This led to various discussions, and one topic that Boyce focused heavily on was Neil Lennon’s substitutions and tactical decisions that he made during the match.
Before Nir Bitton was sent off, Lennon had not made one substitution, then when he was sent off Shane Duffy was brought on to fill the gap.
Then after Rangers scored, Lennon brought Scott Brown, Hatem Abd Elhamed, and Tom Rogic off the bench yet, according to Boyce, Celtic still ended the match with Duffy upfront, which he was not happy with.
He said: “I think that the decisions Lennon made quite clearly didn’t work, and you get to five minutes to go and tell me he’s not up front. Tell me he is not up front again – I mean, as if he’s not made a big enough plonker of himself in this game all day – tell me that Shane Duffy is not now up front and we have used all five subs.
“If we have got to that stage, when we hadn’t used any subs up [until] the red card, after the red card we use all five and Shane Duffy is the answer up top; it’s just unacceptable.”
Do you think this was a poor idea?
No, it could have worked
TIF Thoughts on Boyce’s claim…
The fact that Rangers have only conceded five goals in the league all season and Lennon thought that the answer to breach that defence would be a central defender, then we can understand why Boyce is so annoyed.
Celtic left Albian Ajeti as an unused substitute, who is at least an attacking player and might have done more than putting Duffy up front, who had a poor game, earning an average rating of 6.55 and only completing 50% of his passes.
Duffy has scored goals at most clubs he has played for, but surely a team containing the likes of Odsonne Edouard should be able to come up with something more creative than throwing Duffy forward in a desperate attempt to take something from the game.
Therefore, we can totally see why Boyce is annoyed, and we agree with everything he is saying.