Player ratings v wigan
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1741
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:00 am
Player ratings v wigan
Beyond moo and 442 madness where did it go so wrong?
Bogdan 7 Competent and cant be blamed for the goals
Steinsson 5 Couldnt handle Moses or Di Canto and consistently showed them inside to the massive gap between him and Wheater.Unable to get forward as he knew he was struggling defensively
Ricketts 6 Least effective game since coming back
Wheater 5 Lost his man for the first,possibly slow to get across for the first shot on the second. May well have been rattled by being constantly exposed to pace(see Steinsson
Knight 7 No Knightmares,mercifully quiet and steady
NRC 6 Saddled with too much defensive duty was on a fools errand. No opportunity to get forward in the way he has done when playing 451
Mavis 6 Great goal covered ground but never got a challenge in, no opportunity to make surging runs or dictate play as no doubt very aware that should he feck up there was no cover
Eagles 5 Nothing worked going forward.Repeatedly failed to help Steinsson out
Petrov 5 Didnt really look a threat inspite of a number of opportunities to run at the fullback
KD 5 Was making the effort but contributed nothing,no link up play,no threat, lucky not to be sent off following the frustrated lunge
NGog 6 Worked hard,nice thru ball for Miyaichi,didnt really have anyone to link up with for much of the game
Miyaichi7 Looks useful,quicker and less predictable than Petrov.
Tuncay 6 worked hard and at least looked to create given freedom to roam
Klasnic 6 At least got in a couple of decent positions but off target. Not convinced he's too bothered about being here now.
So Coyle is right to say a number of players were below par,the wingers did nothing(first half) and the central pair couldnt run midfield and were afraid to get forward and link play, you could drive a bus through the space between Steinsson and Wheater, Having two uptop reduces NGogs opportunity to move effectively and gives a big vague target making the hopeful ball more tempting. At least when there is one up top the onus is on accuracy.
It's very easy to see why 451 works better than 442 with these players.
Bogdan 7 Competent and cant be blamed for the goals
Steinsson 5 Couldnt handle Moses or Di Canto and consistently showed them inside to the massive gap between him and Wheater.Unable to get forward as he knew he was struggling defensively
Ricketts 6 Least effective game since coming back
Wheater 5 Lost his man for the first,possibly slow to get across for the first shot on the second. May well have been rattled by being constantly exposed to pace(see Steinsson
Knight 7 No Knightmares,mercifully quiet and steady
NRC 6 Saddled with too much defensive duty was on a fools errand. No opportunity to get forward in the way he has done when playing 451
Mavis 6 Great goal covered ground but never got a challenge in, no opportunity to make surging runs or dictate play as no doubt very aware that should he feck up there was no cover
Eagles 5 Nothing worked going forward.Repeatedly failed to help Steinsson out
Petrov 5 Didnt really look a threat inspite of a number of opportunities to run at the fullback
KD 5 Was making the effort but contributed nothing,no link up play,no threat, lucky not to be sent off following the frustrated lunge
NGog 6 Worked hard,nice thru ball for Miyaichi,didnt really have anyone to link up with for much of the game
Miyaichi7 Looks useful,quicker and less predictable than Petrov.
Tuncay 6 worked hard and at least looked to create given freedom to roam
Klasnic 6 At least got in a couple of decent positions but off target. Not convinced he's too bothered about being here now.
So Coyle is right to say a number of players were below par,the wingers did nothing(first half) and the central pair couldnt run midfield and were afraid to get forward and link play, you could drive a bus through the space between Steinsson and Wheater, Having two uptop reduces NGogs opportunity to move effectively and gives a big vague target making the hopeful ball more tempting. At least when there is one up top the onus is on accuracy.
It's very easy to see why 451 works better than 442 with these players.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 38816
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!
Jussi would have been blamed!
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: Player ratings v wigan
In three of the last four goals that we've conceded we haven't anticipated the loose ball. That's not the goalkeeper's fault regardless of who's in goal.BWFC_Insane wrote:Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!
May the bridges I burn light your way
- officer_dibble
- Immortal
- Posts: 15295
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: Player ratings v wigank
zat knight looks genuineley surprised and is always second to react whenever there is a ball into the box.
wheater was shit yesterday as well - im not just anti knight
I wouldnt give anyone other than 2 of the subs above 5 out of 10 as it suggests they were above average. bottlers the lot of em, tactical discussions aside.
wheater was shit yesterday as well - im not just anti knight
I wouldnt give anyone other than 2 of the subs above 5 out of 10 as it suggests they were above average. bottlers the lot of em, tactical discussions aside.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 38816
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Oh absolutely.....knight and Wheater must be the slowest of thought pairing in the league like....Bruce Rioja wrote:In three of the last four goals that we've conceded we haven't anticipated the loose ball. That's not the goalkeeper's fault regardless of who's in goal.BWFC_Insane wrote:Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2076
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:54 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Its obviously something else that Coyle & his staff can't see (do they wear blinkers ?) - Bruce is right for 3 of those goals no one anticipated the loose ball, but I just thought it looked like the defenders couldnt really be arsed just strolling around half hearted. Coyle knew that Cahill would be going in Jan - and he brought in Ream, by not playing him (not even on the bench) and continuing to play the pedestrian Knight & Wheater together must mean that Ream is either not fit enough yet or not good enough.BWFC_Insane wrote:Oh absolutely.....knight and Wheater must be the slowest of thought pairing in the league like....Bruce Rioja wrote:In three of the last four goals that we've conceded we haven't anticipated the loose ball. That's not the goalkeeper's fault regardless of who's in goal.BWFC_Insane wrote:Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!
- plymouth wanderer
- Icon
- Posts: 4571
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:20 pm
- Location: Er Plymouth
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Peter Thompson wrote:Its obviously something else that Coyle & his staff can't see (do they wear blinkers ?) - Bruce is right for 3 of those goals no one anticipated the loose ball, but I just thought it looked like the defenders couldnt really be arsed just strolling around half hearted. Coyle knew that Cahill would be going in Jan - and he brought in Ream, by not playing him (not even on the bench) and continuing to play the pedestrian Knight & Wheater together must mean that Ream is either not fit enough yet or not good enough.BWFC_Insane wrote:Oh absolutely.....knight and Wheater must be the slowest of thought pairing in the league like....Bruce Rioja wrote:In three of the last four goals that we've conceded we haven't anticipated the loose ball. That's not the goalkeeper's fault regardless of who's in goal.BWFC_Insane wrote:Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!
or injured knowing our luck
Never get into an argument with an idiot. i'll bring you down to my level and beat you with experience
Re: Player ratings v wigan
unless it's jussi!!!Bruce Rioja wrote:In three of the last four goals that we've conceded we haven't anticipated the loose ball. That's not the goalkeeper's fault regardless of who's in goal.BWFC_Insane wrote:Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!

Re: Player ratings v wigan
When was Ream's last game for Red Bulls? It must be the best part of 3 months ago. Add to that the delay in getting his work permit so he was out of the country most of that time and I would guess he probably isn't match fit. We just have to hope that he has been training hard this last month rather than spending time in bed.Peter Thompson wrote:Its obviously something else that Coyle & his staff can't see (do they wear blinkers ?) - Bruce is right for 3 of those goals no one anticipated the loose ball, but I just thought it looked like the defenders couldnt really be arsed just strolling around half hearted. Coyle knew that Cahill would be going in Jan - and he brought in Ream, by not playing him (not even on the bench) and continuing to play the pedestrian Knight & Wheater together must mean that Ream is either not fit enough yet or not good enough.BWFC_Insane wrote:Oh absolutely.....knight and Wheater must be the slowest of thought pairing in the league like....Bruce Rioja wrote:In three of the last four goals that we've conceded we haven't anticipated the loose ball. That's not the goalkeeper's fault regardless of who's in goal.BWFC_Insane wrote:Bogdan was poor on the second goal, palmer it straight into the middle of the box or so it seemed without a replay being seen.......
Jussi would have been blamed!
I have never seen him play but he must come in for either Wheater or preferably Knight ASAP because those two are just not good enough as a defensive partnership.
Do not trust atoms. They make up everything.
-
- Hopeful
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 1:58 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
we shouldn't/can't play 442 we were beginning to pick up points playing 451... Why change an improving format?
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: Player ratings v wigan
And still posts the fastest times in speed trials. Is Ream exceptionally fast or have the general levels of fitness declined under Coyle? I expect we'll find out before long, but I've expected the latter for quite a while now.malcd1 wrote: When was Ream's last game for Red Bulls? It must be the best part of 3 months ago. Add to that the delay in getting his work permit so he was out of the country most of that time and I would guess he probably isn't match fit. We just have to hope that he has been training hard this last month rather than spending time in bed.
May the bridges I burn light your way
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 44175
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: Player ratings v wigan
In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort. Yesterday it all seemed to have gone back in the box except that used up chasing shadows. Teams have sussed out Owen Coyle and how to play us. The only space we saw was in their half when banging panic balls into it. Holden and Lee are very sadly missed because, Muamba apart, all anybody seems to want to do with the ball is get rid of it asap..I'm struggling to remember when was the last time somebody got a through ball to chase, the sort of ball that N'gog might have a fighting chance with. I really can't remember.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
Re: Player ratings v wigan
We also looked organised, disciplined and composed on the ball. The work rate was better and we didnt give the opposition as much time and space on the ball. We had more outlets when we were in possession, and we defended better and attacked better.TANGODANCER wrote:In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort.
i hate to beat the same drum as everybody else, but I'll continue to do so until I'm sure Coyle has got it into his head. Four Five One. With Muamba starting.
Who's that coming up the hill boys,
The Wanderers are coming up the hill boys,
They all laugh at us, they all mock at us,
They all say our days are numbered,
Born to be a Wanderer, victorious are we....
The Wanderers are coming up the hill boys,
They all laugh at us, they all mock at us,
They all say our days are numbered,
Born to be a Wanderer, victorious are we....
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1861
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 9:32 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
scotty wrote:We also looked organised, disciplined and composed on the ball. The work rate was better and we didnt give the opposition as much time and space on the ball. We had more outlets when we were in possession, and we defended better and attacked better.TANGODANCER wrote:In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort.
i hate to beat the same drum as everybody else, but I'll continue to do so until I'm sure Coyle has got it into his head. Four Five One. With Muamba starting.
And finishing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Born to be a Wanderer!!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Some say Wisdom comes with age, I may be the exception !!
Re: Player ratings v wigan
precisely - and that is MORE than simply formation...scotty wrote:We also looked organised, disciplined and composed on the ball. The work rate was better and we didnt give the opposition as much time and space on the ball. We had more outlets when we were in possession, and we defended better and attacked better.TANGODANCER wrote:In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 34731
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Well our midfield workrate decreased 20% at least yesterday, because there was one less person in it. Unfortunately our attacking workrate didn't increase 20% and pretty difficult to tell at the back, because they were much more exposed.thebish wrote:precisely - and that is MORE than simply formation...scotty wrote:We also looked organised, disciplined and composed on the ball. The work rate was better and we didnt give the opposition as much time and space on the ball. We had more outlets when we were in possession, and we defended better and attacked better.TANGODANCER wrote:In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort.
The same workrate, would have looked less than it was with that formation. Against Liverpool, Arsenal and Everton we had much more possession than yesterday, chasing your tail never looks as "hard working" as having more of the ball and doing things with it.
Re: Player ratings v wigan
I am talking primarily about NOT having the ball - harassing them - closing them down... if we had LESS of the ball, then I'd expect that workrate to increase!Worthy4England wrote:Well our midfield workrate decreased 20% at least yesterday, because there was one less person in it. Unfortunately our attacking workrate didn't increase 20% and pretty difficult to tell at the back, because they were much more exposed.thebish wrote:precisely - and that is MORE than simply formation...scotty wrote:We also looked organised, disciplined and composed on the ball. The work rate was better and we didnt give the opposition as much time and space on the ball. We had more outlets when we were in possession, and we defended better and attacked better.TANGODANCER wrote:In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort.
The same workrate, would have looked less than it was with that formation. Against Liverpool, Arsenal and Everton we had much more possession than yesterday, chasing your tail never looks as "hard working" as having more of the ball and doing things with it.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 34731
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
The point I'm making is, that it's difficult to tell whether it increased or not in the MF, given that we had one player less in there. It could have increased marginally and would still have looked less.thebish wrote:I am talking primarily about NOT having the ball - harassing them - closing them down... if we had LESS of the ball, then I'd expect that workrate to increase!Worthy4England wrote:Well our midfield workrate decreased 20% at least yesterday, because there was one less person in it. Unfortunately our attacking workrate didn't increase 20% and pretty difficult to tell at the back, because they were much more exposed.thebish wrote:precisely - and that is MORE than simply formation...scotty wrote:We also looked organised, disciplined and composed on the ball. The work rate was better and we didnt give the opposition as much time and space on the ball. We had more outlets when we were in possession, and we defended better and attacked better.TANGODANCER wrote:In the games against Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal we looked to have energy and effort.
The same workrate, would have looked less than it was with that formation. Against Liverpool, Arsenal and Everton we had much more possession than yesterday, chasing your tail never looks as "hard working" as having more of the ball and doing things with it.
It certainly didn't seem to be any better upfront, but I put that down to one player being largely anonymous.
I thought they put a lot of effort in, in the defence quite often being outnumbered, at pace (well more pace than we've got anyhow) - our defence ain't good with pace...
-
- Legend
- Posts: 8454
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:43 pm
- Location: Trotter Shop
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Knight is better than Wheater in every part of the game...malcd1 wrote:
I have never seen him play but he must come in for either Wheater or preferably Knight ASAP because those two are just not good enough as a defensive partnership.
Wheater is like a disaster - in the form of a red card - waiting to happen...
And is slower and not as good positionally, and doesn't have as much energy...
Neither makes you feel confident that we are safe, secure, tucked in and ready for the bedtime story...
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 34731
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: Player ratings v wigan
Correct on all counts. Wheater is a donkey.William the White wrote:Knight is better than Wheater in every part of the game...malcd1 wrote:
I have never seen him play but he must come in for either Wheater or preferably Knight ASAP because those two are just not good enough as a defensive partnership.
Wheater is like a disaster - in the form of a red card - waiting to happen...
And is slower and not as good positionally, and doesn't have as much energy...
Neither makes you feel confident that we are safe, secure, tucked in and ready for the bedtime story...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Harry Genshaw and 36 guests