Julio Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 If Frail has 100% control over substitutions as we are led to believe then his decision yesterday to take Ruben off for Nade was a disgrace. Watched his interview earlier on sultana and he said it ws to solidify the midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4marsbars Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I thought at the time it was a strange one, but maybe he just wanted to defend higher up the pitch, and it worked. Great first half from Ruben though. Is Nade now officially fatter than Phil Stamp at his max? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susie-Jambo-66 Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 If Frail has 100% control over substitutions as we are led to believe then his decision yesterday to take Ruben off for Nade was a disgrace. Watched his interview earlier on sultana and he said it ws to solidify the midfield. Ruben took a knock so that is prob why he took him off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leginten Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Maybe he meant that it was to take pressure off the midfield. I've really no idea - it was a puzzling decision to me, especially as Ruben was the best player on the park. I suppose by that time Ruben had (nominally) been pushed forward slightly to play in the (nominally) slightly advanced role that Stewart had been playing before Wallace came on, so to a certain extent it could be argued that it was almost a like-for-like substitution. But Nade's performance left a really bad taste in the mouth. That guy has a major attitude problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julio Posted January 20, 2008 Author Share Posted January 20, 2008 I thought at the time it was a strange one, but maybe he just wanted to defend higher up the pitch, and it worked. Great first half from Ruben though. Is Nade now officially fatter than Phil Stamp at his max? Hes huge and must be fatter than Stampy. Hes not quiet in the Mixu Pantyliners stakes yet though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lou Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 During the game, I thought the most logical substitution was Stewart for Nade, as I feel Mikey toiled yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 When Wallace came on I saw him passing on instructions to Palazeulos to man mark Boozy but by then I think he was already whacked. Suspect the substitution was partly with Tuesday in mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrewsHMFC Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Nade's performance left a really bad taste in the mouth. That guy has a major attitude problem. Agreed. Nade seems to have a decent shot on him and can hold the ball up well, all in all he should be doing really well for us. Instead we've seen him inflate slowly to the size of Pluto and do more whining than a bird with the painters in. Someone (A manager!) needs to get his attitude sorted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winston churchill Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 When Wallace came on I saw him passing on instructions to Palazeulos to man mark Boozy but by then I think he was already whacked. Suspect the substitution was partly with Tuesday in mind it looked to us like he was telling ruben to go further up the park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Wiseau Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Sub worked. We pressed the Hibs goal more when Nade came on than we had in the previous 35/40 minutes. It was a change that relieved the pressure, and helped us shut out the game. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leginten Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Sub worked. We pressed the Hibs goal more when Nade came on than we had in the previous 35/40 minutes. It was a change that relieved the pressure, and helped us shut out the game. Simple as that. Purely down to Velicka getting a second wind and Miko playing very sensibly, in my view. Nade's contribution: caught offside, a misplaced pass, two fouls and a needless booking. The result every time was possession to Hibs and a chance for them to get the ball upfield. Nade was an absolute liability. I'd be fining him for his indiscipline - and for being fat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gillie chris Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Agreed. Nade seems to have a decent shot on him and can hold the ball up well, all in all he should be doing really well for us. Instead we've seen him inflate slowly to the size of Pluto and do more whining than a bird with the painters in. Someone (A manager!) needs to get his attitude sorted Who is Pluto:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Wiseau Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Purely down to Velicka getting a second wind and Miko playing very sensibly, in my view. Nade's contribution: caught offside, a misplaced pass, two fouls and a needless booking. The result every time was possession to Hibs and a chance for them to get the ball upfield. Nade was an absolute liability. I'd be fining him for his indiscipline - and for being fat. I'll explain. I'm not crediting Nade for our upturn when he came on - I'm crediting Frail. Nade coming on was key, because it gave Velicka someone to play off. He'd been battering up against the Hibs defence himself for so long, that I think having a partner coming on would have contributed to his second wind. It also gave the Hibs defence more threats to look at, which stopped them going forward as much, and the two up front denied them the same time and space to pick their passes - as they had been doing over the previous 20 minutes. It's important to point out that before Nade came on, every ball up front had resulted in Hibs possession and a chance to attack anyway. We hadn't been able to press their defence properly for a good while beforehand, and although Nade contributed little on a performance level (I thought he pressed the ball a little better than he has been though), his presence was a major factor in our ascendancy over the closing stages. I agree with the fining though... I was as confused as anyone when he came on, but I think it worked pretty well in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beverley Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Who is Pluto:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leginten Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I'll explain. I'm not crediting Nade for our upturn when he came on - I'm crediting Frail. Nade coming on was key, because it gave Velicka someone to play off. He'd been battering up against the Hibs defence himself for so long, that I think having a partner coming on would have contributed to his second wind. It also gave the Hibs defence more threats to look at, which stopped them going forward as much, and the two up front denied them the same time and space to pick their passes - as they had been doing over the previous 20 minutes. It's important to point out that before Nade came on, every ball up front had resulted in Hibs possession and a chance to attack anyway. We hadn't been able to press their defence properly for a good while beforehand, and although Nade contributed little on a performance level (I thought he pressed the ball a little better than he has been though), his presence was a major factor in our ascendancy over the closing stages. I agree with the fining though... I was as confused as anyone Fair dos - ya radge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandyseymour Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 If Frail has 100% control over substitutions as we are led to believe then his decision yesterday to take Ruben off for Nade was a disgrace. Watched his interview earlier on sultana and he said it ws to solidify the midfield. give it a rest...Stewart was knackered so he pushed Ruben forward into the hole to combat Beuzelin (hibs playmaker) but it was clear that he was knacked as well, not surprising given that he must have covered every blade of grass .... (also remember he took a sore one 1st half)...so Nade was put on to add strength and hold the ball up...seemed good strategy to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julio Posted January 20, 2008 Author Share Posted January 20, 2008 give it a rest...Stewart was knackered so he pushed Ruben forward into the hole to combat Beuzelin (hibs playmaker) but it was clear that he was knacked as well, not surprising given that he must have covered every blade of grass .... (also remember he took a sore one 1st half)...so Nade was put on to add strength and hold the ball up...seemed good strategy to me Nade offered ZERO. Ruben was MOTM by a country mile. How you can say it was a good strategy is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Gosling Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I thought it was clever, meant Hibs couldn't push as many players forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Nade offered ZERO. Ruben was MOTM by a country mile. How you can say it was a good strategy is beyond me. You seem to have forgotten how much possession hibs had in the 2nd half. While Ruben had played well what we were doing was not working and we had to change. We needed to get another striker on not only to give hibs something to think about but also stop jones moving up front. You did notice despite them getting beat they did not stick the big horse up front ? You should have also noticed we also had a lot of possession in the final 3rd after the change. The fact Nade didn't do anything when he came on is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboron Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Purely down to Velicka getting a second wind and Miko playing very sensibly, in my view. Nade's contribution: caught offside, a misplaced pass, two fouls and a needless booking. The result every time was possession to Hibs and a chance for them to get the ball upfield. Nade was an absolute liability. I'd be fining him for his indiscipline - and for being fat. I`m in agreement, christ he was only on the pitch for about 15 minutes yet he looked like he was blowing out his @rse, thank god Velicka got a wee bit more energetic late on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beverley Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 jamboron.... he looked knackered even just running onto the pitch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gillie chris Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Pluto isnt that big:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Ruben was whacked, had put in a shift and looked relieved to be coming off for a rest I dont think it indicates anything like the OP concludes Managers often make "strange" subs but they are subject to more information than us in the stand Apart from anything ruben deserved a solo ovation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.