Why No Kouassi?

[Hooleys]

We seemed to stumble on a winning formula against Reading at home and Barnsley away with Kouassi and Dale coming into the team.
The shape seemed to be working, obviously not the finished article (regarding the team) why then just seem to ignore it? By leaving Kouassi out?
Strange decision to me.
Opinions anyone

 

[Devonshire]

Because it’s the Critchley way, overthink it and try and be clever with your selections he needs to learn football is a simple game

 

[Graves]

Unfortunately Dale has had some difficult personal circumstances and needs a bit of time, but the Kouassi decision baffles me too. We won two on the bounce, then it was changed. Why?

 

[tangerine_neil]

It baffles me even more when everyone and their dog can see that Lavery is not back to full fitness yet. Yet he gets the start. Best player for winning and directing a header is left on the bench for virtually all match.

 

[Matesrates]

KK should have been on from the start, everyone can see that except for classroom Critchley

 

[southshore]

It baffles me even more when everyone and their dog can see that Lavery is not back to full fitness yet. Yet he gets the start. Best player for winning and directing a header is left on the bench for virtually all match.

Unfortunately Lavery can only play one position, straight down the middle, and he needs a target man next to him.

 

[Ping Pong]

Wish Critchley would explain this crazy decision!

 

[7YearCritch]

You stick with a winning formula until it starts to go wrong and then you try something different. Critch seems to stick with the stuff that doesn't work and instantly dispose of the stuff that does!

 

[zico_bamber]

I have a theory. Critchley keeps mentioning stats in his interviews. I think certain players "data" give them more likelihood of being picked than others. Carey, for example, probably covers more ground than anyone. Perhaps KKs stats aren't up to much despite actually playing well.