Awful

[Robin1988]

Burns running the channels...JET holding up play... Doh!

"JET, a player who can hold the ball up, run the channels"

 

Credit the original poster.

[cider-manc]

Personally I thought Agard was subbed as he had taken a bit of a knock, was seeming to tire (which wasn't surprising considering the shift he had put in) and when leading in the closing stages it is very common to take one of your strikers off and replace with a midfielder/defender.

 

However....

 

I thought taking off Freeman, Bryan and Agard removed any outlet and pace that we had when replacing them with Pack, Waggy and Cunningham. It invited a lot of pressure on to us and it had already begun to mount. I would probably have left Bryan on and perhaps bought JET on for Wilbs as he also looked shattered towards the end. But it's easy to say in hindsight and if we had held on it wouldn't even be a discussion. 

[AshtonGreat]

Ridiculous thread, as far as I'm concerned. Some people need a dose of reality. Sometimes mistakes are going to be made. It happens and we won't win every game. But SC and the team are doing most things very right and we are in a place that we haven't been for many years - and certainly one that was a distant dream under that last geezer. To say SC should be sacked as soon as we reach the Championship makes no logical sense and is desrespectful.

[Rob k]

Think a few tricks blinds some of our fans, but for me he simply doesn't fit into modern football especially at this level

A few tricks? How about the 20 odd goals and the same number of assists?

[Red white and red]

Please tell me this is a joke thread... We're top of the league, 5 points clear and there are still people moaning!, FFS you must have been suicidal when we were bottom last season!

[NickJ]

If you'd have gone you'd be feeling the same as me and the 884 others.

I saw the title of this thread and thought maybe somebody had dragged up an old one from the dark days of O'Dismal.

Unbelievable.

Speak for yourself I was one of the 884 and don't feel that way at all.

[Major Isewater]

I saw the title of this thread and thought maybe somebody had dragged up an old one from the dark days of O'Dismal.

Unbelievable.

Speak for yourself I was one of the 884 and don't feel that way at all.

It's true the threads under SOD were much more negative than the threads under SC ...

They'd start off quite studied ,a few interchanges then someone would lob one in from nowhere or make a silly grammatical mistake and the points were lost.

[bemmyredjeff]

You can be

1. Happy with Cotterill

2. Happy we are unbeaten at the top of the league

3. Frustrated at today's substitutions which invited pressure and indirectly caused them to score

4. Disappointed we threw away a 2 goal lead against a side we could and should have beaten.

It's more likely people who didn't see the game will be less disappointed and be happy at the result and league placing like I would be but those who saw the game would have seen the impact and how we threw away the initiative.

That's my view anyway.

I went to Vale on tuesday but not yesterday and you are absolutely right.

I reacted more as if it was a defeat than a draw against allbeit a decent team.

Every point is vital and that definately seems like two dropped by losing the initiative. 

[Frenchay Red]

A bit disappointing? Of course. Our expectations are now on a completely different level, given the way SC has turned things round and got us off to a flyer this season.

 

Awful? Well if you're a Crewe or Sheff U fan then yes.

 

But top of the league, 5 points clear and no league defeats. If that's awful, then I'll take an awful season please.

[TETBURY MASSIVE]

You haven't got a clue, I am happy yet I'm entitled to draw opinion on what I saw.

Don't assume, it makes you sound like a ****.

You are one angry man, pretty disgraceful to call me that. I suppose you only really happy when we are losing and you can complain......

[Lew-T]

We needed to be more ruthless yesterday, Fleetwood were there for the taking at 3-1. I personally would have brought JET on to kill it off!

However, there will be setbacks this season and I say credit to Fleetwood, they made us work and we couldn't handle it.

Bring on the MK! COYR

[EstoniaTallinnRed]

Terrible substitutions made AGAIN, inviting the opposition team back in the game.

Today at 3-1 we should have put Fleetwood to bed.

Instead we took off our pace/attacking outlets and tried to cling on, yet still playing the same tactics eg the balls into the channels for the likes of Agard, Bryan Freeman to chase who were at this point sat on the bench.

At 3-1 the game was crying out for JET, a player who can hold the ball up, run the channels, produce goals from nothing. His very being on the pitch means defenders doubling up on him which of course creates gaps to exploit.

We are still unbeaten and today we played a decent team.

We lost 2 points today, not down to any single player, but by inept tactics and substitutions, that's the fault of the manager and a reoccurring one at that.

The sad thing is I'd of taken a point today at 3pm.

.........oh yes I do know we are still top and unbeaten in the league, doesn't mean that there's not lessons to be learned.

Yes I agree with every word!   As soon as I heard Pack was coming on I thought   Oh No!  we will give a goal away and what happened Pack gave the ball away and this led to their equaliser     I don't know why SC does this when we were coasting and our attack is better than our defence even though it is much better than most of last season.  Yes 2 points were thrown away and I only hope we are not 2 points short of automatic at the end of the season.   Perhaps a lesson will be learnt from this,  but somehow I doubt it,  i think SC is doing a very good job, but these defensive subs when we are on top of the game is his weakness.

[spudski]

Why is it some people are knocking the OP.

 

Time and Time again on this forum, no one reads the bloody posts and what they are talking about.

 

He isn't saying we were awful...he is trying to discuss what he thought was negative tactics by SC.

 

Why can't people ad to the thread and discuss this, instead of attacking the poster and implying he's moaning.

 

It seems if we are doing well, you can't discuss football issues. Yet when things aren't going to plan, people over react and go ******* mental....

 

Why not discuss football...instead of knocking posters all the time?

[Chappers]

I was there and thought the substitutions were wrong. It was an open game and we looked a lot better going forward than defending so I thought we needed to just keep doing what was working. Losing Agards pace really stifled our attack and handed them the initiative. Just one of those things though, another time it would work and we would see out the game or score on the break. At the end of the day, a point away to a pretty decent team, so let's be positive.

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

Well that didn't take long did it...... shocking post.... either Mr Cotterill has done something really bad too you personally or your a very angry man.... I hope you don't celebrate when we win....

 

Not really that shocking tbh.

[HoldenBall]

Lets face it if Pack successfully cleared his lines for the 3rd goal we wouldn't be dissecting his substitutions, this things happen in football. I'm sure when we're a goal up and it's near the end of the game and SC makes similar substitutions no one would bat an eye.

[EstoniaTallinnRed]

Wasn't their equaliser a direct result of a mistake by Pack, because that is what was said in commentary.

Yes!   This is what I said in my previous post.  I don't care what others say on here about him,  from listening to all the games this season,  I always fear he will make serious mistakes when he comes on, which he did yesterday.   In my view he is not good enough for this league and at best is a league two player. 

[NickJ]

Why is it some people are knocking the OP.

 

Time and Time again on this forum, no one reads the bloody posts and what they are talking about.

 

He isn't saying we were awful...he is trying to discuss what he thought was negative tactics by SC.

 

Why can't people ad to the thread and discuss this, instead of attacking the poster and implying he's moaning.

 

It seems if we are doing well, you can't discuss football issues. Yet when things aren't going to plan, people over react and go ******* mental....

 

Why not discuss football...instead of knocking posters all the time?

Nobody has knocked the OP, just his ridiculous views such as:

"We lost 2 points today, not down to any single player, but by inept tactics and substitutions, that's the fault of the manager and a reoccurring one at that."

Did I dream for example Cunningham scoring 2 minutes after coming on as a sub recently?

Reoccurring? The only thing reoccurring about this manager is his ability to turn around the dross of what went on before.

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

Nobody has knocked the OP, just his ridiculous views such as:

"We lost 2 points today, not down to any single player, but by inept tactics and substitutions, that's the fault of the manager and a reoccurring one at that."

Did I dream for example Cunningham scoring 2 minutes after coming on as a sub recently?

Reoccurring? The only thing reoccurring about this manager is his ability to turn around the dross of what went on before.

 

Not ridiculous at all, we did drop 2 points when in a commanding position.

 

SC has done a great job but his defensive subs is his Achilles heel at this point in time.

[spudski]

Nobody has knocked the OP, just his ridiculous views such as:

"We lost 2 points today, not down to any single player, but by inept tactics and substitutions, that's the fault of the manager and a reoccurring one at that."

Did I dream for example Cunningham scoring 2 minutes after coming on as a sub recently?

Reoccurring? The only thing reoccurring about this manager is his ability to turn around the dross of what went on before.

It seems many who were their agree with the OP.

Even SC has said he didn't enjoy the last quarter of the game.

Did SC not try to shore up the situation and invite Fleetwood at us?

Cunninghams goal came about as he is a wingback and we were playing offensive football at the time. So that has nothing to do with yesterdays change in tactics.

 

The point the OP is trying to make, is that he thought SC got it wrong by inviting Fleetwood at us.

He is talking about tactics...not about 'dross that went on before'....again...why bring that up? He's talking about tactics...

[NickJ]

The same tactics that took us from bottom to top half last season and top of the league by 5 points this.

Knock the manager because he doesn't get it right EVERY time? Ridiculous.

And he didn't invite Fleetwood on to us, we had chances ourselves after the substitutions.

[HoldenBall]

The same tactics that took us from bottom to top half last season and top of the league by 5 points this.

Knock the manager because he doesn't get it right EVERY time? Ridiculous.

And he didn't invite Fleetwood on to us, we had chances ourselves after the substitutions.

Exactly, we had chances when SC made those subs.. although I would of kept Agard on because of his pace you can't blame SC for Pack not clear his lines for the 3rd goal. We also had chances to make it 4-1, but they weren't taken.

[spudski]

The same tactics that took us from bottom to top half last season and top of the league by 5 points this.

Knock the manager because he doesn't get it right EVERY time? Ridiculous.

And he didn't invite Fleetwood on to us, we had chances ourselves after the substitutions.

Blimey mate... I really do think you've not read the OP correctly or how it was implied.

 

Why can't he discuss tactics that were carried out during this one match?

 

He's not knocking the manager perse...just discussing what he thought was in his opinion a tactical error.

 

He has actually praised the manager as we all have in numerous posts.

 

So do you actually think he got his tactics right yesterday at 3-2...and if so...why so?

[Kid in the Riot]

SC's substitutions have been frustrating at times. He certainly seems conservative and waits a long time to make changes. The fact he doesn't trust JET to be on the pitch for more than 10 mins, even when chasing a game, is annoying.

 

BUT in the interests of balance I think he got his substitutions right in the following games: Sheff U (A), COLU (H), Notts C (A) and Scunny (H).

 

The games that I felt he could of acted quicker and been more positive were Orient (H) and possibly Rochdale (A).

 

So overall he ain't doing too bad on this front.

[NickJ]

I personally would have kept Agard on, but equally I would feel quite embarrassed had I described the substitutions as inept. We were superb but Fleetwood are a decent team and shit happens.

We were a minute from three points conceded to a decent goal albeit after a momentary individual lapse. I don't recall the OP praising Cotterill when he brought JET on and we scored a late winner against Notts County, or when Cunningham came on and scored immediately.

Overall I trust the judgment of the man who has turned this club around, and to knock the occasional substitution which doesn't work out is ridiculous.

[AshtonGreat]

It seems many who were their agree with the OP.

Even SC has said he didn't enjoy the last quarter of the game.

Did SC not try to shore up the situation and invite Fleetwood at us?

Cunninghams goal came about as he is a wingback and we were playing offensive football at the time. So that has nothing to do with yesterdays change in tactics.

 

The point the OP is trying to make, is that he thought SC got it wrong by inviting Fleetwood at us.

He is talking about tactics...not about 'dross that went on before'....again...why bring that up? He's talking about tactics...

I'm with Nick J on this one. There's nothing wrong with constructively criticising a manager's tactics, but using words like 'inept' and 'awful' when we have one of the best records in all four divisions is, frankly, absurd and a little bit ungrateful in my opinion. The fact that, as some have said, many of the travelling fans agreed with this opinion leads me to wonder whether they're a negative influence.

[Merrick's Marvels]

If you'd have gone you'd be feeling the same as me and the 884 others.

 

Don't presume to speak on my behalf about anything, ever, matey.

[spudski]

I personally would have kept Agard on, but equally I would feel quite embarrassed had I described the substitutions as inept. We were superb but Fleetwood are a decent team and shit happens.

We were a minute from three points conceded to a decent goal albeit after a momentary individual lapse. I don't recall the OP praising Cotterill when he brought JET on and we scored a late winner against Notts County, or when Cunningham came on and scored immediately.

Overall I trust the judgment of the man who has turned this club around, and to knock the occasional substitution which doesn't work out is ridiculous.

Fair point...In keeping Agard on as you had wished, you are implying that we should have kept a more offensive option...not as defensive as SC did. I presume Agard was taken off because he was knackered and on a booking.

Perhaps Burns would have been a better option to replace Agard...fresh fast legs and an offensive outlet.

 

Perhaps the OP's use of the words 'inept and awful' could have been changed with 'questionable'?

 

I also don't think he is not trusting SC's judgement long term...just a question on the tactics used yesterday...something that is discussed everyday by media and pundits after every game played...

 

Nothing wrong in discussing tactics and possible errors as well as good tactics...surely?

[Mike Litoris]

The same tactics that took us from bottom to top half last season and top of the league by 5 points this.

Knock the manager because he doesn't get it right EVERY time? Ridiculous.

And he didn't invite Fleetwood on to us, we had chances ourselves after the substitutions.

I think you miss the point, completely. Maybe Wolfy's post was a touch overstated but there is an issue with Cotterill's subs this season. It's not a major one, but it should be addressed and discussed.

It's like the boards running of the club, just because it's going well at the moment does that mean they cannot improve? Of course not.

It's about striving to be better, and at the moment that is one side of the game that at the moment Cotterill is falling a little short. It's a long season, and those points could be vital come the end of the season.

I know many set their stall out at the start of Cott's reign to back him to the hilt. No problem with that, but sometimes he's gonna get it wrong and should never be above criticism. This forum, and football would be a dull place if he was.

[Robin1988]

Not ridiculous at all, we did drop 2 points when in a commanding position.

 

SC has done a great job but his defensive subs is his Achilles heel at this point in time.

And how is that? Before yesterday we'd dropped points from winning positions once, and that was when the Rochdale equaliser was scored 10 minutes after half time.

 

In fact, last season under SC we only dropped six points from winning positions from December to May, so to call it an 'Achilles heel' is somewhat dramatic.