From Nixon great news if true for me , and Nixon has been correct a lot about Owen Coyle and who he wants. I'd rather Klasnic back then have someone like Nugent.

 

Bolton boss Owen Coyle is ready to bring back Ivan Klasnic for a second spell at the club in a cut-price move from French side Nantes.

 

Coyle hopes to tie up a deal today for the Croatian international who was a big hit with the fans last season despite being in and out of his side.

 

Klasnic is keen to return to the Reebok and chairman Phil Gartside is trying to hammer out terms with him and Nantes because Bolton do not want to take on his ?3 million-a-year salary.

 

Nantes are in financial trouble and need to offload Klasnic because they cannot afford to pay him. All of the parties are working on a compromise deal.

 

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Bolton-set-to-tie-up-deal-for-Nantes-striker-Ivan-Klasnic-after-moves-for-Chelsea-starlet-Franco-Di-Santo-and-David-Nugent-fail-Exclusive-article541355.html

Me neither he is not the world beater some on here think he is

We cant afford a world beater, so he will have to do until we can afford 30 million on a player( which will not be in my life time)

and we cant afford him by the look of things

Edited July 31, 201016 yr by athywhite

at the right price yeah silly money no

Me neither he is not the world beater some on here think he is

 

i dont think hes a world beater either however give me him any day of the week before that waste of space elmander or any of the other shower we've been linked with - di santo, nugent

Klasnic Cancels Nantes Contract.

 

good news for us hopefully.

Klasnic Cancels Nantes Contract.

 

good news for us hopefully.

 

Get him signed OC, sharpish!

Good news, just hope he can agree wages. I think we are hamstrung by still carrying Shittu, Samuel, Riga etc on our books. There's probably ?50k a week on those 3 alone

Klasnic Cancels Nantes Contract.

 

good news for us hopefully.

 

 

That's bad news. The only was we were going to get him was if Nantes were paying some of his wages.

 

Now he isn't under contract to them, they won't, he'll feck off somewhere for 60k a week.

Why didnt he play that much last season ?

Why didnt he play that much last season ?

 

He was eased in at the start of the season, picked up an injury which hampered him towards the end of the season.

Looks a decent player. Give you more movement, than just KD up top.

 

He looked good against us, and is much better option than the names thrown about, Nugent etc.

He was eased in at the start of the season, picked up an injury which hampered him towards the end of the season.

Plus he was giving Elmander a chance to shine, which he didn't really take. So the move for Kasnic is the only option for us to get in a goal scorer.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the club offered him a contract depending on apppearences and in doing so reduced his weekly demands to something more resonable in the region of ?25-35 a week.

Looks a decent player. Give you more movement, than just KD up top.

 

He looked good against us, and is much better option than the names thrown about, Nugent etc.

 

Dont start talking sense now! People would rather have some tosser who runs around like a headless chicken for 90 minutes than somebody with movement and an eye for goal ::

he'll feck off somewhere for 60k a week.

Oh aye, teams will be forming an orderly queue to get him on their wage bills at that money.

 

No danger.

Obviously Klasnic is a good player and score goals, but im not convinced getting him in will be a good move. I think the advantages of not having him far outweigh the advantages of having him.

Advantages of having klasnic

* we have a natural goalscorer

* we have more strikers, therefore more backup if we get struck by injuries or have a good cup run.

The disadvantages of having klasnic

* If klasnic plays, we therefore have to play 442 as he isnt capable of playing up top on his own. IMO 4231/451 is our best formation with the players we have.

* In 442, muamba is forced to do some kind of attacking pay which isnt playing to his strengths.

* In 442, lee and petrov/taylor have more defensive responsibilities than when played in a 5 man midfield.

* We have a lot of central midfielders, all who could merit a place in the starting team , and in 442, we have less opportunities for them to play. Some of them are going to get frustrated. competition for places is good but having cohen, muamba, obrien, davis, m davies, gardner, basham and holden competing for two places is a bit extreme.

* Elmander is going to get less football, and although im sure that will make alot of you happy, many of us want to see him succeed, and he isnt going to score goals sat on the bench, and he doesnt have the attributes to be an impact sub. HOWEVER, i still believe elmander and klasnic upfront would be a fantastic strike pair, but Coyle, as shown last season, refuses to try this.

Obviously Klasnic is a good player and score goals, but im not convinced getting him in will be a good move. I think the advantages of not having him far outweigh the advantages of having him.

Advantages of having klasnic

* we have a natural goalscorer

* we have more strikers, therefore more backup if we get struck by injuries or have a good cup run.

The disadvantages of having klasnic

* If klasnic plays, we therefore have to play 442 as he isnt capable of playing up top on his own. IMO 4231/451 is our best formation with the players we have.

* In 442, muamba is forced to do some kind of attacking pay which isnt playing to his strengths.

* In 442, lee and petrov/taylor have more defensive responsibilities than when played in a 5 man midfield.

* We have a lot of central midfielders, all who could merit a place in the starting team , and in 442, we have less opportunities for them to play. Some of them are going to get frustrated. competition for places is good but having cohen, muamba, obrien, davis, m davies, gardner, basham and holden competing for two places is a bit extreme.

* Elmander is going to get less football, and although im sure that will make alot of you happy, many of us want to see him succeed, and he isnt going to score goals sat on the bench, and he doesnt have the attributes to be an impact sub. HOWEVER, i still believe elmander and klasnic upfront would be a fantastic strike pair, but Coyle, as shown last season, refuses to try this.

 

 

i think you should give coyle a bell and tell him .

 

megson in .

Obviously Klasnic is a good player and score goals, but im not convinced getting him in will be a good move. I think the advantages of not having him far outweigh the advantages of having him.

Advantages of having klasnic

* we have a natural goalscorer

* we have more strikers, therefore more backup if we get struck by injuries or have a good cup run.

The disadvantages of having klasnic

* If klasnic plays, we therefore have to play 442 as he isnt capable of playing up top on his own. IMO 4231/451 is our best formation with the players we have.

* In 442, muamba is forced to do some kind of attacking pay which isnt playing to his strengths.

* In 442, lee and petrov/taylor have more defensive responsibilities than when played in a 5 man midfield.

* We have a lot of central midfielders, all who could merit a place in the starting team , and in 442, we have less opportunities for them to play. Some of them are going to get frustrated. competition for places is good but having cohen, muamba, obrien, davis, m davies, gardner, basham and holden competing for two places is a bit extreme.

* Elmander is going to get less football, and although im sure that will make alot of you happy, many of us want to see him succeed, and he isnt going to score goals sat on the bench, and he doesnt have the attributes to be an impact sub. HOWEVER, i still believe elmander and klasnic upfront would be a fantastic strike pair, but Coyle, as shown last season, refuses to try this.

 

Whilst i agree that 4 5 1 is the option we should play in a number of games - particularly away from home - i think we need to have the option to play 4 4 2 - particularly against dross from 9th -20th at home, certain dross teams away. I dont think we have this option with the players weve got at the moment, or least i dont think the players we'd send out in the 4 4 2 are right - ie the 2nd striker is total shit at the minute whoever plays. Therefore get him signed

I can see why 442 may be perceived to be a more 'attacking' formation, but i feel that if 451 is used correctly it can be just attacking as 442, if not more so. It depends on who is played in the centre. A midfield centre 3 of muamba, obrien and cohen would be okay against man u away, as its solid and defence minded, where as a centre 3 of muamba, holden and m.davies is attacking and creative. The beauty is we have many options in midfield.

So we need a goalscorer but Klasnic isnt good enough? I fucking give up i really do. Theres a big thread saying goalscorer needed and the amount of people on this thread against signing Klasnic is just stupid. ::

So we need a goalscorer but Klasnic isnt good enough? I fucking give up i really do. Theres a big thread saying goalscorer needed and the amount of people on this thread against signing Klasnic is just stupid. <img src='http://www.wanderersways.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='::::' />

 

I agree that we should sign him, but not at any price ! What we don't have access to are two key pieces of information :

 

i) How much can we afford to pay him ?

ii) How much of his budget is Coyle prepared to pay for him (if he wants him which I'm sure he does) ?

Its obvious that those who dont want Klasnic are in the small minority. If we need a goalscorer, then Klasnic is fine by me. But some of us dont think we need a goalscorer. Just because theres a thread on goalscorer needed doesnt mean it is correct. I can appreciate both sides of the argument, but i certainly dont think my side of the argument is stupid.

Some think Klasnic is needed for bolton to progress and hopefully perform better next season.

Others, such as me, think the formation of the team is more important, and that we already have the players, without Klasnic, to do better than we did next season.

I wont complain if we sign Klasnic, having options is great. Fitting him in alongside our current players is the real challenge for Coyle.

3 games without a goal from "open play" against lesser opposition prove we need a goalscorer.

 

Klasnic in for me !!

But even if Klasnic played in those games, how many goals would we have scored, we'll never know, but im banking on it not being many. Even if Villa or Eto'o or any other finisher played in those games i'm not convinced we'd of scored. I only went to the Oldham game, so i can only make judgement on that. At no point did we create the chances for someone like klasnic to score in that game. Theres no point having Klasnic sat upfront if he doesnt get the service. If you'd have said three games with 0 goals but 60 shots off target, then fine, get a goalscorer in, its obvious we need one. But i don't think thats the case. Start creating the chances before we think about finishing em off.

Anyone who thinks signing Klasnic is anything other than good wants their head testing:

 

- If we can't afford him we won't sign him

- Elmo will not score goals in the Prem consistently as long as he has a hole in his arse - pains me to say it but it's true based on the facts presented to us over the last 2 years

 

Klasnic is not the type of stiker you'd build a side around like Anelka but he has class and scores goals he's proved it, the problems not him it's the fact we're carrying strikers who don't score goals in the squad aka Elmo and Davies - Davies is untouchable it would appear so we need to look to get Elmo moved on in my view that's the problem we have to deal with not whether Klasnic would add to our squad or not.......a striker that scores goals ooooh perish the thought!

Its obvious that those who dont want Klasnic are in the small minority. If we need a goalscorer, then Klasnic is fine by me. But some of us dont think we need a goalscorer. Just because theres a thread on goalscorer needed doesnt mean it is correct. I can appreciate both sides of the argument, but i certainly dont think my side of the argument is stupid.

Some think Klasnic is needed for bolton to progress and hopefully perform better next season.

Others, such as me, think the formation of the team is more important, and that we already have the players, without Klasnic, to do better than we did next season.

I wont complain if we sign Klasnic, having options is great. Fitting him in alongside our current players is the real challenge for Coyle.

 

I know it's not going to happen but I would have Klasnic as the 1 up top ahead of Davies.

 

With the players that we have in the squad now, there should be much more of an emphasis of football on the ground, getting it out to Petrov and Lee and less aimless balls forward.

 

For me Davies doesn't have the technical ability to fit into that style of play, as much as I think the guy is a legend, his link up play, positioning and finishing amongst other things are nowhere near as good as Klasnic's.

 

With Holden/Wilshere given a kind of free role in the midfield 3 and able to get up and around Klasnic, and Lee and Petrov constantly creating chances from either side, I know who I would prefer to be in and around the box on the end of them.