In my last post on this blog, I briefly discussed the part that chance plays in football. I also pointed out that it is difficult for us fans to judge what happens during games – and to predict what will happen as a result. While catching up on my reading last night, I noted that on the Boy from Brazil website there is an article that refers to a “half-time tactical switch from Lincoln” that exploited a weakness in the way City had lined-up. This tactical switch was the substitution of Scott Kerr for Andy Hutchinson. A little later, I saw on Ceefax that Scott Kerr was a doubt for the next Lincoln game, having been substituted at half-time during the match at Bradford with a recurrence of a back injury. If Jason McKeown is right and the substitution played a part in City’s defeat, then it was luck rather than good judgement on the part of Peter Jackson that enabled Lincoln to take advantage of City’s tactics. Had Scott Kerr not suffered a recurrence of his injury, Andy Hutchinson would not have played. (The BBC website has a report of Lincoln’s injury problems.)
We fans rarely know whether a substitution is purely tactical or if there is an element of fitness in the manager’s choice – unless a player is obviously injured we will assume that a substitution is tactical, but we do not have the knowledge of the player’s condition that is available to the manager and physio. Sometimes a player will perform well and fans will be baffled to see him replaced – near the end of the Port Vale game, some fans were surprised to see O’Leary replaced by O’Brien. O’Leary later said that he had tired towards the end of the match due to a lack of football in pre-season (O’Leary is also said to have been carrying a toe injury – which flared up again before the Lincoln game).
-
Recent Comments
No Comments Yet