Freedman out!

[Prufrock]

Ha, good luck with that mate.

[bobo the clown]

He does give interviews. I often wish he wouldn't as he sounds sooooo low key .... when you SEE them they're even more dispiriting.

... & fck knows what he says about his strikers but if, after being here 15 months, he's saying that he has for the first time had two (both on loan btw) of the type he wants is as bad a statement as any he's made.

... and, do forgive me for not having his previous statements to hand, but I'd swear he said 4-4-2 was a dead system. Now claiming he's wanted it for ever and ever and ever but just hadn't got the right players.

And, before you say it, no I'm not going to suddenly give him a break because he stumbled onto a third home league win in 10 months.

[Bruce Rioja]

He is interviewed every single week, win lose or draw. I've never known him not to give an interview.

Yes he does, and in them, more often than not, he comes out with a pile of absolute bollocks.

[jaffka]

Feckin hell, he now has the two strikers he wants! They aren't even ours and will be gone by the end of the season, one of them even earlier.

One of the strikers out on loan, he bought, where did he fit in with the vision?

[BWFC_Insane]

He does give interviews. I often wish he wouldn't as he sounds sooooo low key .... when you SEE them they're even more dispiriting.

... & fck knows what he says about his strikers but if, after being here 15 months, he's saying that he has for the first time had two (both on loan btw) of the type he wants is as bad a statement as any he's made.

... and, do forgive me for not having his previous statements to hand, but I'd swear he said 4-4-2 was a dead system. Now claiming he's wanted it for ever and ever and ever but just hadn't got the right players.

And, before you say it, no I'm not going to suddenly give him a break because he stumbled onto a third home league win in 10 months.

What is the point of just making things up though? He's never said either. He talked about how the old style of two wingers just launching balls into the box at two strikers is "out-dated" and that he believes in more of a possession game. And he's said he hasn't had a striking combination before that worked together.

I don't see the need to twist words.

There is plenty to go at without doing that, like why we didn't have a striking combination before. Why did he buy Beckford if he felt what we needed up front was a "target" (they were his words). And why did he sign Davies in the first place.

[Prufrock]

He does give interviews. I often wish he wouldn't as he sounds sooooo low key .... when you SEE them they're even more dispiriting.

... & fck knows what he says about his strikers but if, after being here 15 months, he's saying that he has for the first time had two (both on loan btw) of the type he wants is as bad a statement as any he's made.

... and, do forgive me for not having his previous statements to hand, but I'd swear he said 4-4-2 was a dead system. Now claiming he's wanted it for ever and ever and ever but just hadn't got the right players.

And, before you say it, no I'm not going to suddenly give him a break because he stumbled onto a third home league win in 10 months.

He does come across as a weirdo when he talks!

Tbf I think BWFCi was the Zarathustra claiming that 4-4-2 was dead. I know people have joked he and DF are the same person, but come on !

It's far too unsubtle a concept for me, but I think a flat four with 2 wingers and an out and out front two has had its day. Saturday certain wasn't that. It was the same wonky diamond we played to good effect last year. Spearing sitting, Medo deep and narrow on the right, Mavies advanced and narrow on the left Pratley advanced and central. The Juke up top with Mason withdrawn. When Danns came on for Pratters he pushed forward further and effectively made it three up top. El Tel Christmas tree stylee.

So on the one hand, its not like he has stumbled on this formation. He came up with it last year and it worked to good effect. On the other, he then spent a fair whack of his budget ( one of two who cost money?) on Beckford who he doesn't seem to fancy in this system (Mason and he were fit at the same time but only played one). So whilst he had it last year, doesn't seem he planned to use it this. Could be he didn't fancy Beckford as the 1 right up top, but seems unlikely given it was often Sordell (a shit Beckford) who played that role with NGog withdrawn last year. Also unlikely when he played Beckford in the even more isolated 1 in a 451.

[BWFC_Insane]

He does give interviews. I often wish he wouldn't as he sounds sooooo low key .... when you SEE them they're even more dispiriting.

... & fck knows what he says about his strikers but if, after being here 15 months, he's saying that he has for the first time had two (both on loan btw) of the type he wants is as bad a statement as any he's made.

... and, do forgive me for not having his previous statements to hand, but I'd swear he said 4-4-2 was a dead system. Now claiming he's wanted it for ever and ever and ever but just hadn't got the right players.

And, before you say it, no I'm not going to suddenly give him a break because he stumbled onto a third home league win in 10 months.

He does come across as a weirdo when he talks!

Tbf I think BWFCi was the Zarathustra claiming that 4-4-2 was dead. I know people have joked he and DF are the same person, but come on !

It's far too unsubtle a concept for me, but I think a flat four with 2 wingers and an out and out front two has had its day. Saturday certain wasn't that. It was the same wonky diamond we played to good effect last year. Spearing sitting, Medo deep and narrow on the right, Mavies advanced and narrow on the left Pratley advanced and central. The Juke up top with Mason withdrawn. When Danns came on for Pratters he pushed forward further and effectively made it three up top. El Tel Christmas tree stylee.

So on the one hand, its not like he has stumbled on this formation. He came up with it last year and it worked to good effect. On the other, he then spent a fair whack of his budget ( one of two who cost money?) on Beckford who he doesn't seem to fancy in this system (Mason and he were for at the same time but only played one). So whilst he had it last year, doesn't seem he planned to use it this. Could be he didn't fancy Beckford as the 1 right up top, but seems unlikely given it was often Sordell (a shit Beckford) who played that role with NGog withdrawn last year.

Which is what I was actually trying to say really. Of course IF you have a good striking pair (and that is relatively rare nowadays) you play them. But that old style 4-4-2 with two genuine wingers and two "up and downers in midfield" is so rare these days, and generally for a good reason.

[StaffsTrotter]

Of course he's a football genius this morning. Heard him on Radio Manchester after the game which was a surprise in itself because he's normally nowhere to be found after a defeat.

Talking about how he's not changed his plan because he's been unable to change his plan and it's all under extreme circumstances and blah blah blah.

What made me scratch my head was that he said he's been 'unable to play with two up front because he's not had two strikers fit enough to play'.

I was sure we did have some strikers at one point, we had that Davies bloke, that Beckford character, that N'Gog (remember him), plus Eaves and that Sammi Whatisface....

Perhaps I imagined those names.

I don't know if he believes his own lies but as long as we're winning, and it sounded like we played well then he can tell himself whatever the hell he likes.

Only one striker indeed.

Talking about lies, the two bits in bold.....

He is interviewed every single week, win lose or draw. I've never known him not to give an interview.

He said

Many will point to the fact we had two strikers but I have never really had the opportunity to play two of the type I really like.

Which is very different from what you are trying to make out he said.

I made the same point when Bruce originally brought the Df comment up. However as I said then it is still smoke and bollocks. If he really likes the 2 (big/ little man) combo up front, I really don't see why its taken till now for him to stumble upon it, if it was in his game plan all along.

[BWFC_Insane]

I made the same point when Bruce originally brought the Df comment up. However as I said then it is still smoke and bollocks. If he really likes the 2 (big/ little man) combo up front, I really don't see why its taken till now for him to stumble upon it, if it was in his game plan all along.

I think that "gameplan all along" stuff is slightly OTT. All managers have some sort of plan that changes over time as situations develop.

I personally think he bought Beckford because he saw NGog doing the graft in behind him and feeding him chances. He pretty much said that at the fans forum. I think last season he thought we hadn't a natural goalscorer so Beckford was to solve that (and he has to an extent).

But NGog was intermittent in form and fitness, then they got an offer for him and the plan rarely happened. Sometimes because Dougie didn't pick them together but I'm not sure they were ever really a natural fit.

He has apparently been after Jutkiewicz for a while, here and at Palace, so I guess it isn't as random as it might appear. But I certainly think that he misjudged the quality we had to play in Beckford and make it work. The sorts of passes Beckford thrives off, needs some quality in there and I'm not convinced we have those sorts of players in the side....

Saturday we played a lot of simple and direct balls up to the front two who grafted their knackers off to make things happen from there. It was a simpler game, and in possession Mark Davies drfited inside, outside and basically made things happen. We still had solidity with Spearing and Medo there but because of the system they weren't both in each others way.

Personally I think that having the runners and graft up front gave the rest of the team slightly more space to play in and they looked more comfortable. The hopeless punts down the line or speculative crossfield balls from the centre backs suddenly weren't quite as hopeless and forlorn as before.

Plan all along or not I think it let the team play more like Dougie wants them to (on Saturday at least), than perhaps the setup with Beckford on his own did.

[Worthy4England]

He does give interviews. I often wish he wouldn't as he sounds sooooo low key .... when you SEE them they're even more dispiriting.

... & fck knows what he says about his strikers but if, after being here 15 months, he's saying that he has for the first time had two (both on loan btw) of the type he wants is as bad a statement as any he's made.

... and, do forgive me for not having his previous statements to hand, but I'd swear he said 4-4-2 was a dead system. Now claiming he's wanted it for ever and ever and ever but just hadn't got the right players.

And, before you say it, no I'm not going to suddenly give him a break because he stumbled onto a third home league win in 10 months.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with this one - If I look at who he's had in the striker department when he arrived

1) SKD, Sordell, Eaves, N'gog - which he added Cravies to. I'm sure there's lots of 18 year old Champ Man types too, but looking at that lot.

SKD - on the way out and very expensive
Sordell - seems to be more interested in Twitter
Eaves - once got a hat-trick against us when he was playing for Oldham, not seen much to suggest he's the next sliced bread
N'gog - stealing a living.

Anyone else?

He added - Cravies, predominantly injured but shown a couple of decent games, Beckford, took a while to get going, looked to be getting into the swing, got injured, got Mason who wasn't very good, playing off Beckford/N'gog - Messi wouldn't look very good playing off N'gog. Eaves moves like a garden shed.

We clearly had a problem playing Beckford and N'gog, in that neither can win a header, and we'd shunted SKD - so I can see why we've tried to get someone like Jutkeiwicz - as much as we might want to play like a really good team, on the deck, even most of those have someone who can win a header. When we're clearing the ball out, I generally hope it goes towards CYL or Mavies, as they've got more chance if it's over head height than Beckford or N'gog.

So in terms of combos, I could over the time Freedman has been here, have seen us playing Cravies and one other, but the rest of the combos, don't bear thinking about.

I would never have played N'gog and Beckford together - that would just have been wasting 1 1/2 outfield players...

[coffeymagic]

i know Dougie does give interviews however after recent games while Radio Manchester have managed to broadcast the manager's post match thoughts from every other game Dougle's ramblings have been noticiable by their absence.

See also The Football League Show.

Now, whether he's given an interview and they've chosen not to show it for whatever reason is one thing but I'd imagine if he farted Radio Manchester would tell us about it seeing as it's pretty pro-BWFC (as long as Citeh aren't playing of course).

I knew as soon as the full time whistle went on Saturday we'd be hearing what he had to say and it was to the effect of that he wasn't changing his mind and we would have been top of the league and winning games if he'd have been able to pick the players and positions he wanted.

He can't moan about not having strikers when he's papped them all out can he?

I'm not a liar about that am I?

Personally I don't like hearing every thought a manager makes, the four second interview tells us nothing but trite observations but it was just odd that he did an interview when we won.

I'm not a liar on that front either.

Like I say, let him think what he wants to think. If we're winning he can claim to be the King of Jupiter for all I care.

[wigan white]

I can see both sides to this "Not having the strikers to play 4-4-2" business. Yeah, we've had a load of strikers, but obviously SKD was on his way out, Eaves/Sordell aren't fancied. Ngog, was a waste of space. And Beckford/Cravies were never fit at the same time to try them. The deal with sending Cravies to Preston is alledgedly due to his "Off-field problems/attitude to management". So I can see where DF is coming from, however, as stated by others he's not tried any of the "young-uns" who may be able to play this role, but then again we don't see them in training each day like he does.

[Worthy4England]

Dougie's post match comments, every game (as far as I can tell) are on the BWFC Youtube channel. So not noticeable by their absence, unless you only listen to Radio Manchester/Football League Show, who I guess choose whether or not they want to show them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddiYtYHd ... 53l44i0LFw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There's generally about 3 minutes or so...

[StaffsTrotter]

I made the same point when Bruce originally brought the Df comment up. However as I said then it is still smoke and bollocks. If he really likes the 2 (big/ little man) combo up front, I really don't see why its taken till now for him to stumble upon it, if it was in his game plan all along.

I think that "gameplan all along" stuff is slightly OTT. All managers have some sort of plan that changes over time as situations develop.

I personally think he bought Beckford because he saw NGog doing the graft in behind him and feeding him chances. He pretty much said that at the fans forum. I think last season he thought we hadn't a natural goalscorer so Beckford was to solve that (and he has to an extent).

But NGog was intermittent in form and fitness, then they got an offer for him and the plan rarely happened. Sometimes because Dougie didn't pick them together but I'm not sure they were ever really a natural fit.

He has apparently been after Jutkiewicz for a while, here and at Palace, so I guess it isn't as random as it might appear. But I certainly think that he misjudged the quality we had to play in Beckford and make it work. The sorts of passes Beckford thrives off, needs some quality in there and I'm not convinced we have those sorts of players in the side....

Saturday we played a lot of simple and direct balls up to the front two who grafted their knackers off to make things happen from there. It was a simpler game, and in possession Mark Davies drfited inside, outside and basically made things happen. We still had solidity with Spearing and Medo there but because of the system they weren't both in each others way.

Personally I think that having the runners and graft up front gave the rest of the team slightly more space to play in and they looked more comfortable. The hopeless punts down the line or speculative crossfield balls from the centre backs suddenly weren't quite as hopeless and forlorn as before.

Plan all along or not I think it let the team play more like Dougie wants them to (on Saturday at least), than perhaps the setup with Beckford on his own did.

in many ways I can understand (if I'm interpreting correctly) some of the things DF appears to be trying to do i.e. make us flexible - able to play different systems, use different players in those systems etc etc. All very clever and difficult stuff for your average footballer. Its why its ironic that the tactic that worked on saturday as you say was a far more simple big target man. But its a bit of a stretch to now say that the only 2 out of all our strikers dougies had, who can play together is Juke & Mason. All based on 1 game. I've absolutely no doubt some of the guys who are now being conveniently labelled as failures, would have loved having somebody up with them to work off.

[SmokinFrazier]

Freedman's argument that he didn't have the right combination would make more sense if Beckford and N'Gog's partnership hadn't been reasonably successful. They played together 7 times this season and in that period, we won twice, drew three times and lost twice. That's an average of 1.28ppg whereas as a combined total of our season, we're averaging 0.97. Assuming we played every league game using 4-4-2 and had the same success, that average means we'd currently be in 13th place. Football isn't that simple, of course, but it's an indication of how much more successful the Beckford/N'Gog partnership was than anything else Freedman tried and persisted with. He also chose to loan Sordell out, yet when Sordell started in a 4-4-2 under Freedman last season, our record was excellent; we won 6 and lost 1, so lets not pretend the players weren't available for Freedman. They were but it was his decision to either not play them or to send them out on loan.

The win on Saturday did nothing but confirm that Freedman has to go because it's not rocket science to get us winning games, yet he chooses to go against what works. I argued before our good period last season that we should be playing 4-4-2 and whilst I was derided for it back then, I think it's clear to everyone now that it works for us, yet Freedman still won't stick with it. He wants us to play in a certain way, even if the results aren't as good. That's terrible management. It's like a boxing coach being hired by a windmilling, knockout artist and telling them to fight on the backfoot. If he would prefer us to play in a different way, that's fine, but to continuously pick those other tactics ahead of something which is clearly superior is simply wrong. I don't look at the Watford win and think it's a marvelous result, I think we could have been doing that throughout the season had Freedman not been so stubborn.

[Worthy4England]

Freedman's argument that he didn't have the right combination would make more sense if Beckford and N'Gog's partnership hadn't been reasonably successful. They played together 7 times this season and in that period, we won twice, drew three times and lost twice. That's an average of 1.28ppg whereas as a combined total of our season, we're averaging 0.97. Assuming we played every league game using 4-4-2 and had the same success, that average means we'd currently be in 13th place. Football isn't that simple, of course, but it's an indication of how much more successful the Beckford/N'Gog partnership was than anything else Freedman tried and persisted with. He also chose to loan Sordell out, yet when Sordell started in a 4-4-2 under Freedman last season, our record was excellent; we won 6 and lost 1, so lets not pretend the players weren't available for Freedman. They were but it was his decision to either not play them or to send them out on loan.

The win on Saturday did nothing but confirm that Freedman has to go because it's not rocket science to get us winning games, yet he chooses to go against what works. I argued before our good period last season that we should be playing 4-4-2 and whilst I was derided for it back then, I think it's clear to everyone now that it works for us, yet Freedman still won't stick with it. He wants us to play in a certain way, even if the results aren't as good. That's terrible management. It's like a boxing coach being hired by a windmilling, knockout artist and telling them to fight on the backfoot. If he would prefer us to play in a different way, that's fine, but to continuously pick those other tactics ahead of something which is clearly superior is simply wrong. I don't look at the Watford win and think it's a marvelous result, I think we could have been doing that throughout the season had Freedman not been so stubborn.

Hold on a cotton-picking minute. Those 6 with Sordell were in that run of games that I think you declared as (paraphrasing) "lucky as feck and not any sort of indication of an improving team" - make your mind up.

The N'gog and Beckford "partnership" includes a win against Blackpool in the Cup (a team that haven't registered a win in 10 games and are in freefall), and a decent 2-0 against Bournemouth away.

I think someone is picking evidence to support a pre-determined conclusion.

[Enoch]

I think someone is picking evidence to support a pre-determined conclusion.

Get oudda here!!

[LeverEnd]

It's obvious that the 2 we have on loan are currently looking a lot better than what we had earlier but I'm not buying the suggestion that we've simply been unable to play 4-4-2 due to having the wrong players. He could have tried Davies or Ngog with Beckford much more often but didn't, instead persisting with a a plan that produced dire football and dreadful results. It also ruined the confidence of the lone striker I think.
Mason might not have linked up with our own strikers like he did with Juke (in one game let's not forget), but it is my humble opinion that he'd have had a more productive spell and we'd have more points.
Now we've got something that works, albeit on a temporary basis, let's hope he doesn't feck it up by trying to be a smart-arse again.

[SmokinFrazier]

Freedman's argument that he didn't have the right combination would make more sense if Beckford and N'Gog's partnership hadn't been reasonably successful. They played together 7 times this season and in that period, we won twice, drew three times and lost twice. That's an average of 1.28ppg whereas as a combined total of our season, we're averaging 0.97. Assuming we played every league game using 4-4-2 and had the same success, that average means we'd currently be in 13th place. Football isn't that simple, of course, but it's an indication of how much more successful the Beckford/N'Gog partnership was than anything else Freedman tried and persisted with. He also chose to loan Sordell out, yet when Sordell started in a 4-4-2 under Freedman last season, our record was excellent; we won 6 and lost 1, so lets not pretend the players weren't available for Freedman. They were but it was his decision to either not play them or to send them out on loan.

The win on Saturday did nothing but confirm that Freedman has to go because it's not rocket science to get us winning games, yet he chooses to go against what works. I argued before our good period last season that we should be playing 4-4-2 and whilst I was derided for it back then, I think it's clear to everyone now that it works for us, yet Freedman still won't stick with it. He wants us to play in a certain way, even if the results aren't as good. That's terrible management. It's like a boxing coach being hired by a windmilling, knockout artist and telling them to fight on the backfoot. If he would prefer us to play in a different way, that's fine, but to continuously pick those other tactics ahead of something which is clearly superior is simply wrong. I don't look at the Watford win and think it's a marvelous result, I think we could have been doing that throughout the season had Freedman not been so stubborn.

Hold on a cotton-picking minute. Those 6 with Sordell were in that run of games that I think you declared as (paraphrasing) "lucky as feck and not any sort of indication of an improving team" - make your mind up.

The N'gog and Beckford "partnership" includes a win against Blackpool in the Cup (a team that haven't registered a win in 10 games and are in freefall), and a decent 2-0 against Bournemouth away.

I think someone is picking evidence to support a pre-determined conclusion.

The evidence supports my opinion that 4-4-2 is a better formation for us. I'm not clutching at straws with my argument, although I accept that when you're dealing with such few games, it might lead to exaggerated numbers. There's no argument at all to suggest that 4-5-1 is better for us, either from watching the games themselves or by looking at the numbers to prove it's more successful.

My point about Sordell was that he could play in a 4-4-2, as he proved last season, yet Freedman chose to loan him out, so he can't then say "we don't have players suitable of playing 4-4-2" after he's loaned out a player who had success when playing in that formation. Sordell was fine in a 4-4-2, as were N'Gog and Davies, and Beckford is suited that role too. For Freedman to suggest now that without Mason and Juke it wouldn't work is laughable. We have had players all season who could do what those two did, it's just that Freedman wouldn't give them a chance.

And yes, I do believe that a fair few of those games we won last season were down to good fortune but that's the case for 4-4-2 or 4-5-1. We did play better, and got better results, when playing with two strikers though.

[KeyserSoze]

internet