Following a discussion with Black Starr the other day:
People sometimes talk about substitutions being predictable, how it's the often the same players coming on or going off. Sometimes they become so predictable that people become accusatory toward certain managers that their subs are the "same old changes". (I recall Pearson in particular getting this sort of criticism.) But is this actually a problem?
A few seasons back, we expected Shinji Okazaki to get subbed after around 60 or 70 minutes. He would charge around, expending energy and making a nuisance of himself, then we would make the appropriate change for the final quarter of the match. Often this would mean Ulloa coming on and playing a similar sort of role, but could mean another midfielder or a winger. Either way, nobody looked on with any surprise or confusion when Okazaki's number came up.
Is Okazaki a mere exception? Did we accept it because of the sheer amount of energy we saw him expend for an hour? I ask because there's more consternation these days when we see the same numbers appearing on the sub board to be removed from the pitch. We know who they will be, depending on who started:
Iheanacho
Perez
Praet
Barnes
Tielemans
While we don't think of any of the above as lazy, they aren't players we associate with the kind of gigantic workrate that we apply to Okazaki. (Albrighton maybe, and that's why I haven't included him in the list.) In particular, it often gets noted how Praet is being subbed when the general opinion is that people wouldn't do it. But is that because he's run his race rather than anything to do with performance? Is the reason we don't tend to see him and Tielemans start together not because of ability or coordination issues, but because the manager doesn't believe either will last 90 minutes? If so, is that a problem?
I think it's worth noting at this point that Maddison has elevated himself from this group this season. Last season he, too, would rarely last the full 90 and run out of steam after 70 or 75 minutes. This season he looks like he's improved his stamina and is lasting the the full match a lot more. (At least he appears to be. I don't have the stats and much of this is anecdotal.)
Ultimately, my question is: Should we consider some players to simply not be full 90 minute players? Should we accept that, if we see certain names on the teamsheet, we should simply accept that they will be subbed at or around 65 minutes and that that is part of a game plan that the manager will have considered?
Or, alternatively, is Brendan Rodgers simply not appreciating Dennis Praet's value to the team?
Players who get subbed
posted on 6/7/20
Tricky one this Dunge. I think some cases are ok, some are not.
The ok scenarios:
1. A player is asked to get us to a fast start and to control the game. Win it in the first 60 if you like. They’re asked not to conserve any energy, close down and influence from minute 1. Barnes falls in to this category for me as did Okazaki.
2. A player is asked to control the game. Get our plan A working well and keeping us in control of the ball. When plan A is not working, they are hooked, like Perez, Albrighton, and Tielemans.
3. Then you get the difficult group. Nacho and Praet. These two players desire all their talents still don’t look like players than can last or affect a game for 90 minutes. Praet especially looks great until his energy lags. Work for him on the training pitch to get his levels up.
Where is see the problem are points 1 and 2. I’m not happy that plan A is any longer working, and when it’s not, that the likes of Tielemans, Albrighton, Barnes and especially (people will know my opinions on this) Perez.
For me, those players are getting hooked because they’re no affecting the game. That is our current issue.
I liked the way we finished the game against palace. We looked organised and in control at the back. Barnes and Vardy looked lively and problematic going forward. Yes you could argue it was because Palace were chasing the game but it felt more than that for me.
So I don’t think we have many Okazaki’s at the minute. Players are getting subbed because they’re not influencing the game. Up to Rodgers and the players to both fix that tactically, and with performance levels.
posted on 6/7/20
I think I'll really worry when Vardy becomes one of those Players who can't last 90 Minutes !
posted on 7/7/20
Which is why it was incredibly heartening to see Vards score a signature goal in minute 94 on Saturday.
To Dunge's original points, usually those listed are being replaced mostly as a tactical substitution, bringing on Praet, Mendy or Hamza to shore up the midfield, or Ian, Harvey and Gray because we need to score.
Occasionally Tielemans has been pulled because he's tired, although that doesn't seem to have been quite as much of an issue recently.
There is of course a big omission from the list, the aforementioned Gray. He seems to have a cycle of sometimes impressing from the bench to earn himself a start, then being subbed because he's then been absolutely ineffective. That is just my feeling and is also not based on any detailed analysis.