8 games unbeaten with a run of like 8 games that are all "winnable" before an incredibly difficult April/May, each game goes and the gap seems to widen above us and we really are looking at the end game now

We haven't beaten anyone by more than 1 goal since 8th November vs bottom of the league Port Vale (4-0) and our performances recently are mixed, good for a half here and there and needing moments in the last minute to scrape points whilst missing a ton of great chances, I think with this keeper we'd have seen more points earlier in season, in a part I think our performances where much better but we dropped points so much.

If we go into April, 16 unbeaten (that seems far-fetched to say lol), confidence may be sky high playing those teams but when we can't seem to take easy chances and kill games, it's gonna be one hell of a sweat-fest against these tougher teams.

I think part of me feels there's still a chance because nerves play a part, I just don't think given our last 5 games we will get top 2 because we will need Lincoln to have a big slip up whilst we almost go perfect,  if we have a lot of dropped points in these next 8 games, the worst case could be we surrender the playoffs like last season, but I doubt this, you can't be third all season, without really clicking either for it go wrong all of a sudden, if it is to be the playoffs those last 5 games are great preparation at least.

How do you see it going? gonna be nervy.

NEXT 8                              LAST 5

Blackpool  H                 Stockport H

Exeter City A                Cardiff A

Wycombe H                 Huddersfield H

Rotherham A               Bradford A

Doncaster H                Luton H

Port Vale A                  

Stevenage H               

Plymouth A                  

Edited February 18Feb 18 by Didledee
Stockport so good I named them twice

Sheehan changed the game at Lincoln. Previous to him coming on we had zero ball retention and zero control in midfield.

He's perfect for that scenario.

He's not perfect for days like Saturday when a team spends two thirds of the game not coming out of their own half and the rest counter attacking and on a high press mission. Especially with your keeper making suicide passes.

2 hours ago, gonzo said:

Sheehan changed the game at Lincoln. Previous to him coming on we had zero ball retention and zero control in midfield.

He's perfect for that scenario.

He's not perfect for days like Saturday when a team spends two thirds of the game not coming out of their own half and the rest counter attacking and on a high press mission. Especially with your keeper making suicide passes.

Question though- would we have been further behind beforehand if he'd started?

We will never know, but we managed to stay in it.

I don't see any one midfielder having such an effect as to change the overall pattern in that game. 

We've seen plenty of other aways too, where we just haven't been quite good enough over all, irrespective of who played.

Perhaps it suited him as we were going to go on the front foot for the equaliser. 

Similarly, they were perhaps looking at keeping it tight and taking to one nil.

Can spin it whichever way we choose, but we'll never know either way, which makes changes like Saturday all the more baffling.

At home, needing the win, plenty of crosses in, but only one man there.

Out of our 4 leading goalscorers this season, only one was on the pitch.

 

5 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

 

At home, needing the win, plenty of crosses in, but only one man there.

Out of our 4 leading goalscorers this season, only one was on the pitch.

 

Totally agree with this. No idea what he was thinking. 

 

The 3-4-3 we went to for Wigan and Stevenage worked well and I'd use it again away, it was the foundation for two clean sheets and 4 points in two difficult fixtures. Not much created and only one goal scored but we were hard to beat.

Can see why the 4-2-3-1 might be deployed at home, but it leaves us more exposed to counters in wide areas as none of Conway, Johnston or Tutu are suited to being full backs (Tutu, to be fair, has done quite well last couple of games). In that system, the one who's looked most capable of being around Dalby, picking up little bits if the wingers get to the line and pull it back, dare I say it, is McAtee. 

Dempsey & Erhahon did do well as a 2 in a 4-2-3-1 a couple of times, allowing the extra forward in, when Sheehan and Simons did well together at Wigan it was in a 3-4-3. 

We're fudging along with that 4-2-3-1 and dont look much like keeping the back door closed with it, the challenge is turning it into a formation that delivers at least a couple of goals a game. In fairness, we've scored 2, 2, 3 and 2 the last four home games, but, against that, also conceded 1, 1, 2 and 2. 

Just read that, a lot of numbers 🤦😂

 

Edited February 24Feb 24 by ianofcleveleys

8 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

In one.

Irrespective of what folk feel about Sheehan or anyone else, why change a successful formula?

Didn't improve us.

Reward players who are doing well, and make others work hard and take their opportunity when injuries etc allow them back in.

Its not so straight forward though.  If we'd kept with a "successful" midfield, we'd still have Sheehan and Simons, the partnership at Wigan (best 90 minute performance of recent months) and Stevenage (dire game, but a clean sheet and away point).  Simons played v Orient too.  Now he's out of the team rightly or wrongly.

Other factors of course, there are 9 other starters that have a say in how we play, not to mention the opposition.  Its difficult to generalise as we all know how inconsistent our players are.

43 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

Its not so straight forward though.  If we'd kept with a "successful" midfield, we'd still have Sheehan and Simons, the partnership at Wigan (best 90 minute performance of recent months) and Stevenage (dire game, but a clean sheet and away point).  Simons played v Orient too.  Now he's out of the team rightly or wrongly.

Other factors of course, there are 9 other starters that have a say in how we play, not to mention the opposition.  Its difficult to generalise as we all know how inconsistent our players are.

 

And (I think you've made this point before) often the 'winning team' isn't the one which started the game. Simons had as much involvement in the winning goal against Wigan as I did.

I don't know if this is overly controversial, but regardless of personnel & formation I think we've basically been the same team now for months. The only thing that was wildly inconsistent was scoring three first half goals against Barnsley.

I don't see the secret formula others do and I've less of an idea what our best team than Schumacher does.

2 hours ago, Tombwfc said:

 

And (I think you've made this point before) often the 'winning team' isn't the one which started the game. Simons had as much involvement in the winning goal against Wigan as I did.

I don't know if this is overly controversial, but regardless of personnel & formation I think we've basically been the same team now for months. The only thing that was wildly inconsistent was scoring three first half goals against Barnsley.

I don't see the secret formula others do and I've less of an idea what our best team than Schumacher does.

Yes, there are all sorts of stats that say "such and such a player started and we won" (or lost) but I've noticed Simons for eg often gets subbed, and often we improve the scoreline after he's gone off - 2 goals at Huddersfield for eg, plenty of others, its wierd how often we score without Simons on the pitch compared to with.  And those 2 goals were scored after we brought on Taylor, Morley, McAtee, Dalby; next game, Cardiff, the game going nowhere, again we bring on Taylor, Morley, Dalby (and Randall).  Win 1-0.  Simons and Conway off again (as at Hudds).  Nobody suggested Taylor and Morley should be used more.

I'm with you, no secret formula, the 3 goals v Barnsley were great but the first 2 were because Dalby knocked in 2 corners, there's no logic whatsoever that he does that twice in the first 20 minutes in one game then we have umpteen corners v Reading and Blackpool and he doesn't seem to get anywhere near any.  So many conclusions are made on results, as if the same circumstance (a Dalby goal) will necessarily happen the next time we use the same team and formation.

 

2 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

Its not so straight forward though.  If we'd kept with a "successful" midfield, we'd still have Sheehan and Simons, the partnership at Wigan (best 90 minute performance of recent months) and Stevenage (dire game, but a clean sheet and away point).  Simons played v Orient too.  Now he's out of the team rightly or wrongly.

Other factors of course, there are 9 other starters that have a say in how we play, not to mention the opposition.  Its difficult to generalise as we all know how inconsistent our players are.

Sheehan was injured some time after.

Others came in, just as I said above, earned their place, and deserved to keep it. 

It is therefore essential to generalise- I have said above no one player is so key- as the players are indeed inconsistent. 

That generalisation, over a long enough period, shows that reoeated changes don't help.

It a team is repeatedly failing to convert chances, then surely play the ones that have nevertheless scored the most.

Especially when it is decided to cross the ball more.

5 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Sheehan was injured some time after.

Others came in, just as I said above, earned their place, and deserved to keep it. 

It is therefore essential to generalise- I have said above no one player is so key- as the players are indeed inconsistent. 

That generalisation, over a long enough period, shows that reoeated changes don't help.

It a team is repeatedly failing to convert chances, then surely play the ones that have nevertheless scored the most.

Especially when it is decided to cross the ball more.

Completely agree, it’s surely beneficial to all the players to be part of a consistent team playing regularly together. Lincoln are a good recent example of that making very few changes match to match. Spilt seconds make the difference in games and if you can anticipate where a colleague is going to be without having to look it surely helps. Having a big squad sounds great but if you have robust players then no way can you beat a settled team. We’ve chopped and changed far too much for two seasons now because the squads too big and we need to change that next window whatever league were in.

On 25/02/2026 at 10:55, Whitesince63 said:

Completely agree, it’s surely beneficial to all the players to be part of a consistent team playing regularly together. Lincoln are a good recent example of that making very few changes match to match. Spilt seconds make the difference in games and if you can anticipate where a colleague is going to be without having to look it surely helps. Having a big squad sounds great but if you have robust players then no way can you beat a settled team. We’ve chopped and changed far too much for two seasons now because the squads too big and we need to change that next window whatever league were in.

we were told of SS that you need to keep everyone happy and the rotation gives them all games we did that over Xmas and we’re shit but if you also play the same 11 there is more chance of injuries .
There is no ideal situation managers will use any excuse when it’s not going right to many injuries to many games to small of a squad to big of a squad to small of a budget ect 

18 minutes ago, Farnywhite said:

we were told of SS that you need to keep everyone happy and the rotation gives them all games we did that over Xmas and we’re shit but if you also play the same 11 there is more chance of injuries .
There is no ideal situation managers will use any excuse when it’s not going right to many injuries to many games to small of a squad to big of a squad to small of a budget ect 

You're right excuses are regularly used as a get out but how come Cardiff and Lincoln haven’t suffered from too many injuries when they’ve kept very much a similar team all season? Injuries have always been a part of football I accept but constantly changing the team not through injury is surely crazy, especially to keep players happy. I can’t imagine Sam or Bruce taking much stick from players not getting picked and I just wonder if Schuey’s a bit too soft in that regard? I just think for the run in we now need to keep a bit more settled side and if some players don’t like it then tough as long as we’re getting results.

Said my thoughts on here. Think we have the strongest squad going forward. I expect us to get into the play-offs

Nothing much will change between now and May. Think he may play Johnston at left back instead of Conway and stick with his two wingers and only play one upfront.

It is what it is and i will revisit this thread come may

54 minutes ago, Whitesince63 said:

You're right excuses are regularly used as a get out but how come Cardiff and Lincoln haven’t suffered from too many injuries when they’ve kept very much a similar team all season? Injuries have always been a part of football I accept but constantly changing the team not through injury is surely crazy, especially to keep players happy. I can’t imagine Sam or Bruce taking much stick from players not getting picked and I just wonder if Schuey’s a bit too soft in that regard? I just think for the run in we now need to keep a bit more settled side and if some players don’t like it then tough as long as we’re getting results.

So, if we aren't getting results, when do we change the team?

Not trying to be clever, its just not that easy.

Lincoln and Cardiff haven't had a bad spell yet, we can't really include them.  If they'd had the away form we've had all season they wouldn't be bragging about having an unchanged team for 25 games.

It would be interesting to see what the "first XI" would be, I'm not disagreeing with the principle but imagine the weekly discussions on here if the likes of Forino, Conway, Dempsey were overlooked every week in the interests of keeping a settled side. 

It'll be more settled now there's only one match a week.

I found Iles’ article interesting on Sheehan. There’s a lot more than the bit below.

“Playing-wise, I am probably at the best point of my career,” he told The Bolton News. “I don’t know if that’s performances – that’s not for me to say – but tactically, I see the game in a better light now I’m that bit older.

“Maybe it’s being away with Wales, working with Craig Bellamy and knowing the amount of tactical detail he goes into. Definitely since the moment he walked into the Wales set up I have played quite a lot of games and I feel like that has brought me on to another level here as well.

“I love playing for Bolton and you get that sense of confidence which, obviously, is massive for any footballer. I feel like I am in a good place and I think there is more to come from me too, to be honest.”

Schumacher started the season with four players fighting for two midfield positions, with Sheehan joined by Aaron Morley, who has since left for Wycombe, Ethan Erhahon and Xavier Simons, with Kyle Dempsey also able to toggle between the attacking and more defensive roles.

Gradually, Sheehan nudged ahead to command a greater percentage of the game-time, something the Bolton boss puts down to consistency.

“I think Josh has shown some really good form and the way we have played, the way the opposition set up, and the way the games have panned out often suit his qualities,” he told us. “There are games where I haven’t selected him – maybe for the more physical ones, the games that involve fighting for second balls.

1 hour ago, Johnnyrotten said:

So, if we aren't getting results, when do we change the team?

Not trying to be clever, its just not that easy.

Lincoln and Cardiff haven't had a bad spell yet, we can't really include them.  If they'd had the away form we've had all season they wouldn't be bragging about having an unchanged team for 25 games.

It would be interesting to see what the "first XI" would be, I'm not disagreeing with the principle but imagine the weekly discussions on here if the likes of Forino, Conway, Dempsey were overlooked every week in the interests of keeping a settled side. 

Plus we are 3rd in the league. It's hardly been a shambles all driven by bingo machine selections.

Imagine after that bad run over Xmas SS had kept the same team and systems. Fuck me there'd have been a meltdown.

We are two or three results away from having a good season and rushing for autos.

The way folk go on we are mid table and miles off the pace.

2 hours ago, jmjhb said:

It'll be more settled now there's only one match a week.

True for the next couple of weeks but then its 7 games in 4 weeks, back to resting and rotation probably.

9 hours ago, gonzo said:

Plus we are 3rd in the league. It's hardly been a shambles all driven by bingo machine selections.

Imagine after that bad run over Xmas SS had kept the same team and systems. Fuck me there'd have been a meltdown.

We are two or three results away from having a good season and rushing for autos.

The way folk go on we are mid table and miles off the pace.

Plenty of scenarios whereby he doesn’t make changes and he gets an equal amount or even more criticism.

This idea of sticking with the same team and formation that got points against Wigan, Stevenage, Burton etc would have fallen fowl pretty quickly IMO.

Imagine him doing this, sticking with a one-paced squad that was playing poorly, not realising that it needed improving and adding to, and then us going into poor form with no ways to change it up. Like you say it would have gone bonkers on here.

At least now we’ve got some decent variation both in personnel and formation.

I’m really not on board with this bingo machine claim at all. 

There’s a balance between trying to find a more settled side and making changes to suit the game/opposition/fitness of the squad.

Ok it’s debatable (hence lots of talk about it) whether he’s changing too much currently from game to game, but he’s hardly picking out names from a hat.  

2 hours ago, desperado said:

Plenty of scenarios whereby he doesn’t make changes and he gets an equal amount or even more criticism.

This idea of sticking with the same team and formation that got points against Wigan, Stevenage, Burton etc would have fallen fowl pretty quickly IMO.

Imagine him doing this, sticking with a one-paced squad that was playing poorly, not realising that it needed improving and adding to, and then us going into poor form with no ways to change it up. Like you say it would have gone bonkers on here.

At least now we’ve got some decent variation both in personnel and formation.

I’m really not on board with this bingo machine claim at all. 

There’s a balance between trying to find a more settled side and making changes to suit the game/opposition/fitness of the squad.

Ok it’s debatable (hence lots of talk about it) whether he’s changing too much currently from game to game, but he’s hardly picking out names from a hat.  

 

What variation has he in defence??

What change in formation in Midfield

When will he play to the teams strength in the Forward line?

Edited February 27Feb 27 by masi 51

13 hours ago, gonzo said:

Plus we are 3rd in the league. It's hardly been a shambles all driven by bingo machine selections.

Imagine after that bad run over Xmas SS had kept the same team and systems. Fuck me there'd have been a meltdown.

We are two or three results away from having a good season and rushing for autos.

The way folk go on we are mid table and miles off the pace.

Fair points but my perspective is that we haven’t had a settled side all season with constant changes in personnel and not through injuries. I know it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation and it’s easy to criticise in hindsight but I still believe a more settled team produces better results. Similarly I think changing the team depending on the opposition has never worked, just let them worry about us, field your best team and I believe we’ll be much more successful. If that puts some players noses out then tough, if you’re unhappy leave and try somewhere else. 

Lincoln will finish as champions.   We will finish quite close to Cardiff but not quite getting there.

Back of my head though -   cardiff lose a couple and we win a couple and go into the cardiff game say 4 points behind,  then it gets interesting.   

3 minutes ago, W.cramp said:

Lincoln will finish as champions.   We will finish quite close to Cardiff but not quite getting there.

Back of my head though -   cardiff lose a couple and we win a couple and go into the cardiff game say 4 points behind,  then it gets interesting.   

I imagine Bradford and Stockport will expect to be ahead of us at the end of the season - others too if they compare our run in to their own and GIH.
 

I know all this wild speculation about where well finish is a bit of fun and statistically someone is bound to be close to being right, but the pressure of expectation weighs heavily on the players so it’s no wonder the mantra coming out of the team is “12 games left, try our best, see where that leaves us”.

Personally, I haven’t a clue where that will be as so much depends on the quality of our performances and we just haven’t been consistent enough for me to feel confident we’ll turn up with our A game every week from here on in. Sure hope we do, but wouldn’t bet the ranch on it.

 

3 hours ago, masi 51 said:

What variation has he in defence??

What change in formation in Midfield

When will he play to the teams strength in the Forward line?

What variation has he in defence??

- 4 at the back, 5 at the back.

-  Johnston LB Conway LB

- Conway/Tutu as WBs

- Variations of Toal, Forino, Johnston at CB 

- Tutu RB or Christie RB

All of which have been used in the last month.

But I’ll be honest I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make in asking that question? Because he’s varied and  changed too much? Because he’s not gone for your preferred magic formula? Or that the defence has been more settled in personnel than the rest of the team, he’s made good/appropriate changes, hence us having the best record in the league?

What change in formation in Midfield?

Subtle changes; one holder/two holders, with/without a number 10, 3 more traditional CMs, a flat two. 

Again your perspective is confusing, because other than him not going with your magic formula it can be argued he’s tweaked too much, not tweaked at all or got the balance about right. 

When will he play to the teams strength in the Forward line?

So again I think we are back to if he doesn’t go with your magic formula, you are going to criticise him. Some are saying he’s trying and varying too much and he should go and stick with one thing. Others are critical that he hasn’t tried x,y,z.

Personally I think he’s still trying to work this out, because our conversion rate isn’t good enough and he’s trying to bed in the new signings hence I don’t mind the changes and can understand why he’s making them. 

Edited February 27Feb 27 by desperado

8 minutes ago, desperado said:

What variation has he in defence??

- 4 at the back, 5 at the back.

-  Johnston LB Conway LB

- Conway/Tutu as WBs

- Variations of Toal, Forino, Johnston at CB 

- Tutu RB or Christie RB

All of which have been used in the last month.

But I’ll be honest I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make in asking that question? Because he’s varied and  changed too much? Because he’s not gone for your preferred magic formula? Or that the defence has been more settled in personnel than the rest of the team, he’s made good/appropriate changes, hence us having the best record in the league?

What change in formation in Midfield?

Subtle changes; one holder/two holders, with/without a number 10, 3 more traditional CMs, a flat two. 

Again your perspective is confusing, because other than him not going with your magic formula it can be argued he’s tweaked too much, not tweaked at all or got the balance about right. 

When will he play to the teams strength in the Forward line?

So again I think we are back to if he doesn’t go with your magic formula, you are going to criticise him. Some are saying he’s trying and varying too much and he should go and stick with one thing. Others are critical that he hasn’t tried x,y,z.

Personally I think he’s still trying to work this out, because our conversion rate isn’t good enough and he’s trying to bed in the new signings hence I don’t mind the changes and can understand why he’s making them. 

Subtle/tweak are just words which means nothing has changed. I said we play with one upfront you went to great length to tell me we played with two Forwards at Reading.........So yes theres your subtle and tweak rolled into one.

When was the last time someone had a word with any of our last 6 keepers and told him not to play the ball short to Sheehan.

When have we had a right back who can defend

When was the last time we had a left back who defends

Why are our centre backs the only two who walk out at pedestrian speed in the whole league

Why are we the only team in the division with no long throwing as a attacking threat

 

When have we played with more than 2 in midfield?

How many times has anyone played well in the number ten position?

When have we started with both Dalby and Burstow up top?

When have we not had two wingers starting?

 

These are all things brought on by Evatt and now SS  some are down to one manager other things down to both

We are that predictable we still do the same fuck ups from when Evatt was in charge

If you don't think he's altered the shape and dynamic of the midfield over the course of this season then you've been watching the wrong team.

One lot are saying he needs a settled team the other saying we haven't changed enough.

He's openly said he will change to suit each opposition. That's his way. 

Fuckin get on with it.

He sticks with a none firing Burstow and Randall at 10 over Xmas he'd have been burnt at the stake.

He gets it right a lot and wrong sometimes. He's using a collection of division 3 players and lads who's parent club don't want em.

It is what it is.