Ange Postecoglou

Just out of curiosity it was 0-0 for 66 minutes. When exactly in that 66 minutes would have you made the change, and who would it have been?

 

Sorry that's not what I meant. I was replying to somebody who said that we created more chances against Dundee and St Mirren.

I agree that I don't think the quality or quantity of their opportunities were better than ours.

 

Between 55 - 60 mins I, like most of this forum, was screaming for the change.

I would've went Rogic and Soro for Edouard and Turnbull, like Ange eventually did.

We could all see what was coming and inevitably Ange waited until after it was too late to make the change.

 

We couldnt get out our half 2nd half, changes should have come 55-60mins as it was obvious.

 

I dunno mate. It's been said but I don't trust anyone on our bench to make the impact required. With more depth, I'm sure we would've seen things changed quicker.

 

And who would have replaced with whom?

Soro was no better than McGregor, arguably worse. Rogic is clearly well off the pace and even with a tired defense managed 2-3 touches in the game. Kyogo going centrally exploited the tiring defense, but do you think he could have done that for 90 minutes?

The squad is threadbare.

Conceding one goal away to the Champions wasn't the issue. Not scoring at the other end was.

 

We saw the change in the game once it happened, the only issue was by that time we were panicking and snatching at our chances because we were losing.

I don't think there's any excuse or anywhere to hide to be honest. Everyone knew the change and Ange obviously agrees since he made it too. The only issue was it came too late.

 

Edouard for Rogic so Kyogo central, was obvious.

 

Exactly.

It's weird that people are arguing against this as a defence for Ange.. when Ange himself made this change.

The problem was it indisputably came too late. That's on Ange. Period. He learns and we move on.

 

It wasn't so much that the subs made a difference. They sat back again after the goal, much as they did the first half. Soro, Rogic and the young boy are are hardly quality substitutes that changed the game.

Moving Kyogo centrally was the key difference. In hindsight given that how dogshit Odsonne was, not only was it the wrong move to play him centrally, but it was the wrong move to play him at all.

 

I am struggling to remember what Rogic actually did.

Kyogo centrally yes, but I've already explained why I think Odsonne was selected there.

 

Not so much what he did but what Kyogo did and can do centrally.

 

Honestly slippy has had years to build that team and Ange has had 8 weeks,we played well for half the game and if not for eddy the 30 million pound flop we would have gotten something from the game. Two more players in and our injured players on the bench and we will be much stronger going forward.

 

Make up your mind mate. You're saying the subs didn't make a difference then saying the key difference was subbing Edouard and moving Kyogo central.

If Rogic didn't do anything that's still more than Turnbull, who was so knackered he was just running about fouling them and getting in the way. A sub doesn't need to be 'quality', it can just be about replacing a player that is having a shocker, which Turnbull was.

 

Not really. They sat back after the goal. The one change that made a difference was Odsonne off and Kyogo in his spot Its not like there was any other option to go centrally.

Kyogo wasn't a sub. It was a positional change. Soro Rogic and Montgomery were the subs that came on. What exactly did they do?

Don't get me started on Odsonne. He absolutely * the team over. After this debacle he should be nowhere near the squad let alone the starting 11. Get what you can for him and move him on.

 

Yeah and Edouard scores and Ange is a master tactician for changing it up with Kyogo out wide...

The centre backs would have monstered him as a central striker, which is why Odsonne was picked at 9.

 

Mate what the actual * are you arguing here?

You're saying the subs didn't make a difference, but then admitting Kyogo in the middle for Edouard which was facilitated by the Edouard -> Rogic sub was a difference maker.

I shouldn't need to explain this but see when people say things like, "We need Rogic on for Edouard", it's not just because they want Rogic on the field, it's the other changes that result from the sub, i.e. Kyogo going central. That's what people mean when they talk about substitutions, it's so common it goes without saying for * sake.

 

The argument is the subs ie Rogic should have been earlier ie before the goal. There's two parts to that sub: Kyogi goes centrally, Rogic on behind him on in the middle. If that happened earlier in the heat of the game, you would have been massacred in the middle, and you'd be down 2, maybe three, not one, at 70 minutes. Rogic is so far off the pace when the heat is on its not funny.

The move to play Kyogo centrally provided two opportunities against a tired defense. None were better than Kyogo out wide to Eduard in the first half.

 

I would argue that the game shifted momentum more because they scored rather than our changes. No way of knowing but I don't think making those changes alone would've got us out of pressure.

 

This.
We've got a massive amount of improvement to come, we matched them for large parts of the game when (we know) we were playing badly.

Hopefully ange has someone in mind to replace edouard, he's done and needs to * off. Still have injured players to come in and we will aren't playing as ange would like.

I think Hart would've got a bit of a spray for his clearances, there were numerous chances where under alot of pressure we could've played out of the back And put pressure on them for pressing too high, that's where anges teams normally put pressure on the opposition, it's a risky proposition, one where you don't see that kind of risk by other managers but the rewards are huge if you do it right.
It'll come with time.