Freedman out!

[LeverEnd]

I think it is just shit with Dougie AND the players to blame.

But half of them are his players and he prefers to start the ones that aren't ahead of the others he signed.

So the players are in no way to blame whatsoever? Really?

I'd say his judgement, not to mention his managerial ability, is more of an issue.

Ah, so the players are to blame in addition to Dougie. I would say both are a big issue, you know, what with both making cock-ups, poor decisions and in some cases seemingly not giving a shit.

He;'s put his trust in certain players and they have let him down. Now that's ultimately his fault and it's getting to the point where it should cost him his job, but to absolve the lazy arsed wasters from blame just because you're on a personal crusade against the manager is taking it to extremes.

[BWFC_Insane]

Dougie shouldn't be held accountable for the fact that Bogdan lets a simple chance in and Beckford can't put past a keeper one on one.

And where exactly is anyone doing that? I'm blaming him for the formation. At home against Yeovil do you honestly say that it's acceptable for us to be worrying about them rather yhan vice versa? Really?

I don't get the issue with the system. 3 attacking midfield players behind a striker. Given the strengths of Eagles and Hall and supposedly Lee in those versatile roles, is that not our best bet? I'd say it was a pretty bold and attacking selection. And it created chances, we just didn't take them.

[BL3]

He;'s put his trust in certain players and they have let him down. Now that's ultimately his fault and it's getting to the point where it should cost him his job, but to absolve the lazy arsed wasters from blame just because you're on a personal crusade against the manager is taking it to extremes.

But the manager continues to pick these 'lazy arsed wasters', ahead of players he signed. So either he doesn't think that they're lazy, or he doesn't know what he's doing, or both.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

He;'s put his trust in certain players and they have let him down. Now that's ultimately his fault and it's getting to the point where it should cost him his job, but to absolve the lazy arsed wasters from blame just because you're on a personal crusade against the manager is taking it to extremes.

Absolutely agree.

[Tombwfc]

So when we're shitter in defence and not creating chances that is Dougie's fault. When we do better in defence and create chances that is nothing to do with Dougie and just a fluke? If he's to blame for everything shit then he has to be to blame for when it is (slightly) better.

I think it is just shit with Dougie AND the players to blame.

I didn't say it was a fluke, but the level of opposition clearly has something to do with it. In my opinion there is a clear difference in quality between Yeovil and all the other teams we have played so far this season. It's not surprising that we looked better against them than we did against those other sides.

As I said, we also created hat-fulls of chances against Tranmere and Shrewsbury that we didn't create against the likes of Leeds or Brighton. Why was that? Our personnel, Dougie's tactics, or the level of the opposition?

All 3.

Equally?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

So when we're shitter in defence and not creating chances that is Dougie's fault. When we do better in defence and create chances that is nothing to do with Dougie and just a fluke? If he's to blame for everything shit then he has to be to blame for when it is (slightly) better.

I think it is just shit with Dougie AND the players to blame.

I didn't say it was a fluke, but the level of opposition clearly has something to do with it. In my opinion there is a clear difference in quality between Yeovil and all the other teams we have played so far this season. It's not surprising that we looked better against them than we did against those other sides.

As I said, we also created hat-fulls of chances against Tranmere and Shrewsbury that we didn't create against the likes of Leeds or Brighton. Why was that? Our personnel, Dougie's tactics, or the level of the opposition?

All 3.

Equally?

It is football, it is a bit pathetic to get into percentages of blame. It really is as simple as Dougie making bad decisions and players not doing their jobs properly. We can all sit here pointing fingers at one group or the other, but the fact is manager and players are letting us down. So by all means call Dougie shit. I have no problem with that, given there isn't much evidence to argue against that. But call the players shit as well. Most of them are doing their jobs at least as badly. Again, I don't see much evidence to argue against.

[Tombwfc]

So when we're shitter in defence and not creating chances that is Dougie's fault. When we do better in defence and create chances that is nothing to do with Dougie and just a fluke? If he's to blame for everything shit then he has to be to blame for when it is (slightly) better.

I think it is just shit with Dougie AND the players to blame.

I didn't say it was a fluke, but the level of opposition clearly has something to do with it. In my opinion there is a clear difference in quality between Yeovil and all the other teams we have played so far this season. It's not surprising that we looked better against them than we did against those other sides.

As I said, we also created hat-fulls of chances against Tranmere and Shrewsbury that we didn't create against the likes of Leeds or Brighton. Why was that? Our personnel, Dougie's tactics, or the level of the opposition?

All 3.

Equally?

It is football, it is a bit pathetic to get into percentages of blame. It really is as simple as Dougie making bad decisions and players not doing their jobs properly. We can all sit here pointing fingers at one group or the other, but the fact is manager and players are letting us down. So by all means call Dougie shit. I have no problem with that, given there isn't much evidence to argue against that. But call the players shit as well. Most of them are doing their jobs at least as badly. Again, I don't see much evidence to argue against.

All of which is great, but it has nothing really to do with the point I made.

If you play ten games against ten teams and barely create a chance, and then you play a team considerably worse than the ones you've played previously and create more chances - that probably says as much about them as it does you.

That's not an outrageous thing to say is it?

[Hoboh]

Prufock shoudn't rely on highlights and reports. Today we looked like a school boy team all running around clueless no shape.

I must have been at a different game. We was fine yesterday in most things until we got into the final third. We just lack the confidence and creativity to get shots on goal.

Jesus H Christ!

I supose we were ok in most departments factoring in we were at home and hardly play Barcefeckin'lona

Some of you apologists for Freedman/Gartside really take the biscuit, first he'll come good, he's rebuilding, it's the players fault, it's the fans fault, now it's only confidence!
A half decent team would have murdered us yesterday we only looked decent due to it being Yeovil.

Freedman did okay at a club were he was known, liked and felt comfortable he has not one jot of experience to cope with a 'just fell out of the Prem with a big time expectancy' club and is struggling to say the least.
Gartside either lied through his teeth about a swift return (which I doubt giving him a bit of credit) or his judgement of what was needed in the situation (along with a host of others) was totally p*ss poor!

Both should be gone in the morning

I dread the thought of Blackpool surely we ain't going to get hammered in two local darby games!

[Worthy4England]

The buck ultimately has to rest with the Manager...

[thebish]

I think it's because he worries about the opposition rather than concentrating on what we can do.

interesting idea...

I wonder if the modern manager with his modern love of sport science gizmos - i mean the weighty stat-pack and video tracking software that is assembled in advance of a game with any other club...

I know someone who developed that stuff - the stuff they use on the telly to analyse games with little dotted lines and arrrows and player-tracking etc... it's quite sophisticated... his firm sold it to the networks - he is now engaged in selling it to individual clubs to use in preparation for upcoming games..

i wonder if such stuff rather encourages a manager to set out a game to counter the opposition rather than play to your own strengths...

just a thought - a casual, hmmmmm.... kind of thought...

[jaffka]

I think it's because he worries about the opposition rather than concentrating on what we can do.

interesting idea...

I wonder if the modern manager with his modern love of sport science gizmos - i mean the weighty stat-pack and video tracking software that is assembled in advance of a game with any other club...

I know someone who developed that stuff - the stuff they use on the telly to analyse games with little dotted lines and arrrows and player-tracking etc... it's quite sophisticated... his firm sold it to the networks - he is now engaged in selling it to individual clubs to use in preparation for upcoming games..

i wonder if such stuff rather encourages a manager to set out a game to counter the opposition rather than play to your own strengths...

just a thought - a casual, hmmmmm.... kind of thought...

Nicely put the meat on the bones

I was thinking of the interview with Rioch after we won 2-0 at Liverpool.

[SmokinFrazier]

Why Freedman refuses to play 4-4-2 is beyond me, even though it worked for us last season and as soon as we adopted that formation, we went on our best run in years and since we've dropped it, we've barely won a game. How can Freedman not see what works and what doesn't?

In and amongst the regular diatribe a point lurks - and one that I've been asking myself. I can't understand for the life of me, unless he thinks that there are goals in our midfield set-up, why we're lining up with one up top, especially at home and especially against sides whose goal for the season is to hang on in there for dear life.

However, where Freedman baffled me the most today was at, and subsequently after substitution time. Firstly we see Beckford and Feeney ready to come on. 'Brilliant' thinks I and those around me - get Chungy off - we're going 4-4-2 and about fecking time too, though who's coming off for Feeney? I'll come back to that.

Just as the substitutions are about to be made Jay Spearing picks up a bang to the head and a nasty gash above an eye. On seeing this I expected Freedman to ditch the Feeney substitution until he has a better angle on how Spearing is, but no, he ploughs on with the substitutions regardless as to whether Spearing will be coming back on or not. That, I thought was poor. However, going back to the 4-4-2 that never was. I know I wasn't the only person left vexed beyond belief when he swapped Beckford and N'Gog one for one and kept the same formation. What was he hoping for here? Something other than more of the same? How?

So, next thing you know, Bogdan feck up and we're one down, then comes the telling change in formation. We go 4-4-2 and stick Zat Knight up top. Now then, if Freedman recognises at that point that our best chance of scoring a goal is to go 4-4-2 then why aren't we playing 4-4-2 from the start every game? Or, at the very least, why didn't we go 4-4-2 as was expected at substitution time and player Beckford and N'Gog together? Anyone? As we know, and as SF reminds us, that's the formation that got us up the table last season, Craig Dawson aside. It's also the formation that he apologised for having ditched when he admitted fecking up by switching to 4-5-1 on the final game against Blackpool.

This is another of these things that everyone but young Douglas appears to be able to see.

Finally, there is no more desperate a sight than seeing your biggest player thrown up front by dint of nothing other than he is your biggest player, especially when that player has all the ball control of baggy underpants, ditching absolutely everything in recognition that 'tw*t it up to the big lad' is our best 'tactic'.

I know that desperate times require desperate measures but never in my worst nightmares could I ever have dreamt up just how desperate we've become.

That's a good post.

If you look at the results from last year, the improvement when we switch to 4-4-2 is obvious. We started using it around January/February after a pretty average start and immediately picked up much needed points. We started with two strikers against Derby, which we drew 1-1, and then stuck with the formation and went on to win 8 out of our next 10 games. After that, we unforgivably changed to 4-5-1 for the Leicester game, which we lost, then went back to 4-4-2 against Boro, which we won, and then didn't play 4-4-2 in our next two games, and we drew both of those. Freedman has only 13 league wins as a Bolton manager but despite playing the 4-5-1 formation far more often, 9 of those wins came from playing 4-4-2. It is a much more successful formation for us and I don't know why Freedman insists on refusing to play it. Those statistics, and the ones below, are also not taking into account the games we only won we switched to 4-4-2 (such as Burnley or Charlton) or those which saved us from defeat (we were 0-2 against Blackpool playing 4-5-1 and then won the rest of the game 2-0 after switching to 4-4-2)

4-5-1
Played: 24
Won 5
Drew: 10
Lost: 9
Points: 25, or 1.04 per game

4-4-2
Played: 18
Won 9
Drew: 5
Lost: 4
Points: 32, or 1.77 per game

Had we been able to average 1.77 throughout last season, we would have finished second. Had we average 1.04, we'd have ended up on 47 points, which would be second bottom.

And yet despite this clear difference in success, Freedman persists with playing 4-5-1, which is made even more ridiculous by the fact he picks N'Gog, who hasn't got a goal in him, to lead the line. I don't rate Beckford highly but he'd start every single game for me in a 4-5-1 formation until Davies is back. There is no sense at all in starting N'Gog on his own as the player you look towards to get you a goal. He's fine as a number 10 who can hold the ball up and create chances but he's not a goalscorer, which is the first thing a lone striker needs.

Why can us fans see this and not Freedman? Either he's not aware of this or he chooses to ignore it. Either way, it's poor management.

[Prufrock]

But we were lucky in those games were we not? We never outplayed anyone for 90 minutes. And the structure was all wrong.

So why the feck do you want us to do that again?

And we didn't play a 4-4-2. It was a 4-3-1-2 pretty similar to what we played at home to QPR and were woeful with.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

All of which is great, but it has nothing really to do with the point I made.

If you play ten games against ten teams and barely create a chance, and then you play a team considerably worse than the ones you've played previously and create more chances - that probably says as much about them as it does you.

That's not an outrageous thing to say is it?

It does have something to do with it. You said we were a bit better but that was purely down to crap opposition. It isn't as black and white as that. If there was an improvement then those involved should get at least some credit. It has been shit all season, but to say it is all Dougie's fault, but then say it has nothing to do with him when it is better is hardly a balanced view.

[Palace]

I think it's because he worries about the opposition rather than concentrating on what we can do.

interesting idea...

I wonder if the modern manager with his modern love of sport science gizmos - i mean the weighty stat-pack and video tracking software that is assembled in advance of a game with any other club...

I know someone who developed that stuff - the stuff they use on the telly to analyse games with little dotted lines and arrrows and player-tracking etc... it's quite sophisticated... his firm sold it to the networks - he is now engaged in selling it to individual clubs to use in preparation for upcoming games..

i wonder if such stuff rather encourages a manager to set out a game to counter the opposition rather than play to your own strengths...

just a thought - a casual, hmmmmm.... kind of thought...

Exactly that. Just popping in here but we had a turnaround when we started playing to our strengths rather than looking to neutralise the opposition. We were 'overthinking' it and giving too much respect to who we were playing against, in all honestly it's not a high standard the championship. Attack teams and you will tear most apart. You're in a position where he's going to have to start going for it now which is when you should see the best of the formation. Moritz and Danns are two good signings, get them in midfield alongside someone else and you will head up the table.

[plymouth wanderer]

I suppose he picked up this particular trait in italy

[Lord Kangana]

Are we technically in the sh*t now then or not? Or is this part of the grand masterplan to get the kids playing/get rid of the driftwood/restructure the club from top to bottom/fatten the club up for a juicy sale?

And is this the worst ever start to a season now officially, or is there a team we've produced previously that somehow has managed to contrive to be even shitter than this?

Hats off Dougie, you talk a good game.

[Il Pirate]

Why Freedman refuses to play 4-4-2 is beyond me, even though it worked for us last season and as soon as we adopted that formation, we went on our best run in years and since we've dropped it, we've barely won a game. How can Freedman not see what works and what doesn't?

In and amongst the regular diatribe a point lurks - and one that I've been asking myself. I can't understand for the life of me, unless he thinks that there are goals in our midfield set-up, why we're lining up with one up top, especially at home and especially against sides whose goal for the season is to hang on in there for dear life.

However, where Freedman baffled me the most today was at, and subsequently after substitution time. Firstly we see Beckford and Feeney ready to come on. 'Brilliant' thinks I and those around me - get Chungy off - we're going 4-4-2 and about fecking time too, though who's coming off for Feeney? I'll come back to that.

Just as the substitutions are about to be made Jay Spearing picks up a bang to the head and a nasty gash above an eye. On seeing this I expected Freedman to ditch the Feeney substitution until he has a better angle on how Spearing is, but no, he ploughs on with the substitutions regardless as to whether Spearing will be coming back on or not. That, I thought was poor. However, going back to the 4-4-2 that never was. I know I wasn't the only person left vexed beyond belief when he swapped Beckford and N'Gog one for one and kept the same formation. What was he hoping for here? Something other than more of the same? How?

So, next thing you know, Bogdan feck up and we're one down, then comes the telling change in formation. We go 4-4-2 and stick Zat Knight up top. Now then, if Freedman recognises at that point that our best chance of scoring a goal is to go 4-4-2 then why aren't we playing 4-4-2 from the start every game? Or, at the very least, why didn't we go 4-4-2 as was expected at substitution time and player Beckford and N'Gog together? Anyone? As we know, and as SF reminds us, that's the formation that got us up the table last season, Craig Dawson aside. It's also the formation that he apologised for having ditched when he admitted fecking up by switching to 4-5-1 on the final game against Blackpool.

This is another of these things that everyone but young Douglas appears to be able to see.

Finally, there is no more desperate a sight than seeing your biggest player thrown up front by dint of nothing other than he is your biggest player, especially when that player has all the ball control of baggy underpants, ditching absolutely everything in recognition that 'tw*t it up to the big lad' is our best 'tactic'.

I know that desperate times require desperate measures but never in my worst nightmares could I ever have dreamt up just how desperate we've become.

That's a good post.

If you look at the results from last year, the improvement when we switch to 4-4-2 is obvious. We started using it around January/February after a pretty average start and immediately picked up much needed points. We started with two strikers against Derby, which we drew 1-1, and then stuck with the formation and went on to win 8 out of our next 10 games. After that, we unforgivably changed to 4-5-1 for the Leicester game, which we lost, then went back to 4-4-2 against Boro, which we won, and then didn't play 4-4-2 in our next two games, and we drew both of those. Freedman has only 13 league wins as a Bolton manager but despite playing the 4-5-1 formation far more often, 9 of those wins came from playing 4-4-2. It is a much more successful formation for us and I don't know why Freedman insists on refusing to play it. Those statistics, and the ones below, are also not taking into account the games we only won we switched to 4-4-2 (such as Burnley or Charlton) or those which saved us from defeat (we were 0-2 against Blackpool playing 4-5-1 and then won the rest of the game 2-0 after switching to 4-4-2)

4-5-1
Played: 24
Won 5
Drew: 10
Lost: 9
Points: 25, or 1.04 per game

4-4-2
Played: 18
Won 9
Drew: 5
Lost: 4
Points: 32, or 1.77 per game

Had we been able to average 1.77 throughout last season, we would have finished second. Had we average 1.04, we'd have ended up on 47 points, which would be second bottom.

And yet despite this clear difference in success, Freedman persists with playing 4-5-1, which is made even more ridiculous by the fact he picks N'Gog, who hasn't got a goal in him, to lead the line. I don't rate Beckford highly but he'd start every single game for me in a 4-5-1 formation until Davies is back. There is no sense at all in starting N'Gog on his own as the player you look towards to get you a goal. He's fine as a number 10 who can hold the ball up and create chances but he's not a goalscorer, which is the first thing a lone striker needs.

Why can us fans see this and not Freedman? Either he's not aware of this or he chooses to ignore it. Either way, it's poor management.

Everyone's aware you didn't want, do not like, & would like to get rid of Dougie. However, there's a lot of logic here. After 2 bottles of fine merlot, I can't begin to question the maths regarding ppg, but it's a fine line as percentages go Joe. I too wanted Dougie gone around 4 games ago, as I see yet another Coyle situation unfolding. We are now 59 pages into this thread and he hasn't been booted yet. For me he has Blackpool, Brum, Huddersfield. Hell; if he's not got at least 4 points from those games we are well and truly fecked. The board must act then. ..................Did I ever mention we used to employ Hierro? And Okacha? And Djorkiaef? Anelka? OK then, how about Campo? We did son, honestly,........it's all in the history of Bolton Wanderers. We used to play in Europe.....What'dya mean I'm havin' a laugh? It's true honest it is......Seems a long while ago like, but they were good days.............cup finals, beating Arsenal, Man U, Liverpool..................No, I'm not on drugs, it's the truth. Yes, yes, I know. We now struggle at home against Yeovil, but it wasn't always like this...............

[plymouth wanderer]

Why Freedman refuses to play 4-4-2 is beyond me, even though it worked for us last season and as soon as we adopted that formation, we went on our best run in years and since we've dropped it, we've barely won a game. How can Freedman not see what works and what doesn't?

In and amongst the regular diatribe a point lurks - and one that I've been asking myself. I can't understand for the life of me, unless he thinks that there are goals in our midfield set-up, why we're lining up with one up top, especially at home and especially against sides whose goal for the season is to hang on in there for dear life.

However, where Freedman baffled me the most today was at, and subsequently after substitution time. Firstly we see Beckford and Feeney ready to come on. 'Brilliant' thinks I and those around me - get Chungy off - we're going 4-4-2 and about fecking time too, though who's coming off for Feeney? I'll come back to that.

Just as the substitutions are about to be made Jay Spearing picks up a bang to the head and a nasty gash above an eye. On seeing this I expected Freedman to ditch the Feeney substitution until he has a better angle on how Spearing is, but no, he ploughs on with the substitutions regardless as to whether Spearing will be coming back on or not. That, I thought was poor. However, going back to the 4-4-2 that never was. I know I wasn't the only person left vexed beyond belief when he swapped Beckford and N'Gog one for one and kept the same formation. What was he hoping for here? Something other than more of the same? How?

So, next thing you know, Bogdan feck up and we're one down, then comes the telling change in formation. We go 4-4-2 and stick Zat Knight up top. Now then, if Freedman recognises at that point that our best chance of scoring a goal is to go 4-4-2 then why aren't we playing 4-4-2 from the start every game? Or, at the very least, why didn't we go 4-4-2 as was expected at substitution time and player Beckford and N'Gog together? Anyone? As we know, and as SF reminds us, that's the formation that got us up the table last season, Craig Dawson aside. It's also the formation that he apologised for having ditched when he admitted fecking up by switching to 4-5-1 on the final game against Blackpool.

This is another of these things that everyone but young Douglas appears to be able to see.

Finally, there is no more desperate a sight than seeing your biggest player thrown up front by dint of nothing other than he is your biggest player, especially when that player has all the ball control of baggy underpants, ditching absolutely everything in recognition that 'tw*t it up to the big lad' is our best 'tactic'.

I know that desperate times require desperate measures but never in my worst nightmares could I ever have dreamt up just how desperate we've become.

That's a good post.

If you look at the results from last year, the improvement when we switch to 4-4-2 is obvious. We started using it around January/February after a pretty average start and immediately picked up much needed points. We started with two strikers against Derby, which we drew 1-1, and then stuck with the formation and went on to win 8 out of our next 10 games. After that, we unforgivably changed to 4-5-1 for the Leicester game, which we lost, then went back to 4-4-2 against Boro, which we won, and then didn't play 4-4-2 in our next two games, and we drew both of those. Freedman has only 13 league wins as a Bolton manager but despite playing the 4-5-1 formation far more often, 9 of those wins came from playing 4-4-2. It is a much more successful formation for us and I don't know why Freedman insists on refusing to play it. Those statistics, and the ones below, are also not taking into account the games we only won we switched to 4-4-2 (such as Burnley or Charlton) or those which saved us from defeat (we were 0-2 against Blackpool playing 4-5-1 and then won the rest of the game 2-0 after switching to 4-4-2)

4-5-1
Played: 24
Won 5
Drew: 10
Lost: 9
Points: 25, or 1.04 per game

4-4-2
Played: 18
Won 9
Drew: 5
Lost: 4
Points: 32, or 1.77 per game

Had we been able to average 1.77 throughout last season, we would have finished second. Had we average 1.04, we'd have ended up on 47 points, which would be second bottom.

And yet despite this clear difference in success, Freedman persists with playing 4-5-1, which is made even more ridiculous by the fact he picks N'Gog, who hasn't got a goal in him, to lead the line. I don't rate Beckford highly but he'd start every single game for me in a 4-5-1 formation until Davies is back. There is no sense at all in starting N'Gog on his own as the player you look towards to get you a goal. He's fine as a number 10 who can hold the ball up and create chances but he's not a goalscorer, which is the first thing a lone striker needs.

Why can us fans see this and not Freedman? Either he's not aware of this or he chooses to ignore it. Either way, it's poor management.

Cracking couple of posts that

I wouldn't argue with you on them stats SF

[Worthy4England]

Conversely in the last season in the Prem, we were clearly better playing 4-5-1. I'm fairly sure DSB and others have made erudite posts that point to the fact that neither 4-5-1 nor 4-4-2 (or any other combo you think of) are a mantra for better football. The formation needs to fit the players you have and the way you're training.

A static 4-5-1 with no ability to transition from defence to attack doesn't work, a 4-4-2, with two clueless strikers probably doesn't work either. As the minute, with our two main strikers, I'm not sure it'd be any better, despite historical stats - the historical stats don't show that we didn't have Beckford as the second striker last season.