I'm sorry Dubai, but I don't see how you've shown that what follows after your "ergo" is true.
Hudd has shown in the past that he can be effective playing the entire game, not sure what has now changed?
You could just as likely say that if Hudd starts the opposing team is likely to tire quicker because they will have to deal with a better passing team and so starting Hudd allows us to reap the benefits earlier. It might also allows us to create more chances in the opening hour instead of having to wait around for the opponents to tire. Unless we actually get several games of Hudd starting in a similar set-up to the one he looked very effective in yesterday where he consistently fails to impact the game in the first hour then I see no evidence to support your conclusion.
Also, it's not true that we will only have Parker to bring on from the bench, if Holtby isn't starting he could easily be brought on and if Holtby starts then we can have Tom Carroll on the bench to bring on if we need another passer later on in the game. AVB has already used Carroll from the bench to do exactly that with some success.
True, he has shown in the past he can be effective playing for ninety minutes. However, it has to be asked then why he hasn't been used more often this season. There have been many times we have been crying out for his creativity, but yet AVB has persisted in using him sparingly.
So if we need him, but don't use him, then obviously there must be something that precludes AVB from including him in his team setup. For me, that's fitness. Hudd's looked bulkier this season than he did the last time he was playing regularly (09-10), and his injury issues over the past two years have quite evidently reduced his mobility. Now, is it really that much of a jump to assume that a slower, bulkier Hudd would struggle when up against fully fit terriers hounding him ceaselessly, as has been the case with Parker and Dembele countless times this season? And is it also not logical to assume that he would tire quicker when trying to evade the attentions of these opposition players?
I'm quite downhearted about it, but I don't think yesterday's Hudd could have lasted ninety minutes. 09-10 Hudd, sure. But not yesterday's.
Now, I've hopefully established that. It follows, then, to examine what situations Hudd could potentially start in. I assumed that Hudd's relative immobility meant that operating in a two-man pivot with Dembele would expose us to unnecessary risk of quick break-aways, especially when paired with our lack of a genuine centre-back 'speedster' a la Kaboul or King, able to put on burst of acceleration to catch up to opposition counter-attacks. Therefore, I assume that if we start Hudd, it would be in a 3-man midfield with Holtby and Dembele, whose mobility would enable Hudd to perform at maximum effectiveness, at least theoretically. Therefore, Holtby wouldn't be available on the bench.
Sure, you could replace Hudd with Carroll if he's ineffective, but I've always seen Carroll as being more effective in the position Holtby played yesterday, as a link-man between the striker and the deep-lying midfielders. I don't think he could effectively cover a role alongside Dembele and Holtby without us sacrificing some of our defensive solidity, at least not yet. With a good loan next season, possibly. Not yet.
So that leaves Parker as the only option to replace Hudd directly, should he tire. And if we're still drawing or trailing when he comes off, we will have a problem.
For what it's worth, I think Hudd can still carve out a regular place for himself in the matchday squad next season. In fact, I'm rather hoping he does: I've always liked him. But that'll only happen if he regains some measure of mobility, which is crucial in AVB's system. And don't get me wrong, he's not completely immobile: indeed, I wager he'd do a great job for most PL sides. But AVB's tactics so far have seen us rely on strength, speed and movement over traditional 'creativity', and here's where Hudd falls a little bit short, in my estimation.
So, to reiterate; if he comes on late, he will more often than not be a game-changer. If he starts, I fear he won't make the impact we're all hoping he will.
