Freedman out!

[BWFC_Insane]

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

Just like West Ham are "doing something" now eh?

[BWFC_Insane]

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)

Quite revisionist that. He didn't change the system at 2-1 immediately. He took Beckford off when Blackpool were all over us like a rash and overunning the midfield, with Ince exposing Ream (who got little support) constantly. Of course he had to put extra men into midfield and provide Ream with some help, as at the time it was only a matter of time till Blackpool equalised.

His substiutions actually gave us back some measure of control on the game, before them we very much were clinging on for dear life.

[Beefheart]

The notion that 4-4-2 is more attacking that 4-5-1, or a variation of it, is overly simplistic and outdated really. Very few of the top teams in the world play 4-4-2 for good reason. I think it's just natural for fans to want a change of formation when things aren't going well. When Coyle was here he would play a 4-4-2 and we would cry out for 4-5-1 (or a variation of it). I think the problem tends to be deeper than whether we are playing 1 striker or 2.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

As the question is being asked, and at risk of it being the wrong thread - personally I'd prefer us not to play 4-4-2 against hard-working Forest, but to play a team with a solid base capable of springing into attack. Say, Eagles and Lee either side of Moritz, with Mark Davies and Spearing-or-Medo behind them.

Mind you Barefoot has complained of "tippy-tappy football" so I think we may have somewhat different views on the game. But I will ask Barefoot this: if you "don't like managers who are too stubborn", why complain when Freedman changes his formation (two up top), takes the lead, then changes it again when the opposition are threatening? Surely that's not stubborn?

As explained above I'm all for attacking football with a solid base, rather than gormlessly going 4-4-2 as a default (I was there at Crawley when Coyle lost the game and the plot doing that). And I suspect that Freedman is somewhat overly cautious, but he's saved/won us a fair few points by making sure we don't unnecessarily throw them away. Had we blown the second-half lead because Freedman didn't react to Blackpool coming into it, I would have been livid at the manager's inertia, and I wouldn't have been alone.

[Beefheart]

I would also say that we probably benefited from having a greater number of more technically gifted players in the side. Eagles, Ngog and Moritz all linked up well, where I think recently the midfield might have been overloaded with grafters.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I would also say that we probably benefited from having a greater number of more technically gifted players in the side. Eagles, Ngog and Moritz all linked up well, where I think recently the midfield might have been overloaded with grafters.

That too. Although of course you need both, or it all gets a bit Coyle-at-Wembley.

[LeverEnd]

The change in formation definitely came after Blackpool has started to get the upper hand, it wasn't the cause.

[Athers]

The notion that 4-4-2 is more attacking that 4-5-1, or a variation of it, is overly simplistic and outdated really. Very few of the top teams in the world play 4-4-2 for good reason. I think it's just natural for fans to want a change of formation when things aren't going well. When Coyle was here he would play a 4-4-2 and we would cry out for 4-5-1 (or a variation of it). I think the problem tends to be deeper than whether we are playing 1 striker or 2.

A thousand times this!

Barcelona play one or even none up front, the defensive buggers. Real Madrid just the one. Arsenal - just the one. Tony Pulis defend deep and launch it: Two.

[boltonboris]

I think the reason so many of us want a 2 up top is because the 1 is so often isolated beyond function.

[LeverEnd]

I think the reason so many of us want a 2 up top is because the 1 is so often isolated beyond function.

That's exactly it for me. Midfield isn't breaking forward enough.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think the reason so many of us want a 2 up top is because the 1 is so often isolated beyond function.

Careful, you'll get him playing Ngog as a false nine... no isolation there, with the striker withdrawn like the head of a frightened turtle.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Post-Blackpool, Freedman quoted in the BN on 4-4-2:

We went with a standard front two and played pretty direct if I’m being honest. I thought the two strikers were excellent. We looked at their shape and how they play and we just felt we could take advantage of one or two things. And it worked for us, especially in the first half. I felt we were right at their back four. Sometimes that approach works for you, other times it doesn’t. But it worked today.

Teams come to the Reebok and sit in. We played with a lot of desire, great bits of quality. Defensively, we made one or two mistakes – we have got to get better at that – but in the end we showed grit and determination to see the game out. We deserve that bit of luck. We have had lots of draws – fine lines at this place – and hopefully that kick starts us at the Reebok. Today was a big achievement at getting across the line. Can we play better? Yes, of course we can. But when you have got the honesty and determination in the group, they are going to win matches.

(And on Medo:

I thought he was great. Mark Davies had a cold and Jay Spearing I rested. So he was asked to do a real disciplined role and he did that. Medo kept picking up the ball and breaking their attacks down and re-generating the ball to our players. I also have to give credit to Andy Lonergan because he pulled off one or two saves that were really important in the end.

)

[boltonboris]

read somewhere that Medo is statistically the best midfielder in the division in terms of tackles, pass %, interceptions etc.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

read somewhere that Medo is statistically the best midfielder in the division in terms of tackles, pass %, interceptions etc.

Intriguing. WhoScored.com is a bit of a faffy site with a somewhat arbitrary "rating" system but they seem to count a few things, so it's worth a few minutes on their reorderably-columned Bolton page. (I can't find a comparison by league; it may exist, but so does my workload.)

They have Medo as our top tackler - by far, with 3.9 per game (next is effectively Baptiste on 2.2, if you ignore Mears's 3 in his sole game and McNaughton's impressive 3.4). For interceptions per game, Medo's below Spearing and Ream. For clearances, Mills is top. Spearing is much more likely to produce a chance-making pass (1.6 per game to Medo's 0.6 - Jay being third behind Chungy and Eagles, ignoring the departed Feeney).

For passes, they have Spearing on 83.6% pass accuracy - bettered only by Mark Davies (whose sample is surely too small to be reliable but who will, we would hope, continue in that vein). Chungy is third, Danns fourth, Medo fifth, Mason sixth.

You, I and others all know that passing accuracy can be something of a duff statistic as it rewards the safe sideways pass and punishes the riskier through-ball, but it certainly gives you food for thought that Zat's the second worst outfield player (after target man Craig Davies - target men almost always have a low accuracy). A startling 36.1% of Zat's passes haven't reached their man. That speaks of a centre-back who shouldn't be dictating play, although to be fair to Zat he may have been frustrated by the lack of shorter, safer passing options in front of him...

Another Zat fact: 2.8 aerial duels won per game. Fewer than Tierney, Mears and Baptiste. A lot fewer than Mills and Wheater.

Bolton on WhoScored

[Athers]

Noticeable that on those % completed stats Knight only has 20 passes per game, vs Mills 36 (at 68%) and Ream is down as 40 (75%) but then he's played a couple of games at full back and in midfield.

So poor old Zat only plays about 13 passes to a white shirt per game.

For interest I looked up the top passing % and Koscielny (38) & Mertesacker (47) at Arsenal run at a whopping 92%. I'd imagine most of these are easy little taps to Arteta and Flamini. But then again a lot of teams sit off against Arsenal anyway so it's easier for them. Could be here all day

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Yeah, centre-backs frequently get high percentage completion – pass to each other or to a midfielder dropping deep for the ball. That's how it should be, rather than a centre-back clipping it hopefully forward - rarely a good thing, whether it's Zat or Rio Ferdinand in his pomp.

[Athers]

Our CB numbers are impressively low if you consider we have had both Medo and Spearing (and even Ream) sat in front of the back four all season.

[CAPSLOCK]

I'm not a Spearing knocker - it does seem to be in vogue, mind - but I wonder how many times the next pass after Spearings is one that concedes possession

[thebish]

I'm not a Spearing knocker - it does seem to be in vogue, mind - but I wonder how many times the next pass after Spearings is one that concedes possession

I'm not a spearing knocker, I'm a spearing knocker's son...
I'm only knocking spearing 'till the spearing knocker comes.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I'm not a Spearing knocker - it does seem to be in vogue, mind - but I wonder how many times the next pass after Spearings is one that concedes possession

He set up a goal over Christmas with an intelligent angled forward ball... nothing Hollywood like his old mate Stevie G, just an intelligent look around and finding an option ten yards forward. That's all we need, especially if he's got three like Moritz/Eagles/Chungy in front of him (or a striker coming deep like Ngog or Mason).