2020/21 Jean-Philippe Gbamin

[catcherintherye]

Yep, that's it in a nutshell. I've seen managers make subs that I thought were awful but turned out to be inspired (Martinez bringing on Deulofeu for Baines in the 3-3 derby springs to mind) and vice versa. You can only judge it by the end result really. If Gbamin had come on and been neat and tidy and helped us see the game out I'd have been happy, but as he didn't you have to wonder whether it was the right approach. It's not being fickle or wise after the event, it's just how life works.

And I think Ancelotti would see it that way too. He's long in the tooth and will know that substitute did not work out.

 

[Toast]

We all want it to go well for you mate..

 

[Tin-Tin]

We all want it to go well for you mate..

Aah he's adorable

 

[Vic Vinegar]

Was a bit of a weird game to throw him in for I thought.

 

[Bluestar]

Was a bit of a weird game to throw him in for I thought.

He replaced an ACM with a DCM with the idea of stiffening the middle. The only other option was to replace James with King.

If Gomes hadn’t got injured so early, the substitution would probably have been Siggy. However, the moment of this substitution, the central midfield consisted of Davies, Siggy and James and we were starting to get over run. I can’t see what alternative he had.

 

[Martin Alvito]

He replaced an ACM with a DCM with the idea of stiffening the middle. The only other option was to replace James with King.

If Gomes hadn’t got injured so early, the substitution would probably have been Siggy. However, the moment of this substitution, the central midfield consisted of Davies, Siggy and James and we were starting to get over run. I can’t see what alternative he had.

Right, he can put King in and change the formation, which likely strands him up top with no service. Alternately, he can shift Sigurdsson forward, stick Gbamin next to Davies and hope for the best.

This seems like an easy call.

 

[Lanolin]

Right, he can put King in and change the formation, which likely strands him up top with no service. Alternately, he can shift Sigurdsson forward, stick Gbamin next to Davies and hope for the best.

This seems like an easy call.

There’s no reason to believe a midfield 4 of sigurdsson, Davies, digne and richarlison couldn’t provide service - for 10 minutes - to the strikers. If you think the gbamin sub was the right thing to do then that’s absolutely fine, we all have opinions, but this constant suggestion that it was the only option is really weird. It wasn’t, and if we hadn’t made a ludicrous sub 5 minutes earlier we’d have had even more.

 

[Martin Alvito]

There’s no reason to believe a midfield 4 of sigurdsson, Davies, digne and richarlison couldn’t provide service - for 10 minutes - to the strikers. If you think the gbamin sub was the right thing to do then that’s absolutely fine, we all have opinions, but this constant suggestion that it was the only option is really weird. It wasn’t, and if we hadn’t made a ludicrous sub 5 minutes earlier we’d have had even more.

I'll be honest - I'm not clear on what we're shifting to in your proposal to bring King on. It sounds like you're suggesting that we'd go to 4-4-2 with Digne and Richarlison in midfield. Does that put Holgate at LB and Richarlison on the right side of midfield?

"It was the only option" in the sense that there's only one recognized senior midfielder on the bench at that point, so when a midfielder needs to come out there's only one like-for-like option. Bringing on a third striker up 1-0 would be unconventional, to say the least, and staying with two up top would push someone into a role they don't ordinarily play.

 

[Lanolin]

I'll be honest - I'm not clear on what we're shifting to in your proposal to bring King on. It sounds like you're suggesting that we'd go to 4-4-2 with Digne and Richarlison in midfield. Does that put Holgate at LB and Richarlison on the right side of midfield?

"It was the only option" in the sense that there's only one recognized senior midfielder on the bench at that point, so when a midfielder needs to come out there's only one like-for-like option. Bringing on a third striker up 1-0 would be unconventional, to say the least, and staying with two up top would push someone into a role they don't ordinarily play.

No it would have Godfrey at left back and holgate at right back, and so effectively be the team we picked for about half a dozen games or so on the trot not very long ago. There’s really nothing remotely odd about it. As I said, by all means believe gbamin was the right sub, but maybe stop pretending nothing else was possible.

 

[Bluestar]

There’s no reason to believe a midfield 4 of sigurdsson, Davies, digne and richarlison couldn’t provide service - for 10 minutes - to the strikers. If you think the gbamin sub was the right thing to do then that’s absolutely fine, we all have opinions, but this constant suggestion that it was the only option is really weird. It wasn’t, and if we hadn’t made a ludicrous sub 5 minutes earlier we’d have had even more.

The Coleman sub was the problem. Not Gbamin.
If Coleman stays on, then he has the option of Gbamin and King, which feels better to me.

 

[davids]

Surely though Gbamin should have had at least a few U23 games under his belt, before being thrown into a PL game ? Not blaming him at all, but isn't that what used to happen ?

I'd imagine a few practice matches were played during the international break,maybe he did okay. Problem with U23 games is they are nowhere near the intensity of the Prem.

 

[mahermi1]

I'd imagine a few practice matches were played during the international break,maybe he did okay. Problem with U23 games is they are nowhere near the intensity of the Prem.

Yeah your right on that, just for building stamina, fitness that's about it.

 

[jazzy]

Yeah your right on that, just for building stamina, fitness that's about it.

Agree. I think all we will see for the rest of the season are a few cameos from the bench

 

[Martin Alvito]

No it would have Godfrey at left back and holgate at right back, and so effectively be the team we picked for about half a dozen games or so on the trot not very long ago. There’s really nothing remotely odd about it. As I said, by all means believe gbamin was the right sub, but maybe stop pretending nothing else was possible.

I'm still not clear on what this formation is, or how it's at all similar to what we were running other than the fact that you're playing the four center backs at the back. Richarlison was never in midfield for that setup, so I don't understand what you're proposing that you say Ancelotti missed as an option.

It seems like a relative risks problem to me. The risk with bringing Gbamin on is that he plays poorly due to the long absence. The risk with bringing King on and changing the formation is shipping a goal during the adjustment under heavy pressure from Palace. The latter sounds to me like the type of risk that van Gaal might run, but never Ancelotti.

The Coleman sub was the problem. Not Gbamin.
If Coleman stays on, then he has the option of Gbamin and King, which feels better to me.

Why do you want to bring King on? I don't see how going three at the top was going to get an insurance goal with Rodriguez off and DCL misfiring. If the Coleman sub was the error, shouldn't Ancelotti just replace Rodriguez with Gbamin, leave Godfrey on the bench and forego the third sub? Or are you saying that one of DCL/Richarlison should have made way?

 

[Lanolin]

I'm still not clear on what this formation is, or how it's at all similar to what we were running other than the fact that you're playing the four center backs at the back. Richarlison was never in midfield for that setup, so I don't understand what you're proposing that you say Ancelotti missed as an option.

It seems like a relative risks problem to me. The risk with bringing Gbamin on is that he plays poorly due to the long absence. The risk with bringing King on and changing the formation is shipping a goal during the adjustment under heavy pressure from Palace. The latter sounds to me like the type of risk that van Gaal might run, but never Ancelotti.



Why do you want to bring King on? I don't see how going three at the top was going to get an insurance goal with Rodriguez off and DCL misfiring. If the Coleman sub was the error, shouldn't Ancelotti just replace Rodriguez with Gbamin, leave Godfrey on the bench and forego the third sub? Or are you saying that one of DCL/Richarlison should have made way?

Jesus mate, it's really not that hard, i've literally listed the players. Richarlison would be playing right wing, where he's played plenty of times before. It's one hypothetical scenario to show that however many times you say it, bringing Gbamin on was not the only option. There are other ways we could have set up too but I won't be trying to explain them, we could be here all month by the look of it.