16/17 HAL Round 19 | Newcastle Jets v Melbourne Victory | Sat 10th Feb 2017 05:35pm

So we're not seeing enough from him because our other players aren't passing it to him?

He faded a bit (as he will every game, doesn't have the legs for a full game) but for the 50-70 minutes he can play he has consistently been one of our best and most dangerous players. He links up play well, makes good runs and has great awareness. Not to mention he's our best finisher if not one of the best in the league. I thought he had another good outing last night and continues to do so. Even if we were to get another good striker or two I would be happy to keep him around, for the half hour he would come off the bench for he would be influential and dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

So we're not seeing enough from him because our other players aren't passing it to him?

He faded a bit (as he will every game, doesn't have the legs for a full game) but for the 50-70 minutes he can play he has consistently been one of our best and most dangerous players. He links up play well, makes good runs and has great awareness. Not to mention he's our best finisher if not one of the best in the league. I thought he had another good outing last night and continues to do so. Even if we were to get another good striker or two I would be happy to keep him around, for the half hour he would come off the bench for he would be influential and dangerous.

---

On the ball last year he was more decisive and more of a threat in front of goal and finishing was lethal. We havent seen that lethal instinct yet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeterpool

I was sitting with a mate and he pointed out that Ma wasn't taking any responsibility on the ball during the second half in particular and went hiding on the field. Gotta say I thought he was on the money. That was around the 55 minute mark onwards - I think had we brought Brown on at that stage his energy could have got us over the line.

---

That is every game Ma has started. He goes missing for large chunks of the game and usually ends up drifting wide.

Ma has some nice touches here and there and a great left peg but he isn't up to starting, particularly as our #10. Should be permanently left on the bench

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by borat

That is every game Ma has started. He goes missing for large chunks of the game and usually ends up drifting wide.

Ma has some nice touches here and there and a great left peg but he isn't up to starting, particularly as our #10. Should be permanently left on the bench

---

Then we mosewell sell him we need our imports starting not on the bench

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

So we're not seeing enough from him because our other players aren't passing it to him?

He faded a bit (as he will every game, doesn't have the legs for a full game) but for the 50-70 minutes he can play he has consistently been one of our best and most dangerous players. He links up play well, makes good runs and has great awareness. Not to mention he's our best finisher if not one of the best in the league. I thought he had another good outing last night and continues to do so. Even if we were to get another good striker or two I would be happy to keep him around, for the half hour he would come off the bench for he would be influential and dangerous.

---

Nobby is paying the price for being isolated without support. If we had a #9 and Nobby could play in behind him as a second striker the goals would flow. It's not his game to play on the point and make goals for himself

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by borat

Nobby is paying the price for being isolated without support. If we had a #9 and Nobby could play in behind him as a second striker the goals would flow. It's not his game to play on the point and make goals for himself

---

Funny I wonder what position Kokko plays?? Also same problem we had with Heskey, He was never a lone striker good job egghead

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StannyCFCJET

Then we mosewell sell him we need our imports starting not on the bench

---

Agreed

He was imposed on us by Lee, but it's Jones who continually picks him in the team.

The team selections and use of the bench are baffling. Mullen may have played well last night, but you can put your house on that he will cost us more games as long as he stays at RB. It happened for the Wanderers and its happened to us. Ticking time bomb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by borat

Nobby is paying the price for being isolated without support. If we had a #9 and Nobby could play in behind him as a second striker the goals would flow. It's not his game to play on the point and make goals for himself

---

Agree, I think he is a natural second striker and am still waiting to see him played together with Kokko (probably won't happen). However I still think he does a reasonable job at what he's being asked to do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by borat

Agreed

He was imposed on us by Lee, but it's Jones who continually picks him in the team.

The team selections and use of the bench are baffling. Mullen may have played well last night, but you can put your house on that he will cost us more games as long as he stays at RB. It happened for the Wanderers and its happened to us. Ticking time bomb.

---

Mullen has had 3 good games Perth away first game. City at Coffs and Victory at home rest of the time he has been pants and given away many goals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StannyCFCJET

Funny I wonder what position Kokko plays?? Also same problem we had with Heskey, He was never a lone striker good job egghead

---

I don't think Kokko is any world beater and have no confidence he would bag 10+ goals if he was being played. But what would happen is we would see the best from guys like Nobby, playing in behind, who can score goals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by borat

I don't think Kokko is any world beater and have no confidence he would bag 10+ goals if he was being played. But what would happen is we would see the best from guys like Nobby, playing in behind, who can score goals.

---

That is my sole point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StannyCFCJET

I Feel like Mark Jones's use of his Subs is costing us points. Fresh legs around the 55-65th min wouldve knocked the sails fully out of victory I reckon

---

Just on this (I agree with you by the way) -

So far this season, Jones has made 54 substitutions. only 18 of these came on or before 65 minutes, and at least 2 or 3 of these were due to injuries/babies being born.

So 67% of the subs are made too late to have any real impact IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WolfMan

Just on this (I agree with you by the way) -

So far this season, Jones has made 54 substitutions. only 18 of these came on or before 65 minutes, and at least 2 or 3 of these were due to injuries/babies being born.

So 67% of the subs are made too late to have any real impact IMO

---

A substitute after 65 minutes can have no impact? What?

I don't know the stats but I wouldn't be surprised if the professional average for substitutes was pretty similar to that, I don't think it would be unusual at all to see games with no subs until after 65 minutes that aren't injury enforced. I tend to think if someone gets subbed before that, or at half time, its either due to them having a shocker, or a change for tactical reasons, defensive or formational mismatch etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

A substitute after 65 minutes can have no impact? What?

I don't know the stats but I wouldn't be surprised if the professional average for substitutes was pretty similar to that, I don't think it would be unusual at all to see games with no subs until after 65 minutes that aren't injury enforced. I tend to think if someone gets subbed before that, or at half time, its either due to them having a shocker, or a change for tactical reasons, defensive or formational mismatch etc.

---

Yeah but some of our players are getting gassed early so they need to be subbed cause their performance drops and they risk injury + plus we have people on the bench who should be given adequate time to affect the game from the bench. Brown for examples

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

A substitute after 65 minutes can have no impact? What?

I don't know the stats but I wouldn't be surprised if the professional average for substitutes was pretty similar to that, I don't think it would be unusual at all to see games with no subs until after 65 minutes that aren't injury enforced. I tend to think if someone gets subbed before that, or at half time, its either due to them having a shocker, or a change for tactical reasons, defensive or formational mismatch etc.

---

Point taken.

I wasn't exactly saying those after 65 minutes can't have an impact. I'll go back and check timing, a lot from memory were 85 mins plus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WolfMan

Point taken.

I wasn't exactly saying those after 65 minutes can't have an impact. I'll go back and check timing, a lot from memory were 85 mins plus

---

Yeah fair enough. 85 plus you are starting to look at token substitutes, game management etc.

Something else to consider would be earlier in the season during our injury troubles, we probably didn't have a whole lot on the bench worth bringing on.

I'll help out a bit.

55 substitutions this year

19 of those played <10 minutes

10 of those played <5 minutes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeterpool

I'll help out a bit.

55 substitutions this year

19 of those played <10 minutes

10 of those played <5 minutes

---

Cheers mate.

Average across the year is 70 minute mark, but that is skewed by the half time subs and injuries.

That average creeps up to 76 minutes just looking at the last 3 matches

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeterpool

I'll help out a bit.

55 substitutions this year

19 of those played <10 minutes

10 of those played <5 minutes

---

Curiosity, are those times measured as regulation time or including stoppage time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeterpool

I'll help out a bit.

55 substitutions this year

19 of those played <10 minutes

10 of those played <5 minutes

---

29/55 with very little time to make an impact.

I'd like to see how many were injuries/babies being born.

Stubbins did the same thing, however the bench he had was far worse than what we have now.