Hull 3-1 Bolton

I have us down as winning a nervy game without conceding, that's why I love football so much, it's anyone's game.

largehat wrote:
I see what you're saying with this. But the whole team had a poor first half against Forest, the whole team had an average first half against Derby, and the whole team had a poor 90 minutes against Burnley. You're not advocating dropping everyone.

The rest of the time (and believe me I am not pleased to be talking about two half games out of three games so far this season), our best two players are ptetty universally accepted to be Eagles and K Davies.

I was on here after the Burnley game demanding Davies be dropped too, I don't know if you read that or not, but he has gone on to do very well in our last two games. It's not good to drop someone who is playing well, you could make the argument that he is "due a stinker", and maybe he is, in which case he can be taken off, just as he was versus Burnley.

He's done far more to earn the shirt than Sordell so far, surely, who isn't the lightning quick superman many of us who hadn't seen much of him play were led to believe he would be.

How many good performances in a row would it take for you to be happy for K Davies to keep his place?

I've been wrong about Davies in the past and admitted it. I said he was past it in 09/10 and he had a three month period in 10/11 that saw him deservedly get capped for England.

Just how bad he is when he is bad is the reason he is a bigger problem than most other players. When he isn't heading the ball, what is he useful for? He isn't fast, skilful or mobile, whether through choice, instruction or lack of fitness he doesn't work hard off the ball, and he averages at 7 goals a season in 9 seasons at the club, for some of which he has been chief penalty taker. When he doesn't win the aerial battle, we might as well play with ten men.

If Davies continued to only come alive in second halves, I'd still be suggesting that he doesn't start. It's no coincidence if a player is only proving effective later on in games when defenders are tired and more prone to a concentration lapse.

P.S. You have a tendency to refer to the majority being on your side in an argument. You remind me of my friend Julia. When we have a debate in the pub, she gets up to ask surrounding drinkers what they think. If she finds that the majority are on her side, that in her head counts as a victory. It was "generally accepted" in Germany that Hitler was a good bloke. Sometimes a minority is a minority because only a small percentage of a population see a bigger picture.

doffcocker wrote:
P.S. You have a tendency to refer to the majority being on your side in an argument. You remind me of my friend Julia. When we have a debate in the pub, she gets up to ask surrounding drinkers what they think. If she finds that the majority are on her side, that in her head counts as a victory. It was "generally accepted" in Germany that Hitler was a good bloke. Sometimes a minority is a minority because only a small percentage of a population see a bigger picture.

I only imply that "the majority is on my side" when I have concrete evidence to support it. You'd hopefully agree I am quite happy to fight my own battles and fly in the face of majority opinion on here. Your friend Julia's habit would annoy me if she were my friend, it winds me up when people do that too. When I worked in retail I would encounter customers who were kicking off and they would "look for allies" among other customers. I think you're being unfair, I have, at this moment, about 8 users of this forum who read all my posts with, it seems to me, the sole intention of finding something to pick on. Do you see me complaining to others about it or finding people to back me up?

I've seen several man of the match polls on various sites and they all placed Eagles and K Davies as our top two in man of the match, they've had sponsors votes too. Also, if you look at the match reports which rank players out of 10 in various newspapers, they tended to score highest, although not universally so.

So I think when I said that it was "generally accepted" they have been our best two players so far, that was a factual statement. I didn't say they 'were definitely' our best two players, a lot of people make statements of fact on here that aren't facts, I'd be interested to see you pick up on one of those. Football is a game of opinions of course, it doesn't mean just because the majority of people think something it is correct. So when I use a phrase like 'generally accepted', it's because I think that in football, the case to drop a player usually has to be more compelling than the case to keep them in the team, ie, the status quo. I wouldn't have said it was "generally accepted" unless I'd seen this information. If you have other examples of this perceived tendency of mine, you're welcome to highlight them, but no, it's not something I do and it aggravates me when others do it. I'm happy to describe anything as "accepted" if I have got concrete evidence - I will be happy to highlight that evidence in our discussions in future.

I don't accept your comparison with public perceptions of Hitler in the 1930s because the people who "thought he was a good bloke" did not have the benefit of hindsight which we do now in referring to Kevin Davies's form and performances. It's for this reason I am not saying "pick Davies, he will score 2 goals tomorrow" and you're not saying "pick Davies and he will have an absolute howler and get himself sent off" - a case could be made for each scenario but there's a big difference between what can be confidently asserted and what can be speculated upon.

A case can also be made that Hitler didn't order the Holocaust, even to this day there is no definitive proof. Just like there is no definitive proof that Kevin Davies has been a good footballer for Bolton Wanderers, it's up to each individual to weigh up the evidence and draw his own conclusions and make their case. I would say there is a "general perception" that Kevin Davies has been a good footballer for Bolton Wanderers in his time at the club, but I can only draw on evidence of his reputation, I can't 'prove' it.

doffcocker wrote:
Just how bad he is when he is bad is the reason he is a bigger problem than most other players. When he isn't heading the ball, what is he useful for? He isn't fast, skilful or mobile, whether through choice, instruction or lack of fitness he doesn't work hard off the ball, and he averages at 7 goals a season in 9 seasons at the club, for some of which he has been chief penalty taker. When he doesn't win the aerial battle, we might as well play with ten men.

If Davies continued to only come alive in second halves, I'd still be suggesting that he doesn't start. It's no coincidence if a player is only proving effective later on in games when defenders are tired and more prone to a concentration lapse.

And now back to the actual football.

I agree that when Kevin Davies is ineffective, he is terrible. He does do a little more than win headers when he is on his game though, he also wins free kicks and creates space for more mobile players. It's not unusual to see him surrounded by 2-3 opposition defenders, even if he doesn't win the header himself, this gives us an increased chance of picking up the second ball.

I don't really think it's fair to say that because you believe he has only played well in second halves of games, he should be employed as a second half sub, and this is because the whole team played much better in the second halves of the Derby and Forest games. To me, dropping Davies is a bit flawed because of this.

I saw a great piece of satire in a BWFC fanzine in the late 1990s, after Roy McFarland got sacked as joint manager with Colin Todd. It depicted McFarland and Todd sat in the boardroom at Burnden Park together, and the chairman saying "if you two don't buck your ideas up, we'll sack Roy".

I think the same logic applies to Davies and particularly Davies and Sordell. The team had a bad first half in both those games. It would be akin to Coyle saying to those two before kick off tomorrow "if you two don't buck your ideas up I'm going to drop Kevin".

And that's why I find it unfair to say Sordell should keep his place but not Davies. I do take on board that you favour a 4-5-1, but I can't see why it should be Sordell who keeps his place. In my opinion his sole contribution has been an 8 yard finish.

I take your point about referring to the majority in this case, largehat. I think people make one of two assumptions: Theory X - Opinions are just opinions. Theory Y - There are two kinds of opinions - right ones and wrong ones. There has been occasions where you've implied that I'm just wrong because lots of other people say so. Hitler clearly isn't the best comparison, but I think you take my point that the majority are by no means always right.
For what it's worth, for having a bigger impact against Derby in half an hour than any other player all match, he won my MOTM also on another forum.
I reject the idea that I just have a vendetta as he was my favourite player for many a year back when I had no pubes.

Fair enough. I try very hard not to make assumptions in my statements as there are several saddos on here who don't post their own opinions on anything very often, but look to try and attack mine to try and make themselves look good, so I know how it feels when you think someone is looking to misrepresent your views. I suspect in several cases it is because they have no dick. So yeah, I do stick to my guns though and as I say, if I do make any statements which seem to refer to popular consensus in any form, I'll say or show why in future.

I suppose I'm so pleasantly surprised by Davies's form in the last two games that he has, to this point, won over my general cynicism so far. If he carries on like this, I believe he will "prove' a lot of people wrong over the course of the season who were damning of offering him a new contract and seeing him as anything other than an impact sub. I do agree that the majority aren't always right.

Hat :- 'A case can also be made that Hitler didn't order the Holocaust, even to this day there is no definitive proof'.



I hope you're not a holocaust denier and just someone trying to get Hitler off the hook.

It's still chilling whichever.

Right on cue.

Hope Spearing starts - see if he will really make a difference...

Wouldn't it be nice to see Davo or Sordell up front on their own and Spearing starting in a midfield 5.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:Wouldn't it be nice to see Davo or Sordell up front on their own and Spearing starting in a midfield 5.

My god it would. Think thats what im waitin for most tbh! Just to see the team sheet!

We got our wish!

Post the teamsheet please you tease.

BWFC: Bogdan, Mears, Knight, Ream, Ricketts, Chung-Yong, Spearing, Andrews, M Davies, Eagles, K Davies

I'd have picked Sordell before K.Davies, but you can't have everything.

Coyle wakes up last?

Think i'm trippin me. Apparently ive just read that coyles gone 451

It's true, our starting 11 is as follows:

...........Bogdan......

Mears.....Knight.....Ream.....Ricketts

Lee........Andrews.....Spearing....Davies.....Eagles

................Davies.....

Wouldnt it be funny if we got batterd

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

This is broadcasting the game, I can hear it so i assume it's not restricted.