TyldesleyLatic

The club will have recouped some money in loan fees for Boselli. Yes he will still be a saleable asset but the club won’t get anywhere near the £6.5mill they paid for him so will take a hit.
To be fair as well, Bobby has said when he was dropped, when he was sent out to Genoa on loan, at the end of last season & during close season that Boselli would be back & would be a success yet he then sends him away again. Bobby talks alot of spin at these fans forums. Boselli was a flop & I’m pretty certain he’ll be flogged in the summer or sent out on loan again

With regards to Marlon King, IMO footballing wise he was a flop & an expensive one in much the same vein as Boselli. However in footballing terms the club still had a fairly valuable asset (isn’t he currently playing for a top 6 Championship side?) – he only became of no value for non-footballing reasons and when the club cancelled his contract (rightly in my opinion). No saying what will happen to Boselli for non-footballing reasons & then he too may become of no value as an asset. So I don’t think its fair to compare them in that respect – the club could have retained his registration & either played him or sold him when he was released as other clubs have done

As for Bruce like I have previously said, he made good & bad signings. On the pitch he’d got the club challenging for Europe until his team was sold out from under him so in that respect (for me) was good for the club.
Financially, the way I look at it is that he wasn’t spending money that Dave Whelan said he couldn’t have. He was spending money authorised by Whelan in terms of both fees & salaries – it only became an issue when Whelan decided things needed to be reigned in (an action I only question the timing of not the principle). In my own opinion purely in footballing terms he was better than Martinez – not perfect by any means & I know its subjective based not only on league position but also personal taste

Naming a pre-prem striker wasn’t any real attempt to get round your argument. It was more a case of using them as an example to show the manager signed good & bad strikers. Jewell also bought some crap uns lower down e.g. David Graham
It was just an attempt to show that they signed good & bad players. Strikers in particular
I also acknowledge your point to a certain extent that Bobby operates on a lesser budget. I think that’s pretty much fact. Personally however i think that for £11mill we, as fans, are entitled to a far better goals return ration from those strikers than 1 in 15 – its appalling.
I know every signing is a gamble but his judgement has to be questionned on 3 in particular:
Scotland – a Scottish & lower league journeyman & one who wasn’t particularly well liked by the fans of the club he was playing at despite his goals return for them. At 31 years of age some form of alarm bell should have been ringing as to why he hadn’t played at the top level. Bobby said he was certain he would adapt immediately to the game at the top level (later amended to he wanted to ease him in). You didn’t have to watch him for long to see he wasn’t a top flight striker.
Boselli – by all accounts warned by his director football that he wasn’t suited to either the British game or Bobby’s system. He forced through the signing & again it didn’t take watching him long to realise that he can’t play as a lone striker
Di Santo – What was his goal return in almost 40 professional games in this country? 1 in 40? Poor in itself but again it doesn’t take long to realise he isn’t suited to playing a lone striker either

Sammon cost beans comparatively so isn’t really a gamble & Moreno was a loan so again doesn’t gamble much but you’re talking £10.5mill there on 3 players where, from the evidence so far (IMO) you seriously have to question his judgement

He pee’d me off more when he thought he was able to tell the likes of Hutchings, Bruce & Martinez where they should be playing him & how they should be playing full stop – his attitude at times stank whilst he was at Latics & quite clearly even pushed Bobby to breaking point hence why he was dropped & publicly told he wasn’t getting a new contract offer (even if the club knew he probably wouldn’t accept it anyway).

In the end for all his talk of moving to a big club, he wound up at West Brom coz they appeared to be the only prem club who offered him anything. It’s lucky for him they sacked Di Matteo & appointed Hodgson otherwise he’d probably be playing championship football now whilst telling anyone who’d listen that he was too good to play centre half in that division & should be playing centre mid for Liverpool alongside Gerrard

That said, what he says about Latics now doesn’t concern me one jot. I’m glad he’s gone & his opinion is irrelevant

Can I just chuck my twopenneth in about the “2 up front v 1 up front” argument please because it’s too simplistic (IMO) to dismiss it by saying “if Rodallega/Di Santo/Sammon misses sitters on his own up front he’s still gonna miss sitters if he’s got Sammon/Rodallega/Di Santo playing alongside him

I’ll start however by saying that the current formation of 3 centre halves, 2 wing backs, 2 central midfielders & 2 more advanced/free role type midfielders suits the personnel we have in the squad (IMO)

The formation comes unstuck however (again IMO) because of the 3 centre forwards Latics have, 2 aren’t suited to a lone striker role & the 1 who is best suited to it (in terms of his style of play) doesn’t have the ability at this level.
Di Santo has the ability to win the ball & lay if off or drop deep to pick it up & lay it off but it isn’t in his instincts/ability to then get back into the traditional strikers position i.e. in the box – just look at McArthur’s winner against Bolton. He challenges for the initial ball forward & either wins it or, due to his pressure, forces the defender to flick it backwards. he then makes virtually no effot to follow that up & it winds up being a midfielder from a starting point 20 yards further away from goal who runs past him & tries to anticipate a cross/rebound. When the ball hits the back of the net Di Santo is 30 yards from goal watching
Rodallega isn’t a grafter, doesn’t close defenders down, doesn’t win balls played up to him in the air with his back to goal & doesn’t have the physical strength to hold off defenders long enough to bring his team mates into play
IMO Sammon could play the role well at a much lower level where he isn’t against as good a defender.
The argument of playing 2 up front as I understand it is that:
a) you have players whose abilities compliment each other & more clear cut opportunities are created. Look at it like Michael Owen – in his prime a deadly finisher but stick him up front on his own & he would struggle even with world class players in his team. Stick a player like Heskey alongside him & suddenly you’ll have bags of goals. Which brings me to
b) Playing with 2 in a traditional strikers role gives them more opportunity to pull the opposition defence apart. At the moment any opposing teams back line have to worry about the movement of 1 player & anyone else they can see coming forward & pick them up (in theory). If you had say Di Santo dropping deep that brings a defender out with him, the ball is laid off to the wings & a cross put in then Rodallega only has 1 centre half to get the better of

No it doesn’t solve the problem of them missing chances as they did on Sunday but football is often a confidence thing & our players tend to snatch at chances because they don’t get many of them and/or with poor goal scoring records & being asked to play roles they are unsuited to their confidence is low. Put them in a partnership & that could change

On the subject of “well the players miss the chances anyway” it seems to me that many have been talking on this thread as if the number of chances created in the Norwich match is the norm & from my experience that isn’t the case – more often than not Latics struggle to create chances & one of those reason may very well be coz when balls are put into the box there is often no-one there (if Di Santo is up front) or (if Rodallega is up front) the centre forward is on his own & out marked

In an ideal world, with Latics current squad, Bobby could play 3-4-2-2!!!
Anyway, I’ve rambled on long enough so here endeth my piece

You talk as if every performance is like the Norwich one last week & it isn’t
The team also concede too many goals in general & more specifically soft goals where the oppositon don’t have to work hard to score
On top of that for every game where Latics create alot of chances & miss them there are (IMO) more where Latics dominate possession but create next to nothing and games where they are just plain rank
So I’m afraid that you also have to attach blame to the team being crap, martinez’s tactics & selections etc..
It is in no way purely down to not being able to put chances away

Personally I’d go for:
McCarthy in Gomez’s position & Gomez dropped
Diame into McCarthy’s position
Stam in at right wing back
Boyce taking Alcaraz’s position & Alcaraz dropped

Only seen Dicko in a reserve game & he looked awful. Seemed to have a really bad “I am” attitude about him to – From what I could understand of him Denis Lawrence seemed to spend most of the game either telling him to not do what he was doing or to pull his finger out

Griff – I like to think that I’m not one of those who slates Gomez for every mistake he makes whilst not doing the same to others, but I have to say that I thought he was woeful yesterday for the most part from start to finish. Too slow in thought & body & kept getting caught in possession as a result. The 10 minutes or so before he got subbed (as you’ve acknowledged) was shocking IMO it wasn’t the only poor part of his performance

On the game as a whole I thought for most of the game Latics played quite well. It wasn’t one of those games (like last week) where nothing was created & numerous chances were created but this week it was poor finishing that let them down. To restrict a team that, arguably, were better than United the other week to the goal, a header from Morison & one other week effort on target has to be commended.
That said the goal Latics did concede was indicative of the type of goals Latics give away under Martinez. Slow non-penetrative play followed by a mistake, followed by the midfield & defence switching off for the throw, followed by a statue-esque defence when the cross came in. Caldwell (who i thought played well) should know with hsi experience not to wait for the ball to come to you in that area but to ensure you get to the ball first. Very sloppy

For all some people have slated McArthur I thought he played well. I thought Beausejour played well (although his final delivery was poor at times), Figueroa looks to have rediscovered his form, Maloney looked like he could offer somet different over these last 10 games & Moses was looking to play people in more than he was looking to have a dig himself.
On the downside I thought that Rodallega, whilst getting in the box more than Di Santo does, didn’t work their backline enough, Alcaraz is far too sloppy, Gomez I’ve mentioned & McCarthy looked anonymous at times. When he did that really good bit of play early in the second half it was when he’d pushed forward & I do think he’d benefit from being played in a more advanced midfield role (a la Gomez’s position) coz I don’t think he’s a grafting midfielder. Oh & as someone else has already pointed out, Mr Boyce aint never gonna be no wing back

All in all one of Latics better performances & was glad to see chances being created & missed rather than not created at all