Pre-Season Fixtures 2018

[GhostoftheBok]

Little LB and Darby CB??

Seems so.

[TonyDomingos]

FT 3-1. Hall for us.

[officer_dibble]

Well if that doesnt scream we need some players I dont know what does. The keeper (ex bradford and blackpool) - no thanks; Darby wouldnt get in most league 1 sides; Gary O Neil is past it; Mark Little isnt a left back...

Should be some emberassed faces on that team bus.

[twilight]

Doesn't matter what position Darby was playing, it's the fact he was playing at all that concerns me...I know these are pre-season games and all the players need to get match fit, but it worries me that he's anywhere near our 1st team. Just hope he's not in the 1st team squad against West Brom

[GhostoftheBok]

Well if that doesnt scream we need some players I dont know what does. The keeper (ex bradford and blackpool) - no thanks; Darby wouldnt get in most league 1 sides; Gary O Neil is past it; Mark Little isnt a left back...

Should be some emberassed faces on that team bus.

Iles has posted that Williams (the keeper) is looking for a coaching role and isn't in our squad plans.

[palindromeofbolton]

Doesn't matter what position Darby was playing, it's the fact he was playing at all that concerns me...I know these are pre-season games and all the players need to get match fit, but it worries me that he's anywhere near our 1st team. Just hope he's not in the 1st team squad against West Brom

I'm looking over the subs again this morning and see he got a full 90 into the bargain. It's not like he's suddenly in front of Wheavers. Can only be that he and Litts simply needed the game time more than Wheavers and Taylor. I don't have any other explanation.

When Taylor came on for Litts the offish Twitter said Darby switched over to RB, so did Darby start on the left, Little on the right with Olkowski in the centre with Hobbs?

Slightly strange that Wilson didn't come on at all - even if it was for five minutes at the end to "Christen" him, or give Darby the opportunity to go off to a standing ovation.

[mullayo]

When Taylor came on for Litts the offish Twitter said Darby switched over to RB, so did Darby start on the left, Little on the right with Olkowski in the centre with Hobbs?

Slightly strange that Wilson didn't come on at all - even if it was for five minutes at the end to "Christen" him, or give Darby the opportunity to go off to a standing ovation.

Started with Olki ---Darby---Hobbs---Little
Olki went off at 46min for Beevers farewell performance. Little to right and Darby to left?

Wanderers: Williams, Little (Taylor 72), Hobbs (Wheater 64), Olkowski (Beevers 46), Darby; Ameobi (Noone 46), O’Neil (Vela 72), Pritchard (Lowe 72), Buckley (Wildschut 46); Hall (Oztumer 72), Le Fondre (Donaldson 72).

Not used: Alnwick, Nganioni, Wilson, Edwards, Earing, Wood.

[TANGODANCER]

That any sort of a team with first XI players in should lose to a team at that level is more than a bit worrying. Bolton Wanderers?

[GhostoftheBok]

Parkinson is apparently annoyed that the defence "put the ball at risk" by passing around at the back.

If you don't think defenders should play football against a Conference North side, then that says a lot about how you approach the game in general.

[BWFC_Insane]

Parkinson is apparently annoyed that the defence "put the ball at risk" by passing around at the back.

If you don't think defenders should play football against a Conference North side, then that says a lot about how you approach the game in general.

Given what happens he's probably right. I'm a big believer in no risk defending. Row Z when needed. The reason being that unless you're absolutely brilliant most of the time trying to play from the back catches up with you. See England. It was fine until we came up against a proper team and then because we couldn't do anything else we had a problem.

[GhostoftheBok]

Parkinson is apparently annoyed that the defence "put the ball at risk" by passing around at the back.

If you don't think defenders should play football against a Conference North side, then that says a lot about how you approach the game in general.

Given what happens he's probably right. I'm a big believer in no risk defending. Row Z when needed. The reason being that unless you're absolutely brilliant most of the time trying to play from the back catches up with you. See England. It was fine until we came up against a proper team and then because we couldn't do anything else we had a problem.

I'm a believer in clearing the ball first. I'm also a believer in moving the ball through the compartments.

If Phil plays without a target man and still refuses to train the midfield and defence to find space to receive the ball, we're in bother.

In a 4-4-2 with Alf and Hall up top, you either pass the football or you get bossed by a Conference North side. Even a manager who plays hoofball needs to drill the team on how to pass out from the back when needed.

[truewhite15]

Parkinson is apparently annoyed that the defence "put the ball at risk" by passing around at the back.

If you don't think defenders should play football against a Conference North side, then that says a lot about how you approach the game in general.

Given what happens he's probably right. I'm a big believer in no risk defending. Row Z when needed. The reason being that unless you're absolutely brilliant most of the time trying to play from the back catches up with you. See England. It was fine until we came up against a proper team and then because we couldn't do anything else we had a problem.

I'm a believer in clearing the ball first. I'm also a believer in moving the ball through the compartments.

If Phil plays without a target man and still refuses to train the midfield and defence to find space to receive the ball, we're in bother.

In a 4-4-2 with Alf and Hall up top, you either pass the football or you get bossed by a Conference North side. Even a manager who plays hoofball needs to drill the team on how to pass out from the back when needed.

From what I read, he was commenting more on players passing it square along the 18 yard line, rather than having a go at the defenders for not tw*tting it first time.

But don't let that get in the way of a pre-conceived prejudice.

[nicholaldo]

I'm not sure that it's really a matter of training as it is capability. I suppose we could improve our efforts to pass through the defence and midfield by working on it, but as it stands we'll still be starting with Wheater and Beevers at centre-back and they're both very limited in that department. We'd have to keep things really simple for them to be able to go along with things, and we'd also need to consider who we have who can show for it from midfield. Perhaps that could be Oztumer (a la Mark Davies under Freedman) but then that obviously negates his influence further upfield. I don't know enough about Lowe to know whether he's the sort of player who can do it, and I suppose Vela could but then I think we'll struggle if he's one of our central two.

Anyway, I can't get worked up about the result last night simply because of the abysmal starting eleven that we went with. Darby at centre-back and Little at left-back is just asking for trouble. And that's not taking into account that we had Gary O'Neil, who's surely only here to make up the numbers, and a relative youngster with next to no experience of senior football in front of them. It's only if there was any prospect of the starting line-up that we go with on the opening day looking like that that I'd be panicking, and there certainly isn't.

[GhostoftheBok]

From what I read, he was commenting more on players passing it square along the 18 yard line, rather than having a go at the defenders for not tw*tting it first time.

But don't let that get in the way of a pre-conceived prejudice.

I don't have a preconceived prejudice. I am fine with Parky and I think he's done well to get us up and then keep us up. He has a style of play, though. We don't drill for playing out from the back on the training ground. Have a word with one of the lads who have trained with us since Parky arrived, or watch our defensive and midfield movement in games.

If you don't want people playing square balls then they need another passing option. Parky's option is always direct. If you've got nobody to hit (because you're playing 4-4-2 without a target man) then the issue of not drilling for a short release ball will force players to go square.

[boltonboris]

And also, the more we work on passing shapes in training (to completely change your playing identity takes a lot of time and hardwork), the less we'll be working on defensive shape and set-pieces. Don't forget, 20 or so of the teams in our division have better players than us. It''s vital that most of our work is stopping them hammering us

[GhostoftheBok]

I'm not sure that it's really a matter of training as it is capability. I suppose we could improve our efforts to pass through the defence and midfield by working on it, but as it stands we'll still be starting with Wheater and Beevers at centre-back and they're both very limited in that department. We'd have to keep things really simple for them to be able to go along with things, and we'd also need to consider who we have who can show for it from midfield. Perhaps that could be Oztumer (a la Mark Davies under Freedman) but then that obviously negates his influence further upfield. I don't know enough about Lowe to know whether he's the sort of player who can do it, and I suppose Vela could but then I think we'll struggle if he's one of our central two.

Anyway, I can't get worked up about the result last night simply because of the abysmal starting eleven that we went with. Darby at centre-back and Little at left-back is just asking for trouble. And that's not taking into account that we had Gary O'Neil, who's surely only here to make up the numbers, and a relative youngster with next to no experience of senior football in front of them. It's only if there was any prospect of the starting line-up that we go with on the opening day looking like that that I'd be panicking, and there certainly isn't.

I agree with all that. I'm not fussed about the result and I have mates up in Guiseley (I live in the area) who are delighted, so fair play.

We don't need real ball-playing types at the back to make sure players offer simple balls out. In fact, us not having proper footballers at the back (to my mind) should make us focus more on having easy options and not less.

If both your centrebacks have hooves instead of feet, then your midfielders need to be drilled properly to get in position for 10 yard passes.

[GhostoftheBok]

And also, the more we work on passing shapes in training (to completely change your playing identity takes a lot of time and hardwork), the less we'll be working on defensive shape and set-pieces. Don't forget, 20 or so of the teams in our division have better players than us. It''s vital that most of our work is stopping them hammering us

It's not a total change of identity, though. It's basic drills that we've done in the past under other managers who play, shall we say, "industrial" football. Allardyce, Pulis etc will drill players on offering options. It doesn't mean you suddenly try to play like Swansea, but if you don't get players into a place where that kind of movement is second nature then it doesn't happen in games.

[GhostoftheBok]

I'll say again, just so I'm not misunderstood - I've no issue with Parky. I just think there are areas we could gain 5-10% over a season that would make a difference.

When Owen was here we didn't drill team defensive shape like we should have. Players were told what to do and they did 5-a-side defending, but we didn't have it down rote and it showed when we lost the ball. Not bringing in a coach who could do that job (it was suggested to Owen) probably cost him his job. Owen believed in individual battles and character winning you games, though.

There were issues with all the managers we've had. The reason Sam was so successful was that he looked for points of failure and fixed them. I'm hoping Parky will too. Dougie, Owen et al didn't.

[TonyDomingos]

Wanderers' starting XI to face @theposhofficial: Alnwick, Olkowski, Beevers, Wheater (C), Taylor, Lowe, Vela, Wildschut, Ameobi, Donaldson, Le Fondre

Subs: Williams, Hobbs, Little, Darby, Noone, Buckley, O'Neil, Oztumer, Edwards, Pritchard, Earing, Hall

[TANGODANCER]

Wanderers' starting XI to face @theposhofficial: Alnwick, Olkowski, Beevers, Wheater (C), Taylor, Lowe, Vela, Wildschut, Ameobi, Donaldson, Le Fondre

Subs: Williams, Hobbs, Little, Darby, Noone, Buckley, O'Neil, Oztumer, Edwards, Pritchard, Earing, Hall

With 12 subs on the bench is it musical football?