Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
BearSmog

Boro v Hull City 3-1 (Gestede (2) Bamford)

Recommended Posts

Well pullis got it right that’s all you can say

 

Are you sure you can say that?

 

Well we won and the two players he chose when lots said he shouldn’t scored  so if he takes the flack on sat we must say he’s done it right this time

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

So are you saying we won both games because we made defensive subs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well pullis got it right that’s all you can say

 

Are you sure you can say that?

 

Well we won and the two players he chose when lots said he shouldn’t scored  so if he takes the flack on sat we must say he’s done it right this time

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

Definitely in the Reading game, but also in the Hull game from what I can tell, the defensive subs were followed up with us dropping off and willingly allowing more and more pressure. 

 

We conceded against Reading and ended up sweating out the final 10 minutes or so - that game we had a RB on at LW ffs just to have more defenders on the field. 

 

Keeping it tight and being aware and not being as free flowing / attacking is one thing, but taking off attackers and throwing on as many defensive minded players as possible and just inviting pressure is stupid and will cost us this season if we keep doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you sure you can say that?

 

Well we won and the two players he chose when lots said he shouldn’t scored  so if he takes the flack on sat we must say he’s done it right this time

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

So are you saying we won both games because we made defensive subs?

 

no I’m saying we won both so you can’t say the decisions were wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you sure you can say that?

 

Well we won and the two players he chose when lots said he shouldn’t scored  so if he takes the flack on sat we must say he’s done it right this time

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

Definitely in the Reading game, but also in the Hull game from what I can tell, the defensive subs were followed up with us dropping off and willingly allowing more and more pressure. 

 

We conceded against Reading and ended up sweating out the final 10 minutes or so - that game we had a RB on at LW ffs just to have more defenders on the field. 

 

Keeping it tight and being aware and not being as free flowing / attacking is one thing, but taking off attackers and throwing on as many defensive minded players as possible and just inviting pressure is stupid and will cost us this season if we keep doing it.

 

In the future who knows what may happen. But if we hadn’t gone defensive we may have lost...impossible to say. So as we won the decisions weren’t wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well we won and the two players he chose when lots said he shouldn’t scored  so if he takes the flack on sat we must say he’s done it right this time

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

Definitely in the Reading game, but also in the Hull game from what I can tell, the defensive subs were followed up with us dropping off and willingly allowing more and more pressure. 

 

We conceded against Reading and ended up sweating out the final 10 minutes or so - that game we had a RB on at LW ffs just to have more defenders on the field. 

 

Keeping it tight and being aware and not being as free flowing / attacking is one thing, but taking off attackers and throwing on as many defensive minded players as possible and just inviting pressure is stupid and will cost us this season if we keep doing it.

 

In the future who knows what may happen.  But if we hadn’t gone defensive we may have lost...impossible to say. So as we won the decisions weren’t wrong

 

Surely loads of managers make defensive subs mid way through the second half when their teams have a two goal lead? Isn't it [reasonably] common practice?

 

It would be a challenge for the stattos out there (I know there are a few) to find some stats on 2 goal leads; defensive subs v non defensive subs; win/lose/draw in both categories.... and goals conceded goals scored in both categories.

 

I'm pretty sure those stats won't exist though !!

 

I'd say you hear pundits on MotD and the like talking about protecting a two goal lead fairly often don't you?

 

Edit: However, maybe that's when their teams are starting to come under pressure with the two goal leads..... rather than still controlling the game against relatively poor teams like Reading and Hull !?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well we won and the two players he chose when lots said he shouldn’t scored  so if he takes the flack on sat we must say he’s done it right this time

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

So are you saying we won both games because we made defensive subs?

 

no I’m saying we won both so you can’t say the decisions were wrong

 

Ok, so if we lose a game then we can say that whatever decisions were made were wrong because we lost the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was being sarcastic. I more meant are you allowed to say that. I totally agree with you.

It was more in response to people who are being negative, despite the victory. Because of the subs we made.

I think we should be happy with the victory and give Pulis  credit.

 

I’d agree about the defensive subs.  He’s done it against reading and hull and we’ve won both.  Bristol city when three up against Sunderland went for more and we know what happened there

 

So are you saying we won both games because we made defensive subs?

 

no I’m saying we won both so you can’t say the decisions were wrong

 

Ok, so if we lose a game then we can say that whatever decisions were made were wrong because we lost the game?

 

Not saying football is black and white it isn’t. If we lose a different decision may have won it. It may also have lost the game by more it’s impossible to say however if we lose people can criticise the decisions and no one can say they are wrong. But when we win the decisions were definitely good enough . He made decisions that won us the game so the right ones. Now on to the next decisions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not saying football is black and white it isn’t.  If we lose a different decision may have won it. It may also have lost the game by more it’s impossible to say  however if we lose people can criticise the decisions and no one can say they are wrong. But when we win the decisions were definitely good enough . He made decisions that won us the game so the right ones.  Now on to the next decisions

 

Well, you actually are saying it's black and white.  If we win then whatever decisions that were made were correct regardless of how those decisions influenced the game.  We won therefore they were right decisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Hull have any significant chances after the changes were made? By all means, the changes made will have invited pressure, but did they actually do anything with their time on the ball? If so, were they definitely the wrong decisions? Questionable, for sure. But wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the majority of fans at the Riverside,( 3-1 up against a very poor Hull side, who also had their 13 goal top scorer out injured) the subs were ultra cautious to say the least, Hull were all over the shop when we attacked them, instead we elected to sit back and invite pressure, an all too familiar story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Hull have any significant chances after the changes were made? By all means, the changes made will have invited pressure, but did they actually do anything with their time on the ball? If so, were they definitely the wrong decisions? Questionable, for sure. But wrong?

 

Not in this case mate, but mainly because Hull were dreadful. My worry is if it’s a recurring tactic that if we’re in control of a game in a future against a better team, if he shifts the balance with the changes like he did last night and invites that much pressure we’re bound to concede. It happened too against Reading and they were also rubbish.

I’m all up for securing things up, but think he probably just did it a bit too much last night against a crap team that we could have quite easily put five past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was pretty clear to see it pan out as we brought on the 9th defensive minded player. It's actually common sense. If you don't have as many attacking players on the pitch, it's unlikely you're going to attack as much as when you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that we won, so it has turned out to be the correct decision.

 

I also agree that it is entirely common practice to make defensive subs towards the end of the game when winning.

 

It is a decision I am willing to back from a manager with over 1000 games in management, a couple of promotions, never been relegated, reached an FA cup final. The guys is about as experienced as it gets. So if he thinks it is the right thing to do then I back him.

 

Also saying the bribing on defenders means teams will attack us more is a problematic one. It may well be true. But I also think it is natural that a losing team attack in the last part of a game. Couldn’t one argue that becoming more solid we are preparing for the coming pressure (and dealing with it) rather than just carrying on and hoping the opposition don’t attack us more? I know Hull are a poor side, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have thrown it all at us at the end.

 

 

Also - the subs aren’t as odd as some are making out.

Clayton for Besic is a like for like in terms of position. And Clayton has proved himself to be one of the best at this level for breaking up the opposition’s play. Which might well be needed with 25 mins to go. Plus fresh legs on the centre of the pitch.

Howson for Bamford is less obvious is you view it as a striker for a CM. But if Bamford is playing left AM and Howson is a forward thinking CM or even a central AM (as he played in the previous match) then it is not as unusual. Again, fresh legs and a player who probably more likely to get back and help defend if needed, with 19 minutes to go.

 

Crainie for Downing with 6 mins to go is obviously the biggest positional switch. But many have said Downing doesn’t necessarily have the legs to go full pelt for 90 mins. And bringing in an extra defender for the last 6 mins when 3-1 ahead is a move that so many managers would make.

 

It would be lovely to see us throw 3 extra forwards on and look to spank a team by 5 goals, but in reality how many managers do that in league games? And how many fans would go mad if we threw the forwards on and left ourselves exposed to a team desperate to get back into the game. If we had drawn that game fans would have gone crazy for us not seeing out a winning position.

 

They might not have been the subs you would have made. But to be so negative after winning a game 3-1 is not for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying throw on 3 strikers and go all out attack is the way to go.

 

I'm saying throwing on 3 extra defenders and collapsing back on our own penalty area is not the way to go.

 

We were comfortable at 3-1 as it was, Hull weren't creating anything anyway, so why the need to bring on more defenders and play that way? 

 

Better teams will punish us for doing it, especially if he starts doing it with 1 goal leads!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Hull have any significant chances after the changes were made? By all means, the changes made will have invited pressure, but did they actually do anything with their time on the ball? If so, were they definitely the wrong decisions? Questionable, for sure. But wrong?

 

Not in this case mate, but mainly because Hull were dreadful. My worry is if it’s a recurring tactic that if we’re in control of a game in a future against a better team, if he shifts the balance with the changes like he did last night and invites that much pressure we’re bound to concede. It happened too against Reading and they were also rubbish.

I’m all up for securing things up, but think he probably just did it a bit too much last night against a crap team that we could have quite easily put five past.

 

Perhaps, being of the defensive mind, Pulis decided that completely stifling a shocking team was the better move than trying to destroy them? If it is as you say and Hull didn't create anything from that point on then it would seem to be a fairly good decision though I haven't seen the game so simply speculating. Not what I would have done either by any means but there you go.

 

To be fair to him against Reading, he was about to make a positive change and bring Harrison on and it was just prior to that which we conceded. He did bring Britt on for a bit of energy up front but then Britt hasn't been providing much of that of late.

 

At the end of the day, putting 5 past a crap team isn't going to get us in the play-offs, it's points we need to work for and keep when we're in that position. We obviously need to play better against better teams and I'm not sure we'll get to know how Pulis will react against better teams in a similar position as we'd have to actually get in front first.

 

Wolves at home will be an interesting one to see how we set ourselves up from the get go. I have a bad feeling we may see a team set up to win a point at home which certainly will not go down well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...