Yesterday a lot of us wanted subs. We didn’t get them. Blackburn made subs and won late on. 2+2=4, right? Maybe so.
Roy has been a football manager since 1976. We’ll call that 30 years, allowing for partial seasons, etc. Nowithstanding international work, let’s say that he’s managed 45 games a season over those 30 years. That’s 1,350 matches.
In all of those games Roy will have had the option of using substitutes. Sometimes he’ll have been ahead and in need of reinforcements to see it out; sometimes he’ll have been behind and needing to change things; other times it’ll be tightly balanced, and any small move could tilt things either way. He’ll have seen it all several times over, and probably tried all conceivable approaches to substitutes in that time. He’ll have sent on forwards early to shake things up, he’ll have left a struggling team unchanged because he senses that it’s just about hanging on.
Sometimes he’ll have made changes that work. Sometimes he’ll have made changes that haven’t worked. Sometimes he’ll have done nothing and been either rewarded or penalised for it. Whatever. He’s had the time to get a feel for these things, to build an approach. There will presumably be no hard and fast rules, he’ll just play it as he sees it, relying on instincts honed over 1,350 football matches.
One thing I’ve always felt about football is that the game is very random. I say this a lot and people rightly question the stance, but I pretty much stand by it. In the old days of FA Cup replays you’d sometimes see a draw, then another draw, then a hammering in the second replay. These days you sometimes see two teams play one another twice in succession, perhaps because of a cup engagement, and sometimes you’ll see very different results. In football there are a number of moments on which entire matches hinge. Remember England beating Germany 5-1 in Munich? Germany could have been out of sight in that match before England hit their stride. England beating Croatia 4-1 recently? Our first goal came when one Croatia defender cleared the ball against the backside of another. Not that these incidents diminish what comes next, but sometimes weird things happen and games spin out of control, and there’s little anyone can do or could have done about it.
It happens all the time at Fulham too. We were able to beat Manchester City after being 2-0 down because Joe Kamara did something good, but another Joe, Hart, let his shot between his legs after being superlative until then. Then Danny Murphy hit a penalty and Hart saved it, but that rebound could have gone anywhere. It came back to Murphy, who converted. Kamara scored in injury time to seal an improbable win. We beat Birmingham, who missed a golden chance in the first half, then lost Liam Ridgewell to injury. Ridgewell’s replacement was our old friend Franck Queudrue, who promptly lost Brian McBride for goal 1, and then set up Erik Nevland for goal 2. I could go on.
Football falls on these tiny moments, some go your way, some don’t. And just as you can flip a coin and get a head 4 times in a row if you try enough, you can also get a run of good fortune when you need it most and therefore stay in the top division if you’re lucky.
Which is not to undermine the team’s play in those games, because they were well prepared and kept playing their game, and this is entirely my point. If Roy Hodgson gets his team physically and mentally prepared – and he stressed this at the fans’ forum – then sometimes that will be enough on the day and sometimes it won’t, but if you take care of things to the best of your ability then theoretically you maximise your chances of winning each football match.
But there will always be mistakes, unponderable weirdness, and surprises. Roy knows this and said as much at the fans’ forum. Football is unpredictable. As a manager his job is to prepare, to control the controllables, and to go from there. On the field anything can happen.
Perhaps he takes this too far. Jose Mourinho would sometimes remove a misfiring winger after no time at all if it felt like the game wasn’t shaping up to plan. Jose Mourinho had a big ego, felt that he could control everything, that he could shape football matches. And perhaps he was right. Perhaps Roy is too passive, believing that things have been set up to plan and from there we might win and we might not, but the controllables were controlled and that’s the main thing. I don’t know. But again, Roy has developed a feel for making his substitutions over a long period of time, backs his own judgement, and has largely been successful in so doing. So yes he might have been slow on the trigger yesterday, but something will have told him to hold off, something would have made him think that things were going to be alright out there. Just turns out that it didn’t work out. Sometimes that’s the way it goes.



as much as I love young Roy, it was NOT a question of his being “slow on the trigger.” It was a question of him not taking full advantage of his options. The truth is that Zamora was running on empty after 70 minutes, and AJ probably 15 minutes earlier than that. Bullard had the crap kicked out of him and had downshifted by 35 minutes, and Murphy was ineffective as early as 20 minutes. Their central defense controlled our strikers and their midfield pushed ours around. In response to four players having been past their best by the 70th minute — and not having made a dent in a side that had shipped 8 goals in their last two matches — Roy ignored Andreassen, Dempsey, and Nevland. Did he really expect the guys he had out there to get any better? Or does he only have faith in 11 players?
I’ll accept that we’ll beat teams better than us and lose to teams far worse than us, but these were three points waiting to be taken on the road, and in a comfortable position. As it is, we’re two points clear of relegation with a game in hand that has a 95% probablility of netting us zero points.
As far as my last question in the first paragraph, I guess we’ll know midweek when we see the starting lineup in the League Cup.
Comment by HatterDon — September 22, 2008 @ 1:58 am |
I could not make it to the game on Saturday due to heavy work commitments so my view is based strictly on television coverage but I thought we looked pretty good. Last week against Bolton he did bring on substitutes, the whole balance of the team changed and not for the better. As you say Rich sometime you just get done in football games and that happened to us by a well executed move. You never know if he had changed things we might have lost 2-0.
Comment by Bruno — September 22, 2008 @ 7:24 am |
I haven’t seen anything of the match so can’t comment on specifics – Roy may have got it wrong this time but we did only concede one late goal and I don’t see how any substitution could have ensured that that wouldn’t have happened but then again it might have, but since the substitution didn’t happen we don’t know what would have happened had it happened. I can’t say that any clearer.
I think the key is that Roy has built a team and has squad players available but none of them are better than the first 11. I doubt that any one of us would select a different starting 11 to the one used in the last 2 matches. Murphy has his critics, I accept, and a few might prefer Andreasson (on little evidence) but that apart the team picks itself.
If Roy has a settled pattern that he doesn’t want to disrupt then like for like substitutions will only weaken the team albeit tired or injured players will need to be replaced.
Some assert that Murphy or Bullard can’t last 90 minutes but the late goals against Leicester, Portsmouth and Man City prove otherwise. Johnson may have been tired but needs pitch time to build up his match fitness.
I’d like to ask Roy if with hindsight he feels that he should have made a change or 2 but like Rich I think it’s too simplistic to say that he got it wrong and that things would (as opposed to could) have been different if he’d made other decisions.
Comment by Tony Gilroy — September 22, 2008 @ 9:23 am |
Good points on use of subs… During Finland’s qualifying campaign for the Euro 2008 under Roy, his reluctancy to use substitutes was frequently criticized – it’s fascinating that the same discussion comes up with Fulham as well. Being a Finland supporter, my experience is that Roy is extremely conservative in both selecting the team and bringing on subs, especially when playing away from home. I’m sure he has good reasons for it, but it certainly makes it easy for the fans to criticize his lack of initiative when the play is not good.
Comment by Finn — September 22, 2008 @ 11:39 am |
How can you give the gaffer a free pass when he admitted that the player beaten was hurt? If he’s hurt, then you sub him off, right? Isn’t that what subs are for? Stoor is a right back, he’s on the bench, if Pantsil is injured, replace him with Stoor. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Who cares how long Roy’s been a manager, he messed that up and lost us a point.
Another point – I do not believe that Murphy is a 90 minute man over the course of a 38 game Prem campaign, at least in the position he has been playing. This is a problem because he’s the captain. He and Bullard can’t boss the central midfield against a physical (dirty) team like Rovers. Andreasen/Etuhu/Teymourian would have been useful, especially in the last 10-15 minutes. Tactics are fluid and should be adjusted over the course of a match, and that includes introducing new players into the mix.
On the bright side, we’ve been in every game so far and could just as easily be on 12 points, or 8. COYW!
Comment by Ali — September 23, 2008 @ 3:17 pm |
Well lots of players get hurt in football matches. You hope that they’ll be able to carry on so as not to disrupt things. Clearly Paintsil’s injury didn’t appear serious at the time, so he wasn’t substituted. It’s very easy to be wise with hindsight. He didn’t “mess up and lose us a point”, this is exactly the sort of extreme thinking that this website tries to avoid. He made a judgement call that didn’t pay off; it happens.
The Murphy point is not a new one, and may be correct. I guess you have to take it on a game-by-game basis, because certainly he’s made huge contributions to games late on in the past. On this occasion he did look tired, but again, a judgement call that didn’t pay off; on we go.
Comment by weltmeisterclaude — September 23, 2008 @ 3:35 pm |
Maybe I whould qualify that a bit – I think Roy has done well so far and really improved the team. He certainly knows a lot more about tactics and subs than I do, given his work with this club as well as his long, distinguished career.
You are right about injuries. And it may be a stretch to make a causal link between the point and the failure to sub off an injured player, whose injury may or may not have contributed to losing his marker on the goal-conceding play. A play which was nicely executed and where at least 3 of our players could have done better. But based on the content and tone of the post-match comments, it appeared that he knew Pantsil was carrying a knock. In my view, it’s a bit too risky to rely on him to gut it out knowing you have three subs available, including a like-for-like in Stoor.
On Danny Murphy – he makes it hard because he was so instrumental late on in games during the survival run. But that came at the end of a season in which he did not play in every game, let alone start 38. I believe he hasn’t done that since 04-05. And I don’t recall him playing much as a central mid with defensive responsibilities over the years. He played just under 2500 minutes last year and started 28 games. A central mid with defensive responsibilities (say, Gareth Barry) will start every game and play 3300-3500 minutes in a season, assuming no injuries. I’m just not convinced Murphy can do that and sustain high levels of performance through the season. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but on early evidence, he seems to fade late on in the matches I have watched (Hull, Arsenal and Rovers).
Finally, I don’t post much, but I really appreciate your work on this site. Thanks and keep it up.
Comment by Ali — September 23, 2008 @ 6:12 pm |
Thanks, Ali, good stuff. It’ll be interesting to see how Danny Murphy is used as the season progresses, eh? I’m happy with him doing his thing for now, and we know Roy’s aware of the issue (another Fans’ Forum comment) so we’ll just have to see I guess.
Comment by weltmeisterclaude — September 23, 2008 @ 6:41 pm |