Moyes-substitutions

[Connor]

There's an argument that he should. I doubt he will though. I could quite easily see him being used as a sub to better effect in that game though

In what world should he start against the Reds? Because he scored against Mansfield?

KDH is a better option there, and neither Grealish nor Ndiaye is making way

 

[toffeeblue9]

In what world should he start against the Reds? Because he scored against Mansfield?

KDH is a better option there, and neither Grealish nor Ndiaye is making way

The argument would be that we aren't going to have loads of the ball and his major strength is getting the ball up the pitch quickly in transition. He might be best suited to that sort of game.

Having said that, I'd still prefer us to put out whatever Moyes sees as our best XI, which currently involves Grealish, Ndiaye and KDH

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

I wouldn't say it's picking holes, it's just commenting on what you see. It's a results business, if you don't get the result you want then you will always look at what you could have done differently, it's natural. Nobody's saying he needs to be sacked for not making another sub, just giving their own opinions on what could have been done differently and how that might have changed the way things played out.

It's all just speculation though. Fans nearly always want more changes and earlier changes than most premier league managers who generally stick to their original plans for longer. We have no idea how any changes would have panned out and Moyes can't make decisions with the benefit of hindsight. All we do know is that we had control of the game for the last 15 minutes, had numerous corners and periods of pressure around the Villa box and they posed very little risk on the counter. With a bit more luck we would have scored. Moyes plan worked but we just didn't score. That happens sometimes. I personally would have liked Dibbling to get 5 or 10 minutes but I can completely understand why that change wasn't made.

 

[WilliamBoo]

There's an argument that he should. I doubt he will though. I could quite easily see him being used as a sub to better effect in that game though

Ok, but I hope he doesn't put him in if we're losing, because he's not a game changer.

 

[Raino85]

Perhaps you are right and Alcaraz (for instance) is not as good as those who were already on the pitch. However, he could have offered fresh legs against a tiring Aston Villa backline which may have swung the pendulum in our favour. That is precisely why a player like Alcaraz should have been introduced in the latter stages of yesterday's match.

We could of maybe gone to a back 3 at the end and threw Alcaraz on for Garner and just chucked him up there.....................maybe if we were 1-0 down, but while its 0-0, the fear of dropping a point is always there

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

We could of maybe gone to a back 3 at the end and threw Alcaraz on for Garner and just chucked him up there.....................maybe if we were 1-0 down, but while its 0-0, the fear of dropping a point is always there

Yep, and Villa have players who could definitely hurt us on the break.

 

[Lanolin]

It's all just speculation though. Fans nearly always want more changes and earlier changes than most premier league managers who generally stick to their original plans for longer. We have no idea how any changes would have panned out and Moyes can't make decisions with the benefit of hindsight. All we do know is that we had control of the game for the last 15 minutes, had numerous corners and periods of pressure around the Villa box and they posed very little risk on the counter. With a bit more luck we would have scored. Moyes plan worked but we just didn't score. That happens sometimes. I personally would have liked Dibbling to get 5 or 10 minutes but I can completely understand why that change wasn't made.

Yeah of course it is, pretty much anything we talk about on here is just speculation really. We can sit here and say 'if we'd taken our chances we'd have won easily' but that's also just speculation isn't it - we might have gone 1-0 up and gone into our shell, they might have woken up knowing that they needed to score, got some confidence after scoring one, and ended up winning 7-1, we'll never know. Nobody is slating the manager or anything, just discussing whether we could have done things differently. As i've said a couple of times, I'd have liked to have seen another change personally but i'm not saying it would definitely have won us the game or it was criminal not to do it, it's just an opinion.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

Yeah of course it is, pretty much anything we talk about on here is just speculation really. We can sit here and say 'if we'd taken our chances we'd have won easily' but that's also just speculation isn't it - we might have gone 1-0 up and gone into our shell, they might have woken up knowing that they needed to score, got some confidence after scoring one, and ended up winning 7-1, we'll never know. Nobody is slating the manager or anything, just discussing whether we could have done things differently. As i've said a couple of times, I'd have liked to have seen another change personally but i'm not saying it would definitely have won us the game or it was criminal not to do it, it's just an opinion.

Quite a few people are slating the manager. Dithering Davey etc.

 

[Lanolin]

Quite a few people are slating the manager. Dithering Davey etc.

Not in this thread they're not, the most critical thing anybody has said is that he's always erred on the side of caution which is barely critical at all and something that he'd probably even agree with himself anyway.

 

[Eggs]

Moyes has always been stuck in his subs ways, but.... we only drew cos Beto can't finish. We win that with a decent striker, we will be still saying this in 2044, i just know it.

….i said immediately after his debut that Beto will be very much ‘hit and miss’. He’ll get his quota, on another day one of those chances goes in but he lacks quality to consistently and clinically finish opportunities. We know he’s a handful for defenders, you can’t fault his attitude but he’s just not very good in possession of a football.

 

[kev]

He’ll get his quota, on another day one of those chances goes in but he lacks quality to consistently and clinically finish opportunities. We know he’s a handful for defenders, you can’t fault his attitude but he’s just not very good in possession of a football.

A fair appraisal I think.

 

[Vaughan]

the 3 forwards behind a striker (really need a collective term for this as it’s going to come up a lot) were all playing really well, and also putting in a lot of graft too. game was in the balance against a side thats finished 4th and 6th the past two seasons. if we were playing Burnley it might have been a different story

the late/lack of subs from moyes can be frustrating but we were all over them last 30 and he didnt want to disrupt that

as much as i want us to win, i also think preserving an unbeaten run at BMD for as long as possible is crucial, and those 3 are all much better defensively than mcneil alcaraz and dibling

i would have considered maybe Alcaraz for KDH, as Charley always has something up his sleeve centrally. Ndiaye and Grealish were too good to be taken off

the only other realistic change would be either of the fullbacks for Patterson or Aznou, but unless we were behind i don’t think that would happen

finally mcneil shouldnt really be in the conversation except for injuries or if we’re winning comfortably and want to give Grealish a breather. i think we’ve quite quickly moved beyond him

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

the 3 forwards behind a striker (really need a collective term for this as it’s going to come up a lot) were all playing really well, and also putting in a lot of graft too. game was in the balance against a side thats finished 4th and 6th the past two seasons. if we were playing Burnley it might have been a different story

the late/lack of subs from moyes can be frustrating but we were all over them last 30 and he didnt want to disrupt that

as much as i want us to win, i also think preserving an unbeaten run at BMD for as long as possible is crucial, and those 3 are all much better defensively than mcneil alcaraz and dibling

i would have considered maybe Alcaraz for KDH, as Charley always has something up his sleeve centrally. Ndiaye and Grealish were too good to be taken off

the only other realistic change would be either of the fullbacks for Patterson or Aznou, but unless we were behind i don’t think that would happen

finally mcneil shouldnt really be in the conversation except for injuries or if we’re winning comfortably and want to give Grealish a breather. i think we’ve quite quickly moved beyond him

100% agree. I've seen us throw attacking players on late in games lots of times and actually get worse as a result.

 

[Vaughan]

100% agree. I've seen us throw attacking players on late in games lots of times and actually get worse as a result.

I’m generally more of a go for the win over the draw kind of thinker, i just think Saturday’s game had a lot riding on it

throwing Rohl in was a risk, youd argue playing KDH there and having one of mcneil, alcaraz or dibling joining the 3 would be more conservative but he gave the new lad the chance

i think away from home he brings on charly or dibling, but a defeat at bmd would hurt the feel good factor and we have a realistic chance of going undefeated there for a while. spurs the big test end of october

similarly if we were playing a side that didnt have players of the quality of Watkins, Rodgers, Elliot, McGinn etc then he might have made another su

in the past few years we havent really had any attacking players that were too good to be exempt from a sub whilst chasing a result. last one was Richarlison over 3 years ago. now we have a few