Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

James McCarthy

Status
Not open for further replies.
bicycleheader said:
Starting the sentence with "id say" is opinion Dougie, so I don´t really think Bobby needs to admit a mistake that you believe was made. I don´t believe it was a mistake necessarily. Thats two opposing opinions...get it?

The whole discussion about the match is one thing. I was just pulling up a ranty post as I find them amusing when its clearly opinion but shouted out as big rafafacts.
Click to expand...

Obviously I went onto qualify why it's a Fact, I wouldn't have thought that was beyond anyone's comprehension. One person picks the team and chooses the tactics, when it's so obviously wrong he's the only person who can take responsibility nobody else. There are many factors that go into a defeat, I'd prefer the manager to take his share of the blame along with everyone else and not hide behind excuses.

You on the other hand seemingly believe Martinez had no role to play in the defeat, and see things more simplistic way, something I can only envy.
 
bicycleheader said:
Your missing the point again by calling it a tactical decision. Its possible it was I guess, but I would see it as a managerial decision involving managing an injury concern which is one of his many responsibilities.

Most of us would have said the team picked could have at least gotten a draw. The result doesn´t prove anything other than we lost!

Seriously.....this has always always been a part of football.
Click to expand...

It was certainly a tactical decision, as he tactically opted to put him on the bench. That's not even an opinion really, it's what it was. It's as factual as saying Lukaku played up front as a striker. The opinion would be whether the tactical decision was correct or not, not whether it was one in the first place.

A decision out of his hands would be if the player wasn't fit enough to play, but he clearly was as he played. Once he named McCarthy on the bench, any caveat of an injury for the player went out the window. He'd passed a fitness test to play football, and that's the end of the matter.

Martinez tactically opted to keep McCarthy out of the team. It doesn't matter if a slight injury concern was there or not, if he selected him in his 18 then that's a moot point as he's fit enough to play, end of story. And the result and performance combined says he got it tactically wrong. His substitutions mid-game prove he got it tactically wrong - even if you asked Martinez himself I'm fairly sure he'd tell you he misjudged the situation, hence why we had all three subs on by the hour mark.
 
Tubey said:
It was certainly a tactical decision, as he tactically opted to put him on the bench. That's not even an opinion really, it's what it was. It's as factual as saying Lukaku played up front as a striker. The opinion would be whether the tactical decision was correct or not, not whether it was one in the first place.

A decision out of his hands would be if the player wasn't fit enough to play, but he clearly was as he played. Once he named McCarthy on the bench, any caveat of an injury for the player went out the window. He'd passed a fitness test to play football, and that's the end of the matter.

Martinez tactically opted to keep McCarthy out of the team. It doesn't matter if a slight injury concern was there or not, if he selected him in his 18 then that's a moot point as he's fit enough to play, end of story. And the result and performance combined says he got it tactically wrong. His substitutions mid-game prove he got it tactically wrong - even if you asked Martinez himself I'm fairly sure he'd tell you he misjudged the situation, hence why we had all three subs on by the hour mark.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is 'if player 'x' is in the match day squad then he is fit enough to play 90 mins'?

Incorrect.
 
Dithering Dougie said:
Obviously I went onto qualify why it's a Fact, I wouldn't have thought that was beyond anyone's comprehension. One person picks the team and chooses the tactics, when it's so obviously wrong he's the only person who can take responsibility nobody else. There are many factors that go into a defeat, I'd prefer the manager to take his share of the blame along with everyone else and not hide behind excuses.

You on the other hand seemingly believe Martinez had no role to play in the defeat, and see things more simplistic way, something I can only envy.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with criticism of the boss, not at all. You say you went on to qualify it as fact but you are not, you are just giving some basis for your opinion.

"when its so obviously wrong" is just an opinion and is much of the basis for your opinion. It can be wrong for lots of other reasons too, just like the reason the boss gave.

I said I am inclined to believe him as I think he has earned our support in this way. I could be wrong though, and that is why I don´t state my opposing opinion as a fact.
 

Tubey said:
It was certainly a tactical decision, as he tactically opted to put him on the bench. That's not even an opinion really, it's what it was. It's as factual as saying Lukaku played up front as a striker. The opinion would be whether the tactical decision was correct or not, not whether it was one in the first place.

A decision out of his hands would be if the player wasn't fit enough to play, but he clearly was as he played. Once he named McCarthy on the bench, any caveat of an injury for the player went out the window. He'd passed a fitness test to play football, and that's the end of the matter.

Martinez tactically opted to keep McCarthy out of the team. It doesn't matter if a slight injury concern was there or not, if he selected him in his 18 then that's a moot point as he's fit enough to play, end of story. And the result and performance combined says he got it tactically wrong. His substitutions mid-game prove he got it tactically wrong - even if you asked Martinez himself I'm fairly sure he'd tell you he misjudged the situation, hence why we had all three subs on by the hour mark.
Click to expand...

Sorry Tubey, you THINK he tactically kept him out. Keeping him out because he had an injury which meant it was better if he didn´t play, and at most only played a part if needed, is a managerial decision to me. Its not as black and white as you are trying to make out, sorry its just not.

I´m not saying I know for sure what basis he made that decision on, but his comments support my take on it.

if he selected him in his 18 then that's a moot point as he's fit enough to play, end of story.
Click to expand...

you are still totally missing the point that this is not 100% true though, like I said theres a world of degrees between 100% fit and lying in a hospital. This has been around forever! So, sorry, its not end of story.

dont we have work to do?
 
i think @Tubey might be right here, because he didnt replace mccarthy with the obvious replacement of osman and played 3 'wingers' i think because he thought palace would park the bus(which they did) unfortunately martinez didnt bank on palace scoring twice! lol as i said before i will forgive him as it was tactics to WIN the game
 
mkrudden said:
So what you are saying is 'if player 'x' is in the match day squad then he is fit enough to play 90 mins'?

Incorrect.
Click to expand...


No as there are players who aren't fully fit, who need easing into match practice to handle 90 minutes aerobically, such as Alcaraz. But McCarthy wasn't in that situation.
 
Tubey said:
No as there are players who aren't fully fit, who need easing into match practice to handle 90 minutes aerobically, such as Alcaraz. But McCarthy wasn't in that situation.
Click to expand...

Lets say that the medical department advised Roberto that based on test results there was a 30% chance of McCarthys injury being severely aggravated if he plays.

Roberto therefore has to decide either to have that risk for 90 mins, increasing the chances of him aggravating the injury, or playing McCarthy for just 30 minutes which would obviously minimise the chances of aggravation.

I don't really see what the issue is here? He wasn't fit/was too much of a risk to start.

On a side issue, I thought Ross played quite well alongside McCarthy in a Pirlo type role, pinging passes around.
 
Not sure if anyone has already touched on this form last night, but McCarthy's absence was felt most by the fullbacks IMO. Particularly in the first half I don't think Bainesy or Coleman were able to get forward once due to them having no protection from McCarthy as the usually do. This left us badly exposed to their 2 wingers who both unfortunately for us played very well. When Baines was pushed forward 2nd half we started to look more of a threat again.
 

Really too bad this game came too early for Gibson, would have been interesting to see him slot in next to Barry and keep the ball cycling, damn...........
 
This lad is an exceptional midfield player. The heart of a Lion and the lungs to match. Never say die and works his nuts off for the team.

I honestly can't split him and Coleman for player of the year, both deserve it.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top