Freedman out!

[thebish]

We should be on the front foot.

Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the players and the mindset.

But the XI we've chosen today is quite a forward-thinking one.

... & all the better for it.

Despite currently a scoreline of 1-1 at least we've taken it to them.

This and then some.

hmmmm but even then it sounds like we were a couple of great goalkeeping saves from a very different story...

[bwfcdan94]

We should be on the front foot.

Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the players and the mindset.

But the XI we've chosen today is quite a forward-thinking one.

please explain how 5-4-1 could be attacking for example or how 2-3-5 could be defensive?

[LeverEnd]

Well done to Dougie today for putting a proper side out, respecting a competition that's a big part of our history, and trying something new (for him, tactically). I'll get excited when we've put a few games like together consistently in the league though. Really hope we don't regress again next week.

[alonga6]

Well done to Dougie today for putting a proper side out, respecting a competition that's a big part of our history, and trying something new (for him, tactically). I'll get excited when we've put a few games like together consistently in the league though. Really hope we don't regress again next week.

Next week? What? It's the famous team! Bolton Feckin' Wanderer's - back in the pit's for years ;o)

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

We should be on the front foot.

Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the players and the mindset.

But the XI we've chosen today is quite a forward-thinking one.

please explain how 5-4-1 could be attacking for example or how 2-3-5 could be defensive?

The players don't stand still. If the 5 and the 4 in 5-4-1 get forward in numbers when in possession they that would be quite attacking. If 4 of the 5 in 2-3-5 decide to sit just in front of the 3 and not move forward in possession, then this would be very defensive. Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the personnel and what those personnel do.

[bwfcdan94]

We should be on the front foot.

Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the players and the mindset.

But the XI we've chosen today is quite a forward-thinking one.

please explain how 5-4-1 could be attacking for example or how 2-3-5 could be defensive?

The players don't stand still. If the 5 and the 4 in 5-4-1 get forward in numbers when in possession they that would be quite attacking. If 4 of the 5 in 2-3-5 decide to sit just in front of the 3 and not move forward in possession, then this would be very defensive. Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the personnel and what those personnel do.

That would be 3-6-1 then 2-7-1, that's a new one on me. The point I am making is that strikers attack, the second they start dropping into the midfield they become midfielders in the same way when fall backs start playing as wing backs they become wide midfielders. I understand your point but I don't agree with it.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

We should be on the front foot.

Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the players and the mindset.

But the XI we've chosen today is quite a forward-thinking one.

please explain how 5-4-1 could be attacking for example or how 2-3-5 could be defensive?

The players don't stand still. If the 5 and the 4 in 5-4-1 get forward in numbers when in possession they that would be quite attacking. If 4 of the 5 in 2-3-5 decide to sit just in front of the 3 and not move forward in possession, then this would be very defensive. Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on the personnel and what those personnel do.

That would be 3-6-1 then 2-7-1, that's a new one on me. The point I am making is that strikers attack, the second they start dropping into the midfield they become midfielders in the same way when fall backs start playing as wing backs they become wide midfielders. I understand your point but I don't agree with it.

You see, all this over analytical formation bollocks was started by Sky as they had hours of telly to fill. They also had to find something to fluff out the use of buzzwords from the pundits. So, Andy Gray and his board was born. Putting rows of coloured counters in to different pretty patterns. It's bullshit. I mean, half the time match goers can't even agree what formation we play. Why? Because football is much more fluid than that. Would you describe Thierry Henry as a winger? Probably not, but he drifted out to the wing for large periods of games. Was Nolan a midfielder or striker? We call him a midfielder but he arguably did more in the penalty box for us than in midfield. As much as Sky like to neatly package the game to sell to the world, it is more fluid than a set of numbers, otherwise it'd be dull as ditch water and Tango would be calling bingo numbers rather than commentating on the match thread.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

And the point you're both arriving at is that "4-5-1" or whatever doesn't tell the full story, because it's not table football. Each system should have *at least* two formations - with the ball and without it. For instance, Allardyce's system was pretty much 4-1-4-1 without the ball (the more defensive 1 being Warhurst or Campo, etc) springing to 4-3-3 in possession with the wide 'auxiliary attackers' augmenting the target man.

At a further level, you could argue it depends where the ball is on the pitch, either in possession or out of it. Some teams (like Southampton) track the ball in packs so their formation is actually pretty lopsided whenever the ball's wide. Other teams might stick more rigidly to their zones, either to track opposition runners or to spread play when they get the ball.

Formations are mere theoretical starting points frozen in time. Once the ball's moving players act upon further instructions. And, back to where we came in, it also depends on the players themselves, regardless of tactics. You could make a case that Gary Megson played a 4-3-3 formation, but with Matt Taylor on one side and (infamously) Gavin McCann on the other it was a lot less attacking than Owen Coyle picking a 4-4-2 with Elmander, Petrov and Lee alongside Muamba in midfield. And those instances are carefully chosen for illustrative purposes.

[BWFC_Insane]

I still am not sure I get the shouts for 4-4-2.

I get it suits our strikers better. But for me our best player when fit is M Davies. And he definitely doesn't fit in a 4. Moritz the same. He is better behind a striker in a 5.

I think our midfield is too weak to play in that way a lot of the time. At home against certain sides, sure, but I'd certainly be worried if we tried it every week or even most the time.

I mean for me it looked good first half mainly because of Blackpools failings rather than ours. I look at the second half once they stepped up and think our system completely got swamped for large parts of it till the changes.

[SmokinFrazier]

West Ham are currently 4-0 down to Forest with time still to play. Will Allardyce get another game in charge?

[LeverEnd]

West Ham are currently 4-0 down to Forest with time still to play. Will Allardyce get another game in charge?

I doubt they'll sack him before the LC semi.

[boltonboris]

Mark Davies would be fine in a 4 I reckon. Not with Spearing, but definitely with Medo. Could have Danns as a narrow wide man too, to help beef it up a bit when we've not got the ball

Would also give is the chance to change the 4 to a 5 if required without making subs

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Would also give is the chance to change the 4 to a 5 if required without making subs

That would be nice, being reactive during the game...

[boltonboris]

It means coaching the players though. Which seems to be a problem for our managers

[SmokinFrazier]

Mark Davies would be fine in a 4 I reckon. Not with Spearing, but definitely with Medo. Could have Danns as a narrow wide man too, to help beef it up a bit when we've not got the ball

Would also give is the chance to change the 4 to a 5 if required without making subs

Yeah, I think a Davies or Spearing partnership with Medo could work, though I don't think Spearing and Davies offers enough defensively without someone behind them. We have a good midfield right now though, which allows us to have a variety of different systems which should all work.

CYL - Medo - Davies/Spearing - Eagles
---------N'Gog - Beckford------------

or

-------------Medo-------------
CYL - Spearing - Davies - Eagles
------------Beckford-----------

or

CYL - Medo - Spearing - Eagles
-----------Moritz-------------
----------Beckford------------

We have a fair bit of depth in the squad too, with Danns, Pratley, Vela, Hall etc., so there's plenty of room for variation in formation and players.

[Barefoot Wanderer]

Well done to Dougie today for putting a proper side out, respecting a competition that's a big part of our history, and trying something new (for him, tactically). I'll get excited when we've put a few games like together consistently in the league though. Really hope we don't regress again next week.

Yeah, but you know what'll happen on saturday don't you?

- dougie will revert to 4-5-1

in dougies book if a player plays well he's rested for a game or two and if a different formation works then change that as well. I recall DF playing 4-4-2 when he's been chasing a game but if we go in front he resorts back to 4-5-1

dougie is more affraid of losing a match than thinking he may win it - blackpool didn't matter until we were 2-1 up at which point he er..

yeah you've guessed it. He went back to 4-5-1. brought chungy on for beckford. took moritz and eagles off and brought on pratley and
vela

I don't like managers who are too stubborn. One of DF's coaching staff should pull him to one side and say, "look, we've only won two at home don't you think you should try something different or more possitive" - failing that PG should sack him, but that's never going to happen because PG is so stubborn he still thinks sacking Allardyce was a good idea (clut)

[CrazyHorse]

Allardyce wasn't sacked. He left to spend time with his family.

Before rucking up at Newcastle and being revealed as their new manager 20 minutes later.

[Enoch]

He'd heard Roeder had Skype set up in the office.

[Hoboh]

BSA needs to swallow his pride and rebuild his reputation now
Feck off fatty Phil , Sam back and we will do something.

[boltonboris]

Never jump in bed with an ex. Especially a fat ugly one who leaves you feeling like all your mates hate you when you're with her.