Substitution Logic

[GrandOldTeam]

Oh geez, I agree with Chico ENTIRELY.

Seriously Everton fans, we looked surprisingly good today. Moyes fielded a good team that was ready to play. Felliani, Baines, and Coleman were GREAT, ARTETA SHOWED UP, the D was solid.

Are we really criticizing Moyes for putting a sub on ONE MINUTE after Mikel? (I agree that he was looking to see if formations changed)

I'm not happy with a tie. I hate that we gave up that goal, but today was one of the most enjoyable games of football I've seen everton play this year.

No. Laughing at how people naturally assume its a dig at an isolated incident.

It's more of a debate as to why our manager goes out of his way to avoid making a change at the same time as the opposition;

Liverpool: Bily held back when Liverpool brought on Shelvey for Meireles (like for like, so not a case of seeing if system changed).

Stoke: Losing 2-0. Beckford was held back for the next stoppage in play rather than being brought off when Stoke replaced Etherington.

West Ham: Beckford introduced in the 90+ minute and brings on Bily separately seconds later.

Wigan : at home, he held back Anichebe when they made a sub. Anichebe was ready to come on, Wigan introduced a change as Anichebe was waiting. Anichebe was told to stand back and wait for the next stoppage.

Sunderland: He brought on Yak late on, and then in the next break in play he brought on Beckford...

Chelsea: Beckford held back until the next stoppage in play when Lampard is replaced by Mikel.

Answers on a post card..............

On the surface its a trivial point. But an interesting one nevertheless. If I wanted to criticise the management, I certainly wouldn't take this angle.

 

[chicoazul]

I hate your talent for details, hate it.


retires*

 

[kenada_blue]

No. Laughing at how people naturally assume its a dig at an isolated incident.

It's more of a debate as to why our manager goes out of his way to avoid making a change at the same time as the opposition;

Liverpool: Bily held back when Liverpool brought on Shelvey for Meireles (like for like, so not a case of seeing if system changed).

Stoke: Losing 2-0. Beckford was held back for the next stoppage in play rather than being brought off when Stoke replaced Etherington.

West Ham: Beckford introduced in the 90+ minute and brings on Bily separately seconds later.

Wigan : at home, he held back Anichebe when they made a sub. Anichebe was ready to come on, Wigan introduced a change as Anichebe was waiting. Anichebe was told to stand back and wait for the next stoppage.

Sunderland: He brought on Yak late on, and then in the next break in play he brought on Beckford...

Chelsea: Beckford held back until the next stoppage in play when Lampard is replaced by Mikel.

Answers on a post card..............

You getting at the fact that Moyes waits for the other team to change rather than MAKE the other team change by the changes he's made?

 

[Muggins]

I think its to do with added on time. Every second is precious in Moyes eyes, as has proved for us.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

You getting at the fact that Moyes waits for the other team to change rather than MAKE the other team change by the changes he's made?

No. That's another argument.

In these instances we've had a change WAITING. They've not been reactive substitutions, they've been delayed ones. The delay just baffles me. Against Wigan, Anichebe was standing with the third official waiting to come on for a few moments. In that time Wigan decided to make a change. Moyes noticed it and told Anichebe to stand back and wait for the next stoppage in play.

Its difficult to explain... never mind understand.

Again, this isn't a dig at Moyes - it's genuine curiosity.

 

[chriswho]

Fair enough GOT. Good examples. I'm actually with you in that I've been frustrated about Moyes's subbing before. I just didn't see this game as a prime candidate to try and prove that argument with.

In my opinion, I expect he was planning beckford for saha until the equalizer came, and after that, Rodwell became the natural replacement (he put in a good shift but was the most under performing player on the team). I say that only as a minor knock against Rodwell, it is more a praise that FINALLY it wasn't Arteta, Bily, or Saha - as each of them seemed to be fighting for that award this season. Rodwell putting out GREAT effort but just not quite flowing with the game is to be expected, so he was the right sub.

 

[Muggins]

There is a fella i work with. He won't answer his desk phone mid ring. He always has to wait for the gap between the rings before picking it up. Sometimes he just stares at the phone with his hand on it whilst its ringing, then at the break, picks up.

So annoying and weird....

 

[chicoazul]

So, we conclude that Moyes has OCD.

CLOSE ZE THREAD.

 

[Nordecke]

A fair few times this season Moyes has intentionally held back a substitution to avoid making a change at the same time as the opposition.

He did it at Liverpool and notoriously at West Ham.

Now, I can understand it your looking to tick down the clock, but we've done it at home to bottom of the league opposition.

Can anyone shed any light on the reasoning behind the likes of that today? It drives me insane.

Beckford was ready to come on when Mikel did on the 85th minute for Lampard, only to be held back until the next stoppage in play on the 86th minute.

What's that all about? What am I missing?

I called Becks for Rodders.. Though I wanted it in the 70th when we were bossing their ass's all over the show..

I just don't get why we didn't go for it.

 

[Brownie]

It's just good tactics, why wouldn't you do it. Maybe he didn't know Mikel was about to come on and wanted to sort out how he was going to try to attack with his own substitution. It's always better to make reactive substitutions if the opposition give you that chance, they're revealing something to you before you have revealed anything to them. The problem comes when you make cautionary substitutions to deal with the opposition's changes rather than exploit them. Likewise refusing to make the first substitution because you're worried about being exploited yourself.

In this instance I think dbrag's right and it was just cos we were defending a set piece.

 

[harry]

A fair few times this season Moyes has intentionally held back a substitution to avoid making a change at the same time as the opposition.

He did it at Liverpool and notoriously at West Ham.

Now, I can understand it your looking to tick down the clock, but we've done it at home to bottom of the league opposition.

Can anyone shed any light on the reasoning behind the likes of that today? It drives me insane.

Beckford was ready to come on when Mikel did on the 85th minute for Lampard, only to be held back until the next stoppage in play on the 86th minute.

What's that all about? What am I missing?

I think it was because chelsea had the ball in our half (throw in i think) he didn't want to change it whilst we was under a bit of pressure. but i'm only guessing.

 

[davek]

I dont know about holding back for another stoppage, but he should have had Beckford on right after the equaliser. We'll more than likely go out down there in the replay. You've got 15 minutes + stoppage time after they scored to get the winner. And the storm we whipped up with the existing formation after our goal had blown itself out before they got on terms, so it wasn't like we needed to just keep plugging away.

 

[Brownie]

I dont know about holding back for another stoppage, but he should have had Beckford on right after the equaliser. We'll more than likely go out down there in the replay. You've got 15 minutes + stoppage time after they scored to get the winner. And the storm we whipped up with the existing formation after our goal had blown itself out before they got on terms, so it wasn't like we needed to just keep plugging away.

They scored on the counter attack from us nearly scoring and had created absolutely nothing until then. We really shouldn't have needed to 'go for it', we simply shouldn't have conceded a goal at all.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

Well, it's a reactive sub, isn't it. Not much to work with on our bench.

 

[billycopper]

They scored on the counter attack from us nearly scoring and had created absolutely nothing until then. We really shouldn't have needed to 'go for it', we simply shouldn't have conceded a goal at all.

It's not the first time we've done it this season, is it? Considering we're normally lucky to have one player in the opposition penalty area, you wonder how we manage to get caught short.