Use of subs to change games

[Iain G]

Something John Collins did get right, using subs to impact and try and change the way a game is developing, something Mixu got wrong and something Yogi is showing signs of not getting right.

For the life of me I can't work out why he brought on both Galbraith AND Benji in straight like for like changes, when shutting down Celtic and making us harder to break down was what we were crying out for, he should have gone with Thicot or McCann and just sat them in front of the defence to break down the rapidly increasing number of Celtic attacks.

Is this Yogi being a bit naive, sticking to his gameplan, intending to push for another goal or simply being unable to change a team during a match as is required?

[vahibbie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Something John Collins did get right, using subs to impact and try and change the way a game is developing, something Mixu got wrong and something Yogi is showing signs of not getting right.

For the life of me I can't work out why he brought on both Galbraith AND Benji in straight like for like changes, when shutting down Celtic and making us harder to break down was what we were crying out for, he should have gone with Thicot or McCann and just sat them in front of the defence to break down the rapidly increasing number of Celtic attacks.

Is this Yogi being a bit naive, sticking to his gameplan, intending to push for another goal or simply being unable to change a team during a match as is required?

The problem is Yogi brought on 2 attacking players possibly to press Celtic and increase our lead.....but the team as a whole went into defence and sat back on our 1 goal advantage.
I think we probably could have still won with those 2 subs IF we hadn't sat back. If the instructions were to sit in and defend then the 2 subs were most definitely wrong.
I'm not sure Yogi and the players were following the same game plan

In general though, Yogi makes some howlers in his subs. IMHO of course, as I realise from some posters that it's easy to criticise and make statements that are never tested

[Iain G]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The problem is Yogi brought on 2 attacking players possibly to press Celtic and increase our lead.....but the team as a whole went into defence and sat back on our 1 goal advantage.
I think we probably could have still won with those 2 subs IF we hadn't sat back. If the instructions were to sit in and defend then the 2 subs were most definitely wrong.
I'm not sure Yogi and the players were following the same game plan

I understand why you bring on Galbraith, Celtic know he nicked that goal last time we were there and his pace would cause them problems, but Benji is hardly known for his work rate!!

And we failed to do something about Fortune who caused us a lot of problems...

[broonie27]

Even from here in New Zealand it was patently obvious Celtic were pushing up and going to for it. Yogi must have seen this so why he didn't put at least one more defender is beyond me. As the previous posted said, i can understand Galbraith so we could possibly nick one on the counter, but ****ing Benji - give me a break! It wasn't as if we were all over them when he made the subs, we were up against it. Shocking decision making if you ask me.

[HFC 0-7]

Never mind Saturday, I cant remember Yogi making a tactical substitution to bolster the midfield or make us harder to break down. This is where I think Yogi is seriously out his depth at. For someone that used to play in defence, you would think he would realise how much it can steady a team putting an extra man in defence at the right time, or even a man to sit in front of the defence. I think the only time he has brought on a defensive minded player this season has been because of an injury to a player, not a tacticaly minded change.

[Brizo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Never mind Saturday, I cant remember Yogi making a tactical substitution to bolster the midfield or make us harder to break down. This is where I think Yogi is seriously out his depth at. For someone that used to play in defence, you would think he would realise how much it can steady a team putting an extra man in defence at the right time, or even a man to sit in front of the defence. I think the only time he has brought on a defensive minded player this season has been because of an injury to a player, not a tacticaly minded change.

Most costly example of this imo vs RC at home. They were playing 5 in midfield vs our 3. We were winning 2-1 and Yogi subbed a defensive minded midfielder Rankin for an attacking midfielder Galbraith. The result was that we effectively went 424 , Miller and McBride were swamped in midfield by their 5, they got an equaliser and the rest is history.

Yogis pre match match chat had been all about the "Holy Grail" and he had defensive minded players Cregg and Thicot on the bench if he wanted to sub Rankin. If there was ever a game to hold what we had and close a game out this was it

Yogis tactics often seem to come from the eleven halftime , twentyone the winner school of tactics.

[RMG_82]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Something John Collins did get right, using subs to impact and try and change the way a game is developing, something Mixu got wrong and something Yogi is showing signs of not getting right.

For the life of me I can't work out why he brought on both Galbraith AND Benji in straight like for like changes, when shutting down Celtic and making us harder to break down was what we were crying out for, he should have gone with Thicot or McCann and just sat them in front of the defence to break down the rapidly increasing number of Celtic attacks.

Is this Yogi being a bit naive, sticking to his gameplan, intending to push for another goal or simply being unable to change a team during a match as is required?

yogi's a ****ing mind cripple. Stevie Wonder could see that we should have blostered the midfield to hold onto the lead and play off stokes pace on the break. we ended up with 5 attackers at full time. the boys a moron. but as hibs fan i cant complain because we are better off than this time last season.

European spot please John and all is forgiven

[PeterboroHibee]

Bringing Benji on was a weird substitution, but one that was obviously going to happen going by previous subs he has made.

Didnt really make any sense, okay he has ability, but when we are 2-1 up at Celtic Park, we are going to get under pressure at some point, why bring on probably the laziest player at the club?

It seems like hes worried to go defensively with subs incase it does goes wrong, and another problem seems to be not wanting to take certain players off eg Stokes; not a criticism of Stokes, think hes a great player, but if we went 451 with a player holding, makes us more solid and leave Nish on as he would be the best option for holding the ball up.

[Hibby 2005]

Galbraith on from the start rather than as a sub with Riordan and Stokes up front, Nish on the bench. Three workers in midfield.

Yogi's failed to do this all season and still refuses to do so despite 2 wins in 14?

[truehibernian]

Doesn't matter what formations you play, what players are on or off the pitch, the basics of football are that if you retain possession, play the ball simply and to each other, you limit the possession they get, you make them rush their passes, and you force the play further up the pitch. Sadly, in the Hibs team at present, there are no leaders, no captains, no players that take responsibility, and push the team up the pitch. Had we kept the ball when we had it, looked for each other and played simple balls, we would have won the game. Nish's second touch is a tackle, McCormack rushed passes, the midfield were too far detached from the front men. The defence chose to sit back and absorb instead of pushing up onto the half way line. As Murdo MacLeod pointed out throughout the game (and he was as ever complimentary about Hibs when it merited it), Hibs players need at least one touch before they pass the ball, whereas Celtic were playing crisper one touch football. Hibs therefore played themselves into trouble because as ever this season, they were laboured, slow, dithery and far too considered. No pace, urgency, leadership. That's what needs addressed............that and playing players in their correct positions.

[silverhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Something John Collins did get right, using subs to impact and try and change the way a game is developing, something Mixu got wrong and something Yogi is showing signs of not getting right.

For the life of me I can't work out why he brought on both Galbraith AND Benji in straight like for like changes, when shutting down Celtic and making us harder to break down was what we were crying out for, he should have gone with Thicot or McCann and just sat them in front of the defence to break down the rapidly increasing number of Celtic attacks.

Is this Yogi being a bit naive, sticking to his gameplan, intending to push for another goal or simply being unable to change a team during a match as is required?

I would go as far as to say that i dont think Yogi needed to make any changes during the game on Saturday, wee were doing okay until Yogi made the subs, he should have tried too see out the game with the team on the park as they were doing okay.
If subs were to be made it should have been Wothersoon (not fully fit for 90 mins) and Nish that made way for Thicot and Stevenson to shore up our defence and midfield, cant believe that Yogi brought on Benji and Galbraith instead, sitting at the game i said to my son that wee would toil to hold on to our lead after the subs were made.