Hamilton v Bolton

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:
Not sure what we have learned from the experience, but I'm half way to concluding that we have learnt we are even shitter than we thought we were.

Impossible man!

Funnily enough that's what my missus says.

Re this pre-season v real thing debate. I think we all recognise that it isn't necessarily about results, but a) yes we would like to see some good results and moreover performances to give us (and the team) a little more confidence as we go into the challenge ahead b) mixing up the line ups by using a zillion subs doesn't really help anyone get a feeling of where we are going or how we will look, but I suppose it gives everyone a run out c) Coyle Out? Last season I gave him the benefit of the doubt because of injuries and "investment signings" against a backdrop of slaughtering the wagebill, but now we are in the second tier he really has to come good on the results front for me. And the younger players have to be given a chance and have to prove themselves. Vela, Riley and Sordell looked good enough, but OC is going to have to impress me with his selections to keep me out of the Coyle out brigade. 6 games would be about right for me - see where we are then. My criteria would be: bottom half - out! top half but not in play-off position - another 6 games and review again. Play-off position - the man's a visionary.

We really need another striker IMO, I was reading Marc Iles report on the BN site and we only had Davies and Eaves as main striking options against hamilton.

Can you imagine going into to a game next season with Ngog and sordell out at the same time and relying on them 2 for goals?.....I dread to think of it.

aaron_bwfc wrote:We really need another striker IMO, I was reading Marc Iles report on the BN site and we only had Davies and Eaves as main striking options against hamilton.

Can you imagine going into to a game next season with Ngog and sordell out at the same time and relying on them 2 for goals?.....I dread to think of it.

Almost as bad is the prospect of Coyle selecting a Davies/Ngog pairing as his first choice.

If it was a 4-2-3-1 with Sordell/Eaves or N'gog as the lone striker I'd be reasonably happy to be honest, I'm more confident in Petrov/Mavies/Eagles/CYL grabbing a goal than SKD or to an extent N'gog. 4-2-3-1 would play to our strengths well.

But I agree we do need an extra striker, if N'gog continues to flatter to deceive then it's all on Sordell.

largehat wrote:Butty - by 'selective grasp' I am referring to what I consider to be your conscious decision to pick and choose aspects of the situation which fit your desiderata - ie to have a good old whinge about Coyle.

The 'left back problem' you refer to is a perfect example. Rather than acknowledge that Ricketts' return from injury solved that problem over 6 months ago, you point out that he's a right sided player. But he's played really well at left back since his return from injury, and we have two other specialist right backs in the first team squad. There simply isn't a left back problem and there hasn't been for months.

I think you're too eager to moan about Coyle and that's why I suggest you should hang fire until you have something credible to moan about. If you want to write about problems that aren't there though (ref: your line about "I will continue to do so as when I see fit", that's your prerogative of course, but you'll have to accept that others may exercise their own prerogative to point out the glaring holes in your logic, when such holes are present.

Large Hat. I am with Chips on this. He/She is expressing an opinion which is the only purpose of this site.

Why you have to lapse into Latin is a bit silly and not the usual football chat language.

If you think that a right footed left-back is the answer to that spot then I disagree (if that's alright).

There are a few more points you make that I disagree with but you are a bit too pretentious for my liking so I'll leave it at that.

That's fine, yesbutno, there's a 'foes' function on this forum just for situations like this. I certainly wouldn't want to get into a discussion with anyone who considers me to be both silly and pretentious and who thinks I write in Latin when I don't.

Just being pedantic but -

Desiderata - Latin: "desired things", perfect passive participle of desidero.

Sluffy wrote:Just being pedantic but -

Desiderata - Latin: "desired things", perfect passive participle of desidero.

Cheers for that, Sluffy. Had no idea that the word had Latin origins, I know it's currently an English word, which is the language I post in. At least I know what 'yesbutno' was on about.

Desiderata is a latin word used by yourself.

If you don't know which language you debate in, may I suggest you don't debate at all.

May I suggest that you go **** yourself

Desiderata was also a song. Mo Chowder on another forum always posted it when the shit hit the fan!

The words are quite appropriate. I never really got the song but I think the words are suggesting that we are all children of the universe. ( I already knew that.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Reebok Trotter wrote:Desiderata was also a song. Mo Chowder on another forum always posted it when the shit hit the fan!

That's a lovely poem, RT.

Considering it was published in 1927 it's amazing how much still holds true today.

Rudyard Kipling was in the same mould as Max Ehrman.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I have enjoyed the too-ing and fro-ing on this topic.

What comes across to me is that it's wrong to criticise an individuale ( in this case the Bolton manage) but it's perfectly ok (in fact desirable) to criticize anyone with a contrary view.

So what I'm trying to say is, is this a forum for 'Coyle is a good manager (despite the results and time) and if you disagree then you are 'Negative' and are just a whinger and your posts don't count.

You must be joking, you could count the amount of people who still back Coyle on here on two fingers.

Surely football is all about opinions ? You have the pro Coyle faction and the anti Coyle faction. Who determines which faction is correct ? Personally I couldn't give two hoots. I support Wanderers and that is it. Managers come and go but the team remains.

I have serious reservations about Coyle especially because Wigan are in the Premiership and we aren't. A lot of Wiganers were slagging off Martinez but by Christ they produced results in their last eight games. We were shit and we can't deny it.

For me, Coyle has to get his act together this coming season. I'm not interested what he tells the press. All that matters is performance on the pitch. As a former player he is fortunate that the fans have given him the benefit of the doubt after the Megson period but ultimately the manager is judged on results. There can be no more excuses. This is the season where he has to deliver. If not then he is history.

chipbutty - I too have enjoyed the too-ing and fro-ing on this thread, not personal. The only blatantly personal comments on this thread haven't been written by me. I have stated before that I enjoy debating things with you. Your posts certainly 'count' where I am concerned and I read them carefully and within interest.

RT - I've never subscribed to the notion of 'pro-Coyle' and 'anti-Coyle' camps as you may know. There are two simple reasons for this. The first, you have already mentioned. I am 'pro-Bolton Wanderers' first and foremost. Secondly, if Coyle doesn't deliver this season (I mentioned a benchmark of being 9 points away from 6th place by the end of October) I will want him gone. So how can I be 'pro-Coyle'? I only want Coyle as manager for as long as I think it is the right thing for Bolton Wanderers and not a moment longer. All I ever disagree with others about is when they suggest that time has arrived, when I don't think it has. We will see.