MATCHWATCH : Luton Town (a)

[Snowflake Royal]

Well yeah. It you decide to rule out all the genuine options for spurious reasons, there wouldn't be any genuine ones.



Much like trying to suggest half the side was experienced first teamers despite only two of them being over 23 and having more than 30 odd professional starts to their name.

[URZZZZ]

I am split on this question of what level of side we should have put out yesterday.

I am with Barney and Crowbar in that I feel generally you should put out somewhere near your best side for all games as winning becomes a habit.
On this idea that you don't play certain individuals because they might get injured, do you also not let them train because they might get injured?
More injuries occur in training than in matches so there is an argument for them to play more and train less.

Having said that, with no crowds, therefore no Revenue , I can understand why we might opt out of Cup competitions (we already did in the Carabao Cup) as there is no financial incentive but the FA Cup was once even more prestigious than winning the first division title so I hate it that it has now become of such little consequence.

Just one more point on the number of games these lads play.
In theory a first-teamer will play 46 League games with the potential of 5 more if we reach the play-off final making a maximum of 51 games.
How many will play the full 90 minutes of all of those games?
None.

By comparison Liverpool in one season played 62 games travelling across Europe, playing on different quality pitches and used 15 players, most of whom played most games.
Now we have deiticians, sports scientists, analysts, advanced medical equipment and greater speed of travel between matches etc so is it such a big deal to think that players might have to perform in 40 odd games in a season, with or without a couple of weeks lost in pre--season.?

It will be seen over the coming weeks whether teams like Bournemouth ,who fielded almost a full first team yesterday (including the fragile David Brooks and Josh King) are affected by playing an extra game or two and BTW they have 2 games next week when we have just the one.

It’s about mitigating the risk, rather than eliminating it though. More injuries may occur in training but proportionally wise, I’d suggest the difference is minimal. Joao, Meite, Richards, Moore have all picked up injuries in games so far this season which have kept them out for a period of time

And in a normal season, perhaps I’d be more inclined to agree. I didn’t agree with Bowen doing it last year, given the positive momentum we’d just generated beforehand (for the first proper time last season). But this year we’ve continuously played three per week (which the players won’t be used to) and furthermore the squad contains a handful of players who are too important at the moment to be out (which you could argue hasn’t really been the case the last few years)

I do think Puscas and Swift (if able to) could/should have got a run out and perhaps could have been the difference and I would have liked to see Melvin Lambert play alongside Baldock also. Additionally I didn’t agree with the subs and I thought they weakened us but perhaps he had a view to next week at the forefront of his mind

Do think the overriding point is that there isn’t a definitive, correct answer to the “cup debate”. Many successful managers play a strong side in the cup, whereas other successful managers make 11 changes. From a managers perspective, all down to personal interpretation of the values of the cup

As an aside, don’t recall Morrison missing a single minute in the league yet, perhaps he may be able to do 90 minutes for 46 games (plus the 3 PO games - not sure where 51 games came from)

[Nameless]

Well yeah. It you decide to rule out all the genuine options for spurious reasons, there wouldn't be any genuine ones.



Much like trying to suggest half the side was experienced first teamers despite only two of them being over 23 and having more than 30 odd professional starts to their name.

Aluko, Baldock, Semedo, Southwood. Which 2 of those are you ignoring ?
Add in Olise (over 40 first team games in 2 years as a regular first team squad member) and Tom McIntyre (pushing 30 games in 2 years as a regular first team squad member) and that’s a decent core of players to support the 5 genuine kids (without argueing that Esteves is a regular first team squad player as well).

If you are simply going to dismiss quite reasonable reasons for resting players as ‘spurious’ just to try and support your case we’re going nowhere.
48 hours on and Pauno still hasn’t gone back on his selection. I’m not sure there is much more to be said.

[Stranded]

Well, this argument is going round in circles.

At the end of the day, Pauno knows if his players need a rest, most Champ sides made just as many changes as we did so we are hardly alone.

The team that played created plenty of chances and were stopped by a keeper playing well or the woodwork. That team probably should have won, which for me is enough and shows it was a decent decision and shows the next wave of youth the path to the first team.

Yes winning breeds winning but losing without much of the usual starting XI in place will have no effect on that confidence but the performance of some of those academy players will have given them and the management further confidence that they could step up now if needed.

[Snowflake Royal]

Whoops. Missed Semedo. 3 is definitely not half. Someone can't tell the difference between starts and appearances.

[Hound]

Yep bored of this argument now (though no doubts that won't stop Ian debating it for the rest of the week ), so this is the last I'll say on it

I can understand people disagreeing and thinking that we should put more emphasis on the Cup. In other seasons and circumstances I'd also expect us to go stronger. However considering the position we are in the league, and the last 6 weeks of injuries, I think people should at least understand why Pauno played the team he did and it certainly wasnt 'terrible management', which is what i had the issue with

understandable management if not necessarily one you agree with. And as been mentioned, we aren't privy to the players fitness levels, covid test results etc. I've no doubts Pauno and co made their decisions based on the levels of the players and the league fixtures to come

Anyway, suppose we'll see how it works over the rest of the season. We've basically had a mid winter break, it should benefit the rest of the league campaign.

[Zip]

We have a huge game coming up on Saturday. Beat Brentford and we are very much in the mix for automatic promotion. Lose and we can start to focus on making the play offs. Time to move on from the Cup.

[Hound]

oh actually two last things that I dont think were mentioned

Watson nowhere to be seen. And thought Osho played well for them.

[Pepe the Horseman]

Well, this argument is going round in circles.

At the end of the day, Pauno knows if his players need a rest, most Champ sides made just as many changes as we did so we are hardly alone.

The team that played created plenty of chances and were stopped by a keeper playing well or the woodwork. That team probably should have won, which for me is enough and shows it was a decent decision and shows the next wave of youth the path to the first team.

Yes winning breeds winning but losing without much of the usual starting XI in place will have no effect on that confidence but the performance of some of those academy players will have given them and the management further confidence that they could step up now if needed.

To back up your last point, after we lost to Luton in the League Cup, and had the same people moaning about the team selection, we won 6 of the following 7 games.

[Zammo]

Well, this argument is going round in circles.

At the end of the day, Pauno knows if his players need a rest, most Champ sides made just as many changes as we did so we are hardly alone.

The team that played created plenty of chances and were stopped by a keeper playing well or the woodwork. That team probably should have won, which for me is enough and shows it was a decent decision and shows the next wave of youth the path to the first team.

Yes winning breeds winning but losing without much of the usual starting XI in place will have no effect on that confidence but the performance of some of those academy players will have given them and the management further confidence that they could step up now if needed.

^ this with bells on.

First teamers defo in need of a rest, although I thought Swift would have started. BUT I enjoyed watching the youngsters live on the box. AND arguably, they probably should have won.

[Nameless]

Whoops. Missed Semedo. 3 is definitely not half. Someone can't tell the difference between starts and appearances.

I can, but wasn’t going to fall into extra trap of massaging the figures....
If you’ve played 40+ games you have 40+ games worth of experience. You still seem to be missing Southwood from your ‘approved’ list.

[Vision]

Whilst I can understand the frustration of some fans towards the line up I'm struggling to get some of the apparent anger directed towards the management here. I think people are overlooking several unique mitigating factors here.

1. This is a season played in the shadow of a pandemic with a truncated pre-season that the current manager didn't even oversee. All bets are off in terms of how to approach the season as a whole and as the situation is at this present time with regard to the current infection rate it would be foolish to assume that we won't lose players at some stage and also that games won't be postponed leading to possible fixture congestion further down the line.

2. This is currently the thinnest 1st team squad of senior players we've had in many a year. The fact that the likes of Bournemouth , Brentford and even oxf*rd Luton can make wholesale changes whilst still retaining a team of senior players tells you what we are up against in any pursuit of promotion.

3. As to the above. Prior to the Sheff Wednesday game (and I've no reason to think this has since changed) we had used the fewest players of any team in the Championship despite all the enforced injury changes . We clearly have to manage our more limited resources more carefully than others and we're asking a lot from our first choice pool of 15 or so players. Players such as Morrison, Rino and Laurent who have played pretty much every minute in the League and will in all likelihood continue to do so for the remainder. They need to be rested at some point.

4. Early kick offs on heavy pitches in January are a recipe for injuries. To include players such as Puscas, Swift Joao and Richards who are just returning from injury lay offs would be a big risk.

5. Nobody on here has any idea about the current fitness levels of our senior players. Those that are carrying minor niggles, major knocks or showing fatigue in training. There may be very good reasons why the players people think should have started weren't considered by the management.


If I was to be critical of Saturday it would be the late substitutes whilst we were clearly in the ascendency but even then you could probably argue the case for ensuring the Senior players didn't play a full 90 minutes and Tetek set up Melvin -Lambert for a great chance at the end which could/should have forced Extra Time. Also worth remembering that Senior players may have ended up playing 120 minutes rather than 90 minutes if they were included from the start.

We are in a great position in the league in a season like no other. Few would have foreseen this at the start of the season and if you look at teams amongst with their squads and/or management experience it will be quite some achievement if we are in the mix come the final stretch. To do so VP will need to manage the resources available to him more judiciously than others and he has little margin for error. If he's being over cautious in the Cup competitions then rather than conclude it's "poor management" I think we need to bear the unique circumstances we are currently operating under in mind.

[Hendo]

Whilst I can understand the frustration of some fans towards the line up I'm struggling to get some of the apparent anger directed towards the management here. I think people are overlooking several unique mitigating factors here.

1. This is a season played in the shadow of a pandemic with a truncated pre-season that the current manager didn't even oversee. All bets are off in terms of how to approach the season as a whole and as the situation is at this present time with regard to the current infection rate it would be foolish to assume that we won't lose players at some stage and also that games won't be postponed leading to possible fixture congestion further down the line.

2. This is currently the thinnest 1st team squad of senior players we've had in many a year. The fact that the likes of Bournemouth , Brentford and even oxf*rd Luton can make wholesale changes whilst still retaining a team of senior players tells you what we are up against in any pursuit of promotion.

3. As to the above. Prior to the Sheff Wednesday game (and I've no reason to think this has since changed) we had used the fewest players of any team in the Championship despite all the enforced injury changes . We clearly have to manage our more limited resources more carefully than others and we're asking a lot from our first choice pool of 15 or so players. Players such as Morrison, Rino and Laurent who have played pretty much every minute in the League and will in all likelihood continue to do so for the remainder. They need to be rested at some point.

4. Early kick offs on heavy pitches in January are a recipe for injuries. To include players such as Puscas, Swift Joao and Richards who are just returning from injury lay offs would be a big risk.

5. Nobody on here has any idea about the current fitness levels of our senior players. Those that are carrying minor niggles, major knocks or showing fatigue in training. There may be very good reasons why the players people think should have started weren't considered by the management.


If I was to be critical of Saturday it would be the late substitutes whilst we were clearly in the ascendency but even then you could probably argue the case for ensuring the Senior players didn't play a full 90 minutes and Tetek set up Melvin -Lambert for a great chance at the end which could/should have forced Extra Time. Also worth remembering that Senior players may have ended up playing 120 minutes rather than 90 minutes if they were included from the start.

We are in a great position in the league in a season like no other. Few would have foreseen this at the start of the season and if you look at teams amongst with their squads and/or management experience it will be quite some achievement if we are in the mix come the final stretch. To do so VP will need to manage the resources available to him more judiciously than others and he has little margin for error. If he's being over cautious in the Cup competitions then rather than conclude it's "poor management" I think we need to bear the unique circumstances we are currently operating under in mind.

+ oxf*rd 1

[Zip]

Whilst I can understand the frustration of some fans towards the line up I'm struggling to get some of the apparent anger directed towards the management here. I think people are overlooking several unique mitigating factors here.

1. This is a season played in the shadow of a pandemic with a truncated pre-season that the current manager didn't even oversee. All bets are off in terms of how to approach the season as a whole and as the situation is at this present time with regard to the current infection rate it would be foolish to assume that we won't lose players at some stage and also that games won't be postponed leading to possible fixture congestion further down the line.

2. This is currently the thinnest 1st team squad of senior players we've had in many a year. The fact that the likes of Bournemouth , Brentford and even oxf*rd Luton can make wholesale changes whilst still retaining a team of senior players tells you what we are up against in any pursuit of promotion.

3. As to the above. Prior to the Sheff Wednesday game (and I've no reason to think this has since changed) we had used the fewest players of any team in the Championship despite all the enforced injury changes . We clearly have to manage our more limited resources more carefully than others and we're asking a lot from our first choice pool of 15 or so players. Players such as Morrison, Rino and Laurent who have played pretty much every minute in the League and will in all likelihood continue to do so for the remainder. They need to be rested at some point.

4. Early kick offs on heavy pitches in January are a recipe for injuries. To include players such as Puscas, Swift Joao and Richards who are just returning from injury lay offs would be a big risk.

5. Nobody on here has any idea about the current fitness levels of our senior players. Those that are carrying minor niggles, major knocks or showing fatigue in training. There may be very good reasons why the players people think should have started weren't considered by the management.


If I was to be critical of Saturday it would be the late substitutes whilst we were clearly in the ascendency but even then you could probably argue the case for ensuring the Senior players didn't play a full 90 minutes and Tetek set up Melvin -Lambert for a great chance at the end which could/should have forced Extra Time. Also worth remembering that Senior players may have ended up playing 120 minutes rather than 90 minutes if they were included from the start.

We are in a great position in the league in a season like no other. Few would have foreseen this at the start of the season and if you look at teams amongst with their squads and/or management experience it will be quite some achievement if we are in the mix come the final stretch. To do so VP will need to manage the resources available to him more judiciously than others and he has little margin for error. If he's being over cautious in the Cup competitions then rather than conclude it's "poor management" I think we need to bear the unique circumstances we are currently operating under in mind.

That’s a very good post and just to add we are going to be very limited in reinforcements during this window too.

[South Coast Royal]

I am split on this question of what level of side we should have put out yesterday.

I am with Barney and Crowbar in that I feel generally you should put out somewhere near your best side for all games as winning becomes a habit.
On this idea that you don't play certain individuals because they might get injured, do you also not let them train because they might get injured?
More injuries occur in training than in matches so there is an argument for them to play more and train less.

Having said that, with no crowds, therefore no Revenue , I can understand why we might opt out of Cup competitions (we already did in the Carabao Cup) as there is no financial incentive but the FA Cup was once even more prestigious than winning the first division title so I hate it that it has now become of such little consequence.

Just one more point on the number of games these lads play.
In theory a first-teamer will play 46 League games with the potential of 5 more if we reach the play-off final making a maximum of 51 games.
How many will play the full 90 minutes of all of those games?
None.

By comparison Liverpool in one season played 62 games travelling across Europe, playing on different quality pitches and used 15 players, most of whom played most games.
Now we have deiticians, sports scientists, analysts, advanced medical equipment and greater speed of travel between matches etc so is it such a big deal to think that players might have to perform in 40 odd games in a season, with or without a couple of weeks lost in pre--season.?

It will be seen over the coming weeks whether teams like Bournemouth ,who fielded almost a full first team yesterday (including the fragile David Brooks and Josh King) are affected by playing an extra game or two and BTW they have 2 games next week when we have just the one.

It’s about mitigating the risk, rather than eliminating it though. More injuries may occur in training but proportionally wise, I’d suggest the difference is minimal. Joao, Meite, Richards, Moore have all picked up injuries in games so far this season which have kept them out for a period of time

And in a normal season, perhaps I’d be more inclined to agree. I didn’t agree with Bowen doing it last year, given the positive momentum we’d just generated beforehand (for the first proper time last season). But this year we’ve continuously played three per week (which the players won’t be used to) and furthermore the squad contains a handful of players who are too important at the moment to be out (which you could argue hasn’t really been the case the last few years)

I do think Puscas and Swift (if able to) could/should have got a run out and perhaps could have been the difference and I would have liked to see Melvin Lambert play alongside Baldock also. Additionally I didn’t agree with the subs and I thought they weakened us but perhaps he had a view to next week at the forefront of his mind

Do think the overriding point is that there isn’t a definitive, correct answer to the “cup debate”. Many successful managers play a strong side in the cup, whereas other successful managers make 11 changes. From a managers perspective, all down to personal interpretation of the values of the cup

As an aside, don’t recall Morrison missing a single minute in the league yet, perhaps he may be able to do 90 minutes for 46 games (plus the 3 PO games - not sure where 51 games came from)

Got carried away with how many games are required in play-offs.

So they potentially play even less games of 46, 48 or 49.
Not that many really, especially as most, if not all, of the players will miss games through selection or injury and will not always complete the 90 minutes.
Not a bad job of work is it with (at this level) long Summer holidays as well and just the odd bit of overtime (cup games-2 this season)? .

Anyway, interest gone very quickly in cup competitions and now full on in the League with Brentford, Norwich, Bournemouth and Swansea still distracted by the FA Cup.

[NewCorkSeth]

Hey everybody. Just here to stir up shit in case it's dying down.

I couldn't care less about the FA Cup and think it would have been naive and, quite frankly, idiotic to risk any first team stars in that match. I'm glad he selected that team. Was important to give them minutes and matchday experience.

[bcubed]

Yep bored of this argument now (though no doubts that won't stop Ian debating it for the rest of the week ), so this is the last I'll say on it

I can understand people disagreeing and thinking that we should put more emphasis on the Cup. In other seasons and circumstances I'd also expect us to go stronger. However considering the position we are in the league, and the last 6 weeks of injuries, I think people should at least understand why Pauno played the team he did and it certainly wasnt 'terrible management', which is what i had the issue with

understandable management if not necessarily one you agree with. And as been mentioned, we aren't privy to the players fitness levels, covid test results etc. I've no doubts Pauno and co made their decisions based on the levels of the players and the league fixtures to come

Anyway, suppose we'll see how it works over the rest of the season. We've basically had a mid winter break, it should benefit the rest of the league campaign.

Isn't terrible management just shorthand for management I don't agree with?

[South Coast Royal]

Hey everybody. Just here to stir up shit in case it's dying down.

I couldn't care less about the FA Cup and think it would have been naive and, quite frankly, idiotic to risk any first team stars in that match. I'm glad he selected that team. Was important to give them minutes and matchday experience.

Yes absolutely and players should stay in bed all week and not risk injury through training or doing anything but rest.
Cotton wool needs to be supplied for all first team squad players.

[NewCorkSeth]

Hey everybody. Just here to stir up shit in case it's dying down.

I couldn't care less about the FA Cup and think it would have been naive and, quite frankly, idiotic to risk any first team stars in that match. I'm glad he selected that team. Was important to give them minutes and matchday experience.

Yes absolutely and players should stay in bed all week and not risk injury through training or doing anything but rest.
Cotton wool needs to be supplied for all first team squad players.

What would cotton wool do? Is it for nose bleeds?

[South Coast Royal]

We have a huge game coming up on Saturday. Beat Brentford and we are very much in the mix for automatic promotion. Lose and we can start to focus on making the play offs. Time to move on from the Cup.

Hopefully Brentford will be knackered having had that big Carabo Cup game as well-advantage RFC.