Evatt seething over negativity on Ifollow

IAN Evatt has responded angrily to ‘negative’ reaction to Wanderers’ weekend victory against Barrow.

The Bolton boss says he is “baffled” by some comments about his side’s performance in their 1-0 win against his former club at the UniBol.

It is understood that remarks made in the club’s iFollow commentary, and in particular those of former Bolton winger Gary Henshaw, have been particularly taken to heart.

Speaking at his pre-Oldham Athletic press conference, Evatt said he could not understand how the mood had been so downbeat after a fifth successive win which put the club into the play-off positions.


“It’s amazing,” he said. “Don’t watch us. If you don’t want to support the team then don’t bother. I don’t understand how anyone can be negative at the moment considering what we have been through in recent history.

“I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone can be negative about Saturday.

“A team came and had two banks of five, defended in their own half for the majority of the game, we made 630-odd passes, more forward passes than most of the league did in the entirety of their passing in a football match. We don’t smash it long, we don’t boot it, we try and create, what is there to be negative about? We have just won five straight games and six out of seven, what is there to be negative about? What is the matter with people?

“It is almost as if people have got used to criticising, used to negatives. And when Bolton are doing well, it upsets them. How can that be?

“I’m absolutely baffled, astounded. I honestly do care how we win. And you ask all the other managers, all the other people in football about how Bolton Wanderers play and they will say we’re a fantastic team which plays football the right way. That is how we should be spoken about and it’s how we should have been spoken about following the game on Saturday. That’s a fact.

“If you don’t like us passing it around and want us to boot it up to the front man, it’s not changing. We can’t boot it up there because we haven’t got any physicality at the top end of the pitch. That is what these League Two defenders want – big hairy-***** defenders who are 6ft 5ins want to head it out all day long. They don’t want us moving and probing them and having rotations and passing patterns, that’s what they don’t want.

“If you want to see that then go and watch someone else because you are not going to see it here, that’s my message to them. And I am talking about one person in particular there and you all know who I am talking about.”

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

It must be a slow news day.

It was a bad game and performance but we nicked a win. I watched it on ifollow and don't remember Henshaw being that negative?

Norpig wrote:It was a bad game and performance but we nicked a win. I watched it on ifollow and don't remember Henshaw being that negative?

Have you been taking sensible pills recently?

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Have you been taking sensible pills recently?

I've always been sensible, does this mean i'm not a twerp anymore? 

Maybe Ian is too close and needs to step back for an objective view. Without two flukes and a 94th minute winner in the last few games and the mood would be different.
Nobody is complaining about winning games - just the football on display is being questioned at the moment.  I think most agree it's slowly improving - we still have the right to voice our opinions.

I don't understand this?

From what I can gather - and what Iles states in his article above - Evatt seems to be unhappy with the iplayer commentator/summariser, and former Wanderer, Gary Henshaw's comments - yes?

If so how the Devil does he know what he's been saying?

I mean surely he can't have been listening to the commentary whilst the game is being played and I doubt very much that he's sat with them in the commentary box during the game has he?

I would have though too that when he watches the game back later on he would do so with no commentary - why would he want to hear the views of those clowns anyway, even if they had been praising the team - surely he would have his own thoughts to dissect the game rather than anything Laurel and Hardy had to offer?

Pretty poor do if he IS really listening to the likes of Henshaw for ideas of how to play isn't it!

I'm therefore wondering if in fact he hasn't even heard a word of what Henshaw had spoken...

...but someone else had!

Have perhaps the Beaconsfield Whites have not been attending in person recently and been viewing iplayer instead?

If the Beaconsfield Whites have been raiding their piggy bank to significantly back Evatt in the January window to make a push for promotion (and hopefully people through the turnstiles as and when allowed), then the last thing they'd want to hear is negativity about how their currently 'winning' team (five in a row) that they have paid for, are doing by some random ex-players personal opinion?

Maybe his views on one match is fair enough but has Henshaw been constantly negative about Evatt and the team, maybe the Beaconsfield Whites think he has and Evatt has got wind of such and is firing back accordingly?

However the Tweets I have seen from Dearden (who asked the question) and Iles, initially at the time, seem somewhat to contridict the narative that has since followed.

Bit complicated (I will put the audio out) but Jack said: What is your message to those people who may be being negative. He didn't know about the commentary issues when he asked the question and potentially thought it was aimed wider.

— Marc Iles (@MarcIles) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So if Dearden DIDN'T know at the time he asked question about the 'disatisfaction' Evatt had with Henshaw at the time, then what prompted Dearden to ask unless 'Dearden' believed there to be 'fan' negativity in general???

I'm no fan of Dearden, he seems an utter buffoon to me and should have been put out to grass years ago in my opinion but he asked the question because he must believe there is widespread negativity about I guess?

So as I say I'm confused.

Is it all about Henshaw - if so why is Evatt even listening to his commentary, he certainly isn't listening to it going out live?

If it IS Henshaw, then is Evatt voicing someone else's displeasure and not his own?

If it isn't Henshaw is Iles somehow taking the 'heat' off his best mate Dearden for asking his question, by throwing Henshaw under the bus instead?

In fact, I think if you extend your audio clip by 20-30 seconds, he references the 'one person' he's talking about. Just saying. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Marc Iles (@MarcIles) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

If it WAS about Henshaw then why didn't Radio Manchester who Tweeted Evatt's 'rant' make that clear at the time???

All a storm in a tea cup I know but I think the story Iles/Dearden/Radio Manchester put out at the time is not all it seems to be!

Who are the Beaconsfield Whites?

Norpig wrote:Who are the Beaconsfield Whites?

I'd hazard a guess, and say Bolton supporters from Beaconsfield

MartinBWFC wrote:

Norpig wrote:Who are the Beaconsfield Whites?

I'd hazard a guess, and say Bolton supporters from Beaconsfield

It's what Bob's has been referring to as the Brittan family.  

The two sons have set up a teeth whitening business called 'Beaconsfield Whites' and their address according to CH is in the vicinity of Beaconsfield.

The point I was making really though is when and how was Evatt supposed to have heard Henshaw's commentary - if that is really what the issue is - and I don't reckon he has - so someones pointed it out.

Could be anyone I know but wouldn't the normal reaction if say any random person said, 'hey Ian, did you hear what Henshaw was saying on the commentary', would I imagine for him to say something like 'I couldn't give a fuck'.

I know if it was me that I would.

So someone he 'listen's' to has said something to him and he's felt he's had to make it known that he's 'listened' by speaking out so publically.

It could have been his wife for all I know but the point is he said what he did for a reason - and that reason can't have been because he was listening to the match commentary's during the games can it?

What he's said seems to have caused a bit of a kerfuffle by everyone but no one seems to have stopped and thought how come he's listening to the match commentary during a game or why is he so concerned about what Henshaw thinks - both of which I don't believe he's done/cares about, so there seems to be more to what's happened than meets the eye, or at least it does to me.

Not that it really matters much in the scheme of things.


Whilst I'm here don't you think it is about time you change your avatar by now Norpig?

Just a thought.

Sluffy wrote:



It's what Bob's has been referring to as the Brittan family.  

The two sons have set up a teeth whitening business called 'Beaconsfield Whites' and their address according to CH is in the vicinity of Beaconsfield.

The point I was making really though is when and how was Evatt supposed to have heard Henshaw's commentary - if that is really what the issue is - and I don't reckon he has - so someones pointed it out.

Could be anyone I know but wouldn't the normal reaction if say any random person said, 'hey Ian, did you hear what Henshaw was saying on the commentary', would I imagine for him to say something like 'I couldn't give a fuck'.

I know if it was me that I would.

So someone he 'listen's' to has said something to him and he's felt he's had to make it known that he's 'listened' by speaking out so publically.

It could have been his wife for all I know but the point is he said what he did for a reason - and that reason can't have been because he was listening to the match commentary's during the games can it?

What he's said seems to have caused a bit of a kerfuffle by everyone but no one seems to have stopped and thought how come he's listening to the match commentary during a game or why is he so concerned about what Henshaw thinks - both of which I don't believe he's done/cares about, so there seems to be more to what's happened than meets the eye, or at least it does to me.

Not that it really matters much in the scheme of things.


Whilst I'm here don't you think it is about time you change your avatar by now Norpig?

Just a thought.

Gordon Bennet, Beaconsfield White? What did they think Steradent White, Satin Slipper, 'mutton dressed as lamb' and Dulux Brilliant White was all about?

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
Gordon Bennet, Beaconsfield White? What did they think Steradent White, Satin Slipper, 'mutton dressed as lamb' and Dulux Brilliant White was all about?

Someone mention slippers?

boltonbonce wrote:
Someone mention slippers?

Do you mean you didn't notice either, Boncey? Sometimes I wonder why I make the effort