest option would have been to take off Nish (who is really beginning to wear on my patience btw!!!) and throw Galbraith into the mix. I reckon if we had put Stokes upfront and used his (Galbraith) pace out wide we could have caused some damage.
Nish didn't show me anything to suggest that he is a football player yesterday and I think that everytime he plays we end up resorting to hoof ball!!!
FFS read the forum before you post! Rankin is the scapegoat this week! Could you not wait a couple weeks till the next game before making it Hughes! :grr:Quote:
Originally Posted by hibztilltheend
I thought Nish, whilst not much came off for him, worked hard yesterday and is able to score goals, but for this reason alone (which really isn't his fault) I was wanting to see him hooked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russdoorsfan71
He seen how the match was being played out. IMO he made the correct decision and settled for the draw. He will know that a draw would be accepted but defete would not.
Rankin is not a scapegoat he is simply ineffective, yes that's the word that best describes him. Not so much a bad footballer, just ineffective.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Ineffective?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob1875
If he played every game for Hibs this season, he'd be running away in the assist chart. :faf:
The subs issue is baffling, I will trust the big man though.
I would have made two further changes yesterday with about 20 to go.
Either Stokes or Nish for Byrne and have Byrne playing on the right side of the front three and would have put on McCormack on for Rankin and moved Wotherspoon into midfield to play alongside Miller & McBride.
I am however happy with the point gained and hope Yogi sticks to the system we finished with rather than having 4 strikers on the pitch, sounds great in theory but if you have noone to create the chances then you ain't going to score goals.
I don't think introducing youngsters and changing our shape would have helped us win the derby. By the time the players had settled in, Hearts could have been handed the initiative. the last thing that the team need was disruption when the game could have gone either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franck is God
The only option I saw open to Yogi post Riordan, was to hook Lewis, pushing Nid to LB and push Hogg out to RB, bringing in Thicot and Hunter to take care of the CB positions before getting Liam and Kevin off the park and bringing Paul, George, John or potentially Ringo into the centre before pulling Nish off and replacing him with Byrne out on the right where Stokes was and letting him drift across to the left allowing Deek and Stack to cover the central midfield, making late runs into the box with the option of having Mixu make his presence felt at Right Mid, which would have required achange of shape or possibly have Gottkalksson do a job in the hole just off the front three where we could have deployed Paddy Deane to play the Matty Jack role before looking for McIntyre to slot home a penalty and put us in the driving seat. But for me, there would have been no place for Wright on the bench.
Thats probably the most sensible thing you have posted on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedway
Ultimately I think that if JH had done that we would not have finished the game with the same players that started it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedway
I have been frustrated at the lack of substitutions in the past for example the Dundee Utd game, I think they went down to ten men (unless I had too much T that day), our boys looked tired going in to the last fifteen and yet no subs were made. Contrast my frustration to Sat past when I didn't give a hoot that we didn't take anyone of. Maybe Yogi thought we needed experience to see the game out and neither Galbraith nor Byrne give us that.
That's a very good point that I hadn't considered.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Think we are nit-picking a bit. already had a lot of disruption in the build up to the game and had to settle for a patched up team, think moaning about yogi not changing things further on into the game is harsh. the call is to put Galbraith on to presumably swing crosses over to nish? have a feeling goncalves would have gobbled them up. Could Galbraith have supported lewis stephenson at the back? doubt it. sounds suicidal
Interesting question - I think every manager has different theories re subs and when/if to make them.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibztilltheend
Yogi for me seems to like to keep - as he sees it - his best players on the pitch and not make change for changes sake.
I think Hakim (where has he been???) makes a good point in that we had a weakened side out anyway. There would certainly have been a case for bringing Galbraith or Byrne on to inject a bit of pace near the end but maybe Yogi felt that with Riordan, Stokes and Nish on and the team in the ascendency in the closing stages he had the best chance of stealing a win. Up for debate I suppose but with 21 point in the bag and only 3 off the top I'll bow to Yogi's greater wisdom. :cool2:
It seems to me that it is difficult to say he has called it wrong so far because things haven't really gone wrong (except for the Hamilton game and I don't know whether he made subs during that game). There might come a time when say we lose a lead or a game (heaven forbid) and some fans think it was avoidable if subs had been made at all or at the right time. I say this because Yogi seems to stick as much as poss with his starting eleven and game plan. It may be, and I haven't analysed this, that Yogi sees his eleven as being flexible enough to shuffle things around on the pitch with out bringing on new faces. That's all conjecture, but for sure his policy appears to be to use subs sparingly.
I just wonder what Galbraith has to do to get a game.
Only him and Wotherspoon can give us natural width and deliver a great cross ball. Something tho we are winning we are screaming out for.
:faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee