Match Thread: Bolton Wanderers v Lincoln City | Page 15 | Vital Football

Match Thread: Bolton Wanderers v Lincoln City

mikeosullivan said:
I don't think MK knows his best team yet, even if everyone is fit, or the best way for us to play.
Click to expand...
I actually think he does know what his best team is, only he cannot field it yet because of injuries. Before the game today, he indicated that Jackson and Walsh are his preferred centre backs, and most of us would agree with that; that releases Poole to play at right back. He also has Montsma to return next month, whom he has already said he rates highly - I would like to see him in midfield. His opinion of Mandroiu is obvious, so he will play if fit, and he has already said he likes Bishop. Those few changes omit O'Connor, TJ, and probably Sorensen and Oakley-Boothe, neither of whom has pulled up any trees so far. It will be interesting to see what team we are fielding in a month or two - does this look more solid and creative:

Rushworth
Poole - Jackson - Walsh - Roughan
Mandroiu - Montsma - Bishop
Garrick - Hopper/House - Diamond
 
Temp said:
We were poor today, Bolton were poor, the ref was poor.
The atmosphere in the stadium was poor. Bolton fans only sing when they're winning.
We could have won but we keep on hoofing the ball upfield, usually straight to a Bolton player.
What happened to our beautiful game when the ball is kept on the ground and swiftly moved into attack? Seems that stopped when MAPP left.
Guess we'll just have to be patient for a bit longer.
Click to expand...
A good summary.
 
Temp said:
What happened to our beautiful game when the ball is kept on the ground and swiftly moved into attack? Seems that stopped when MAPP left.
Guess we'll just have to be patient for a bit longer.
Click to expand...
Yes I saw a lot of that last season
 
Another hurry scurry performance which seems to be our MO at the moment. Worked agsinst Derby but didn't work today.
Team was set up to stop them playing which in itself is Ok but does need you to use possession well when you have the ball. Distribution and ball retention was poor again today. Game plan seemed to be get it forward to Diamond quickly or...get it forward to Diamond quickly. Virtue is a threat going forward which probably gives him the edge over Sorenson who may run round like a Duracell Bunny but gives the ball away far too much when under pressure. Maybe Appleton can send us Bridcutt on loan in January...
Garrick was ineffective again and apart from the first game he has been pretty much invisible each game. Admittedly Whittaker did similar last season but we can safely say that Garrick is not as good as Whittaker. Not sure how well Adelakun is doing at Gillingham but that doesn't matter anyway and I don't think either Garrick or Vernam is an upgrade on him.
Mandriou has good balance and looks like a player but will need time. He also looks like an attacking midfielder rather than a forward but we do seem a little short of forwards now...
 
Scotimp said:
I actually think he does know what his best team is, only he cannot field it yet because of injuries. Before the game today, he indicated that Jackson and Walsh are his preferred centre backs, and most of us would agree with that; that releases Poole to play at right back. He also has Montsma to return next month, whom he has already said he rates highly - I would like to see him in midfield. His opinion of Mandroiu is obvious, so he will play if fit, and he has already said he likes Bishop. Those few changes omit O'Connor, TJ, and probably Sorensen and Oakley-Boothe, neither of whom has pulled up any trees so far. It will be interesting to see what team we are fielding in a month or two - does this look more solid and creative:

Rushworth
Poole - Jackson - Walsh - Roughan
Mandroiu - Montsma - Bishop
Garrick - Hopper/House - Diamond
Click to expand...
Monstma is not a midfielder. Not good enough on the ball. He can play one or two great diagonals but it doesn't mean he is a midfielder lol
 
tell_it_like_it_is said:
Another hurry scurry performance which seems to be our MO at the moment. Worked agsinst Derby but didn't work today.
Team was set up to stop them playing which in itself is Ok but does need you to use possession well when you have the ball. Distribution and ball retention was poor again today. Game plan seemed to be get it forward to Diamond quickly or...get it forward to Diamond quickly. Virtue is a threat going forward which probably gives him the edge over Sorenson who may run round like a Duracell Bunny but gives the ball away far too much when under pressure. Maybe Appleton can send us Bridcutt on loan in January...
Garrick was ineffective again and apart from the first game he has been pretty much invisible each game. Admittedly Whittaker did similar last season but we can safely say that Garrick is not as good as Whittaker. Not sure how well Adelakun is doing at Gillingham but that doesn't matter anyway and I don't think either Garrick or Vernam is an upgrade on him.
Mandriou has good balance and looks like a player but will need time. He also looks like an attacking midfielder rather than a forward but we do seem a little short of forwards now...
Click to expand...
,,Maybe Appleton can send us Bridcutt on loan in January"
Not sure if Mr.Appleton will be still in the position to send us a player on loan in January..
 
Scotimp said:
I actually think he does know what his best team is, only he cannot field it yet because of injuries. Before the game today, he indicated that Jackson and Walsh are his preferred centre backs, and most of us would agree with that; that releases Poole to play at right back. He also has Montsma to return next month, whom he has already said he rates highly - I would like to see him in midfield. His opinion of Mandroiu is obvious, so he will play if fit, and he has already said he likes Bishop. Those few changes omit O'Connor, TJ, and probably Sorensen and Oakley-Boothe, neither of whom has pulled up any trees so far. It will be interesting to see what team we are fielding in a month or two - does this look more solid and creative:

Rushworth
Poole - Jackson - Walsh - Roughan
Mandroiu - Montsma - Bishop
Garrick - Hopper/House - Diamond
Click to expand...

Agree with most of this Scotimp. Re the team, that is close to my strongest set-up, apart from Garrick. He was better yesterday, but faded and is still a liability in some ways. Wouldn’t have him in the team yet without working on some of his basic team-play and aggression. Unfortunately Vernam hasn’t impressed yet either so I think, until we get a better option as a right winger we’d be better playing 442, or better still a 4132 with Montsma in front of the back 4, which should also strengthen the midfield and stop the ball coming back so much. So:
Rushworth
Poole, Jackson, Walsh, Roughan
Montsma,
Mandriou, Sanders, Davenport/Bishop
Hopper, Diamond

This would have the effect (hopefully) of strengthening the right side and making us less vulnerable to the midfield being over-run. We probably still need an experienced midfield general, but Sanders seems to be the best we have for that option at the momen.
 
Scotimp said:
I actually think he does know what his best team is, only he cannot field it yet because of injuries. Before the game today, he indicated that Jackson and Walsh are his preferred centre backs, and most of us would agree with that; that releases Poole to play at right back. He also has Montsma to return next month, whom he has already said he rates highly - I would like to see him in midfield. His opinion of Mandroiu is obvious, so he will play if fit, and he has already said he likes Bishop. Those few changes omit O'Connor, TJ, and probably Sorensen and Oakley-Boothe, neither of whom has pulled up any trees so far. It will be interesting to see what team we are fielding in a month or two - does this look more solid and creative:

Rushworth
Poole - Jackson - Walsh - Roughan
Mandroiu - Montsma - Bishop
Garrick - Hopper/House - Diamond
Click to expand...

Well MK seems to talk up all the players though. That is not a criticism.
 
My thoughts on the game, it was always likely to be a game that we would lose, I know all the Bolton fans think they will be play-off if not automatic promotion contenders.

Thought we huffed and puffed without much end product and midfield was over run so Bolton dominated position.

Thought our distribution was poor from the back and we gave the ball away cheaply on too many occasion.

Diamond looked lively upfront but I was disappointed we didn’t isolate him against Santos more as he is a good centre half but not the quickest.

With regards to the penalty I never like it when the linesman who is further away than the ref makes the decision , thought the ref was a proper Homer and we were never going to get much from him.

with our current run of fixtures next week is a big game against a poor Charlton team winless in 7.
 
Chimpimp said:
Our ongoing problem is that there are very few "crap" teams in our league.

Nonetheless our first 10 games... made up of

6 away , 6 against top half teams...

represent a very acceptable return.

Broken down we seem to be doing better against the teams lower in the league ( no losses ) than the higher placed teams!


Top 6 - (played 2 away) - W0 D1 L1
Next 6 - (played 2 home 2 away) W1 D 1 L2
Next 6 - (played 1 home 1 away) W 1 D 1 L0
Bottom 6 - (played 1 home 1 away) W 1 D 1 L0


Looking forward to next week...
Click to expand...
Would of fancied us to beat the plastics had the game gone ahead to add to those figures
Interesting to see them Oxford and Wycombe just outside the relegation places
 
Having watched the game back this afternoon, I think it was very much what you would have expected.

Tactics/formation/approach.

We set up to be hard to beat and ironically the best 2 chances for Bolton which both ended in goals were created by Lincoln players.

Jackson uncharacteristically did almost everything wrong including fatally pulling the Bolton players shirt - but I still don't think he would have scored - so totally self inflicted by us.

Roughan - complete abberation - less said the better

Other than that we kept them at bay - replay that game with the same approach 10 times and I reckon we would have got at least a point on about half those occasions. Which I reckon means the tactics were fine.

Things to improve on. The obvious one is retaining better possession. To some extent setting your stall out to defend means you don't play a slightly risky pass - and it's a difficult line to judge sometimes.

...but to improve this there are a couple of obvious things to say. O'Connor is a good head it, kick it defender in a game like that but Walsh instead of him, improves the control and use of the ball from the back no end.

Hopper would also have been able to hold the ball up better than House.

But those options weren't available so we did pretty well with what we had.

I also thought we created three or four reasonable chances to score. By which I mean if it was our day we could have won 1-0 and as an away game against a top 6 side, without our A1 selection, that was a decent effort.
 
To be honest i think we set out for a draw and bar two mistakes thats what we would have got,
i liked the new lad in what i saw quite quick forward thinking once settled he may be a handful
 
Chimpimp said:
Having watched the game back this afternoon, I think it was very much what you would have expected.

Tactics/formation/approach.

We set up to be hard to beat and ironically the best 2 chances for Bolton which both ended in goals were created by Lincoln players.

Jackson uncharacteristically did almost everything wrong including fatally pulling the Bolton players shirt - but I still don't think he would have scored - so totally self inflicted by us.

Roughan - complete abberation - less said the better

Other than that we kept them at bay - replay that game with the same approach 10 times and I reckon we would have got at least a point on about half those occasions. Which I reckon means the tactics were fine.

Things to improve on. The obvious one is retaining better possession. To some extent setting your stall out to defend means you don't play a slightly risky pass - and it's a difficult line to judge sometimes.

...but to improve this there are a couple of obvious things to say. O'Connor is a good head it, kick it defender in a game like that but Walsh instead of him, improves the control and use of the ball from the back no end.

Hopper would also have been able to hold the ball up better than House.

But those options weren't available so we did pretty well with what we had.

I also thought we created three or four reasonable chances to score. By which I mean if it was our day we could have won 1-0 and as an away game against a top 6 side, without our A1 selection, that was a decent effort.
Click to expand...
Very good summary. I liked that we changed things and went 5-4-1 (or whatever you want to call it) to frustrate them. If not for the unusual bad decision from Jackson and a black out from Roughan we could have easily get something from there. To be honest they deserved to win but it wasn't a bad game from us (like Cambridge or Posh away).
 
JAYIMP said:
Very good summary. I liked that we changed things and went 5-4-1 (or whatever you want to call it) to frustrate them. If not for the unusual bad decision from Jackson and a black out from Roughan we could have easily get something from there. To be honest they deserved to win but it wasn't a bad game from us (like Cambridge or Posh away).
Click to expand...
It was and most Imps who were there would agree. You can tell from the atmosphere in the away end how a game is going and how they feel about a game. I don’t think anyone ever felt we were close to scoring or even mounting any sustained pressure.
They play a 532 formation but their wingbacks play like wingers and had so much energy up and down their wings. Roughan and TJ by comparison were static fullbacks until TJ started playing as a winger for the last 10 minutes maybe cos he was too knackered to track back. Their 3 in midfield swamped and overrun our 2 which left their back 3 to cope with our front 3 which they did with only Diamond ever a threat.
We were pretty woefull and If we line up with that formation, personnel and tactics we won’t survive this season
 
johnolbe said:
It was and most Imps who were there would agree. You can tell from the atmosphere in the away end how a game is going and how they feel about a game. I don’t think anyone ever felt we were close to scoring or even mounting any sustained pressure.
They play a 532 formation but their wingbacks play like wingers and had so much energy up and down their wings. Roughan and TJ by comparison were static fullbacks until TJ started playing as a winger for the last 10 minutes maybe cos he was too knackered to track back. Their 3 in midfield swamped and overrun our 2 which left their back 3 to cope with our front 3 which they did with only Diamond ever a threat.
We were pretty woefull and If we line up with that formation, personnel and tactics we won’t survive this season
Click to expand...
It didn't work out this time. Sure. I'm not a fan of settling for a draw before the game but changing to this more defensive formation looked to me like a good idea. Biggest downside of it is obviously the fact that we do not have Norton - Cuffy type of wing backs anymore and that leaves us bit toothless, agreed.

Execution itself wasn't the greatest but we have limited them to a few half chances and in the end only two individual mistakes made the difference. If not for those we would be talking now about great effort etc.
We were deservedly beaten by a better team and I wasn't impressed with our performance but I will stick to my opinion that it wasn't nowhere near as bad as Cambridge or Peterborough. We were in the game until that certain Roughan's moment.
 
Ainsworth7 said:
Montsma is a midfielder like Harry Maguire is Franco Baresi.
Click to expand...
Would he be any worse than any of the other options we currently have? Good defender, plus he has good control and passing skills. Might be worth a try at least, maybe in a less important game at first. Could also make the attacking midfielders freer to push on and link up with the strikers without worrying about making the defence vulnerable. 🤔
 
PerthImp said:
Would he be any worse than any of the other options we currently have? Good defender, plus he has good control and passing skills. Might be worth a try at least, maybe in a less important game at first. Could also make the attacking midfielders freer to push on and link up with the strikers without worrying about making the defence vulnerable. 🤔
Click to expand...

Personally I think it’s a completely different role/position, and he’s our best defender. Leave him be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.