A megson topic.

I posted this in another thread but felt it was more of a new topic so here goes, and I know, I will prob get a bit of a hammering over this from some ppl. We all have our opinions.

In reply to a comment which said that megson had things just about right on the pitch and off i said:

I still wonder why it took so long for megson to start using the players and the type of tactics 95% of the fans wanted. His self professed preferred tactics were losing us goals, games and points, and he only changed things because the fans, the media and probably the board were on his back. He knew his job was on the line a few games into the season. Things have changed to appease the angered fans and hey, the performances have improved and the booing and megson outs have stopped.

So, did megson got it right on the pitch? or was it the fans? is it their demand for change that has improved things? and if so, is megson really up to it?

Were the media and gary megson right when they said that many Bolton fans would never be happy while megson was here? they all seemed bewildered that our supporters were disappointed with our team and our manager earlier in the season, supposedly we were all expecting too much as a result of the dizzy heights reached in recent years.
is it coincidental then that the boo boys have faded and the fans are happier since a more positive approach has been implimented, was it not that we just wanted to see some football or at least some desire, were we expecting to be in the top four? did we boo when chelsea thrashed us twice with 8 goals in a week or when man utd beat us or when tottenham rescued a point in injury time at the reebok? no! Because we were finally showing some character and some desire, we had balls. I think that is all most of us were ever asking for.

Will Megson admit that now? Will he say the fans were right to be showing their displeasure during our dire run of winless matches, all out defend football and negative approach to every game? or are we still cluless, pathetic and never satisfied?
Funny how the cluless tiny people, the useless fans, forced a change and everything got better, even if not massively.
There are still improvements to be made and my fear is that, when something needs changing or putting right, is Megson the man to do it? Or will it take months of dragging his heels, enraged fans and staring down the barrell of the sacking gun before he does anything?

I voted "other". Not sure exactly what "other" encompasses, but I think it is a minumum of fans, managerial skills and that bit of something extra combined...too tired to think what the "extra" bit is right now.

I think the question is loaded....... there are lots of reasons why team has an upturn in form....ie luck can change... form of players improves (due to them maybe not rowing with the wife this month) other teams play worse... etc, etc.... I can't see what fan pressure changes because the players don't really care what the fans think.... they're only interested what the guy who picks the team thinks....!

I agree that the question is clearly written by a guy who believes that the fans are the reason for the upturn in form. That's not a bad thing but its hardly objective. Wendy, I'd say 'other' could mean the players at his disposal. That's why I went for it anyway. I think if you ask most people for the upturn in results, they'd say the inclusion and performances of Lee, Gardner and Cohen as they are players who can move the ball better, beat a man, play a good pass and make something exciting happen.

Obviously those players weren't playing in the games preceeding the Stoke match for whatever reason. Gardner was injured obviously and, if I am correct, the Stoke game was his first game back; Lee was in a new country and new league so he was always going to be used sparingly. Clearly the cameo against West Ham after the Stoke match and the winning goal at Birmingham has probably forced Megson's hand. Coehn played in the Liverpool and Pompey match but, to be fair, he can't do it all himself.

I wouldn't say Megson should take sole credit but I believe he deserves more credit than the fans do. He did sign the players which are playing this better football. The players obviously deserve credit too for demonstrating to everyone that they can mix it up a bit.

In addition, the league games prior to the Stoke games were one's where, although the football might not have been the best, most fans and players thought we should have got something from, with he notable exception of the Sunderland game which was just bobbins. We were unlucky against Hull and had chances which perhaps now if we played the game again we would have taken due to the upturn in confidence. Not saying it is any excuse, we SHOULD have beat Hull but the performance istelf, result aside, wasn't that bad. Then we had the Liverpool match where we were holding our own and more until the sending off. Just think, if we had got 4 points from the opning games, some of us on here would be talking about Eruope and the like. Fine line between success and failure at this level, evidenced yesterday by WH's win and the fact that failing to get something from a tough trip to Villa Park could welll see us in the bottom three Saturday tea time despite the recent upturn in form.

I just hope that Megson picks the team that started against Everton opposed to the team which started against Chelsea. Despite the fact that Elmander played quite well, I'd still prefer Gardner and Taylor in the team instead. Unless we Gardner left back and Taylor left mid leaving Elmander to partner Davies upfront but I'm going off topic now. Where was I? Oh yeah, Megson Out!