A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2076
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:54 pm
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
I would have made a mobile, pacy CB my No1 priority in the transfer window before anyone else, got the player in early and then played that player with Mills the other CB....BWFC_Insane wrote:So who would you pick?Peter Thompson wrote:He's slow & lazy, has an awful 'can't be bothered' laid back attitude and has a major mistake / error in him in almost every game. He looks like a player who doesn't really care whether we win or lose.
He should never have been given a new contract under Coyle, and even worse should not have been made captain under Freedman. Wheater is equally as bad at the moment even slower than Knight and again there is a mistake in him per game as well.
So playing the 2 of them together is poor football management, anyone with pace & movement will score against us, and TBH I'm staggered that Freedman has put them both in the same team, and this is one of the main reasons why I have doubts in Freedman's judgement and tactical nous as a manager.
Matt Mills who seemingly was desperate for a move to Leeds to be reunited with McDermott but wouldn't take a wage cut to do so.....or Ream who if we believe Nixon has said in an interview to the media that he finds the championship too physical and can't cope?
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 38902
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
With what money? Or are you saying play Andrews and don't sign Spearing? Not sure many would have been happy with that.Peter Thompson wrote:I would have made a mobile, pacy CB my No1 priority in the transfer window before anyone else, got the player in early and then played that player with Mills the other CB....BWFC_Insane wrote:So who would you pick?Peter Thompson wrote:He's slow & lazy, has an awful 'can't be bothered' laid back attitude and has a major mistake / error in him in almost every game. He looks like a player who doesn't really care whether we win or lose.
He should never have been given a new contract under Coyle, and even worse should not have been made captain under Freedman. Wheater is equally as bad at the moment even slower than Knight and again there is a mistake in him per game as well.
So playing the 2 of them together is poor football management, anyone with pace & movement will score against us, and TBH I'm staggered that Freedman has put them both in the same team, and this is one of the main reasons why I have doubts in Freedman's judgement and tactical nous as a manager.
Matt Mills who seemingly was desperate for a move to Leeds to be reunited with McDermott but wouldn't take a wage cut to do so.....or Ream who if we believe Nixon has said in an interview to the media that he finds the championship too physical and can't cope?
Seeing as we've had a one in one out I suspect the problem is that we haven't been able to shift any of our centre halves to bring another one in!
-
- Reliable
- Posts: 839
- Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:50 pm
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
think I'd have a quick, strong tackler, good in the air, good on the ball, 2 footed, good range of passing, good reader of the game, leader, hard bastard type as my CB
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
I think Dougie would have loved to get a centre back in early on, but with us being heavily stocked with centre backs on silly wages it was a no go until someone moved out.
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
I would have made a mobile, pacy CB my No1 priority in the transfer window, got the player in early and then played that player with Jack Charlton.
Oh and renamed the Reebok, Shangri La.
Oh and renamed the Reebok, Shangri La.
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
He's adopted Elmander's role of 'Expensive signing who hasn't lived up to expectations and has somehow garnered a reputation for not giving a shit'. I think to some people he's basically the poster boy for where it all went wrong
FWIW, I think he's perfectly adequate for the most part. I wouldn't play him and Wheater together, but I don't think they are solely to blame. We seem to be playing too high of a line and we don't keep the ball well at all going forward.
We have a lot of problems and I don't believe that simply shoving West Brom's fifth choice centre half into the team will suddenly solve everything.
FWIW, I think he's perfectly adequate for the most part. I wouldn't play him and Wheater together, but I don't think they are solely to blame. We seem to be playing too high of a line and we don't keep the ball well at all going forward.
We have a lot of problems and I don't believe that simply shoving West Brom's fifth choice centre half into the team will suddenly solve everything.
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Well more of an even debate than Knight is rubbish. I am not a fan of Zat I just cannot see why the defence has been singled out. I could have easily have named this post why have we only scored 2 league goals this season?? If the strikers had been more clinical we would be sitting pretty with 6 points making this argument moot.
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
I like Jay, but he isn't the only defensive midfielder on earth. Generally I think tough tackling midfielders who don't offer much creatively are pretty common and usually available quite cheap (Medo, for example). Could we not have spent that £2m (or the majority of it) on a centre half?BWFC_Insane wrote:With what money? Or are you saying play Andrews and don't sign Spearing? Not sure many would have been happy with that.Peter Thompson wrote:I would have made a mobile, pacy CB my No1 priority in the transfer window before anyone else, got the player in early and then played that player with Mills the other CB....BWFC_Insane wrote:So who would you pick?Peter Thompson wrote:He's slow & lazy, has an awful 'can't be bothered' laid back attitude and has a major mistake / error in him in almost every game. He looks like a player who doesn't really care whether we win or lose.
He should never have been given a new contract under Coyle, and even worse should not have been made captain under Freedman. Wheater is equally as bad at the moment even slower than Knight and again there is a mistake in him per game as well.
So playing the 2 of them together is poor football management, anyone with pace & movement will score against us, and TBH I'm staggered that Freedman has put them both in the same team, and this is one of the main reasons why I have doubts in Freedman's judgement and tactical nous as a manager.
Matt Mills who seemingly was desperate for a move to Leeds to be reunited with McDermott but wouldn't take a wage cut to do so.....or Ream who if we believe Nixon has said in an interview to the media that he finds the championship too physical and can't cope?
Seeing as we've had a one in one out I suspect the problem is that we haven't been able to shift any of our centre halves to bring another one in!
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
I'd play Chris Fairclough and Gerry Taggert and have done with it 

Pfffft.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 38902
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Gundi and Gary Cahill for me.....TKIZ! wrote:I'd play Chris Fairclough and Gerry Taggert and have done with it
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
We seemed to have a thread similar to this one recently on Knightmare and I stick to what I said in that he is the worst player to play for our club ever.
The above post is complete bollox/garbage/nonsense, please point this out to me at any and every occasion possible.
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Back four of Candela, Bergsson, Cahill and Pedders for me....

Pfffft.
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 3736
- Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 8:14 pm
- Location: Bury
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Dan, Dan, Dan, Dan, Dan! With the greatest of respect, you didn't see some of the players that we had between 1981 and 1987. Probably others before and since then too. Dave Sutton made Knight look like Bobby Moore. Seriously.bwfcdan94 wrote:We seemed to have a thread similar to this one recently on Knightmare and I stick to what I said in that he is the worst player to play for our club ever.
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 14516
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Giving it away after charging out for absolutely no reason and leaving a gaping hole behind him. It was the sort of defending you'd expect from a 12 year old who's never played 11-a-side before.malcd1 wrote:I don't think that was Zat chasing back making that last ditch challenge. I'm positive it was Baptiste.Norpig wrote:Goal 1 was a mistake by Zat Knight which he nearly managed to get back and rectify but it was ZK fault.
Look again. You will see Zat ambling back after giving the ball away.
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Since 2000-2001 the best we did in goals conceded was in 2005-2006, the defenders we had then that played apart in that season;
Tal Ben Haim
Ricardo Gardner
Bruno N’Gotty
Abdoulaye Faye
Joey O'Brien
Radhi Jaïdi
Nicky Hunt
Top scorer was Stelios with 12
Tal Ben Haim
Ricardo Gardner
Bruno N’Gotty
Abdoulaye Faye
Joey O'Brien
Radhi Jaïdi
Nicky Hunt
Top scorer was Stelios with 12
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 14516
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
If the defence wasn't so bad (playing centre backs better than the current ones at RB, despite not being as good a RB as the actual RB who's sat on the bench.. Still with me) we might be able to play a bit further up the pitch and get the ball to the front men and make it stick and not have 2 defensive mids to protect them.. Well, I say protect...Norpig wrote:Well more of an even debate than Knight is rubbish. I am not a fan of Zat I just cannot see why the defence has been singled out. I could have easily have named this post why have we only scored 2 league goals this season?? If the strikers had been more clinical we would be sitting pretty with 6 points making this argument moot.
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 31734
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
Knight or Wheater, but not Knight and Wheater.
Rapidly siding with Boris's notion - shift Bap across, bring Mears in, see how that goes. I note Mears and Hayden White played 45 mins each tonight... could he possibly be assessing options?
Rapidly siding with Boris's notion - shift Bap across, bring Mears in, see how that goes. I note Mears and Hayden White played 45 mins each tonight... could he possibly be assessing options?
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1321
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:54 am
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
I'd go with Ream and Wheater for a few games. Ream has generally looked poor in the Championship so far but in his entire time at Bolton, he's only had one sustained period in the side for us and he performed well in that period. There's a chance he won't improve but it's tough for a defender to come in for a game after not playing a game in months and be expected to be up to pace. Ream hasn't played consistently since his first season with us in the Premier League, so I'd like to try him with Wheater for 5 games or so.
I'm not saying he's definitely going to be the answer to our problems but what I do think is that he and Wheater had a good partnership in the past, and playing him for a game every 6 weeks will always lead to disjointed, poor performances. He, like any player, will be off the pace when brought into the first team so sporadically. I don't think Ream is much worse than Knight - if at all - but unlike Knight, there's at least the chance that Ream can improve if he gets game time. We've seen Knight at the best he possibly can be whereas there's likely more to come from Ream, if he's allowed the chance to perform regularly and be a part of a partnership himself.
It might not work but for me, it's better than sticking with something that you know will only ever disappoint.
I'm not saying he's definitely going to be the answer to our problems but what I do think is that he and Wheater had a good partnership in the past, and playing him for a game every 6 weeks will always lead to disjointed, poor performances. He, like any player, will be off the pace when brought into the first team so sporadically. I don't think Ream is much worse than Knight - if at all - but unlike Knight, there's at least the chance that Ream can improve if he gets game time. We've seen Knight at the best he possibly can be whereas there's likely more to come from Ream, if he's allowed the chance to perform regularly and be a part of a partnership himself.
It might not work but for me, it's better than sticking with something that you know will only ever disappoint.
Re: A case for Defence (is it really all Zats Fault?)
No offence smokey but if we are to have a cat in hells chance of staying in touch with the pacemakers and stand a chance of promotion, five games to 'try' a central defender who has hardly proved his worth, even for the tool who bought him, ain't an option.SmokinFrazier wrote:I'd go with Ream and Wheater for a few games. Ream has generally looked poor in the Championship so far but in his entire time at Bolton, he's only had one sustained period in the side for us and he performed well in that period. There's a chance he won't improve but it's tough for a defender to come in for a game after not playing a game in months and be expected to be up to pace. Ream hasn't played consistently since his first season with us in the Premier League, so I'd like to try him with Wheater for 5 games or so.
I'm not saying he's definitely going to be the answer to our problems but what I do think is that he and Wheater had a good partnership in the past, and playing him for a game every 6 weeks will always lead to disjointed, poor performances. He, like any player, will be off the pace when brought into the first team so sporadically. I don't think Ream is much worse than Knight - if at all - but unlike Knight, there's at least the chance that Ream can improve if he gets game time. We've seen Knight at the best he possibly can be whereas there's likely more to come from Ream, if he's allowed the chance to perform regularly and be a part of a partnership himself.
It might not work but for me, it's better than sticking with something that you know will only ever disappoint.
I agree we need to do something but not that drastic, from what I've seen the midfield and defence need to learn they are on the same team and operate as a unit. With the players we have we never will be prolific scorers which makes clean sheets and 'nicking the odd one' the only way to go, get up quick and get back quicker.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], HMX, Majestic-12 [Bot], sonicthewhite, The_Gun and 29 guests