Team for Crystal Palace

[Wycombe Royal]

Even if Coppell wanted to he couldn't field that side.

WR: Blackburn away, two years ago. Do you really want to risk injury or sending off? Remember what we did to Millwall, Nottingham Forest, etc.

For the amount of times you need a sub keeper I just don't think it is worth it. I would rather have additional outfield options on the bench. I would guess that we have NEEDED to use a sub keeper no more than 3 times in the past 7 or 8 years. A sub keeper is a waste of space of the bench.

Whereas two strikers and two centre backs/defensive midfielders aren't?

No they aren't. Outfield players are far more likely to get injured or sent off and also are more likely to have an impact on the game if used. You can't change your tactics or formation by changing your keeper but you can by using outfield subs. Having 5 as opposed to four gives you far more options to make tactical changes.

[Alan Partridge]

Bench: Doyle, Bikey, Cisse, Long, Convey

No keeper?

Nope. When was the last time we needed to use the sub keeper?

Blackburn away last game of the season. Federici was used there and at Spurs as well.

[Wycombe Royal]

No Keeper?

Nope. When was the last time we needed to use the sub keeper?

Blackburn away last game of the season. Federici was used there and at Spurs as well.

At Spurs Hahneman could have continued. He was taken off as a precaution and was fit for the next match. At Blackburn I admit it would have been hard for him to continue playing with a broken hand.

[Alan Partridge]

I don't totally disagree with your point, however even 4 subs should be enough to cover bases, the problem is Coppell keeps naming 2 defenders out of four, why???

Subs are there mainly for changes to win games, Of course you need a defender there to cover an injury, the other 3 should be forward thinking players, 2 strikers and a winger for example. By picking Kelly, Pearce and a keeper he is only leaving himself 2 players to use if and when Reading are chasing the game.

[Thaumagurist*]

Want

Federici
Rosiner--sonko-- bikey----armstrong
kebe---harper---Keracan---S.Hunt
-------Lita----N.Hunt------

Subs. USA/Mooney/Cisse/ lita / ingi

Even if Coppell wanted to he couldn't field that side.

'greed. There cannot be a bench big enough to accomodate a country the size of USA.

[Streets]

I don't totally disagree with your point, however even 4 subs should be enough to cover bases, the problem is Coppell keeps naming 2 defenders out of four, why???

Severe lack of strength in depth perhaps. Although the kids are doing their utmost to prove otherwise.

[BR2]

I don't totally disagree with your point, however even 4 subs should be enough to cover bases, the problem is Coppell keeps naming 2 defenders out of four, why???

Subs are there mainly for changes to win games, Of course you need a defender there to cover an injury, the other 3 should be forward thinking players, 2 strikers and a winger for example. By picking Kelly, Pearce and a keeper he is only leaving himself 2 players to use if and when Reading are chasing the game.

Having grown up in an era when there were NO subs I think it's crazy how it has all evolved.
I can see the need for say 3 subs including a keeper (specialised job) but the idea that tactics are so important that you need a choice from 7 subs or even 11 in international matches strikes me as pointless.
Most managers are pretty clueless in using subs-how often do they make a tactical substitution in the first half for example?
As for subbing after the 90th minute to supposedly use up time and break up play I reckon it does no more than prolong play and defeats the objective.

Back to keepers I think there should always be one on the bench but I can understand why Wycombe thinks they are unnecessary because of the rarity they are called upon-it could however just be that one game which seals promotion or relegation.
One other bugbear-players who are not 100% fit being on the bench.
Play them and take them off rather than bring them on with little time left and having sat around for over an hour seizing up and more likely to get injured when they come on.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

I think it will be:

USA

Rosenior Inga Sonko Armstrong

Kebe Harper Cisse S Hunt

Lita N Hunt


Can see why people would want Cisse replaced, but we have a serious lack of height as it is.

Pearce has not done a lot wrong against weak opposition, without looking amazing. But his lack of pace is a real problem for me. Would be a bit different if he had plenty of experience to make up for it.

[brendywendy]

armstrong and nhunt in. shunt to play LW

kids on the bench, with convey ,to come in if required

swhat id do anyway

[SCIAG]

I don't totally disagree with your point, however even 4 subs should be enough to cover bases, the problem is Coppell keeps naming 2 defenders out of four, why???

Subs are there mainly for changes to win games, Of course you need a defender there to cover an injury, the other 3 should be forward thinking players, 2 strikers and a winger for example. By picking Kelly, Pearce and a keeper he is only leaving himself 2 players to use if and when Reading are chasing the game.

Kelly is effectively a winger if we have Shunt at left back.

[Royalee]

Hahnemann

Armstrong
Cisse
Pearce
Rosenior

Convey
Bikey
Karacan
Kebe

N Hunt
Mooney

[brendywendy]

not sure how wise changing 3 of the back four is for one game,
and ive not seen anything of mooney to make any kind of judgement about him deserving a start
but other than that
id take that quite happily

[Alan Partridge]

Pearce, Karacan, Bikey, N Hunt, Armstrong IN
Convey, Sonko, Ingimarsson, Doyle, Cisse OUT

[Royalee]

not sure how wise changing 3 of the back four is for one game,
and ive not seen anything of mooney to make any kind of judgement about him deserving a start
but other than that
id take that quite happily

Well if they let less than four goals in then that's an improvement surely? The extra strength in midfield will lessen the pressure on our defenders anyway.

As for the strikers, I've put those two in purely because Mooney's big and in some sort of goalscoring form and I've been told Noel Hunt's played well when he's featured.

[Streets]

Will Stretch play after just two days training with us though? Hope so, not sure. He didn't arrive back in Reading until yesterday apparently, after "tying up loose ends" in Sheffield.

[brendywendy]

Pearce, Karacan, Bikey, N Hunt, Armstrong IN
Convey, Sonko, Ingimarsson, Doyle, Cisse OUT

you and i may stretch to that many changes, and if coppell agrees and does exactly that ill be ecstatic
i just cant see it though

[Ian Royal]

not sure how wise changing 3 of the back four is for one game,
and ive not seen anything of mooney to make any kind of judgement about him deserving a start
but other than that
id take that quite happily

Well if they let less than four goals in then that's an improvement surely? The extra strength in midfield will lessen the pressure on our defenders anyway.

As for the strikers, I've put those two in purely because Mooney's big and in some sort of goalscoring form and I've been told Noel Hunt's played well when he's featured.

Against a Palace side who haven't managed to score a league goal this season and compared to a defence that kept 2 clean sheets prior to that?

No, not really. changing 3 at the back is a good way of risking giving Palace their first goal IMO. Especially as 1 of those players is weak in the air and considered a midfielder by the management, another is young and relatively inexperienced and the third will have managed about 2 training sessions.


For Floyd:

My point about Ivar working with Coppell before is relevant because it means he Coppell knows him and how he plays and can adapt well. He is also likely to be familar with Coppell's tactics and style of play.

As I said it can be done but it's not ideal. If you have another option for the short term that isn't going to cause a disaster why take the gamble.
Hunt's done ok at the back, Convey has done ok on the wing. We'll want Armstrong in, but better to get him fully up to speed, unless he is deemed ready and raring to go.

[floyd__streete]

Hunt's done ok at the back, Convey has done ok on the wing.

No he hasn't. He's contributed very little and you could probably count on one hand the number of crosses he has put into the box. You are Steve Coppell AICMFP (but even our dithering manager wouldn't play a left winger instead of a recognised left back on Saturday.....would he?).

[Thaumagurist*]

Could people stop referring to Hahnemann as "USA" on here, please?

[brendywendy]

Hunt's done ok at the back, Convey has done ok on the wing.

No he hasn't. He's contributed very little and you could probably count on one hand the number of crosses he has put into the box. You are Steve Coppell AICMFP (but even our dithering manager wouldn't play a left winger instead of a recognised left back on Saturday.....would he?).

id think twice after two days training,





then stick him in