wba at home
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 31610
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: wba at home
Y'all sound to me to be talking about different (potential) subs...
Bringing Vela on for a forward would have been a tactically smart move, which some would still have decried had West Brom equalised, but I maintain it wouldn't have typified stubborn managerial one-dimensionality...
Mind you it matters little considering they were ignoring orders anyway...
Bringing Vela on for a forward would have been a tactically smart move, which some would still have decried had West Brom equalised, but I maintain it wouldn't have typified stubborn managerial one-dimensionality...
Mind you it matters little considering they were ignoring orders anyway...
Re: wba at home
Mesen I'd have brought Klasnic off for Vela. Done his job. Sentiment shouldn't defeat getting points. But anything to that end would have done.norm the jedi wrote:If we'd stuck Vela or Alonso on and conceded? Despite the fact that two days and the benefit of hindsight later received wisdom states that would have worked?Prufrock wrote:Seriously? Sticking on a bloke who hasn't played for nine months to hold onto a lead and he'd have been crticised 'no matter what'?!
This idea that if he had brought on Vela to sure it up in the middle a)we would still have conceeded, and b)he'd have got stick for it is bollocks. Right decision. Doesn't mean we defo would have held on, but doesn't make it not right!
He'd have been slaughtered as well. Or would everyone have gone "aye well it was the right move?"
What I don't get is the counter argument, attack being the best form of defence etc. Well that clearly wasn't happening, well intentioned or not, so why not sort it, given he had one more sub left. Instead we were camped in our own half, but with 8 strikers on. Or whatever.
And If he had gone for that sub, no he would not have been slaughtered. Not by me anyway.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
Re: wba at home
Bruce Rioja wrote:Hang on - the purpose of having a guy on the bench is so that he can be brought on at any point! If a guy isn't up to partaking in a game, why's he there?
There is a difference between clodding on your barely fit but most creative and inventive player when you desperately need a goal. Something else when you need to protect a lead.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
Re: wba at home
I've only watched Bolton since Jan, and it seems to me the defense is better than a lot of you give them credit for, probably slightly worse than average. Obviously they were much worse the first half of the season though. The center of midfield seems to be the biggest problem by far, probably the worst in the league. The defense is constantly exposed, everyone/anyone could score 2.
Agree that the last 2 subs against wba were head scratchers, but what was there on the bench. No way LCY should play when a defensive sub is needed. I watch the equalizer a few times, and he just stood there ball watching, leaving Morrison wide open to score.
The coach is open to signing Americans, why not try sign Jermaine Jones from Schalke as a D-Mid? He wants to move to the Premier League, and did well at Blackburn last year. Assuming Bolton stay up, and they can agree on salary...
Agree that the last 2 subs against wba were head scratchers, but what was there on the bench. No way LCY should play when a defensive sub is needed. I watch the equalizer a few times, and he just stood there ball watching, leaving Morrison wide open to score.
The coach is open to signing Americans, why not try sign Jermaine Jones from Schalke as a D-Mid? He wants to move to the Premier League, and did well at Blackburn last year. Assuming Bolton stay up, and they can agree on salary...
Re: wba at home
I've started to comprehend the tortured logic of Owen Coyle. Changing your shape, making defensive substitutions - they're the preserve of a manager presiding over a well-drilled, well-managed and highly organised unit. When your team is a shambolic clusterf*ck of chaos and pandemonium, no substitution or tactical change is going to make any difference. You may as well make any random change on the grounds that it's no better or worse than another.
Just to reiterate, saying Coyle "would've been crucified if he'd brought on a defensive player and we'd still conceded" makes no sense whatsoever in the context of the season. His refusal to countenance a draw has cost us any number of points this season. His refusal to play a more conservative formation had us getting mullered for four months. You could say his relentless "positivity" has been very "negative" for Bolton Wanderers.
Just to reiterate, saying Coyle "would've been crucified if he'd brought on a defensive player and we'd still conceded" makes no sense whatsoever in the context of the season. His refusal to countenance a draw has cost us any number of points this season. His refusal to play a more conservative formation had us getting mullered for four months. You could say his relentless "positivity" has been very "negative" for Bolton Wanderers.
Re: wba at home
The wayward defensive coaching is a major concern. Conceding 70+ goals in the premiership won't suddenly evaporate next season regardless where we end up.
They're not bad defenders individually, it's just they seem to have absolutely no cohesion as a unit at all. Strikers drift through or beat the offside trap at will and players get dragged out of position without cover. There's fundamental routines missing in training and too often our midfield can't grasp the basics of forming a wall and combining with the defence to keep the opposition from setting up chances.
Coyle absolutely needs to sort out team shape and formation because it's far and away our biggest weakness. That and the fact we do very poorly against teams that press us high up the field. Something Stoke did in the FA Cup and something they'll certainly do at the Britannia.
They're not bad defenders individually, it's just they seem to have absolutely no cohesion as a unit at all. Strikers drift through or beat the offside trap at will and players get dragged out of position without cover. There's fundamental routines missing in training and too often our midfield can't grasp the basics of forming a wall and combining with the defence to keep the opposition from setting up chances.
Coyle absolutely needs to sort out team shape and formation because it's far and away our biggest weakness. That and the fact we do very poorly against teams that press us high up the field. Something Stoke did in the FA Cup and something they'll certainly do at the Britannia.
Re: wba at home
Chungy is poised to start aye!
Re: wba at home
[quote]Agree that the last 2 subs against wba were head scratchers, but what was there on the bench. No way LCY should play when a defensive sub is needed.. watch the equalizer a few times, and he just stood there ball watching, leaving Morrison wide open to score. [/quote} THIS Classic example of how a sub can change the game I'm not blaming Chungy entirely (the lad shouldn't have been on the park Vella should have been IMO) can just about fathom Coyles logic on this one but the more cautious approach was what was needed preserve what we've got and for that the blame is entirely on Coyles shoulders.as it has been for his entire tenure for his tactical naivety his inability to see the bigger picture where a draw is just as important as a win his inability to see his mistakes and rectify them his constant talking up of the opposition
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 18 guests