Kayak substitution

[theonesmith]

Thought Stephens was having a bit of a mare (especially 1st half), I'd have taken him off before Kayal for sure.

Odd how Wilson came on and played down the right as well, what was THAT all about. He's supposed to be our poacher, we've got wingers all over the shop, and yet Wilson is the one playing wide.

I agree, our right hand side was bizarre at times today. I also think Stephens' positioning was a contributing factor to not getting the most out of the formation. If you're playing 3 in the middle, you really want Kayal and Stephens bursting into the box for shots and to get on the end of crosses. Instead, so often (at least in the first half) you'd see our two wingers over towards the left and Stephens falling into a right mid role - shows up on his heatmap too, quite significantly:



We had three quality midfielders playing today - were they as effective a combination as they could be? I don't think so.

 

[alfredmizen]

Strange one for me, unless injured. We seemed to go very flat for 15 mins after he went off. He was the one driving us forward. He wasn't happy when he came off. Apologies for title, using iPhone

We should have sung "you don't know what you're canoeing "


I'll get me coat.

 

[1066familyman]

Thought Stephens was having a bit of a mare (especially 1st half), I'd have taken him off before Kayal for sure.

Odd how Wilson came on and played down the right as well, what was THAT all about. He's supposed to be our poacher, we've got wingers all over the shop, and yet Wilson is the one playing wide.

I agree, our right hand side was bizarre at times today. I also think Stephens' positioning was a contributing factor to not getting the most out of the formation. If you're playing 3 in the middle, you really want Kayal and Stephens bursting into the box for shots and to get on the end of crosses. Instead, so often (at least in the first half) you'd see our two wingers over towards the left and Stephens falling into a right mid role - shows up on his heatmap too, quite significantly:

View attachment 71072

We had three quality midfielders playing today - were they as effective a combination as they could be? I don't think so.

There was one time in particular during the 2nd half when Stephens, Bruno and VLP almost fell over each other they were so bunched.

I've a feeling Wilson goes over to the right because he sussed right from the off that Bruno is so good going forward and plays such delightful balls that he'll get plenty of service from him down that side.

 

[terryberry1]

Did warren aspinal start this thread?

 

[London Irish]

I see a lot of praise for Crofts tonight IMHO he really wasn't that great tonight and I would certainly have taken him off and not Kayal

I'm no Crofts fan but I thought he was having a tidy game. But that position he played in front of the central defenders was an easier ride tonight than the role that Kayal/Stephens had which was to create and link with our attacking players.

Kayal is my favourite current player by some distance but I've never seen him misplace so many passes tonight. While I would have kept him on out of a fan's pure faith, I understand why Hughton thought differently.

My quarrels with Hughton tonight would have been the defensive system he chose and the unjustified faith in Hemed, who is badly out of form. Both teams played versions of 4-5-1 and to be honest I thought that suited Ipswich far more, with the tempo of the game deadened and the game reduced to a lottery of waiting for a mistake rather than inventive attacking play.

I don't understand why Zamora couldn't have started, he did more in a few minutes on the pitch to hold the ball up and play dangerous lay-offs than poor Hemed managed all game. I know Hughton said Zamora wasn't an option to start in his post match interview but I'd need that explained really, I would rather Hemed be brought on early in second half to defend a lead that a more attacking line-up might have fashioned.

It's an odd time for Hughton to lose faith in a 4-4-2 system that has worked very well at home and allowed us to play with pace and verve. I thought the defensive midfield role of Crofts was largely a waste tonight. A Zamora/Manu starting forward line-up might have asked much more questions of a lumbering Ipswich backline even taking into account that Wilson's form is indifferent possibly illness affected.

 

[perseus]

I would have taken Murphy off. But then I would not have started two wingers.

4-3-3 looked like a promising move with the difficult fixtures to come.

Crofts looked match fit for the first time for the Albion for over five years.

 

[ringmerseagulltoo]

At Brentford I thought we looked much better after switching to a three man midfield and it seemed to make sense to try it again given our lack of fully fit 90 minute strikers. The choice of striker was puzzling I agree.

Taking Kayal off I can understand. He buzzed around a great deal and promised much but his final ball today went astray far too often. A sign of a tired player I suspect.

 

[studio150]

May be wrong but believe that Kayal suffered a knock at Brentford and taking him off was probably more about protecting him for the next game rather than any statement on his performance tonight

 

[Soulman]

At Brentford I thought we looked much better after switching to a three man midfield and it seemed to make sense to try it again given our lack of fully fit 90 minute strikers. The choice of striker was puzzling I agree.

Taking Kayal off I can understand. He buzzed around a great deal and promised much but his final ball today went astray far too often. A sign of a tired player I suspect.

He needs a break, gets through so much work and because of the situation has not been able to be rested or subbed when we have a two goal cushion.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

At Brentford I thought we looked much better after switching to a three man midfield and it seemed to make sense to try it again given our lack of fully fit 90 minute strikers. The choice of striker was puzzling I agree.

Taking Kayal off I can understand. He buzzed around a great deal and promised much but his final ball today went astray far too often. A sign of a tired player I suspect.

Yes, I thought it was the right move. I think he has been a little poor for a few games now.

That''s mainly because his standards are so high.

 

[supaseagull]

I thought Hughtons tactics were questionable last night.

433 won't win you games at home. We knew that from last season and so it's odd having played 442 with such success this season that it was switched, I can only presume because he wanted to protect Goldson and Dunk.

Anyway that aside our most dangerous player was Murphy. I thought VLP was woeful and whoever gave him mom must have been on the Xmas sherry.

Then also taking off Kayal was baffling. He was the only player Ipswich were backing off from and also the only player in midfield who was creating any chances. Crofts did nothing wrong but neither did he do anything to stand out and despite Stephens poor game, he and Kayal are the two most likely players to cause opposition teams damage.

Our biggest issue was in the final third. Our movement off the ball til BZ came on was appallingly slow and we were not at all creative enough. Hemed proved that he can't play as a lone striker and his positioning was poor.

The hardest thing for me is that I thought Ipswich were really dreadful and I'd be well happy to play that badly and get a win.

The injures we have are ridiculous and with even Baldock or Kaz back that would have been a very different result last night.

Oh and some match officials who have an idea of how to officiate a game would help!

 

[hart's shirt]

Chris could answer that one. Or perhaps pundit Ian 'Ollie' Holloway.

You should eskimo roll.

10 years ago, a good substitution for Kayak might well have been Kanu.

 

[glasfryn]

up the proverbial creek without a paddle ................sorry

 

[The Albion Roar]

No way should Crofts have come off, he was MoM - the combative midfielder holding things together.

Stephens was having a mediocre game by his standards. Kayal was having one of his far-too-often ineffectual performances. For all his plaudits, he doesn't contribute anything like enough in the final third.

Right choice.

 

[mona]

Stop rocking the boat ffs.

 

[Machiavelli]

Strange one for me, unless injured. We seemed to go very flat for 15 mins after he went off. He was the one driving us forward. He wasn't happy when he came off. Apologies for title, using iPhone

I disagree on this. And, as others will be able to point out, I'm a huge fan of Kayal. I just thought he looked tired, one game too many, and his distribution was poor last night.
As much as I'd have liked Calde and Dunk to go off with Hemed, this wasn't really an option, we had to take a midfielder off to change to two-up top. Of the three central midfielders, Kayal was most off the boil.

 

[sir albion]

First thing I thought of when seeing this thread was.....

Love this film

 

[Blues Rock DJ]

4 pages and no mention of giving Jack Harper a run out ? Why JFC was on the bench ahead of him I know not........also for what it's worth, Goldson mom for me.

 

[GT49er]

Thought Stephens was having a bit of a mare (especially 1st half), I'd have taken him off before Kayal for sure.

Odd how Wilson came on and played down the right as well, what was THAT all about. He's supposed to be our poacher, we've got wingers all over the shop, and yet Wilson is the one playing wide.

'Wingers all over the shop' to be sure. The trouble is, 'the shop' is the treatment room, where Kaz and Solly can be found, along with those others who can or have played wide, Liam and Baldock...........

 

[GT49er]

May be wrong but believe that Kayal suffered a knock at Brentford and taking him off was probably more about protecting him for the next game rather than any statement on his performance tonight

Quite possible. In any event, Kayal has played the full 90 minutes in nearly every game this season, in a very demanding role as one of a midfield two. With another match due in 72 hours, a rest doesn't seem unreasonable.