Everton 1-2 Man City

Seamus Colemole · April 25, 2009

GhostOfDixie said:
Well 2 mins after it happened we ended up with 10 men. So we played 30 mins with 10 men. Statistics prove you are more likely to score with 11 men than you are with 10. So....

Yes. A freak injury caused us to go to 10 men.

I agree Moyes would of been better only making 2 just in case but we had a game to go and win so he decided to make 3.

Then our luck went back to being **** and we lost a player. It wasn't the turning point of the game and it wasn't the reason we lost.

Concentrating on it and blaming it for the loss is ridiculous.

GhostOfDixie · April 25, 2009

gkpaul said:
That game was lost on more than Moyes's substitutions. Being 2-0 down before he did it tells its own story, cant see the substitutions changing anything

Well they caused us to be down to ten men due to overly reckless changes when 3 were not needed.

So the subs did change things.

GhostOfDixie · April 25, 2009

deathbyropeandglass said:
Yes. A freak injury caused us to go to 10 men.

I agree Moyes would of been better only making 2 just in case but we had a game to go and win so he decided to make 3.

Then our luck went back to being **** and we lost a player. It wasn't the turning point of the game and it wasn't the reason we lost.

Concentrating on it and blaming it for the loss is ridiculous.

How many managers make triple subs in competitive football? He didn't need to take off Castillo, he didn't need to take off Fellaini. I would have stuck with Saha too.

gkpaul · April 25, 2009

All Im saying is they wouldnt have changed the score line, we were playing poorly before hand and I just could not see us getting nothing from the game no matter what we did.

ForeverEverton · April 25, 2009

Why blame the substitutions, They didnt conceed two goals...............

trueblues1985 · April 25, 2009

The fact of the matter is as I said much earlier 3 games in 6 days took the wind out of them. They looked knackered. Ironic thing is, if we had gone on to win the match after making the triple subs I dont think too many people would have complained about it.

We don't have the resources on the bench to make mass changes. Sure Cahill should have started, however the fact remains since we are a small squad, even 1 or 2 rested players is going to have it's effect that just stands to reason.

I feel desperatly sorry for Jags he has had an immense season.
We where poor but there where reasons why we where that bad..namely they where all knackered after their exertions over the past week it was bound to take it's toll especially against physical teams like utd, chelsea and even more against city.

City played well, they had some good link up play and we where not at the races today..time to move on to next week. Let's hope and pray Jags isnt that bad.

GhostOfDixie · April 25, 2009

gkpaul said:
All Im saying is they wouldnt have changed the score line, we were playing poorly before hand and I just could not see us getting nothing from the game no matter what we did.

But we would have 11 men, not 10. :blink:

GhostOfDixie · April 25, 2009

ForeverEverton said:
Why blame the substitutions, They didnt conceed two goals...............

YES BUT THEY CAUSED US TO HAVE 10 MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

gkpaul · April 25, 2009

Due to a freak injury, had Moyes had the ability to predict it I am sure he would not have made that extra change

GhostOfDixie · April 25, 2009

gkpaul said:
Due to a freak injury, had Moyes had the ability to predict it I am sure he would not have made that extra change

But he didn't need to make 3 subs, he must have thought it was a risk to leave the players without cover for the last half hour. Not even Benitez is that reckless.

teppic · April 25, 2009

looking at the table, we really had no damage today. pretty much as you were.

surely the sickner today was that nasty looking jags injury.

Andriy.EFC · April 25, 2009

GhostOfDixie said:
YES BUT THEY CAUSED US TO HAVE 10 MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The brilliant tactical move was starting Yobo to begin with

trueblues1985 · April 25, 2009

GhostOfDixie said:
But he didn't need to make 3 subs, he must have thought it was a risk to leave the players without cover for the last half hour. Not even Benitez is that reckless.

the fact remains after the triple sub they didnt concede again even with 10 men

bluebloodinmyveins · April 25, 2009

Moyes has an obvious flaw when it comes to subs. Usually he makes them too late or not at all, this time too many in one go.
Some might argue that his subs against the shi*e won us the game, and thats true....But thats the exception rather than the rule.

GhostOfDixie · April 25, 2009

trueblues1985 said:
the fact remains after the triple sub they didnt concede again even with 10 men

Game won by City, not as much gas on the peddle?

But should we just play with 10 men against Chelsea?

I'm not saying that the subs alone were the cause, but we may have had more chance of scoring and winning if we had 11 men on the pitch, and by all accounts we were extremely lucky not to concede more goals.

I know it's not important Europe wise, but financially it's important to get 5th place, and these kind of tactical balls up by the manager are just glimpses of what problems he does have. No matter what Kenwright romances, Moyes does have issues.