MATCHWATCH : Bolton Wanderers (a)

[WestYorksRoyal]

It's more than our academy. The game has a lot more attackers who play across the line and as an attacking midfielder than out and out strikers. Which is odd as on the playground everyone wants to be the one scoring goals.

[West F]

Who was the last decent striker the Academy produced?

Wareham.

No. It was Sam Smith. Reading had a spell of top class striker youngsters coming through 20 or so years ago (Tyson, Henderson, Cox plus Austin on the Academy books too) but there’s been no real quality produced since the late 00s. Perhaps it’s a sign of the trend in coaching changing as as much as anything as everyone flocks to the latest false 9 fad.

I remember the raised eyebrows when Nick moved Austin out to get Church in from Wycombe. If I could smuggle one into a Time Machine from then, I would take Darius, as long as he didn’t put up a fight.

[Brogue]

Andrija Novakovich

[Hendo]

Andrija Novakovich

Just signed for AC Reggiana 1919 in Serie B.

[Snowflake Royal]

Who was the last decent striker the Academy produced?

Loader. Although Ehibhatiomhan is also a forward, he was arguably moved out of position to LW when he broke through.

People love to ignore facts when they're complaining though.

'We have no strikers', 'we signed no strikers'

Er... MOM and Ehibhatiomhan?

'Yeah, but they're shit and I don’t like them so they don’t count'

[Snowflake Royal]

Hmm. Not sure what to make of it all really. Still feel that Hunt is within a grace window what with having to start essentially from scratch this season with a new roster of players, and want to afford the same grace to those players too - it’s rare to hit the ground running, and they will of course need time; this isn’t really something to blame Hunt for.

At the same time, Hunt does seem to be repeating a few questionable decisions that isn’t doing him any favours in terms of fan patience. While he is of course stuck with the players he has, and the time it takes for them to settle, he doesn’t always seem to play the right ones, or put them in the right positions.

I was saying to the missus last night though; if it’s obvious to us as armchair shitmunchers to start so-and-so, or play thingo wherever, it will be obvious to Hunt, so if he’s NOT doing that he is probably privy to more information we are not.

I really do think a decent striker will turn things around. Sometimes it just takes one little thing to fix a broken engine. The worry is whether we will indeed sign such a player! If we don’t, we could be in trouble.

In the midfield issue, there are basically two complaints and issues the fans consider obvious errors.

1) Wing playing as the quarterback rather than further forward.
2) Fraser playing in Knibb's position rather than Elliott/Doyle.

I try to put myself in the manager's place and ask myself why he's doing what so many people think is wrong. Whether I agree or not.

I think 1 should be pretty obvious. It's where Wing played successfully last season under both Selles and Hunt. It plays to many of Wing's strengths, he has [usually] great distribution, both long and short. He can retain possession, deal with a high press, slide tight balls forward into midfield and the wings, and play Hollywood 60 yards, usually with great accuracy turning defence into attack and getting us in behind. And he can ghost into space outside the box for those netbusters. Space he's less likely to get playing further forward in congestion. This one, I tend to agree is pretty valid.

2 is the real headscratcher. It's a departure from last season. It doesn’t seem to fit the system, or the players. My gut feeling is that because we've started badly, Hunt thinks we need to be conservative and play a more defensive game, because our midfield is being played through and overrun. So Elliott/Doyle will be too lightweight and make that worse.

I have some sympathy for that view, especially away and against the better teams. But if that’s Hunt's reasoning, I think he’s got it very wrong. Because it does far more damage to our ability to keep the ball, string passes together and create chances than it helps keep us solid. If you don’t carry a threat and the ability to retain the ball, the opposition has to put very little effort and focus into defending and can just dedicate themselves to attack.

It's this one that has to change for me, and Elliott (or Doyle) has to start in the midfield three. If he makes the change, we'll see if we're right and Hunt was wrong, or if Hunt saw something in training to show him it won’t work or they're not up to it, and we were wrong.

Yeah, I'd go along with this (said very similar on the Hunt thread; I promise I wasn't cribbing).

I also added that sometimes a ship seemingly full of holes has only one, and that little fix makes a surprising difference. With the right balance in midfield (Elliot/Doyle for Fraser) and/or with a decent striker, along with some refereeing decisions going our way, I can imagine we'd be looking at an entirely different set of results.

The striker thing is out of Hunts hands, but surely he'll be starting Elliot or Doyle in central midfield for the next game. No disrespect to Fraser - I think he's going to be a neat signing - but if Wing HAS to play deeper, let's not square-peg any more players into round holes.

Yep agree.

Not hard to see those turning points either.

Lincoln - horrid deflection, denied a penalty, woodwork twice?
Wimbledon- denied a penalty, open goal missed
Bolton - horrid deflection

[Sutekh]

Who was the last decent striker the Academy produced?

Loader. Although Ehibhatiomhan is also a forward, he was arguably moved out of position to LW when he broke through.

People love to ignore facts when they're complaining though.

'We have no strikers', 'we signed no strikers'

Er... MOM and Ehibhatiomhan?

'Yeah, but they're shit and I don’t like them so they don’t count'

I really like Kelvin E as a player but he is just not a striker and I’ve never really seen anything about him to suggest otherwise (except that he has the no. 9 shirt for some weird reason).

MOM is a striker just starting out. He has a really long way to go and may even eventually find he makes a career in a different position. Absolutely not impressed with what I’ve seen so far but accept that that might be more to do with the shortcomings in the squad and/or management as much as anything.

Basil Tuma is the other striker but, of course, he’s injured - as well as being younger than MOM - so no-one’s built any real expectation on whether he can contribute as yet.

The fact remains the club need a striker with a bit of experience to help these lads develop and come through.

[West F]

Who was the last decent striker the Academy produced?

Loader. Although Ehibhatiomhan is also a forward, he was arguably moved out of position to LW when he broke through.

People love to ignore facts when they're complaining though.

'We have no strikers', 'we signed no strikers'

Er... MOM and Ehibhatiomhan?

'Yeah, but they're shit and I don’t like them so they don’t count'

I really like Kelvin E as a player but he is just not a striker and I’ve never really seen anything about him to suggest otherwise (except that he has the no. 9 shirt for some weird reason).

MOM is a striker just starting out. He has a really long way to go and may even eventually find he makes a career in a different position. Absolutely not impressed with what I’ve seen so far but accept that that might be more to do with the shortcomings in the squad and/or management as much as anything.

Basil Tuma is the other striker but, of course, he’s injured - as well as being younger than MOM - so no-one’s built any real expectation on whether he can contribute as yet.

The fact remains the club need a striker with a bit of experience to help these lads develop and come through.

Get smudge back on loan.

[Hound]

In the midfield issue, there are basically two complaints and issues the fans consider obvious errors.

1) Wing playing as the quarterback rather than further forward.
2) Fraser playing in Knibb's position rather than Elliott/Doyle.

I try to put myself in the manager's place and ask myself why he's doing what so many people think is wrong. Whether I agree or not.

I think 1 should be pretty obvious. It's where Wing played successfully last season under both Selles and Hunt. It plays to many of Wing's strengths, he has [usually] great distribution, both long and short. He can retain possession, deal with a high press, slide tight balls forward into midfield and the wings, and play Hollywood 60 yards, usually with great accuracy turning defence into attack and getting us in behind. And he can ghost into space outside the box for those netbusters. Space he's less likely to get playing further forward in congestion. This one, I tend to agree is pretty valid.

2 is the real headscratcher. It's a departure from last season. It doesn’t seem to fit the system, or the players. My gut feeling is that because we've started badly, Hunt thinks we need to be conservative and play a more defensive game, because our midfield is being played through and overrun. So Elliott/Doyle will be too lightweight and make that worse.

I have some sympathy for that view, especially away and against the better teams. But if that’s Hunt's reasoning, I think he’s got it very wrong. Because it does far more damage to our ability to keep the ball, string passes together and create chances than it helps keep us solid. If you don’t carry a threat and the ability to retain the ball, the opposition has to put very little effort and focus into defending and can just dedicate themselves to attack.

It's this one that has to change for me, and Elliott (or Doyle) has to start in the midfield three. If he makes the change, we'll see if we're right and Hunt was wrong, or if Hunt saw something in training to show him it won’t work or they're not up to it, and we were wrong.

Yeah, I'd go along with this (said very similar on the Hunt thread; I promise I wasn't cribbing).

I also added that sometimes a ship seemingly full of holes has only one, and that little fix makes a surprising difference. With the right balance in midfield (Elliot/Doyle for Fraser) and/or with a decent striker, along with some refereeing decisions going our way, I can imagine we'd be looking at an entirely different set of results.

The striker thing is out of Hunts hands, but surely he'll be starting Elliot or Doyle in central midfield for the next game. No disrespect to Fraser - I think he's going to be a neat signing - but if Wing HAS to play deeper, let's not square-peg any more players into round holes.

Yep agree.

Not hard to see those turning points either.

Lincoln - horrid deflection, denied a penalty, woodwork twice?
Wimbledon- denied a penalty, open goal missed
Bolton - horrid deflection

But we were also pretty terrible for long periods in those games, wasn’t just a bit of bad luck.

I’m less bothered by the results or even poor individual performances than the tactics, starting line up choices or subs. Or lack of any chance creation (except when we’re 1 down with 5 to go)

[Royal Monkey]

Who was the academy lad that came on away to Birmingham and bagged 2 goals to win us the game his name has gone out me head !
Really thought he was gonna break through and be successful for us but I think he got an injury then just disappeared about the time Kelvin came through

[Half Horse]

Who was the academy lad that came on away to Birmingham and bagged 2 goals to win us the game his name has gone out me head !
Really thought he was gonna break through and be successful for us but I think he got an injury then just disappeared about the time Kelvin came through

Jahmari Clarke. Now at Yeovil.

[Sutekh]

Who was the academy lad that came on away to Birmingham and bagged 2 goals to win us the game his name has gone out me head !
Really thought he was gonna break through and be successful for us but I think he got an injury then just disappeared about the time Kelvin came through

Jahmari Clarke. Now at Yeovil.

and had 4 non league clubs in 1 year, since leaving, making a total of 6 apps in various leagues and scoring 1 goal.

[Extended-Phenotype]

Yeah, I'd go along with this (said very similar on the Hunt thread; I promise I wasn't cribbing).

I also added that sometimes a ship seemingly full of holes has only one, and that little fix makes a surprising difference. With the right balance in midfield (Elliot/Doyle for Fraser) and/or with a decent striker, along with some refereeing decisions going our way, I can imagine we'd be looking at an entirely different set of results.

The striker thing is out of Hunts hands, but surely he'll be starting Elliot or Doyle in central midfield for the next game. No disrespect to Fraser - I think he's going to be a neat signing - but if Wing HAS to play deeper, let's not square-peg any more players into round holes.

Yep agree.

Not hard to see those turning points either.

Lincoln - horrid deflection, denied a penalty, woodwork twice?
Wimbledon- denied a penalty, open goal missed
Bolton - horrid deflection

But we were also pretty terrible for long periods in those games, wasn’t just a bit of bad luck.

I’m less bothered by the results or even poor individual performances than the tactics, starting line up choices or subs. Or lack of any chance creation (except when we’re 1 down with 5 to go)

I think the point is not that it’s all just bad luck; it’s that while we clearly haven’t gelled as a team yet, and Hunt hasn’t quite figured out who best to play and where from his new roster of players, a more pragmatic assessment of our situation might recognise that luck and decisions have gone against us too. If the refs had given those penalties alone, we could have been looking at a better mix of wins/draws/loses instead of just loses.

Obvs that doesn’t paint over the cracks of what is a broken teapot being hastily reassembled on the fly, but I do think it suggests we are closer to having a competitive team than the results would have us believe.

I dunno, perhaps I’m subconsciously being driven towards over-optimism out of contrarian defiance against the Twitterollocks of “Hunt is runny shit” and “things were so much better under Dai” that makes me remember what a cluster of c[i]u[/i]nts our fanbase really is now the togetherness-in-crisis has evaporated. But I have it in my head that there will be this click and we’ll all be watching a team pushing for the play-offs.

I’m probably just tired of all the doom.

[Hound]

Yep agree.

Not hard to see those turning points either.

Lincoln - horrid deflection, denied a penalty, woodwork twice?
Wimbledon- denied a penalty, open goal missed
Bolton - horrid deflection

But we were also pretty terrible for long periods in those games, wasn’t just a bit of bad luck.

I’m less bothered by the results or even poor individual performances than the tactics, starting line up choices or subs. Or lack of any chance creation (except when we’re 1 down with 5 to go)

I think the point is not that it’s all just bad luck; it’s that while we clearly haven’t gelled as a team yet, and Hunt hasn’t quite figured out who best to play and where from his new roster of players, a more pragmatic assessment of our situation might recognise that luck and decisions have gone against us too. If the refs had given those penalties alone, we could have been looking at a better mix of wins/draws/loses instead of just loses.

Obvs that doesn’t paint over the cracks of what is a broken teapot being hastily reassembled on the fly, but I do think it suggests we are closer to having a competitive team than the results would have us believe.

I dunno, perhaps I’m subconsciously being driven towards over-optimism out of contrarian defiance against the Twitterollocks of “Hunt is runny shit” and “things were so much better under Dai” that makes me remember what a cluster of c[i]u[/i]nts our fanbase really is now the togetherness-in-crisis has evaporated. But I have it in my head that there will be this click and we’ll all be watching a team pushing for the play-offs.

I’m probably just tired of all the doom.

Easy answer. Don’t look at Twitter

I agree we’re not miles off. Tbh I’m pretty frustrated with the performances and results because I’m convinced there’s a decent team in there which just isn’t clicking for one reason or another

[West F]

It's more than our academy. The game has a lot more attackers who play across the line and as an attacking midfielder than out and out strikers. Which is odd as on the playground everyone wants to be the one scoring goals.

True. Maybe their heroes are Messi, Salah, Saka and Mbappe. Rather than a Shearer, Fowler Kane and Cole.

[Snowflake Royal]

Yep agree.

Not hard to see those turning points either.

Lincoln - horrid deflection, denied a penalty, woodwork twice?
Wimbledon- denied a penalty, open goal missed
Bolton - horrid deflection

But we were also pretty terrible for long periods in those games, wasn’t just a bit of bad luck.

I’m less bothered by the results or even poor individual performances than the tactics, starting line up choices or subs. Or lack of any chance creation (except when we’re 1 down with 5 to go)

I think the point is not that it’s all just bad luck; it’s that while we clearly haven’t gelled as a team yet, and Hunt hasn’t quite figured out who best to play and where from his new roster of players, a more pragmatic assessment of our situation might recognise that luck and decisions have gone against us too. If the refs had given those penalties alone, we could have been looking at a better mix of wins/draws/loses instead of just loses.

Obvs that doesn’t paint over the cracks of what is a broken teapot being hastily reassembled on the fly, but I do think it suggests we are closer to having a competitive team than the results would have us believe.

I dunno, perhaps I’m subconsciously being driven towards over-optimism out of contrarian defiance against the Twitterollocks of “Hunt is runny shit” and “things were so much better under Dai” that makes me remember what a cluster of c[i]u[/i]nts our fanbase really is now the togetherness-in-crisis has evaporated. But I have it in my head that there will be this click and we’ll all be watching a team pushing for the play-offs.

I’m probably just tired of all the doom.

Agree with this. I looked at the Hunt out thread appearing and my first reaction was 'these pcunts don't deserve having a club that still exists'

[Hound]

But we were also pretty terrible for long periods in those games, wasn’t just a bit of bad luck.

I’m less bothered by the results or even poor individual performances than the tactics, starting line up choices or subs. Or lack of any chance creation (except when we’re 1 down with 5 to go)

I think the point is not that it’s all just bad luck; it’s that while we clearly haven’t gelled as a team yet, and Hunt hasn’t quite figured out who best to play and where from his new roster of players, a more pragmatic assessment of our situation might recognise that luck and decisions have gone against us too. If the refs had given those penalties alone, we could have been looking at a better mix of wins/draws/loses instead of just loses.

Obvs that doesn’t paint over the cracks of what is a broken teapot being hastily reassembled on the fly, but I do think it suggests we are closer to having a competitive team than the results would have us believe.

I dunno, perhaps I’m subconsciously being driven towards over-optimism out of contrarian defiance against the Twitterollocks of “Hunt is runny shit” and “things were so much better under Dai” that makes me remember what a cluster of c[i]u[/i]nts our fanbase really is now the togetherness-in-crisis has evaporated. But I have it in my head that there will be this click and we’ll all be watching a team pushing for the play-offs.

I’m probably just tired of all the doom.

Agree with this. I looked at the Hunt out thread appearing and my first reaction was 'these pcunts don't deserve having a club that still exists'

Why? It’s just a discussion, it’s not Twitter simpletons dribbling into their keyboards

No one is yelling he must go now, just debating possible shortcomings and how long he has to get things right