You don't change a winning formula, they say. If you're Roy Hodgson, you don't necessarily change a losing formula either. Premier League benches have been elongated this season but the Fulham manager declined to make any substitutions during his team's defeat to West Ham United on Saturday, just as he did during the previous weekend's beating by Blackburn.
Hodgson was rightly acclaimed last season when he insisted on playing deliberate, neat football even when his side were snared in the relegation zone. They continue to cultivate that style and were generally the more convincing side against West Ham even after Andrew Johnson's red card. Hodgson explained afterwards that he didn't think there was any substitution he could make that would definitely improve his team's performance. That could be construed as an admission of the lack of his squad's depth, and certainly the absence of a specialist left winger was punishing, though either Seol Ki-Hyeon or Clint Dempsey could reasonably have been expected to be more visible than the ghostly Zoltan Gera. Chris Baird and Toni Kallio may also have been more reliable in the full-back berths than the negligent John Pantsil and Paul Konchesky. But not "definitely".
"Definitely" was the key word in Hodgson's explanation. By using it he left himself open to accusations of indecision or excessive caution. If we reflect on a record of success that extends well beyond last season's great escape, we may instead deduce that his refusal to gamble on a substitution attests to the strength of his conviction in his methods, a belief, borne of his rich experience, that if you keep performing well you will eventually be rewarded.
Time will tell whether Hodgson is right to be so confident, or whether he's on course to relive the most disappointing days of his career, which happen to have coincided with his last stint in the Premier League. There were many mitigating factors at Ewood Park 10 years ago, notably a hideous injury list, but the fact remains that after a phenomenal first season he presided over a Blackburn nosedive.
If doubt is starting to darken the minds of Fulham fans after recent results, it would be interesting to know how many Tottenham fans would gladly swap him for Juande Ramos, who has been at White Hart Lane for longer than Hodgson had been at the Cottage. Hodgson's reluctance to tweak his team may be frustrating, but Ramos currently represents the other, far more worrying extreme. It's true that the Spaniard, who also has an impressive track record, has had to contend with an unsettling player turnover but it's damning that Spurs are still showing no semblance of cohesion.
Every player knows his role at Fulham even if they occasionally fail to fulfil it. At Spurs, by contrast, instability seems systemic. Of the players whom he inherited and kept, none have improved. There has been much talk of his intensified fitness regime but Tom Huddlestone, for example, is no more dynamic; the defence is as ramshackle as ever; and in goal Heurelho Gomes may even have some fans pining for Paul Robinson.
And the players who were recruited under Ramos, whether at his behest or that of Damien Comolli, have so far not looked like upgrades on the departed. It's too early to write off the likes of Gomes, Roman Pavlyuchenko and Luka Modric, of course, but it's fair to wonder why the club paid £15m on David Bentley only to play him everywhere but on the right wing except as a last resort.
As Hodgson demonstrates an enlightened patience, Ramos seems to be scrambling in the dark.
