Barnsley - Nottingham Forest

[zicorice]

I was swearing at Guerrero for his miss but we lost our way after he went off. Freeman did nothing worthwhile when he came on.
Not sure what subs would have improved us,  Ameobi may have done something, our bench didint look too strong when we were chasing the game.

In my humble opinion, the most balanced post I have read regarding not using the subs. I think we are in minority SM, but I agree 100%. Dont get me wrong I am gutted we lost, but starting XI played very well. 

I was reading the other day about a non scoring CF for Burton Albion a few years back. All his teammates said he was crucial to their success. Guerrero has only played a few games and should get better, (hopefully his finishing will too), but we look a better team with him on the pitch.

Anyway, I've been spikey enough for one night. Good evening all. Onward and upwards.

This was pretty much the discussion I was having with my Dad, was only really Ameobi we felt could offer an improvement. However subs isn't just about improving the team, its predominantly about bringing players on that have more energy. 

I said when Barnsley made the 4th sub it would be an interesting experiment on the 5 subs situation as it was 4 subs v 1. Obviously a pretty small sample but it was clear Barnsley had more energy after that.

Personally felt Hughton should've matched them at that point as it gave them a fitness advantage regardless of the drop off on quality. I dont think it would've been unreasonable to bring on arter for colback, ameobi for knockaer, jenkinson for Christie or iannou for ribeiro.

Although partly this is just a personal thing, I think managers are currently wasting the 5 subs option. In the first lockdown watched some German football when they restarted and most teams made at least 2 changes at HT. Personally I would be taking advantage by asking certain players to press harder than normal with a view to rotating them at HT.

That's a fairly compelling case. A 90 mph game on the back foot was definitely taking its toll on Barnsley players, so may well have done on ours to some extent especially when their fresh legs came on (alongside our chubby ones)

Still think it was more the sucker punch nature of the goal that took the wind out of our sails psychologically-then physically. The subs you suggest probably wouldn't have weakened us too much. But could it have upset our rhythm? Freeman certainly did...

Well this is the debate, as I said probably needs a bigger sample size. You could probably also argue that given they've just had a two week break fitness should be at a higher level.

I said at the time they made the 4th sub I've no idea if the Barnsley players are better or worse but perhaps the difference in quality from their first 11 to subs is less than ours.

As I said this is a personal thing for me, I really feel subs are underused and should be premeditated particularly now we have 5. I'm surprised no-one has seen this as a viable strategy yet. 

In general you wouldn't expect your subs to be as good as the first team otherwise they wouldn't be subs!

Imagine if we had a fit Sow, Mighten, Grabban and Joe W (although I think Figs just keeping the shirt warm for Joe's return) plus Ameobi and Arter on the bench. 4 or 5 of them if we are not playing well could certainly change things up.   Whilst playing well, could also be the case, but I always think football is about finding your rhythm, it appeared we had found ours going forward, creating 4 clear cut chances of which you have to score at least 1 or 2. Ameobi would certainly have been my choice for fresh legs when Guerrero was flagging.

I feel a big squad should allow key players to be rested, but I would fear for us without McKenna and Taylor. We just dont have much outside our current top 13 players available.I think we miss Worrall alot more than we thought we might too.