Pardew's Tactics

After the wolves match Pardew took a load of flack over his subs, I'm one of the few that actually agree with what he did so ill explain my thinking:

Lovenkrands for Ba - People (including me) were questioning why Ba was taken off, turns out he had picked up an injury, Lovenkrands for me was the right choice. He always gives 100% and is fully comited every time he plays, in the last 20 mins against a tiring defence this is what you need some one who is always running about and annoying the defence. Also the last time we played him he scored two goals. Ben Arfa and Marveaux are both coming back from serious injuries and chucking them in against a Wolves team chasing a win could have set them back even more.

Guthrie for Cabaye - our Midfield pair have covered the more distance than any over clubs midfield this season, so at the end of the match they will understandably be knackered. We had also just conceded so needed to up our defence. Guthrie was the only player on the bench that could fill that hole, as he is defensively better than both Ben arfa and Marveaux. It was right for Cabaye to come of as Tiote is a defensive beast.

Marveaux for Obertan - For me this was just to break up the game a bit and stop any momentum that wolves could have gained.

At the end of the day we won so Pards must be doing something right

 

Wasn't too arsed about the first two but the last one should have been made a hell of a lot earlier.

 

This

 

This totally.

Anyone who slates Pard's tactics is obviously a moron.

 

I would have switched to 5 in midfield to crowd it out and hopefully retain the ball better

(also Sammeobi>Loven, but with Loven scoring 2 midweek, it would have been unfair not to put him on)

 

Loven is more consistent, Sammy might/would have given the ball away in dangerous area's too much. I agree with Pardew, it was the right change.

 

i cant recall Lovenkrands ever having the ball to give away.

 

http://www.eplindex.com/wolves-newcastle-stat-analysis/

As it happens, Lovenkrands didn't do awfully.

Does show that our fullbacks were dog ****, as well as Obertan. Should of brought Santon on for Raylor or Simpson.

 

At the end of the day - we won the game!

 

With huge amounts of luck, Wolves did show we need changes now, not after we lose a game.

 

Think we just backed off because we were 2-0 up. Bit sloppy like

 

What would have happened if someone had picked up a knock, we'd have used all three subs and had to have been reduced to 10 men, we would almost definitely conceded then.

 

I don't agree with his substitutions most of the time if truth be told. He is very similar to Hughton with regard to making substitutions. We have yet to see it this year because we have rarely been in trouble, but he has that habit of sitting on his hands when you're behind in games. I'm a big advocate of the Ferguson school of substitutions which is basically, if I'm getting beat I'm gonna attack because I'd prefer to have a go and lose 4-0, rather than do nowt and limp to a 1-0 defeat. Hence he ends up with 4 strikers on a fair bit. Keegan was the same.

But just like with Hughton I'll take the rough with the smooth because the positives far outweigh the negatives. Bottom line is everybody is different and you'll struggle to find a manager where the fans agree with all his substitutions/selections. Jesus I'd never even have Shola in my matchday squad nevermind start him or have him first choice sub! The end results have been good.

 

But Guthrie didn't come on until right at the end of the game either.