Got a question for you guys. 10 minutes left in the game your losing. 1-2 so you substitute two fresh offensive players in for two who has played 80 minutes. Then the coach who is a head takes out an attacking player and replaces him with a fresh defensive player. We're both moves by each coach smart?
Only 10 minutes seems a little late to me. I could see putting in fresh attackers with 15 to play. I'm cool with the defensive switch. But, if you give up the tying goal, you are sort of conceding that you don't want to come back and win
Team behind: 2 new attackers, like for like, is not really a tactical adjustment. It is sticking with the game plan. I won't say it is wrong, but I probably would replace a fullback with a fresh attacking fullback to generate more pressure wide. Team ahead: I think fixing something that isn't broken is a mistake. So I would make like for like changes, looking for tired legs to replace or mismatches.
I was at MCI park Sunday afternoon to watch the Cosmo game Gio there coach was one of my old players. There backs were hurt so they played with backs who normally would be substitutes. There trailing 1-2. The other team kept countering them. That is how they got the lead. Subs made for 14 minutes includes extra time. Cosmo dominated the play for all 14 minutes they drew level, but should have won the game. I think the coach of the other team was stupid for taking out an attacking mid and replace him with a back. First he was not s good defender, and could not do a thing on attack. Cosmos should have won the game. That move helped the Cosmos dominate on the attack.