It's just struck me (I've no idea why now) that we might have a first ever for us from that game. Warnock basically wrote the game off before a ball was kicked by resting players like Becchio so that they were fit for the next game. He also said in his post match that there was no way they were ever going to compete with us (or Cardiff) in a game because we're too good this season. Now on that basis, can anyone remember another league game we've played where the opposition have turned up expecting to lose and rolled over by fielding a weakened team against us? Even in the L1 and D3 promotion seasons I can remember managers saying after the game we'd been too good, or turning up and saying they expected nothing. But I can't remember anybody saying that and playing a weakened team against us just because they didn't see the point of giving it a proper go as we were going to win.
I have a hard time coming up with any example of a team doing that. Most teams put forth extra effort against superior oppostion not less. I can come up with lots of examples of teams who have thought they were better than another and they put out a weak team thinking they could still win, but to put out a weak team thinking you cant win has to be pretty unique. I am supprised that there were not calls for him to be fired after that (maybe there were). If our coach did that I would sure want him canned.
Just because Warnock didn't bring Becchio off the bench doesn't mean he fielded a weakened side. I think you are insulting to the quality of OUR team to be honest. We played a very good Leeds team OFF the park and I very much doubt if he had brought Becchio on the result would of been much different.
But it wasnt just Becchio was it? He made 5 changes to the side that he used to beat Middlesbrough just 7 days before our game. He also sat his captian and top 2 strikers. Who makes that many changes to a side that just won? The team that went out there was not their best squad. It doesnt deminish our performance to point out that they clearly sent out a weaker team than they could have. Lets say we did that against Lecister or someone. We made 5 changes, pulled out our 2 front men (Aluko, Simpson) then took our capitan off (Koren) and pick 2 more people. That doesnt sound like a reciepe for success. Case in point is our recent game against leyton orient we made more than 5 changes sure but that is what happens when you pull out people from a side that is winning. Another case as an example. The difference between who we sent out against leciester and who we sent out against Leeds was one player (meyler). You dont make 5 changes or "rest" that many people on your team unless you are planning on losing. Middlesbrough game 1. Patrick Kenny 25. Samuel Byram 15. Alan Tate 4. Tom Lees 2. Lee Peltier 7. Paul Green 18. Michael Tonge 19. David Norris 9. Jerome Thomas 21. El-Hadji Diouf 10. Luciano Becchio Hull game 1 Patrick Kenny 25 Samuel Byram 15 Alan Tate 4 Tom Lees 5 Jason Pearce 7 Paul Green 14 Aidan White 17 Michael Brown 19 David Norris 28 Davide Somma 44 Ross McCormack
Becchio was one card off automatic suspension. Plus Warnock tried to play us by matching our formation. It failed. Warnock was taking the piss and Bruce said as much. I never liked Steve Bruce but respected his tactics. Now I see him in a completely different light. He runs a game from a players view. An extension of the captains armband. The way he paces the sideline, is a joy to watch. He is emotive and involved. He can see the movement of play and coaches the team during the game. His half time talks must be his best skill. He knows what the players need to do and the players either do it his way or don't play. Great management beat Leeds, Warnock wants us to believe that on their day they would have won.
Don't forget they got hammered by Forest just a few days before playing us, I presume fielding the likes of Becchio, Diouf, Thomas etc. No doubt Warnock thought he needed to make some changes. Having said that he did look very disinterested on the touchline, normally he'd be in the 4th officials face from kick-off to the final whistle.
Colin only said that after they had been soundly beaten, he put a side out he thought could stop us playing, and it back fired. If he had got a draw, or scraped a lucky win, he would be saying he had masterminded these tactics.
sta I agree that Warnock fielded a weakened team. It struck everyone as strange at the time, but it's a bit of a leap to think it was because he saw no chance of getting a result. Someone suggested after the game that he wanted a bad result / performance to show the new owners how weak his squad is and therefore increase his transfer kitty and that seems more likely to me. His after-match comments stating that Leeds couldn't compete with us and Cardiff also supports that idea.
Why else would you chose to play a weakened side against a team that's better than you? You don't artificially suspend your top goalscorer just in case he picks up a booking and misses a game unless you're conceding the game anyway. You play him and he might miss one, you don't play him he definitely misses one. He was carrying a knock and only expected to be able to play in 1 of the next 2 games and Warnock chose the one he thought they could get something from. Warnock has got a funny way of making us think that then. He said in the post match that Leeds are unable to match us or Cardiff this season because we're so good, but that the rest of the division is pretty even.
I was thinking more about Bruce's reaction to Warnocks comments as well as what Warnock said on the Leeds OWS.
It would have been a 1 game ban for collecting 5 yellow cards. The only way it would be 3 games is if he got a straight red card for something like violent conduct, and that's been the case from game 1.
Becchio did have a knock, and he said Diouf needed resting due to the volume of games, and the same with Thomas. I know what you're all saying about sacrificing the game, but Becchio and Diouf returned for Bolton and we won, so wasn't all bad. Managers don't usually risk players with knocks unless they really have to, particularly when we have games every 2 or 3 days.
I was taking it as a compliment to our team this season rather than knocking Warnock for it, in the PL I said a few times when we had a big club followed by a relegation rival we should play weakened teams in the first game due to the chances of getting a result and the relative importance of the results. Thought it said a lot about the job Bruce has done so far that we were in a position where another team was doing it with us. I don't think even when we were clearly the biggest club in the division (the L1/D3 promotion seasons) we had a team that was that much better than the opposition, so to do it when we're one of many of a similar size is good.
The Leeds performance has probably done our chances more harm then good. Not because other teams will set up for us (they do that regardless) but because our players have started thinking they are better than they actually are! Upto now they've achieved absolutely nothing!
