Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

[boltonboris]

I think a lot of our issues came from a couple of the lads giving the ball away too often. It doesn't matter who you have in there. If you give them the ball needlessly, you'll get turned around and run over.

Thomo again for all his endeavour, bravery and application etc, is currently struggling with the ball at his feet and it's something he really needs to work on.

[BWFC_Insane]

I think a lot of our issues came from a couple of the lads giving the ball away too often. It doesn't matter who you have in there. If you give them the ball needlessly, you'll get turned around and run over.

Thomo again for all his endeavour, bravery and application etc, is currently struggling with the ball at his feet and it's something he really needs to work on.

Or is it that we don’t have enough running, pace and strength in midfield to execute the gameplan without surrendering midfield control? We saw Darby sit us deeper and the midfield wasn’t having to get about the pitch so much and it looked comfortable.

But once you go to reading and play that little bit higher the gaps soon open and their midfield was quicker to everything.

We did give the ball away a lot indeed all three midfield players did but I think that is because we just weren’t compact in there and when our midfield is not compact they all seem to struggle. I think when you look cold light of day that midfield three is never going to work.

[BWFC_Insane]

When push came to shove, however, Reading were quicker for most of the afternoon. Considering their troubles this season, they have done well to retain a technically gifted midfield in Lewis Wing, Harvey Knibbs and Charlie Savage, but that is where the battle was won and lost.

With Aaron Morley dropped to the bench Randall and Josh Sheehan were picked to ‘out-football’ the Royals’ imperious trio, and they were second best on the day. Sheehan did hit the bar with one excellent free kick but was otherwise ineffective, and both found themselves chasing back more than they did asking questions on the ball.

Feel like Marc Iles sums it all up very well here. Squad is not quite right. Midfield and up front are lacking. We all know it but Schumacher probably has come in too late to really fix it for this season.

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/2 ... h-verdict/

Not sure there's much "probably too late" about it, in a transfers sense. Think the squad is now full? So it would take a departure or a young loanee as additions. Question is whether he could do something with what we have, for me. Bit of luck, enough to jump into 6th and give it a die roll.

Yep agreed. I think getting in the play offs is more than possible with what we’ve got but may require a little fortune as you say. Winning them from there may require a wee bit more on top!

[Prufrock]

I mean not to bang on but Collins brings the right boots and we win that game comfortably. They weren't half chances. Ok bit of fortune for the one he got straight at the keeper but we created the others. And they had a thick penalty and us fannying about with Tomo off the line.

That was perfectly fine performance wise, you can over analyse things.

[BWFC_Insane]

I mean not to bang on but Collins brings the right boots and we win that game comfortably. They weren't half chances. Ok bit of fortune for the one he got straight at the keeper but we created the others. And they had a thick penalty and us fannying about with Tomo off the line.

That was perfectly fine performance wise, you can over analyse things.

How many times could we say that though? Iles doesn’t seem to think it was great - I agree with you we score and probably win. But I feel that covers up the fact we lacked control. The reverse argument would be had Thomason not cleared off the line we’d be complaining about same old problems potentially.

I think Darby picked a way of playing that covered up our midfield issues. I can see why that maybe isn’t sustainable all the time but then I think we need to be honest that the midfield three that played Saturday aren’t the right balance.

[Prufrock]

What is control? We created several really great chances, they created nothing. I'll take that lack of control every week! Maybe we needed 70% possession...

It's one game with a new manager and shape (it wasn't a midfield 3 for about 70 minutes). On it's own it was perfectly fine. Only time will tell of it's a good start we build on, or an "impress the boss" high water mark.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

What is control? We created several really great chances, they created nothing. I'll take that lack of control every week! Maybe we needed 70% possession...

It's one game with a new manager and shape (it wasn't a midfield 3 for about 70 minutes). On it's own it was perfectly fine. Only time will tell of it's a good start we build on, or an "impress the boss" high water mark.

First three words of this - that's the crucial question.

I agree that we created the better chances – we even created Reading's best two. But I don't think it felt like we were "in control". To me, that's either about the scoreline or where the ball is. I totally, totally get the "sideways and backwards" frustration but for instance on Tuesday when Northampton were threatening I'd've loved a bit of possession - and it's a feeling Iles has echoed in his writing and podcasts.

Although we looked more threatening at Reading, the game was very bitty and transitional. Part of that was indeed the pitch but part of it was the "clear it!" attitude; while sometimes that better than passing riskily, whence Tomo gifted them the chance he then did well to clear off our line, it also more often than not turns the ball over to the opposition.

I suspect the best way is somewhere in between the extremes. That's usually the way.

[Prufrock]

All fair. One of the reasons Schuey* seems so obviously the right choice is that evolution not revolution point. God love JD but I don't think you can have success long term being quite so backs to the wall, play forwards. The new man** has a history of teams wanting to dominate the ball and play out, but with more purpose. It's the old Klopp Liverpool v Guardiola City question.

I'm excited again!

*come on, someone must be able to come up with a better nickname. This isn't going to work and eventually I'm going to just end up calling him SS and getting done by Prevent.

** That will have to do for now

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

All fair. One of the reasons Schuey* seems so obviously the right choice is that evolution not revolution point. God love JD but I don't think you can have success long term being quite so backs to the wall, play forwards. The new man** has a history of teams wanting to dominate the ball and play out, but with more purpose. It's the old Klopp Liverpool v Guardiola City question.

I'm excited again!

*come on, someone must be able to come up with a better nickname. This isn't going to work and eventually I'm going to just end up calling him SS and getting done by Prevent.

** That will have to do for now

Agreed with all that.

(Schu? Shoe? Schuebeyduebydoo?)

[BWFC_Insane]

What is control? We created several really great chances, they created nothing. I'll take that lack of control every week! Maybe we needed 70% possession...

It's one game with a new manager and shape (it wasn't a midfield 3 for about 70 minutes). On it's own it was perfectly fine. Only time will tell of it's a good start we build on, or an "impress the boss" high water mark.

First three words of this - that's the crucial question.

I agree that we created the better chances – we even created Reading's best two. But I don't think it felt like we were "in control". To me, that's either about the scoreline or where the ball is. I totally, totally get the "sideways and backwards" frustration but for instance on Tuesday when Northampton were threatening I'd've loved a bit of possession - and it's a feeling Iles has echoed in his writing and podcasts.

Although we looked more threatening at Reading, the game was very bitty and transitional. Part of that was indeed the pitch but part of it was the "clear it!" attitude; while sometimes that better than passing riskily, whence Tomo gifted them the chance he then did well to clear off our line, it also more often than not turns the ball over to the opposition.

I suspect the best way is somewhere in between the extremes. That's usually the way.

Not sure I see it like this. Against Northampton second half we through a combination of the tactics, system and subs ended up defending relatively deep the midfield deep and indeed just one out and out striker with a sort of false 9 or 10 in Randall who also dropped into midfield. We took few risks and played into the channels. We barely conceded a chance and to me never looked like doing so. We were in complete control of the game even though it’s always an edgy watch. And yes better teams can come and punish you in those scenarios. Obviously we hoped for more of the ball and more outs but it always felt comfortable.

Saturday to me we played higher up the pitch had more of the ball but always it felt a transitional game on the edge. Reading always looked and felt like they could create something and whilst we undoubtedly had the better chances I don’t think we ever had that much control. It always felt like if the won it back they could be at us. Equally we never really looked like winning it back too high so we felt a little easy to play through at times. We once again defended the box well but that felt more stretched to me partly because reading are a better side and partly because we had a weaker midfield being asked to play a bit higher up the pitch at times.

In both cases we gave the ball away but doing so against Northampton was at times almost baked in to the shape yet against reading made us feel a bit more vulnerable.

The reading game we also noticeably took more risks at the back and some of that also felt like it made us less secure.

It was not a bad performance or one where we were not unlucky. But I felt the balance shifted a bit back towards what we might look like under Evatt. I think that’s partially down to reading and how they play. But Iles observation that their attacking midfield was quicker to the ball than ours and stronger on it certainly feels right to me.

[Worthy4England]

Yet amid all that, not sure Southwood got very dirty and we had a couple which Collins is probable reveiwing in his head. There was the one GL clearance from Thomo's give away, but apart from that, it felt like a 0-0.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Yet amid all that, not sure Southwood got very dirty and we had a couple which Collins is probable reveiwing in his head. There was the one GL clearance from Thomo's give away, but apart from that, it felt like a 0-0.

I damn well hope he is...

[Prufrock]

That soft straight ball into a marked midfielder is one I'd like to see go away forever. Carragher was losing his mind about it after arsenal city yesterday. Tomo didn't cover himself in glory but Southwood should never play that. It's fine when they have 5 yards and an angle out to left back. But all Tomo could (and TBF still should) have done was go straight back to Southwood. Nowhere near worth the risk.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

That soft straight ball into a marked midfielder is one I'd like to see go away forever. Carragher was losing his mind about it after arsenal city yesterday. Tomo didn't cover himself in glory but Southwood should never play that. It's fine when they have 5 yards and an angle out to left back. But all Tomo could (and TBF still should) have done was go straight back to Southwood. Nowhere near worth the risk.

That vertical is so often a trigger for the opponent's press that the Athletic did a whole piece about it - oh, maybe a year ago. The fact that it keeps happening even at the level of Arsenal-City shows it still happens. As you say the sensible thing is to ping it back but by that point the opponent is already sprinting full-pelt at the defender and can simply go straight past towards the goalkeeper. Still, if the keeper puts his foot through it, it's safer than passing across.... and you imagine Schubert will be telling him that.

[Prufrock]

Aye basically if you're passing to Rodri, do it. Otherwise cut out the middle man, and your losses, and don't play it.

[Worthy4England]

That soft straight ball into a marked midfielder is one I'd like to see go away forever. Carragher was losing his mind about it after arsenal city yesterday. Tomo didn't cover himself in glory but Southwood should never play that. It's fine when they have 5 yards and an angle out to left back. But all Tomo could (and TBF still should) have done was go straight back to Southwood. Nowhere near worth the risk.

That vertical is so often a trigger for the opponent's press that the Athletic did a whole piece about it - oh, maybe a year ago. The fact that it keeps happening even at the level of Arsenal-City shows it still happens. As you say the sensible thing is to ping it back but by that point the opponent is already sprinting full-pelt at the defender and can simply go straight past towards the goalkeeper. Still, if the keeper puts his foot through it, it's safer than passing across.... and you imagine Schubert will be telling him that.

I agree on the soft straight ball bit. But that wasn't actually what happened.

Southwood squared it across the 6 to Forrester, who panicked somewhat and seeing Sheehan didn't really create a space, his options were a bit limited, so Thomo was probably the better bet of the two. There was probably a time, before Forrester runs past Camara when he gets it where out to either WB is likely his best option. Can he kick with his left?

Point is though, it's already a troubled move, when it gets to Thommo.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Will admit I haven't watched the match back – sitting through it once was enough. Y'know what I mean though: it's knowing when to do it and when not. As I said in my match report, we switched more than once between going long (notably Southwood->Murphy) and attempting Evattian passing out from the back, presumably trying to trigger their press. I don't mind the flexibility, and I assume Schuleather will be picking certain clips to show the players as a "Please don't do this."

[Prufrock]

Ah right you are, though it's basically the same point with Forrester to blame rather than Southwood, who had taken a short goal kick to him.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Ah right you are, though it's basically the same point with Forrester to blame rather than Southwood, who had taken a short goal kick to him.

I don't mind the occasional short goal kick but it always makes my arse clench when the dude is in the six-yard box with the goalkeeper.

Also: I like Forrester but I reiterate that is passing isn't reliable. At Reading, one ball intended to release JDC down the inside-forward channel went out of touch before it bounced. That sort of thing just turns over possession (control?) to the oppo in their half, but even that's preferable to him panic-passing in our box.

[Prufrock]

Yeah it's getting that balance right. What JD definitely seems to have reinstilled is that it's a defenders job to stop goals going in. If you can play great, but you have to love defending and viscerally feel it when it goes in.

That example is one where it goes wrong. Even until the last minute he has the option to just c*nt the feck* upfield.

Players will always make mistakes. I fear under the last regime that wouldn't have been seen as a mistaken decision from Will in itself but a "cost of doing business" when it broke down. I hope that's not the case anymore.