• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Substitutions

lovely rita said:
I am not sure that Winks made a successful tackle - he did give away a free kick in a bad area . I agree had we been coasting protecting Eriksen and bringing on Winks for the last 10/15 would have been fine.

Eriksen did not play against Barnsley so was relatively fresh. Sorry, but I can't see it helping anyone but West Ham. If anything Ali should have been the one to take off.
Click to expand...
Whoscored.com has Winks down for one tackle and one interception. Eriksen had one and zero respectively over his 70 minutes on the pitch for comparison.

Winks ran, pressed, covered space and also kept possession both through passing and running with the ball. He provided exactly what we needed. Just like he did last season when Pochettino brought him on in similar circumstances several times.

Alli gets another rest midweek whereas Eriksen has to travel and play.

Perfect substitution.
 
braineclipse said:
Whoscored.com has Winks down for one tackle and one interception. Eriksen had one and zero respectively over his 70 minutes on the pitch for comparison.

Winks ran, pressed, covered space and also kept possession both through passing and running with the ball. He provided exactly what we needed. Just like he did last season when Pochettino brought him on in similar circumstances several times.

Alli gets another rest midweek whereas Eriksen has to travel and play.

Perfect substitution.
Click to expand...
After lovely rita's comments questioning Winks' performance I rewatched my recording of the game to check whether she had a point. Whoscored was spot on about the single tackle but they must apply a very precise interpretation as to what constitutes an interception. By my reckoning he made at least six, including one crucial one inside the box that might otherwise have allowed Cresswell in on goal. On top of that he made a critical clearance at the death when our goal was under seige.

On the debit side it has to be conceded he was beaten for pace - albeit by just millimetres - in his attempt to prevent Masuaku from putting over the excellent cross that led to West Ham's second goal. But it's hard to imagine Eriksen could have gotten anywhere near the powerful and pacy Frenchman in that particular duel.
 
Last edited:
The subs vs West Ham were very good. Winks and Trippier did well. Llorente was excellent. He brought in experience.
 
braineclipse said:
Whoscored.com has Winks down for one tackle and one interception. Eriksen had one and zero respectively over his 70 minutes on the pitch for comparison.

Winks ran, pressed, covered space and also kept possession both through passing and running with the ball. He provided exactly what we needed. Just like he did last season when Pochettino brought him on in similar circumstances several times.

Alli gets another rest midweek whereas Eriksen has to travel and play.

Perfect substitution.
Click to expand...

It is obviously difficult to know for sure I am not saying Winks was terrible. But I am not quite sure it can be called perfect, we very nearly conceded two points and we lost control of the game.

Eriksen does he share of defensive duties he runs more than any other player normally.

We know that defending deep and inviting pressure is asking for trouble. With Winks on instead of Eriksen: attacks are more likely to breakdown and we are considerably less likely to score. That is effectively what happened and from that you concede more corners and free-kicks.
 
Last edited:
lovely rita said:
It is obviously difficult to know for sure I am not saying Winks was terrible. But I am not quite sure it can be called perfect, we very nearly conceded two points and we lost control of the game.

Eriksen does he share of defensive duties he runs more than any other player normally.

We know that defending deep and inviting pressure is asking for trouble. With Winks on instead of Eriksen: attacks are more likely to breakdown and we are considerably less likely to score. That is effectively what happened and from that you concede more corners and free-kicks.
Click to expand...
We lost control with the red card. Not the substitution.

Winks is very good at keeping possession, as he showed yesterday.
 
lovely rita said:
We know that defending deep and inviting pressure is asking for trouble. With Winks on instead of Eriksen: attacks are more likely to breakdown and we are considerably less likely to score. That is effectively what happened and from that you concede more corners and free-kicks.
Click to expand...
Worked against Dortmund :)
 
lovely rita said:
It is obviously difficult to know for sure I am not saying Winks was terrible. But I am not quite sure it can be called perfect, we very nearly conceded two points and we lost control of the game.

Eriksen does he share of defensive duties he runs more than any other player normally.

We know that defending deep and inviting pressure is asking for trouble. With Winks on instead of Eriksen: attacks are more likely to breakdown and we are considerably less likely to score. That is effectively what happened and from that you concede more corners and free-kicks.
Click to expand...
I feel Poch should have brought on Winks for Sissoko. We needed to keep the ball
 
lovely rita said:
You're so right, we should always sub Winks on for Eriksen and anyone who thinks otherwise must be WUM merchant.
Click to expand...

You have history ;)

There's no reason to be picking out Winks. He played well, kept possession and worked hard to win it back when we didn't have the ball, and it was a logical substitution. We were leading 3-1 and there was less than 20 minutes to play. We didn't need to score more goals, we needed to see out the game. Someone had to go to right back and it's only natural that we sacrificed an attacking player. With Alli suspended for Tuesday there was no point in taking him off. It could be Trippier wasn't ready to come on just yet, but still better to spread out the subs to give us more opportunities to slow down the game.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Worked against Dortmund :)
Click to expand...
It will work against Liverpool or City too as they rely on trying to play behind teams and over commit players when doing so - when agricultural teams are lumping it in to the big man a deeper defence improves their chances of success.
 
Jordinho said:
You have history ;)

There's no reason to be picking out Winks. He played well, kept possession and worked hard to win it back when we didn't have the ball, and it was a logical substitution. We were leading 3-1 and there was less than 20 minutes to play. We didn't need to score more goals, we needed to see out the game. Someone had to go to right back and it's only natural that we sacrificed an attacking player. With Alli suspended for Tuesday there was no point in taking him off. It could be Trippier wasn't ready to come on just yet, but still better to spread out the subs to give us more opportunities to slow down the game.
Click to expand...

I have no history of being a WUM - not being part of the herd or groupthink is not the same thing.

Is there really no reason to question taking off Eriksen and replacing him with Winks? Do you really think it is beyond question? Hmm.

We needed to win the match , scoring another goal was a possible route. Not conceding was another. Superior teams can normally cope quite well without being a man down. Sacrificing your best player is not risk-free at the least.

On balance I do not think it was the right substitution and was concerned when it happened . Of course I can see the thinking behind it. But I can't understand why it is called a qualified success - look at it like this - if we were only one goal up would it still have been the right thing to do?
 
lovely rita said:
I have no history of being a WUM - not being part of the herd or groupthink is not the same thing.

Is there really no reason to question taking off Eriksen and replacing him with Winks? Do you really think it is beyond question? Hmm.

We needed to win the match , scoring another goal was a possible route. Not conceding was another. Superior teams can normally cope quite well without being a man down. Sacrificing your best player is not risk-free at the least.

On balance I do not think it was the right substitution and was concerned when it happened . Of course I can see the thinking behind it. But I can't understand why it is called a qualified success - look at it like this - if we were only one goal up would it still have been the right thing to do?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
lovely rita said:
I have no history of being a WUM - not being part of the herd or groupthink is not the same thing.

Is there really no reason to question taking off Eriksen and replacing him with Winks? Do you really think it is beyond question? Hmm.

We needed to win the match , scoring another goal was a possible route. Not conceding was another. Superior teams can normally cope quite well without being a man down. Sacrificing your best player is not risk-free at the least.

On balance I do not think it was the right substitution and was concerned when it happened . Of course I can see the thinking behind it. But I can't understand why it is called a qualified success - look at it like this - if we were only one goal up would it still have been the right thing to do?
Click to expand...

We won the game.
The manager got something right.
I think it is funny that you continue to question a hypothetical 'outcome' that didn't happen...


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
MKSpur said:
It will work against Liverpool or City too as they rely on trying to play behind teams and over commit players when doing so - when agricultural teams are lumping it in to the big man a deeper defence improves their chances of success.
Click to expand...
Just jesting with Rita.....nothing serious
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back