We should turn into the old Bolton?

[christyldesley]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/feb/05/bolton-owen-coyle-norwich-city?newsfeed=true

Just came across this article that seems to point the finger at Coyle for the loss against Norwich, for the main reason that he didn't bring Kevin Davies on, quick enough.

Possibly the most stupid thing I've ever heard or seen. I don't know if anyone else thought the same at that point in the game but I would have rather seen Sordell come on when Davies did.

It's okay saying that they didn't have two established centre half's, but at the end of the day, Davies can't run anymore, so unless the ball is perfectly played, then he didn't win it. When Davies did come on, we played so many hopeless long balls towards him that Mavies and Reo-Coker vanished. Then to top it all off, Muamba gets taken off.

To sum up on this ramble, I think this article is giving the players (that didn't perform at all) a way out and makes it seem like as soon as we can't break a team down, we should 'huff' it to Davies. Who do they think we are, Liverpool?

[Gloria Stitz]

Journalists give themselves away as not knowing enough to have an opinion on Bolton Wanderers when they question the lack of playing time Davies is getting.

At his most effective, his massive lack of pace is a big hindrance. He should have been sold at a fraction of what Sunderland were offering.

Thanks for reading,

Gloria.

[ShootNaka]

Journalists give themselves away as not knowing enough to have an opinion on Bolton Wanderers when they question the lack of playing time Davies is getting.

At his most effective, his massive lack of pace is a big hindrance. He should have been sold at a fraction of what Sunderland were offering.

Thanks for reading,

Gloria.

Exactly when you are a journalist not watching a team week in week out, you at times have to be presumptuous in regards to the players you are watching, likening them to their previous form. What is obviously not apparent to this journalist is Davies lack of ability to assert himself on a game any more.

[CJ Bwfc]

Hmm, because hoofball worked so well when Mugson was in charge......

The media, like fans of other teams, will always look at Bolton as the original Stoke. Even though we haven't used a hoofball system to any great effect since Big Sam's era which ended half a decade ago! It didn't work for the ginger one, hence why he is now in a League 1 job. Coyle may not be a great manager, but at least he has some ambition and I personally think he will go with Sordell ahead of Davies in future. Well I hope so anyway. Kev is a great guy and a Wanderers legend, but when the legs are gone, they're gone!

[DaveBWFC]

Davies has done well the last few times he's come on as a sub. He still has something to offer if we need him but I don't think he should start games anymore.

[Squidgy]

They lost their two first choice central defenders through injury.

Bringing Davies on was the logical tactical choice given the bench.

[Jimbo]

If it was the Kevin Davies of 12-18 months ago it would still have been a logical tactical decision because he could still punish players not used to playing at centre back.

With all due respect to a club legend, last week there was as much logic behind it as bringing on Robbie Blake. An out of form striker who doesn't worry defenders in the box, can't run at them and isn't even going to trouble them much in the air.

Love the bloke and he probably still does have a job to do at the club as a substitute. I can see his impact coming in holding leads. If we're a goal or 2 up with 20mins left, I've no problem with him coming on for Ngog, holding the ball up, being a calm and experienced head who has seen it all and is able to help grind out a win.

When we're chasing a goal or going for a win, the last thing I want to see is a striker coming on who isn't going to score or run at defences who themselves are now holding onto a lead and probably sitting deeper.

[Manny]

We should do what other clubs did with the likes of Dion Dublin and Chris Sutton and convert him to a central defender.

[Martinbwfc]

We should do what other clubs did with the likes of Dion Dublin and Chris Sutton and convert him to a central defender.

Chris Sutton was the other way around, he was a central defender when he started his career at Norwich, who then started him as a striker.

[Manny]

I thought he went back to being a defender but having looked it up, you're right, he didn't.

[largehat]

I think most managers in the league would have brought Kevin Davies on at some point in the second half in that situation. It was the logical thing to do. If it had worked out all the people with the knives out for Coyle would have kept quiet, but now they have a stick to beat him with.

And to suggest bringing on Robbie Blake would have been a broadly similar move is really stupid.

[Jimbo]

I think most managers in the league would have brought Kevin Davies on at some point in the second half in that situation. It was the logical thing to do. If it had worked...

First bit is speculation. I could as easily say most managers wouldn't have Kevin Davies anywhere near their match day 18. I question whether Owen Coyle would either if it wasn't for 8 years service and the fact he's club captain. He might still make the bench, becase we don't have very much beyond it but I certainly don't think he'd be 'first choice attacking substitute'.

Re Bold Point- ...it didn't.

[largehat]

Well any statement which transposes a perceived point of view onto others could be described as speculation. Given that K Davies was on the bench though, your bit of speculation about other managers not having him in the match day 18 is totally irrelevant, because he was on the bench, whereas mine isn't.

Just because something didn't work, doesn't mean it wasn't a good idea. Coyle is continuously criticised by people for not making changes early enough in games or only making changes once we have gone behind, and for not reacting to what is going on on the pitch. The opposition have both centre backs taken off injured so he puts a big target man on who has the ability to bully the makeshift centre backs. Yes I am speculating that the majority of other managers would have done the same, but don't undermine the sense of that move and then mention Robbie Blake in the same post and expect everyone to think you're being reasonable in your judgement.

[CJ Bwfc]

Just because something didn't work, doesn't mean it wasn't a good idea.

When something doesn't work, surely it's because it wasn't a good idea! I don't think Coyle should be sacked or owt, but he needs to reflect on his ideas that don't work and try different ideas in future matches.

[largehat]

When something doesn't work, surely it's because it wasn't a good idea!

I completely disagree. Some ideas work out and some don't.

[texan dave II]

Take Elmander for instance

[Manny]

Who?

[CJ Bwfc]

I completely disagree. Some ideas work out and some don't.

And bringing Big Kev on DIDN'T work, making it a bad idea. Surely!

[largehat]

And bringing Big Kev on DIDN'T work, making it a bad idea. Surely!

Great, a circular discussion. My favourite.

Sometimes an idea - in any sphere (see what I did there) makes sense but doesn't work out.

Businesses fail, not necessarily because they were a bad idea, but due to factors like marketing conditions, expanding too rapidly, poor cash flow, competition and so on. It doesn't mean they were a bad idea.

HD-DVD wasn't a bad idea, it's just that someone else came up with a similar idea at the same time and something had to give.

Drinks manufacturers bring out new drinks that don't catch on.

etc etc

Bringing Kevin Davies on was a good idea in the circumstances, the problem was that the two makeshift centre backs did a better job than many would have anticipated, Davies didn't see enough of the ball to impose himself on the game, and didn't create much when he did get the ball. In theory, it was a match winning tactic - it just didn't work out on that occasion.

[texan dave II]

So whose fault was it that it did not work
If it was foreseeable that Kev would not see much of the ball then it was indeed OCs fault ie not making the the correct substitutions before or after the insertion of Kev

[Gloria Stitz]

When something doesn't work, surely it's because it wasn't a good idea! I don't think Coyle should be sacked or owt, but he needs to reflect on his ideas that don't work and try different ideas in future matches.

Some managers are blessed with the ability to forsee that an idea isn't going to work before they carry it out! With Coyle it's all about trial and error!

Take the Klasnic and Davies partnership for example. It was great when he finally scrapped it and we began to pick up results, but most of us could see long before that it wasn't working.

Thanks for reading,

Gloria.

[DaveBWFC]

Bringing Kevin Davies on was a good idea in the circumstances

It was and it wasn't. I understand your point and see why Coyle did it. But was it a good idea to take a midfielder off and leave ourselves more open when it's 0-0 away from home? It was a match winning tactic but also a match losing tactic imo.

[largehat]

So whose fault was it that it did not work
If it was foreseeable that Kev would not see much of the ball then it was indeed OCs fault ie not making the the correct substitutions before or after the insertion of Kev

Why does it have to be someone's fault? If it snows and your car won't start, whose fault is it if you're late for work?

It's always 'foreseeable' that a substitution might not work. I do know that Ngog wasn't doing an awful lot and was playing a second game in four days, perhaps we shouldn't have started with him up front either because it was 'forseeable' he wouldn't last 90 minutes?

[largehat]

It was and it wasn't. I understand your point and see why Coyle did it. But was it a good idea to take a midfielder off and leave ourselves more open when it's 0-0 away from home? It was a match winning tactic but also a match losing tactic imo.

Excellent post Dave.

I wouldn't have taken Muamba off for Davies,, I don't think this was the best way of getting Davies into the game, I'd have taken Ngog off rather than change the whole system, but again, I understand why Coyle gambled a possible point for a possible three points. It is his way.

[texan dave II]

Why does it have to be someone's fault? If it snows and your car won't start, whose fault is it if you're late for work?

It's always 'foreseeable' that a substitution might not work. I do know that Ngog wasn't doing an awful lot and was playing a second game in four days, perhaps we shouldn't have started with him up front either because it was 'forseeable' he wouldn't last 90 minutes?

Why would snow keep your car from starting?
It is always ultimately the managers fault is it not?
You said it yourself that taking Muamba off was not a good idea
therefore stands to reason it was not a good idea for OC to do it hence his fault and it cost 3 points that are very badly needed

I have always been a fan of OC but his problem solving skills leave a little to be desired to say the least