Lincoln underestimated or Pearson not wanting to progress?

[Supersonic Robin]

I actually think people are being a bit harsh re the team selection. IMO it made sense to rest some players ahead of the Watford game on Saturday, and in doing so give some game time to a few youngsters/a few players who are out of form. Resting players in a League Cup game is hardly revolutionary or controversial.

Besides, with the exceptions of Bajic, Low, and Kadji, it was a team full of players who could be considered close to the "first XI" and could feasibly start league games for us. It was a strong enough side (on paper) to win the match. After the team was announced last night, was anyone really thinking "Wow, how weak! We'll probably lose 3-1 tonight"? I certainly wasn't.

Also consider that Lincoln didn't appear to be a strong opponent. They're 13th in L1, and had lost to Chippenham Town at the weekend.

Edited November 9, 2022 by Supersonic Robin

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, Supersonic Robin said:

I actually think people are being a bit harsh re the team selection. IMO it made sense to rest some players ahead of the Watford game on Saturday, and in doing so give some game time to a few youngsters/a few players who are out of form. Resting players in a League Cup game is hardly revolutionary or controversial.

Besides, with the exceptions of Bajic, Low, and Kadji, it was a team full of players who could be considered close to the "first XI" and could feasibly start league games for us. It was a strong enough side (on paper) to win the match. After the team was announced last night, was anyone really thinking "Wow, how weak! We'll probably lose 3-1 tonight"? I certainly wasn't.

Also consider that Lincoln didn't appear to be a strong opponent. They're 13th in L1, and had lost to Chippenham Town at the weekend.

What it shows is at pro level you can't take liberties with teams from any division. Mental mistake to make. If you go too weak, particularly down the middle, you get done because at the end of the day you are playing against a team of pro footballers, one or two of who will be on their way up the leagues and so will have talent. Their first goal shows that you can play at League 1 level and still strike a ball when an inexperienced kid doesn't close down quickly enough and then runs out of the way to avoid getting one in the mush. The second goal, you can't do what Low did against semi-pro's let alone League 1 players and the third goal just proved that we literally cannot defend set pieces and it's not getting any better..............or at least not without O'Leary between the sticks anyway. I do have to ask whether Pearson was sending out a message with that team selection because I can't, for the life of me, believe that he thought that team would have no problems winning the game. If you put that XI out against Watford you would be looking at a 6 or 7 goal mauling and he would know that.

[phantom]

2 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

I actually think people are being a bit harsh re the team selection. IMO it made sense to rest some players ahead of the Watford game on Saturday, and in doing so give some game time to a few youngsters/a few players who are out of form. Resting players in a League Cup game is hardly revolutionary or controversial.

Besides, with the exceptions of Bajic, Low, and Kadji, it was a team full of players who could be considered close to the "first XI" and could feasibly start league games for us. It was a strong enough side (on paper) to win the match. After the team was announced last night, was anyone really thinking "Wow, how weak! We'll probably lose 3-1 tonight"? I certainly wasn't.

Also consider that Lincoln didn't appear to be a strong opponent. They're 13th in L1, and had lost to Chippenham Town at the weekend.

Why are we resting players that are short of confidence?

Give them the chance to shine against a lower league club and boost their confidence

After Saturday they have three weeks without a game anyway so resting anyone was simply ludicrous 

[Supersonic Robin]

12 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

(1) What it shows is at pro level you can't take liberties with teams from any division. Mental mistake to make. If you go too weak, particularly down the middle, you get done because at the end of the day you are playing against a team of pro footballers, one or two of who will be on their way up the leagues and so will have talent. Their first goal shows that you can play at League 1 level and still strike a ball when an inexperienced kid doesn't close down quickly enough and then runs out of the way to avoid getting one in the mush. The second goal, you can't do what Low did against semi-pro's let alone League 1 players and the third goal just proved that we literally cannot defend set pieces and it's not getting any better..............or at least not without O'Leary between the sticks anyway. I do have to ask whether Pearson was sending out a message with that team selection because (2) I can't, for the life of me, believe that he thought that team would have no problems winning the game. If you put that XI out against Watford you would be looking at a 6 or 7 goal mauling and he would know that.

(1) Agree we need to respect the strengths of all opposition, though IMO it was principally the players that seemed too complacent (rather than the manager, though of course he takes some responsibility). We didn't look especially engaged in the match last night to me. Perhaps the players were assuming they just had to show up in order to win the game, and hence didn't fully immerse themselves in the match mentally and physically?

(2) I'm still gonna push back on this one a bit. It's easy to say the team was too weak in retrospect, but how many people genuinely looked at the team at 6:45pm last night and thought "That team is far too weak. Lincoln will comfortably beat us tonight"?. I'll admit I didn't think that, and I doubt many other people honestly thought that too. Pearson obviously has to take some responsibility, but I do also feel he's been let down by what should have been a reasonably competent starting XI.

For reference, I'll post a screenshot of the starting XI who beat Wycombe 3-1 in the previous round. The big difference is the introduction of Bajic and Low, but they're similar "styles" of starting XI in terms of strength.

Probably fair to say that compared to our lineup vs Lincoln: Massengo -> Weimann is an upgrade, Tanner & Bentley -> Low & Bajic is a notable downgrade, and the rest of the team is at a fairly similar level?

[Numero Uno]

6 minutes ago, Supersonic Robin said:

(1) Agree we need to respect the strengths of all opposition, though IMO it was principally the players that seemed too complacent (rather than the manager, though of course he takes some responsibility). We didn't look especially engaged in the match last night to me. Perhaps the players were assuming they just had to show up in order to win the game, and hence didn't fully immerse themselves in the match mentally and physically?

(2) I'm still gonna push back on this one a bit. It's easy to say the team was too weak in retrospect, but how many people genuinely looked at the team at 6:45pm last night and thought "That team is far too weak. Lincoln will comfortably beat us tonight"?. I'll admit I didn't think that, and I doubt many other people honestly thought that too. Pearson obviously has to take some responsibility, but I do also feel he's been let down by what should have been a reasonably competent starting XI.

For reference, I'll post a screenshot of the starting XI who beat Wycombe 3-1 in the previous round. The big difference is the introduction of Bajic and Low, but they're similar "styles" of starting XI in terms of strength.

Probably fair to say that compared to our lineup vs Lincoln: Massengo -> Weimann is an upgrade, Tanner & Bentley -> Low & Bajic is a notable downgrade, and the rest of the team is at a fairly similar level?

We beat Wycombe RESERVES. Lincoln didn’t put out their reserves last night and that’s the difference. The spine of that team last night was incredibly weak for various reasons. If the spine is strong you can get away with weakness in other areas. We did the opposite and got tonked.

[Supersonic Robin]

15 minutes ago, phantom said:

Why are we resting players that are short of confidence?

Give them the chance to shine against a lower league club and boost their confidence

After Saturday they have three weeks without a game anyway so resting anyone was simply ludicrous 

See your point so suppose you could argue it both ways re confidence. Many of the players who started last night were relatively low on form/confidence too (hence they haven't been starting in the first XI) - they didn't exactly shine 

Think resting players ahead of the Watford game does make sense. It's a tough game and the league is of course more important. 3 weeks rest after Saturday is all well and good, but of course doesn't help with our preparation for Saturday.

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

What it shows is at pro level you can't take liberties with teams from any division. Mental mistake to make. If you go too weak, particularly down the middle, you get done because at the end of the day you are playing against a team of pro footballers, one or two of who will be on their way up the leagues and so will have talent. Their first goal shows that you can play at League 1 level and still strike a ball when an inexperienced kid doesn't close down quickly enough and then runs out of the way to avoid getting one in the mush. The second goal, you can't do what Low did against semi-pro's let alone League 1 players and the third goal just proved that we literally cannot defend set pieces and it's not getting any better..............or at least not without O'Leary between the sticks anyway. I do have to ask whether Pearson was sending out a message with that team selection because I can't, for the life of me, believe that he thought that team would have no problems winning the game. If you put that XI out against Watford you would be looking at a 6 or 7 goal mauling and he would know that.

I agree with your post and your earlier ones too, but I don’t think Nige was sending a message…it has no upside at all, all downside.  I don’t think it was like Cotts when he played 442 at Derby to prove the fans wrong!

3 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

(1) Agree we need to respect the strengths of all opposition, though IMO it was principally the players that seemed too complacent (rather than the manager, though of course he takes some responsibility). We didn't look especially engaged in the match last night to me. Perhaps the players were assuming they just had to show up in order to win the game, and hence didn't fully immerse themselves in the match mentally and physically?

(2) I'm still gonna push back on this one a bit. It's easy to say the team was too weak in retrospect, but how many people genuinely looked at the team at 6:45pm last night and thought "That team is far too weak. Lincoln will comfortably beat us tonight"?. I'll admit I didn't think that, and I doubt many other people honestly thought that too. Pearson obviously has to take some responsibility, but I do also feel he's been let down by what should have been a reasonably competent starting XI.

For reference, I'll post a screenshot of the starting XI who beat Wycombe 3-1 in the previous round. The big difference is the introduction of Bajic and Low, but they're similar "styles" of starting XI in terms of strength.

Probably fair to say that compared to our lineup vs Lincoln: Massengo -> Weimann is an upgrade, Tanner & Bentley -> Low & Bajic is a notable downgrade, and the rest of the team is at a fairly similar level?

It’s an interesting comparison in line ups.

I was all for a a combo of youngsters and resting the odd player (not gonna say I wasn’t) but that’s not to say that when I saw the line-up I didn’t have a little worry.  Why?  Mainly because I saw a load of out of form, out of match practice players alongside them.  I did have a little fear pre-kick off, but I was happy to go with it.

I’d have been mighty pissed off if Williams and James had started and picked up an injury, likewise Conway or Wells.  Pring had only just come into the side, so sensible too that he didn’t start.

So it’s a tough one.  That side above is better than last night’s on paper…but also in form / sharpness / confidence too.

Was a tough decision, Nige probably got it wrong, but I see why he did it.