I can only assume it was down to the riot at the Senegal vs Ivory Coast game which sounded very nasty indeed and cannot have been a very pleasant thing to have to put up with.
I think he wanted two up top, him playing behind the striker didn't really work and isolated ricardo fuller
I'm guessing that was the idea, though BWP after he came on hardly touched the ball and had minimal impact
Its hard for a player like BPW to get much of the ball when it was just getting pumped long for most of the second half. Fuller aint gonna win them balls for BWP.
I'm glad someone asked this question , i thought he was one of our best players , it was a gamble that didn't pay off unfortunately , maybe he was thinking of Tuesday nights game as well?
Because he was lazy. He may have had a couple of good moments but most of the time he looked uninterested and a typical " cant be bothered" loanee.
Razak put in a good cross and hit a good free kick ...he lost the ball numerous times and didnt make space and close down his player when he didnt have the ball ..i agree with above
thought he looked a very good prospect but with a real attitude and waived his hands in the air a couple of times which is hugely dissapointing from a kid. Tactically may have been a bad move to sub him but if it teaches him a lesson it could be a good move in the longer term. Hopefully he will do less moaning and more playing tomorrow night.
Because he was lazy. He may have had a couple of good moments but most of the time he looked uninterested and a typical " cant be bothered" loanee.
Razak put in a good cross and hit a good free kick ...he lost the ball numerous times and didnt make space and close down his player when he didnt have the ball ..i agree with above
He wasn't lazy. He was man marking Perkins (their blonde midfielder) all through the 1st half and just sat on him.
This stopped Perkins having much influence first half but also meant that Razek did little and allowed the rest of their midfield to pass the ball around without him closing down.
I assume he was playing to orders rather than just fancied a rest.
And as others have said he had travelled to Africa midweek so might have been a bit knackered.
He was having a bad game, simple. Henry - yes he did start off marking perkins and for the first 10 minutes it worked. This looked a deliberate tactical ploy. After that it became sometimes he did and sometimes he didn't which is why they got on top. Unfortunately the subs didn't work but at least powell tried something. I must admit thinking at half time defeat was ineviatble unless we changed something.
I must be alone in thinking that out of the 7 midfielders we saw on Saturday one way or another he was probably the best performer (not saying much perhaps)
I must be alone in thinking that out of the 7 midfielders we saw on Saturday one way or another he was probably the best performer (not saying much perhaps)
I thought the Barnsley albino was good. Always available, never lost possession, kept things going for them.
A little bit off topic but i think it is the third time i have seen Perkins play and each time i have thought he looks good, Was he that good or do you just notice him because of his hair?
I must be alone in thinking that out of the 7 midfielders we saw on Saturday one way or another he was probably the best performer (not saying much perhaps)
I thought the Barnsley albino was good. Always available, never lost possession, kept things going for them.
Sorry... 7 of our midfielders who played either from the start or the bench
Really can't see how some people thought he did a good job on Perkins. The little fella ran the show. If any of our midfielders (Stephens) wants a lesson on how to dictate a game, watch Perkins, the Watford player, and Shelvey V San Marino, always want the ball, always do something with it.
Agree with Henry's take on it. He quietened down their most effective player and had a decent game IMO. I think Powell felt that Jacko could have turned the game around, but with hindsight it may have been better to only switch to 442 (Hollands for BWP)
Comments
I'm glad someone asked this question , i thought he was one of our best players , it was a gamble that didn't pay off unfortunately , maybe he was thinking of Tuesday nights game as well?
This stopped Perkins having much influence first half but also meant that Razek did little and allowed the rest of their midfield to pass the ball around without him closing down.
I assume he was playing to orders rather than just fancied a rest.
And as others have said he had travelled to Africa midweek so might have been a bit knackered.
Unfortunately the subs didn't work but at least powell tried something. I must admit thinking at half time defeat was ineviatble unless we changed something.
I thought the Barnsley albino was good. Always available, never lost possession, kept things going for them.