ZipHendomorganb
I wondered that as well, if he was trying to protect our one fit senior striker as there is a game on Tuesday and we'd not need to score more goals v QPR as we were ahead at the time.
Perhaps bringing on Holmes was the issue - should he have brought on Clarke instead, a positionally like-for-like replacement rather than affecting the defence?
I think the sub made sense, especially when you only have one fit senior striker. If he had left Puscas on and it had stayed 3-1 but he then pulled up and got injured, Pauno would've got pelters for that with people saying "the game was won, why didn't he look after Puscas".
Then take off Puscas and bring on one of our young strikers. Also bring on Holmes but take off the knackered Ejaria. Why make just the one sub? Why leave us with no one up front to relieve the pressure a bit? We had the same issues with Pauno and subs last season. He really seems clueless.
Completely agree with this.