Ani, well said indeed.

Intensity is vital to how we play. And when intensity drops off you’re in trouble and it’s backs to the walls. That’s why it’s generally the attackers that get rotated in/out the most. Because they’re the ones who have to apply the energy to press make runs and give us the best chance of keeping the ball out of harms way.

pacing yourself to play 90 is no good either. All in from minute one until you’re spent and then it’s someone else’s turn

Players are also given targets. KPI’s if you will, when it comes to physical output in a game. X amounts of sprint, X amount of KM’s run. Those KPI’s set a standard for what you need to achieve to give yourself the best chance of winning games of football. Different clubs use different measurables. Some will be purely on running harder and faster than the oppo’s, other clubs will be about where you need to touch the football, most will use both.

Away at QPR in our first away game at this level for donkeys years, our would have been more like the former then the latter

The thing is SS does both (semi pre-planned and reactive). Theres room and a need for both in our game.

We are not talking Evatt’s regular formulaic subs on 60 mins here.

Now we are on the shop floor with the term KPI manufactured by bone idol HR managers who have never done the job in their life. Sorry you cannot get a Doctor or anyone in sports science and get then to relay information to a footballer how many sprints he should be making in a time period be it a half or sixty mins.

Guarantee Mcatee ran further against Preston than he did against QPR because he was in the game more. Can you imagine the scenario SS shouting at macca at half time for not chasing the defender into the corner.......What happened......I have already done my five sprints gaffer

1 hour ago, boltonboris said:

Ani, well said indeed.

Intensity is vital to how we play. And when intensity drops off you’re in trouble and it’s backs to the walls. That’s why it’s generally the attackers that get rotated in/out the most. Because they’re the ones who have to apply the energy to press make runs and give us the best chance of keeping the ball out of harms way.

pacing yourself to play 90 is no good either. All in from minute one until you’re spent and then it’s someone else’s turn

The defenders were the busiest against QPR.

Irrespective of what figures say on analysis, in actuality, so many subs don't necessarily work.

Sometimes they change things for the better, others they disrupt the rhythm.

Taking a broader view; all this technology which indicates when a player may be about to drop off or showing signs of a physical problem us all well and good.

We do seem to get a number of injuries though. Some will be unpredictable ones through game action, others aren't.

There is also the in-game management too, and seeing a game as it is, and not purely through the eyes of stats on a screen.

I don’ think that SS and his team a wedded to all these subs entirely, and do see what is going on, nevertheless their tends to be a certain pattern

21 minutes ago, masi 51 said:

Now we are on the shop floor with the term KPI manufactured by bone idol HR managers who have never done the job in their life. Sorry you cannot get a Doctor or anyone in sports science and get then to relay information to a footballer how many sprints he should be making in a time period be it a half or sixty mins.

Guarantee Mcatee ran further against Preston than he did against QPR because he was in the game more. Can you imagine the scenario SS shouting at macca at half time for not chasing the defender into the corner.......What happened......I have already done my five sprints gaffer

I hope this back and forth doesn’t go on too long it really doesn’t have to if you listen and accept my point.

There’s two things here.

You and plenty of others have the valid opinion (which I don’t agree with) that science, data etc tells us little about what managers should do in the game, be it with subs, tactics, corners etc. that’s fine you have your opinion.

Then there’s the separate debate (which used aspects of the above), I was having with @Johnnyrotten about SSs use of subs.

I was first of all critical about him leaving injured players on, but then went on to give him credit for how he combines the modern approach without being over reliant on it. There’s strong evidence that he’s good at both semi-pre-planning subs and alternatively being effective at reactionary subs and changing his mind based on what he’s seeing play out in front of him.

4 minutes ago, desperado said:

I hope this back and forth doesn’t go on too long it really doesn’t have to if you listen and accept my point.

There’s two things here.

You and plenty of others have the valid opinion (which I don’t agree with) that science, data etc tells us little about what managers should do in the game, be it with subs, tactics, corners etc. that’s fine you have your opinion.

Then there’s the separate debate (which used aspects of the above), I was having with @Johnnyrotten about SSs use of subs.

I was first of all critical about him leaving injured players on, but then went on to give him credit for how he combines the modern approach without being over reliant on it. There’s strong evidence that he’s good at both semi-pre-planning subs and alternatively being effective at reactionary subs and changing his mind based on what he’s seeing play out in front of him.

Back and forth wont go on as long as you accept my point......Really??

Just healthy debate nothing more

SS tactically is as astute a manager and you can include big Sam in that, that this club has had.

It does not mean he gets everything right or certainly his backroom staff tell him. Just because it is the way now does not make it right. When it comes to injuries i certainly cannot pass comment and would not be critical of the medical advice he is given during a game so on that i cannot say anything

57 minutes ago, masi 51 said:

Now we are on the shop floor with the term KPI manufactured by bone idol HR managers who have never done the job in their life. Sorry you cannot get a Doctor or anyone in sports science and get then to relay information to a footballer how many sprints he should be making in a time period be it a half or sixty mins.

Guarantee Mcatee ran further against Preston than he did against QPR because he was in the game more. Can you imagine the scenario SS shouting at macca at half time for not chasing the defender into the corner.......What happened......I have already done my five sprints gaffer

I haven't checked, but I'd wager it would be pretty even in terms of McAtee's output.. Usually you run more when you have LESS of the ball, not more of it.. Which is why teams look to dominate the possession and why we scored so many late goals last season.

Like it or not Masi, these are the realities of modern football and whilst eye tests are still crucial, stats and data cannot be ignored.

12 minutes ago, masi 51 said:

Back and forth wont go on as long as you accept my point......Really??

Just healthy debate nothing more

SS tactically is as astute a manager and you can include big Sam in that, that this club has had.

It does not mean he gets everything right or certainly his backroom staff tell him. Just because it is the way now does not make it right. When it comes to injuries i certainly cannot pass comment and would not be critical of the medical advice he is given during a game so on that i cannot say anything

I read the ‘accept my point’ and thought , strange one, but I think it is just acknowledging we have different opinions on the situation, which is fine, no need to prove one or other is right. I might be wrong…..again

The main thing from my point of view is that as fans we do not have access to to any where as much info as the management team be that data in game, what they have worked on in training and tactics for specific games. Players have this info and need to use it to be as effective as possible during their time on the pitch. As athletes being paid a lot of money they should be able to match their performance to the requirements so different levels of playing 60 minutes rather than 90. So in your example if SS bollocks McAtee for not doing something it should only happen if there is information that shows he should be capable of making that run.

Obviously not as mechanical as F1 but in game data plays a massive part of the sport, whereas in F1 they can see tyre degradation so will change tyres before performance drops off a cliff the data our team will get will show when a player might hit the wall.

There was a story big Sam told about a player coming to him saying ‘I played well on Saturday, I got 8/10 in the Sun player ratings’ , Dam used this as an example of why actual data not opinions is what we started to use

1 minute ago, Ani said:

I read the ‘accept my point’ and thought , strange one,

Fair enough not the right way to phrase my opening. 👍

12 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

I haven't checked, but I'd wager it would be pretty even in terms of McAtee's output.. Usually you run more when you have LESS of the ball, not more of it.. Which is why teams look to dominate the possession and why we scored so many late goals last season.

Like it or not Masi, these are the realities of modern football and whilst eye tests are still crucial, stats and data cannot be ignored.

Football right at the top is to blame for all this data bollox. Nothing wrong with my eyes i watched the City game yesterday....Ten people each with a laptop watching every move plus a Referee, Two linesman, Assistant Referee and numerous VAR in a studio somewhere. City keeper should have walked twice and a penalty given for assault yet nobody sees it. It then filters down and we are seeing it in the lower leagues all with there lap-tops...All trying to justify six and sometimes seven figure salaries it is not a Bolton thing it is football in general being conned

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with your eyes, which I said that the Eye Test is still crucial... But so is data and statistics.. Biomechanics etc.. I don't think anybody is being conned. Everyone wants to win. And using available data is an enormous part of that. Allardyce used it to our advantage.. Data and science reduced the gap between us and teams with budgets that dwarfed ours.

We move with the times, or we get left behind.

City are one of the worlds' top clubs. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for us

Think there is a point in every business where data has essential usages and equally there is a point where too much data just gets in the way.

Did nt we sign Reiss Greenidge based on data ? Then 2 months later we were watching Declan John showing him how to take a throw in before a game.

Just now, Ani said:

Think there is a point in every business where data has essential usages and equally there is a point where too much data just gets in the way.

Did nt we sign Reiss Greenidge based on data ? Then 2 months later we were watching Declan John showing him how to take a throw in before a game.

"best athlete in the league" I seem to remember.. but couldn't trap a bag of cement. A very good example of why an eye test is still to be used! Tobias Phoenix, man... FFS

It's evident we have "starters" and "finishers", it's not just a 11-man game anymore.

3 hours ago, Ani said:

Sorry but if you think the fans really know as much about this as the professionals the fact quite a few of our fans on this thread did not know about the substitution ’ window’ pretty much blows this apart.

On the pre planned subs these happen as over 90 minutes fatigue sets in and bringing on fresh legs for those positions where most running is required is common sense. So McAtee for instance knows he might get 60 minutes so can run harder for those 60 minutes than he would if he thought he was playing for 90. Of course he could last 90 minutes but if we have fresh legs why not use them ( unless the alternative is totally shit). To highlight the point the 400m world record is 43 seconds, the 4x100m world record is 38.6 seconds. Fresh legs make a difference.

The management team have live data on players and watch them all week in training so know when a players levels are dropping off. Pre plannned is not simply taking a player off at the same time every week it is also the planning with the players that will very likely be coming off so they manage their levels in game. The data also highlights where fatigue is likely to lead injury (rather than impact injuries for Stephenson and RR)

Personally hate us having 11 back for corners. The logic is more players back denies the attacking team space but it also means any clearances just come straight back. So why not leave Gale up front ? The flip side is that Gale is hardly going to hold a ball up so invariably it comes back anyway. Last year one team v Arsenal were leaving 2 or 3 upfront to counter Arsenals success on set pieces. (Can not remember who but it was a Sky game)

Quite a long response and not all aimed specifically at you, but I am very much in the @desperado camp in that pre planned subs are a sensible part of how a team manages a squad of players over 90 minutes if you have 16 players you can use it would seem daft to only plan around the first 11. But some flexibility.

Final point on the fans know best look at play semi at Bradford I was shouting at the telly when he bought Simons and Mcatee on for EE and Burstow as like for like subs when I thought we needed to shore things up, then those 2 combined with the other sub Gale for the goal. SS attitude was that we just needed to execute better so fresh legs made that happen. Even I am not right all the time 🤣🤣😎😉

A fair response, no problem.

Just to clarify I'm a million miles from saying fans know best. I've got loads of respect for SS and the coaching team, reasons for subs etc. 99% of the time I'm happy for them to get on with it and I don't think I generally criticise subs, especially as I rate most players so anyone coming on is normally a good player. I did question leaving Stephenson (or any injured player on) but certainly not in a "I know best" way, there's a difference between that and an opinion that I'd have taken a different view.

I'm not sure how some fans not knowing the substitution rules blows anything apart? So if a fan sat 20 rows from me doesn't know some recent additions to substitution rules, the views of me and the other 19 fans sat between us are irrelevant?

But yes I do think they've got it wrong on the 11 back at corners, just as I think a Russell Martin team gets it wrong when they consistently play passes across their own box, or Tuchel brings on 10 defenders or whatever, there are times I think they are making decisions worse than the average fan would make.

That's a long way from we know better generally, I'm referring to specific tactics that are questionable, because the fact is they don't get everything right. And its not even a criticism, its an observation, I respect the things they get right and the tough task they have.

8 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

A fair response, no problem.

Just to clarify I'm a million miles from saying fans know best. I've got loads of respect for SS and the coaching team, reasons for subs etc. 99% of the time I'm happy for them to get on with it and I don't think I generally criticise subs, especially as I rate most players so anyone coming on is normally a good player. I did question leaving Stephenson (or any injured player on) but certainly not in a "I know best" way, there's a difference between that and an opinion that I'd have taken a different view.

I'm not sure how some fans not knowing the substitution rules blows anything apart? So if a fan sat 20 rows from me doesn't know some recent additions to substitution rules, the views of me and the other 19 fans sat between us are irrelevant?

But yes I do think they've got it wrong on the 11 back at corners, just as I think a Russell Martin team gets it wrong when they consistently play passes across their own box, or Tuchel brings on 10 defenders or whatever, there are times I think they are making decisions worse than the average fan would make.

That's a long way from we know better generally, I'm referring to specific tactics that are questionable, because the fact is they don't get everything right. And its not even a criticism, its an observation, I respect the things they get right and the tough task they have.

I've said it before but there is no chance the correct control sample analysis has been done on bringing everyone back from corners that takes into account 2nd, 3rd etc phase attacks from no pressure outside the box, free shots from the edge of the box and offset in reduction of counter attacking chances.

It's just a simple calculation of less chance of a free header if you pack the box. And it's flawed imo because of all those other factors and that attacking teams are also allowed to adapt their corners and free kicks if everyone is back for the defence. It's managerial trend group think that we see on a lot of stuff. Some team will start having success leaving 1 or 2 up the pitch and we'll see a shift

14 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

That 2nd goal v PNE - McAtee and Gale at their best - simply doesn't happen if we'd been defending a corner instead of a move from open play, they would have been on the 6 yard box instead of near the halfway line.

For some reason if its a corner we have to defend with 11 men, but if its open play we're happy to defend with 6 or 7 back.

Here’s one for you @Johnnyrotten 😊

Alternatively and playing devils advocate, in that last minute when Preston should have scored, would you rather have been facing a corner with 11 men back (something which we’d coped with very well most of the game) or an open play ball into the box which had us exposed at the far post, a similar scenario to the one they’d just scored from 3 mins earlier?

5 minutes ago, desperado said:

Here’s one for you @Johnnyrotten 😊

Alternatively and playing devils advocate, in that last minute when Preston should have scored, would you rather have been facing a corner with 11 men back (something which we’d coped with very well most of the game) or an open play ball into the box which had us exposed at the far post, a similar scenario to the one they’d just scored from 3 mins earlier?

A min to go i would have had 10 back and one on the half way line to break and get a third goal.......Having 11 back did not stop them getting that clear chance.

On more than one occasion last season we give away penalties by players who struggle to defend ie Mcatee, ACD and Gale these should be our outlets

And if we are 2-1 up in the last min get them off and get defenders on

14 minutes ago, masi 51 said:

A min to go i would have had 10 back and one on the half way line to break and get a third goal.......Having 11 back did not stop them getting that clear chance.

On more than one occasion last season we give away penalties by players who struggle to defend ie Mcatee, ACD and Gale these should be our outlets

And if we are 2-1 up in the last min get them off and get defenders on

On this debate, I can, as a fan, see the attraction, and indeed the effectiveness (couple of sides tried it last year didn’t they?) of leaving men up on a corner, especially when you need a goal.

I do however, also understand the 11 back too (as long as one of them has the man on the edge of the box marked!) in nullifying goal-scoring opportunities.

1 hour ago, Johnnyrotten said:

A fair response, no problem.

Just to clarify I'm a million miles from saying fans know best. I've got loads of respect for SS and the coaching team, reasons for subs etc. 99% of the time I'm happy for them to get on with it and I don't think I generally criticise subs, especially as I rate most players so anyone coming on is normally a good player. I did question leaving Stephenson (or any injured player on) but certainly not in a "I know best" way, there's a difference between that and an opinion that I'd have taken a different view.

I'm not sure how some fans not knowing the substitution rules blows anything apart? So if a fan sat 20 rows from me doesn't know some recent additions to substitution rules, the views of me and the other 19 fans sat between us are irrelevant?

But yes I do think they've got it wrong on the 11 back at corners, just as I think a Russell Martin team gets it wrong when they consistently play passes across their own box, or Tuchel brings on 10 defenders or whatever, there are times I think they are making decisions worse than the average fan would make.

That's a long way from we know better generally, I'm referring to specific tactics that are questionable, because the fact is they don't get everything right. And its not even a criticism, its an observation, I respect the things they get right and the tough task they have.

To be honest I thought your initial comments about fans was relating to subs. Looking back you had ‘sneakily’ 😉😎👍highlighted the bit about men back on corners which I missed.

That is a subjective debate so agree that anyone is as likely to right on that. I see both views on that your mate Macca I think is dangerous when defending so leaving him up front with Gale every so often would at least give teams something to think about. Thinking about it with all the tactical variations in the game why not do it every so often in a game ?

The area I think teams fall into a trap with is when leading late on and keeping too many back this normally leads to the defence getting the ball and straight on the attack and more pressure.

The fact I thought original comment was based on subs, specifically the ‘planned/semi planned discussion’ made my comment on lots of fans not knowing the rules pretty accurate. Add in the extra info in terms of players fatigue and tactics.

6 hours ago, boltonboris said:

Players are also given targets. KPI’s if you will, when it comes to physical output in a game. X amounts of sprint, X amount of KM’s run. Those KPI’s set a standard for what you need to achieve to give yourself the best chance of winning games of football. Different clubs use different measurables. Some will be purely on running harder and faster than the oppo’s, other clubs will be about where you need to touch the football, most will use both.

Away at QPR in our first away game at this level for donkeys years, our would have been more like the former then the latter

All that may be 100% true but god its depressing to think they have to do x amounts of sprints.

Matt Le Tissier and Frankie Worthy would be dropped immediately. Replaced by Vic and Dan.

2 hours ago, Stig said:

I've said it before but there is no chance the correct control sample analysis has been done on bringing everyone back from corners that takes into account 2nd, 3rd etc phase attacks from no pressure outside the box, free shots from the edge of the box and offset in reduction of counter attacking chances.

It's just a simple calculation of less chance of a free header if you pack the box. And it's flawed imo because of all those other factors and that attacking teams are also allowed to adapt their corners and free kicks if everyone is back for the defence. It's managerial trend group think that we see on a lot of stuff. Some team will start having success leaving 1 or 2 up the pitch and we'll see a shift

Did you see that clear chance PNE had in the first half from a rare corner. I think we had all 11 in the box but am happy to be corrected, then a PNE player made a run from 10 yards outside the box and had a free header from about 15 yards, on another day its a goal. He wasn't even close to being marked, because he wasn't in the box, I will never get to grips with players outside the box being perceived as not being a threat during or immediately after corners, but if its during open play the manager's going ballistic if a player is allowed to get such space.

17 hours ago, Dr. Feelgood said:

That, though you can substitute 5 players, you can only do it in a maximum of 3 events.

You can sub all 5 at once if you wish, but you can't bring one on 5 times.

It's been the way since it became 5 subs. I guess it's to reduce the time wasted by substitutions.

I get the time wasting element but just let refs add on all the time taken in making the substitution at the end

Seems harsh if you've made four subs and used

21 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

All that may be 100% true but god its depressing to think they have to do x amounts of sprints.

Matt Le Tissier and Frankie Worthy would be dropped immediately. Replaced by Vic and Dan.

Le Tissier never it big because he was a lazy cunt

He could score cracking goals but if he went to a big club then he would have to run around

He stayed at Southampton as a big fish in a small pond, doing what he did brilliantly

And the locals loved him which he might not get if he moved

How many England caps did he get?

2 hours ago, desperado said:

Here’s one for you @Johnnyrotten 😊

Alternatively and playing devils advocate, in that last minute when Preston should have scored, would you rather have been facing a corner with 11 men back (something which we’d coped with very well most of the game) or an open play ball into the box which had us exposed at the far post, a similar scenario to the one they’d just scored from 3 mins earlier?

A good question! An immediate thought is that when its 96th minute etc, I don't think any fan has a big problem with an "all back, just boot it out" approach. Trying to create a break is out of the window by then. So I'd rather face a corner, because we can get set and mark everyone up.

PNE had 5 men in or on the very edge of the box when the winger crossed it. We had 3 defenders in the box, 3 about 5 yards outside, not marking anyone. I'm not trying to make it sound simple, in open play its not always possible to think so quickly (v good break by PNE), but I'd want a minimum of their attackers marked: 5 attackers = 5 defenders, each picking up a man. Ideally plus one spare, same as I'd do at corners (rather than several spare that we employ, without marking free men on the edge).

We managed to find ourselves outnumbered around the penalty spot at such a crucial time, I hadn't realised at the time how poor our defensive shape was. If it had been a corner, all 11 back without a doubt and I'd be OK with that in the 96th minute. Open play, just 3 defenders. I just can't explain the difference when the objective is the same, aside from the "offside" option that isn't a factor at corners (but is at free kicks).