Owen Coyle

[Worthy4England]

This is all very interesting, but we actually played 4-4-1 yesterday.

[Turkish Trotter]

Bish I think you're being results orientated here. Let me explain what I mean by that. Its the concept that bad decisions can reap fruition on occasion. If you consistently make bad decisions you're going to get crap results on average. That doesn't mean you'll get the odd game where you won't win(Wigan away). We could use numerous examples of playing this 4-4-2 where we were shit. I mean how do you explain the turnaround against Liverpool where we were awful at Anfield but changed formation to a 5 man midfield and ran the show from the middle of the park?

In essence Tombwfc has it right the best chance of us getting points on average is by playing the 4-5-1, its that simple.

my point was a simple narrow one - in response to the idea that we had NO CHANCE of beating wigan with those players in that formation. we may have been hampered - even hamstrung - but I still contend we should have had enough on the pitch - EVEN IN THAT FORMATION to deal with Wigan...

Well thats obvious! Statistically we don't have NO CHANCE whichever formation we play but which gives us the better chance? Its quite a considerable difference imv and most of this board.

not to BWFCi!!

yes - coyle needed to change it - but ALSO - we would have given ourselves a statistically massively better chance if the players had not massively underperformed.. I refuse to believe it is ALL down to formation - it isn't!

Why did the players not perform them? Who should be getting the performances out of them?[/

Surely the answer to this is THE PLAYERS. The manager can do what he needs to do, but if the players don't perform then he can Fck all about it.

[Wandering Willy]

This is all very interesting, but we actually played 4-4-1 yesterday.

Said exactly the same thing when I saw the lineup on the telly in the ESL at 2.45.

[BWFC_Insane]

What's the point of having a manager then if it's all up to the players?

[Bruce Rioja]

yes - coyle needed to change it - but ALSO - we would have given ourselves a statistically massively better chance if the players had not massively underperformed.. I refuse to believe it is ALL down to formation - it isn't!

I maintain, Bish, that the players we have available cannot play 4-4-2. It has been proved match after match after match. For you to drag Wigan away up, a match in which they fecked it up hand over fist, is, in all honesty, no support to your point at all!

[thebish]

This is all very interesting, but we actually played 4-4-1 yesterday.

[thebish]

yes - coyle needed to change it - but ALSO - we would have given ourselves a statistically massively better chance if the players had not massively underperformed.. I refuse to believe it is ALL down to formation - it isn't!

I maintain, Bish, that the players we have available cannot play 4-4-2. It has been proved match after match after match. For you to drag Wigan away up, a match in which they fecked it up hand over fist, is, in all honesty, no support to your point at all!

apart from the obvious fact that it was against wigan!!

[Bruce Rioja]

yes - coyle needed to change it - but ALSO - we would have given ourselves a statistically massively better chance if the players had not massively underperformed.. I refuse to believe it is ALL down to formation - it isn't!

I maintain, Bish, that the players we have available cannot play 4-4-2. It has been proved match after match after match. For you to drag Wigan away up, a match in which they fecked it up hand over fist, is, in all honesty, no support to your point at all!

apart from the obvious fact that it was against wigan!!

And that they didn't feck it up hand over fist yesterday!

[Hoboh]

Bish I think you're being results orientated here. Let me explain what I mean by that. Its the concept that bad decisions can reap fruition on occasion. If you consistently make bad decisions you're going to get crap results on average. That doesn't mean you'll get the odd game where you won't win(Wigan away). We could use numerous examples of playing this 4-4-2 where we were shit. I mean how do you explain the turnaround against Liverpool where we were awful at Anfield but changed formation to a 5 man midfield and ran the show from the middle of the park?

In essence Tombwfc has it right the best chance of us getting points on average is by playing the 4-5-1, its that simple.

my point was a simple narrow one - in response to the idea that we had NO CHANCE of beating wigan with those players in that formation. we may have been hampered - even hamstrung - but I still contend we should have had enough on the pitch - EVEN IN THAT FORMATION to deal with Wigan...

Well thats obvious! Statistically we don't have NO CHANCE whichever formation we play but which gives us the better chance? Its quite a considerable difference imv and most of this board.

not to BWFCi!!

yes - coyle needed to change it - but ALSO - we would have given ourselves a statistically massively better chance if the players had not massively underperformed.. I refuse to believe it is ALL down to formation - it isn't!

You maybe suprised (well maybe not) to find I fundamentley dis-agree with you there bish. IMHO some of the players we have are only succesful in what they do with back up, in the case of 4-4-2 they are exposed, cannot wait to hoof the ball the feck away and put under pressure in particular when the "boss" (the great motivator) singles them out after the game for blame!
I've not posted so far because I was so angry I'd have probs copped a ban, but Coyle is a joke!!
I was well in the Coyle out camp before but was prepared to cut him a little slack when it looked he was capable of turning things round, recent events have proved that wrong!!
Sorry Mr Owen Coyle but you are not a good manager period and unless you want to be a John Terry do the decent thing and GO.
The only chance we have is a new man this week before the probable tankings in the next two prem games, someone the players will have to impress and one who has not got the baggage Coyle seems to be collecting with his favourites and oh if SKD wants to go to Sheff utd, I'll drive him there.

[Armchair Wanderer]

I generally agree with Hoboh apart from our only option is to get rid.

All we need is for OC to stick to his 4-5-1 guns and leave the 4-4-2 guns somewhere very safe.

In terms of the Wigan game, they set up 3-4-3 with 3 mobile forwards and everyone able to pass well. So it seemed quite fluid. With that setup it's quite easy for the forwards to retreat towards midfield and get the ball. Thus giving you flexibility and numbers in the middle. Plus they didn't always hoof it.

Our static 4-4-2 is the opposite of flexible. We had two in the middle compared to their many in the middle, hence they tended to win the ball after it was hoofed/knocked down. It was almost impossible in that situation, with the limitations of NRC/M.Davies to control possession and pass it through to Ngog, not that we tried.

80% formation/gameplan for me, 20% personnel. But that all adds up to 100% Owen Coyle because he put those players on the pitch.

[Ianmooreslovechild]

I'm with the last two on this. If anything the way we play 442 restricts the creativity of Mavis and NRC,leaves the defence open to runners and encourages us to put it in the mixer and hope for the best all of which makes the players trying to play the system look like shit which can easily be mistaken for they're not trying.Ultimately if you think your manager is nuts and dont believe in the system you are being asked to play then they may well stop trying.Klasnic already did a short while back due to not believing his manager had any idea what he was doing.

[Ianmooreslovechild]

Apparently Coyle is relaxing at home tonight doing a bit of DIY.His wife is a tad pissed off mind having to take a dump in the dark.Turns out Owen doesnt believe in screw fittings either.

[Gail Platz]

This is all very interesting, but we actually played 4-4-1 yesterday.

I'm being serious when I say this in that I'd rather have a traffic cone on the pitch than 'Super' Kevin Davies.

Stick the traffic cone in or around the D area, at least that would create a minor inconvenience, which is more of an effect than the 'Super' one had yesterday.

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

I'm with the last two on this. If anything the way we play 442 restricts the creativity of Mavis and NRC,leaves the defence open to runners and encourages us to put it in the mixer and hope for the best all of which makes the players trying to play the system look like shit which can easily be mistaken for they're not trying.Ultimately if you think your manager is nuts and dont believe in the system you are being asked to play then they may well stop trying.Klasnic already did a short while back due to not believing his manager had any idea what he was doing.

creativity
one can run with the ball intermittently and do the odd give and go, the other is essentially a body in midfield - tackles occasionally and makes the odd run into the box
neither can pass (when have you seen either stretch the play with a 30 yarder?) and neither has particularly good first touch or the ability to find space.
United played 4-4-2 yesterday but their central two can do all of the above. we were playing Wigan ffs and our cm's were outclassed more than outnumbered
say it again - when/if Holden comes back Reo-Coker isn't worth a start

[Worthy4England]

This is all very interesting, but we actually played 4-4-1 yesterday.

I'm being serious when I say this in that I'd rather have a traffic cone on the pitch than 'Super' Kevin Davies.

Stick the traffic cone in or around the D area, at least that would create a minor inconvenience, which is more of an effect than the 'Super' one had yesterday.

Was sad to see TBH.

SKD has had varying fortunes over the last few seasons, but this season he's seemed particularly poor.

I've not really seen a reason to sell him up until this season, but I think it's time to go out to pasture for him.

[Sponge]

I'm with the last two on this. If anything the way we play 442 restricts the creativity of Mavis and NRC,leaves the defence open to runners and encourages us to put it in the mixer and hope for the best all of which makes the players trying to play the system look like shit which can easily be mistaken for they're not trying.Ultimately if you think your manager is nuts and dont believe in the system you are being asked to play then they may well stop trying.Klasnic already did a short while back due to not believing his manager had any idea what he was doing.

creativity
one can run with the ball intermittently and do the odd give and go, the other is essentially a body in midfield - tackles occasionally and makes the odd run into the box
neither can pass (when have you seen either stretch the play with a 30 yarder?) and neither has particularly good first touch or the ability to find space.
United played 4-4-2 yesterday but their central two can do all of the above. we were playing Wigan ffs and our cm's were outclassed more than outnumbered
say it again - when/if Holden comes back Reo-Coker isn't worth a start

Absurd even to compare—of course our players are never going to stack up against to United's. That's Poundland vs Harrods. Frankly it's fecking unebelievable we've stayed in the prem so long, and if we want to stay here beyond this season we have to play to our (frankly limited) strengths, i.e. 4–5–1—a formation in which both Coker and Mavies have shown they can do very well.

[William the White]

I'm with the last two on this. If anything the way we play 442 restricts the creativity of Mavis and NRC,leaves the defence open to runners and encourages us to put it in the mixer and hope for the best all of which makes the players trying to play the system look like shit which can easily be mistaken for they're not trying.Ultimately if you think your manager is nuts and dont believe in the system you are being asked to play then they may well stop trying.Klasnic already did a short while back due to not believing his manager had any idea what he was doing.

creativity
one can run with the ball intermittently and do the odd give and go, the other is essentially a body in midfield - tackles occasionally and makes the odd run into the box
neither can pass (when have you seen either stretch the play with a 30 yarder?) and neither has particularly good first touch or the ability to find space.
United played 4-4-2 yesterday but their central two can do all of the above. we were playing Wigan ffs and our cm's were outclassed more than outnumbered
say it again - when/if Holden comes back Reo-Coker isn't worth a start

MotM game after game.

Player of the season so far.

[Ianmooreslovechild]

Ah Mr Napalm, it is all relative but we've survived for a very long time without that illusive playmaker that we seek every summer. The nearest is Holden like you say but he isnt fit. The point I'm trying to make is that with Moo on the pitch NRC can break into the box as he has done quite effectively a few times and Mavis can run at defenders which is what he does best.Without Moo I dont think they have the confidence or energy to take risks which is why in a 442 we create nothing.

[Hoboh]

Ah Mr Napalm, it is all relative but we've survived for a very long time without that illusive playmaker that we seek every summer. The nearest is Holden like you say but he isnt fit. The point I'm trying to make is that with Moo on the pitch NRC can break into the box as he has done quite effectively a few times and Mavis can run at defenders which is what he does best.Without Moo I dont think they have the confidence or energy to take risks which is why in a 442 we create nothing.

+1

[William the White]

Ah Mr Napalm, it is all relative but we've survived for a very long time without that illusive playmaker that we seek every summer. The nearest is Holden like you say but he isnt fit. The point I'm trying to make is that with Moo on the pitch NRC can break into the box as he has done quite effectively a few times and Mavis can run at defenders which is what he does best.Without Moo I dont think they have the confidence or energy to take risks which is why in a 442 we create nothing.

+1

and two...