Alessandro

Surely that's a typo. 2 months? If we've gone from a 'carry on and self isolate' to a 2 year ban on all large sporting events, concerts and conferences etc that's a rather large escalation in a few days.

This is awful. If flares were seen, pray for a miracle and that they have a life raft - unfortunately in current sea temperatures in the channel hypothermia would set in in well under an hour. Tragic news and thoughts are with all involved.

2 off the line 2 off the post 2 cracking saves At least 2 good headed chances missed Very frustrating loss though, but you can’t say we didn’t give it a go.

Which ones are we talking about - because I can think of two really all game? One in the first half when ?Washington? picked it up left side of the box, cut in and the Maaenpaa saved. One in the second half when Maaenpaa had the rush of blood, forward probably took an unneeded extra touch and 2 defenders got back well to cover. I'm surprised how many people expect us to go away from home, completely dominate the game and not concede chances in a game of football? The bottom line is a '0' in the goals conceded column and I think we deserved that, just.

A great result at ground we've been awful at in the recent past against a team who needed a result and performance after a 7-1 drubbing, with the crowd baying for blood. A game lacking in quality for the large part, but a very professional performance from us. We did what we've been saying we need to work on and took our chances and largely kept QPR at arm's length, a clean sheet with 2 main centre backs out. We saw out the game, just as Boro did against us. But unlike Boro, we didn't sit back with 30%/40% possession, rely on worldie saves and the woodwork twice to keep a clean sheet and a win. First win of the season, onwards and upwards.

Cracking goal - Taylor did well, Eliasson - what a cross. Weimann, 3 goals now.

I never said you were pissed off with winning. I just said goals come how they come sometimes, just ask the team sat at the top of the table. Enjoy them. Getting 'battered' many more weeks then not?? Well that's your opinion. But this is game 4 of the season and despite losing to Boro, we've yet to be 'battered' once.

Yep that was a much better chance. But actually it was great work by Matty to chase that down, get in position and I expect the keeper was thinking a cross was coming. And to those of you saying soft goal?? Maybe, but who gives a flying ****?? Do you think the Boro fans were saying "soft goal" after they scored their first bounced off a defenders back and past an asleep fall back to bounce perfectly onto their forwards foot?

How many people are going back through the thread to see if it’s too late to edit their ‘praise’ of Matty Taylor...

The selection is not an issue for me after Saturday - thought Pisano did an excellent job, as did Kelly who was really excellent. Given injuries I think it's our best option right now until Dasilva is ready. The goals came from individual errors by Webster and Hunt.

Very frustrating again. Boro have done nothing and scored 2 goals from two chances. First one took a lucky bounce and on another day, with a different ref, could have been a foul by the very physical Assom on Webster. Second one could have been a foul on Hunt by the, again, very physical Assom. Or maybe we are just powder-puff? Either way too easy, much too easy for Boro

Agreed - seems crazy to be in the position of having 2 centre backs out already and having to play a makeshift CB in a RB that's not in great form.

As @BobBobSuperBob suggested, could well be 4-4-2. That would be the more defensive option and makes sense to help out Pisano with both Baker and Wright out. Thus it makes sense, just, to go with Pato instead of Eliasson in the number 10 role despite his below par performances and Watkins over Eliasson for his extra physicality. We'll find out shortly!

looks like it: M Hunt Pisano Webster Kelly Brownhill Smith Pack Watkins Weimann Pato

4-3-3

You bloody love Eliasson don't you! Come on Shtanley, admit the #mancrush - you must be delighted he's getting plenty of game time!

In your opinion.....in my opinion, you're talking overly negative nonsense. As i've said already, I think you're exaggerating the 'languid' and 'slow' pace at which we play it out the back and as i've said already, and others seem to too, I think it's too easy to forget the way opposition affect a game. As Ole wrote in his report, this game was ours but for a silly 3 minutes. I still believe we stuck to our game plan and style of play, and simply upped the tempo. The style of play was the same. Happy to agree to disagree.

Firstly, you haven't already asked me to point out a chance, so you can't ask me again. As i've already said, we may have created very little in the first, but that was largely in part to the way in which Bolton sat back and chocked the final third. Should we have done better though, yes, as i've already said. But a game is not played over 60 minutes, so that's irrelevant. What is, is that IMO after 60 minutes we still continued to play in very much the same style as the first 60 minutes. Out of the back, languid as you call it, with Marlon playing that QB role. That's how our first goal came ironically. Keeping possession, working the spaces and finding a killer pass from a good run. That's how we continued to play to the very end of the game, out of the back, perhaps with more urgency, but you can't play flat out for 90 minutes. We were looking for the runs and channels (which we did a lot in the first half) the difference for me was that the game stretched and opened up and those passes and runs into the channels started to come off. That made it look a different game all of a sudden. Despite being 2-0 up, Bolton for me were naive and I believe we kept doing our thing, stuck to our game plan and we got the goals and very nearly the winner.

Although I see where you are coming from, I think you're overly harsh again, but it's all opinions. I do agree that we should play with more urgency and thrust in the final third more often. But we controlled the ball and looked good in possession for 70% of the game today, playing against an anti-football team who, AT HOME, put 11 men behind the ball and hoped to catch us on the break or score from a set piece. Whatever you say about LJ and this team, they look to play football and have a go. At least it's not what many teams do in this division, like Bolton, set up to survive. I can't imagine what you and many others would say if LJ set us up, at home, to only sit 11 behind the ball and look to catch people on the break.

Absolutely. Sounds so simple, but all three of those "star" players that left us, left because they chose to. All had the chance to stay, we wanted them all to stay, all chose to leave. It's time to move on and for people to stop holding it against the club IMO.

Maybe so. But it's a tough place to go, despite being down the bottom last season, their home form was decent and they picked up some good wins. They play cynically and the crowd are just as bad, on the ref's back the whole game.

Time will tell. But I actually thought we were more street wise today and controlled the ball very well. They didn't have us under the cosh for more than 5 or 10 minutes, and away from home that is decent going. I'm not saying we were superb, but I think it's easy to see 2 goals conceded and think, uh-oh, defence is an issue. But actually I'm not sure that was a fair reflection. They had 31% possession and 2 shots on target and never really got a foot hold in the game in term's of possession or pressure IMO.

Turn of phrase. Either way, what I meant was he lost his battle with Buckley. You need your defenders to win their duels every corner. IIRC just before the second goal, Brownhill put Baker in trouble at the back. He fouled under pressure. Starting protesting with the ref. It was taken quickly. So he was out of position, still poor though. I'll look again but that Pack should have got his laces through the cross though.

Actually I don't think we were shaky at all. We kept them shut out the whole first half, and they scored from their only real chances in the second. The 1st goal - attacker outmuscles defender at corner. 2nd a series of little errors and concentration lapse. What the sky highlights don't show is the freekick given away played quickly just before the goal with the one moment in the game of all round general confusion. I don't remember them troubling our goal much other than that, maybe one cross/shot saved by the keeper - who I thought looked pretty solid, especially with ball at feet. One particular pass out the back under a bit of pressure sent us quickly away to create a good chance up the other end.

Nice to be on the right end of a comeback for once. Sucker punch 1st goal from a corner. The second, mistakes all round. Baker, Brownhill and Pack IIRC all ball watching. Sometimes we over play it and get punished, that felt like one of those times. Great comeback though and spirit, Bolton away is not easy. They're physical and cynical but we should take heart from getting back in it. Pack, tremendous pass to pick out Weimann, who I read at least once a day on here won't score many goals, is 2 in 2. Pato with a very good finish for the equaliser, but otherwise very very frustrating. Misplaced passes and control, one very poor set piece at the death. Impressed with Weimann, Watkins, Kelly was assured. Very nearly nicked it at the end when Taylor outmuscled his man and scrapped a sqaure ball to Eisa, who was just beaten by the defender who poked it agonisingly wide for a corner.