Evatt makes honest admission about post-Wembley changes

Ian Evatt admits he might have over-compensated for the play-off final defeat at Wembley in May by trying to change too much at Wanderers.

The Bolton boss brought in a new formation over the summer along with eight new signings but saw his side struggle over the first five games.

A return to 3-5-2 in Saturday’s high-pressure game against Reading brought about instant dividends with a morale-boosting 5-2 win, leaving the manager to own up to his mistakes after the final whistle.

“I am still learning, I am not the finished article at all and I’ll always critique myself first ahead of anyone else,” he told The Bolton News. “And maybe we tried to change too much.

“I think over the summer we focused too much on what went wrong in one game at Wembley. Everyone focussed on Plan Bs and I was one of those thinking deeply about how we do something else.

“But there wasn’t a great deal wrong with Plan A. I think if we didn’t get the injuries we got in the second half of last season we’re promoted. We were still one game away and we didn’t perform at Wembley.

“From that I think we all, myself included, felt like we needed to change something but there wasn’t a great deal wrong.

“The players love this system, they have been recruited for this system. You could see they were happier with some home comforts knowing jobs and what they had to do.

“We will improve too, it is a good starting point.”

Evatt brought in players like Szabolcs Schön, John McAtee and Jay Matete with a view to the new system but he remains confident there will be no player who is left stranded by the formational shift.

“We try to recruit players who are multi-functional,” he said.

“Everyone we signed was with an eye to still playing a 3-5-2 when we needed to so it shouldn’t really affect too many of them. There is nobody in our squad that can’t play either system.

“Obviously for some of the newer ones it is going to take a little extra time to get used to what we do but I thought there were some big performances out there, even the substitutes, the attitude was class.”

Wanderers might have scored five against Reading at home for the second season running but Evatt was not about to hail it as a perfect performance.

Defensively, improvements can still be made, and there were nervous moments in the second half when the Royals’ young team threatened to make a closer match of it.

“That’s my job to pick holes in it but it was never going to be fluid and our perfect best,” Evatt reasoned.

“What I liked about it was that we looked dangerous, scored five goals and could have scored more. Yes, the game was open at times, but that’s the way we play best and the way they play best.

“We dug in, started so well. Sometimes as a manager you just know, and I knew they were in a good place, they were on it. They really blew them away at the start of the game.

“I’m delighted for the players because, like me, they have taken a lot of stick as well. We all care deeply about this place and want to do right by it. Hopefully that is a step in the right direction.”

Source

karlypants wrote:“I think over the summer we focused too much on what went wrong in one game at Wembley. Everyone focussed on Plan Bs and I was one of those thinking deeply about how we do something else.

“But there wasn’t a great deal wrong with Plan A. I think if we didn’t get the injuries we got in the second half of last season we’re promoted. We were still one game away and we didn’t perform at Wembley.

“From that I think we all, myself included, felt like we needed to change something but there wasn’t a great deal wrong.

Almost exactly what I've been saying.

There are things that do need changing such as stop pissing around at the back and mixing it up more (use the air and pass into spaces for players to run on to) but we do have a good side, technically good players and despite what most think haven't been 'found out' since the beginning of the year but was taught a lesson by Oxford in the final.

Why do I say that because we spanked Oxford 5-0 in the middle of us being so called 'found out' and clearly that was the case then otherwise Oxford would have done a job on us at the time - wouldn't they?

Anyway onwards and upwards.

That 5-0 probably helped Oxford as they knew exactly the way to set up at Wembley to avoid another drubbing and it worked perfectly for them.

Norpig wrote:That 5-0 probably helped Oxford as they knew exactly the way to set up at Wembley to avoid another drubbing and it worked perfectly for them.

Yes you are probably right - but my point was that we played them on the 12th March - and clearly THEY hadn't worked us out by then.

We lost our next game away to Derby 1-0 and that seemed to me to be an expected result in the scheme of things, and we then drew away to Stevenage 0-0 who iirc were challenging for a play-off place at the time - so again a reasonable result to expect, and the next game we battered Reading 5-2.

We next played Bristol Rovers away and won 0-2 and went on to play Portsmouth at the Reebok drawing 1-1 again an entirely reasonable result in the circumstances.

That match was played on the 13th April, leaving just THREE games to the end of the season.

From the Oxford game to Portsmouth we played 6 games, won 3, drew 2 and lost 1 - For 13 Against 4

The facts simply don't show that the system we played was 'found out', does it?

The three games remaining, we drew at home to Shrewsbury 2-2 - I think it would have been reasonable to have expected a win for that one, beat Port Vale 2-0 at the Reebok and ended the season at Peterborough who finished fourth with a 3-3 draw.

So the last NINE league games of last season we won 4, drew 4 and lost 1 - For 20 Against 9 - we played the top team - Portsmouth, the second Derby, the fourth Peterborough, and the firth Oxford - and our record against these four was 1 win, 2 draws and 1 loss, For 9 Against 5.

We went on to beat Barnsley who finished 6th by 5 goals to 4 over two legs.

I simply can not understand why anyone believes we had been found out - WE HADN'T!

Our dip in form revolved around the Baxter injury as I keep telling people - if we HAD been 'found out' our results who have significantly fallen off AT THE END OF THE SEASON, when word got around how to stop the way we play.

The results show that simply never happened,

I can understand people believing that we have been 'found out' since the play off final but our first 5 league games this season has been the 'new' version Evatt dreamed up which even I could see wasn't working after the first couple of games.

The only game we played since reverting to last season's style we won 5-2!!!

Now I agree one swallow doesn't make a summer, as the saying goes and Evatt like everyone else knows how Oxford beat our system, so knowing that he should be able to come up with something to allow for it and overcome it - that's what he's paid to do.

I didn't see the match on Saturday but I saw a comment that Santos was no longer the man trying to bring the ball out at the back anymore?  I don't know how true that is but it would go a long way to overcome the Oxford strategy as Santos doing just that was seen to be the prime weakness they identified we had.

It seemed an obvious thing to do to my mind, but then again what do I know.

Santos is a good player, he is good at carrying the ball out but he clearly has a problem in passing a ball in the way that say Sheehan has - simply let him play 'his' game - maybe create spaces in front of him to 'bring' the ball out, rather than having him looking for the right pass under pressure.

Some players can adapt their games, others can't - that's why Santos plays for us and not Man City.