9 points off top. . .15 games still to play (6 Viewers)

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Amazing to think that if wed beaten Carlisle and Shrewsbury at home wed be 3 points off the top

Exactly, we aren't far off, we can do it, but we have to go on a bloody good run now.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Amazing to think that if wed beaten Carlisle and Shrewsbury at home wed be 3 points off the top

It's because we didn't that we are not. Every team can say if this and but for that.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
If we could defend corners we would be few points off automatic

More to the point if we could defend we would. It's the one area that still remains questionable. We do not have a strong defence. Other than Adams you could easily replace them all.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
More to the point if we could defend we would. It's the one area that still remains questionable. We do not have a strong defence. Other than Adams you could easily replace them all.

With the set pieces it seems to be all of them though not just the defenders.

They need to be more focused not to lose their man.

The amount we scramble away as well. That should not even get to that point.
 

Snozz_is_god

New Member
More to the point if we could defend we would. It's the one area that still remains questionable. We do not have a strong defence. Other than Adams you could easily replace them all.

I think that's a little harsh tbh, we leak about 1 soft goal a game, most of the time the aren't as bad as you are making out. If they were we would be losing a lot more games.
 

Snozz_is_god

New Member
Amazing to think that if wed beaten Carlisle and Shrewsbury at home wed be 3 points off the top

I putting these 2 losses down McG going and the readjustment needed to play with Leon up front.

I know he played in the Shrewsbury game, but I think he knew he was off by then and had by his standards a very poor game.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
We most certainly do not have a strong defence.

Do believe there have been a few people on here who have been saying we do.


1. Tranmere 27 goals against
2. Doncaster 27 goals against
3. Bournemouth 39 goals against
4. Swindon 26 goals against
5. Brentford 30 goals against
6. Sheff Utd. 28 goals against

City 39 goals against.


Think our defence is definitely a weak spot for us.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
We most certainly do not have a strong defence.

Do believe there have been a few people on here who have been saying we do.


1. Tranmere 27 goals against
2. Doncaster 27 goals against
3. Bournemouth 39 goals against
4. Swindon 26 goals against
5. Brentford 30 goals against
6. Sheff Utd. 28 goals against

City 39 goals against.


Think our defence is definitely a weak spot for us.

Even more telling when you factor in clean sheets -

1. Tranmere 27 goals against 13 clean sheets 43.3% clean sheets.
2. Doncaster 27 goals against 11 clean sheets 37.9% clean sheets.
3. Bournemouth 39 goals against 8 clean sheets 26.6% cleansheets
4. Swindon 26 goals against 15 clean sheets 51.7% cleansheets
5. Brentford 30 goals against 10 clean sheets 34.4% cleansheets
6. Sheff Utd. 28 goals against 11 cleansheets 37.9% cleansheets

Cov 39 goals against 5 cleansheets 16.1% cleansheets.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Even more telling when you factor in clean sheets -

1. Tranmere 27 goals against 13 clean sheets 43.3% clean sheets.
2. Doncaster 27 goals against 11 clean sheets 37.9% clean sheets.
3. Bournemouth 39 goals against 8 clean sheets 26.6% cleansheets
4. Swindon 26 goals against 15 clean sheets 51.7% cleansheets
5. Brentford 30 goals against 10 clean sheets 34.4% cleansheets
6. Sheff Utd. 28 goals against 11 cleansheets 37.9% cleansheets

Cov 39 goals against 5 cleansheets 16.1% cleansheets.

We do need to tighten up in defence, we've conceded some bad goals, the 2 v PNE were terrible, v Carlisle, v Shrews, them alone, and we'd be in the autos (or very near) our defence is poor, I suggest we sign a CB, I think Wood is solid, Clarke and Christie are good, Adams is good, but Edj is a liability, hands down, our weak link, MR hinted at it before the PNE game, something has to be done!
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
I agree. Very slim chance of the top 2.

To ignore there's a slim chance isn't rational nor pragmatic, that said, I guess Reading fans would've said similar things last season, especially as S'hampton and West Ham were 'bossing it'.
 

zuniga

New Member
Whatever happens we need a winning run to launch ourselves into the top 6, we're not going to stumble our way in there. Despite our excellent run I don't think we've won 3 league games in a row all season, we still manage to drop points here and there which always sets us back. We could do with stringing 5-6 wins together like Yeovil have and really putting pressure on the top 6 rather than hovering around 7th and never making that jump when the opportunity arises.

Hopefully we've had our bad run while other teams may start to stumble, and can kick on now for the remaining 15 games. Wins against Yeovil and Bury would be very encouraging.
 

Colonel Mustard

New Member
We most certainly do not have a strong defence.

Do believe there have been a few people on here who have been saying we do.


1. Tranmere 27 goals against
2. Doncaster 27 goals against
3. Bournemouth 39 goals against
4. Swindon 26 goals against
5. Brentford 30 goals against
6. Sheff Utd. 28 goals against

City 39 goals against.


Think our defence is definitely a weak spot for us.

Defence can be overrated.

Since Robins came in, CCFC have scored 44 goals to 26 conceded. That is a 1.69 ratio.

To give some comparison, the team in first place, Tranmere, have a ratio of 1.70.

So a leaky defence really doesn't matter if the team is scoring plenty of goals. Sometimes a manager is prepared to sacrifice some defence for the sake of goals, whether it's tactical or just more focus on offence at the training ground.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Defence can be overrated.

Since Robins came in, CCFC have scored 44 goals to 26 conceded. That is a 1.69 ratio.

To give some comparison, the team in first place, Tranmere, have a ratio of 1.70.

So a leaky defence really doesn't matter if the team is scoring plenty of goals. Sometimes a manager is prepared to sacrifice some defence for the sake of goals, whether it's tactical or just more focus on offence at the training ground.

We're just a bit crap at the back, we've also conceded a lot of goals from set peices which is nothing to do with sacrificing defense for attack.

We have scored a lot of goals, howeve we have to because we concede 84% of games. If we misfire in front of goal we lose, because we nearly always concede.
 

Colonel Mustard

New Member
...we've also conceded a lot of goals from set peices which is nothing to do with sacrificing defense for attack.

It can be in any number of ways: Robins spends more time on offence than defence on the training ground; Robins chooses to distribute his transfer funds to the favour of the attack, etc.

We have scored a lot of goals, howeve we have to because we concede 84% of games. If we misfire in front of goal we lose, because we nearly always concede.

Football is not a game of perfection, though. You don't have teams who score bags of goals and concede none throughout the season. It really is just about the goals for/goals against ratio, which is already good, and can be refined in the future. The surest and easiest way to do that is to upgrade the positions with new players, rather than bust a gut on the training field.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
It can be in any number of ways: Robins spends more time on offence than defence on the training ground; Robins chooses to distribute his transfer funds to the favour of the attack, etc.



Football is not a game of perfection, though. You don't have teams who score bags of goals and concede none throughout the season. It really is just about the goals for/goals against ratio, which is already good, and can be refined in the future. The surest and easiest way to do that is to upgrade the positions with new players, rather than bust a gut on the training field.

You can score goals and be tight at the back - the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Swindon, Tranmere and Doncaster have managed it, Man U, man city and Chelsea have managed it, Leicester and Cardiff have managed it, port vale, Gillingham and Southend are managing.

Yep we're scoring goals, but a third of the 44 came in 3 games.

And it's not just about the amount we've concede and cleansheets, it's the amount of clearcut chances we allow the opposition to created - Oldham is a prime example, the had 3 one-on-ones. We're lucky this league is so poor.

Our defending is an area of concern and one that I'm sure Robins is well aware of and actively working on.
 

Colonel Mustard

New Member
You can score goals and be tight at the back - the two aren't mutually exclusive.

That's a straw man argument. I didn't suggest they were mutually exclusive.

Swindon, Tranmere and Doncaster have managed it, Man U, man city and Chelsea have managed it, Leicester and Cardiff have managed it, port vale, Gillingham and Southend are managing.

A rather erratic selection. CCFC's goal ratio (1.69 in the Robins era) is better than or equal to Swindon (1.48), Doncaster (1.59), Leicester (1.70) and Tranmere (1.70 - and top of our table).

Yep we're scoring goals, but a third of the 44 came in 3 games.

It doesn't really matter. There might be the odd outlier here and there, but the broader point is that over the course of a season it is teams with a surging goals ratio which will be up there at the higher end of the table.

And it's not just about the amount we've concede and cleansheets, it's the amount of clearcut chances we allow the opposition to created - Oldham is a prime example, the had 3 one-on-ones. We're lucky this league is so poor.

Luck has nothing to do with it. This defence would get murdered by Premier League opposition on a regular basis; but then, one would assume that the defence would be significantly upgraded if that situation were to occur. This defence is solid enough for this league.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
That's a straw man argument. I didn't suggest they were mutually exclusive.



A rather erratic selection. CCFC's goal ratio (1.69 in the Robins era) is better than or equal to Swindon (1.48), Doncaster (1.59), Leicester (1.70) and Tranmere (1.70 - and top of our table).



It doesn't really matter. There might be the odd outlier here and there, but the broader point is that over the course of a season it is teams with a surging goals ratio which will be up there at the higher end of the table.



Luck has nothing to do with it. This defence would get murdered by Premier League opposition on a regular basis; but then, one would assume that the defence would be significantly upgraded if that situation were to occur. This defence is solid enough for this league.

It's not really an erratic selection, they are all top 3-4 teams in their leagues. It's comparable because we're talking about robins' tenure in which our form is in top 3-4 for that period.

I would argue that the defensive is an average league one defence which is being masked but the exploits of an above average league one attack.

If we somehow get promoted, We will struggle next season with this back four.
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Since Robins took over the team has averaged 1.83 pt/match - which is only 4th best after Donny (2.0), Bournemouth (1.91) and Brentford (1.86).

A simple projection: 15 matches left x 1.83 pt = 27.45pt added to our current total (47) = 74-75 points. Which should be enough for play off.

Automatic promotion would probably require 85-87 pts as the league does not have one or two runaway leaders this season.
So we would need another 38-40 points from the remaining 15 games. That equals to about 2.6 pts/match. And that looks pretty unrealistc.

Still, if we can carry on the overall form since Robins took over, we should be just fine and reach the playoffs.

Next opponent is one of the form teams having won 5 of their last 6 games. They will not be a pushover, but it is vital we get at least one point!
 

Colonel Mustard

New Member
It's not really an erratic selection, they are all top 3-4 teams in their leagues. It's comparable because we're talking about robins' tenure in which our form is in top 3-4 for that period.

You cited those teams not because of league position, but because they were 'scoring goals and tight at the back'. Yet CCFC's goal ratio is right up there among them. That's the broader point I'm trying to make - we're doing CCFC a disservice by picking away at the defence. The team is comfortably among the best in the league, and is no more flawed than most of the teams we hold in high regard.

I would argue that the defensive is an average league one defence which is being masked but the exploits of an above average league one attack.

Agreed. I remember a switch at CCFC in the 90s. The attack was carried by the defence in the Babb/Atherton/Borrows years, but eventually the defence was carried by the attack in the Dublin/Huckerby/Whelan years.
 

Colonel Mustard

New Member
A simple projection: 15 matches left x 1.83 pt = 27.45pt added to our current total (47) = 74-75 points. Which should be enough for play off.

Not true. If you refer to the league tables over the past 15-20 years, you'll find that 74 points (or fewer) is sufficient for a playoff place around a quarter of the time. This might be one of those years, but we certainly shouldn't feel comfortable with that number of points. The team results need to get better to really have a shot. It is a big ask.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I would argue that the defensive is an average league one defence

If we somehow get promoted, We will struggle next season with this back four.

Very true. Someone's clubs have performed well against premier clubs in the cup this season. In our two outings the defence has been hammered. Christie and more disappointingly Clark have not made progress. I expected more of wood but I suppose given he was yet another product of the Coleman / thorn school of signings why should I have. Edjiungele may be ok with a better defender (Cranie as an example) but he and wood are a poor combination.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
You cited those teams not because of league position, but because they were 'scoring goals and tight at the back'. Yet CCFC's goal ratio is right up there among them. That's the broader point I'm trying to make - we're doing CCFC a disservice by picking away at the defence. The team is comfortably among the best in the league, and is no more flawed than most of the teams we hold in high regard.

We have one of the best teams on the league, yes, but, our defence is bottom half! We concede too many and the best, and purest example I can pick out is v PNE, both goals were terrible to concede, Edj is an easy target for teams, Matt Smith bullied him, King (PNE) bullied him, he's below average in our team.

Edj is by far the most overrated player in our team, he gets worshipped like a god yet he makes the most mistakes and quite frankly, I think he should be dropped.

There's been a lot of attention on Christie and Clarke, but they aren't the problem, Edj can't handle teams who cross the ball or pump it upfield, Wood is a lot better, but still, not worth his wages IMO. Blair Adams and the 2 RBs are our best defenders, then Wood. It's a shame Reece Brown was piss poor.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Very true. Someone's clubs have performed well against premier clubs in the cup this season. In our two outings the defence has been hammered. Christie and more disappointingly Clark have not made progress. I expected more of wood but I suppose given he was yet another product of the Coleman / thorn school of signings why should I have. Edjiungele may be ok with a better defender (Cranie as an example) but he and wood are a poor combination.

Are you implying Edj is a better defender than Wood?

In fairness to Clarke and Christie, both have had really bad injuries in the last 2 season, it's bound to hamper development.

Never been too keen on 2 left footed CBs, but if I had to drop 1 defender, it has to be Edj.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Are you implying Edj is a better defender than Wood?

In fairness to Clarke and Christie, both have had really bad injuries in the last 2 season, it's bound to hamper development.

Never been too keen on 2 left footed CBs, but if I had to drop 1 defender, it has to be Edj.

Wood is disappointing. Edjuingele has limitations and there are definately better defenders in league one than him but given woods experience and games played he should be a lot better. Edjuingele had had a big adjustment to make and shows signs he could adapt. Too late for wood who is also paid a lot more.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
The only 1 that looks remotely good enough for the championship is Adams. I agree wood has been very disappointing, but then again he has been 3-4th choice centre back in the previous 2 seasons in the championship.

And Clarke and Christies progress has been limited this season.

Edge isn't great either.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
We have one of the best teams on the league, yes, but, our defence is bottom half! We concede too many and the best, and purest example I can pick out is v PNE, both goals were terrible to concede, Edj is an easy target for teams, Matt Smith bullied him, King (PNE) bullied him, he's below average in our team.

Edj is by far the most overrated player in our team, he gets worshipped like a god yet he makes the most mistakes and quite frankly, I think he should be dropped.

There's been a lot of attention on Christie and Clarke, but they aren't the problem, Edj can't handle teams who cross the ball or pump it upfield, Wood is a lot better, but still, not worth his wages IMO. Blair Adams and the 2 RBs are our best defenders, then Wood. It's a shame Reece Brown was piss poor.

Clark I have supported bit we have dropped a league and his performances have dropped with it. Christie also has been poor and gets off lightly with supporters. Oddly Clarke has only ever played well when thorn managed the team. What that says I really don't know.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
The only 1 that looks remotely good enough for the championship is Adams. I agree wood has been very disappointing, but then again he has been 3-4th choice centre back in the previous 2 seasons in the championship.

And Clarke and Christies progress has been limited this season.

Edge isn't great either.

I think Christie and Clarke could step up, they did well (ish) last season.

Even Adams gets skinned sometimes too much.

He's our best defender though.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Clark I have supported bit we have dropped a league and his performances have dropped with it. Christie also has been poor and gets off lightly with supporters. Oddly Clarke has only ever played well when thorn managed the team. What that says I really don't know.

Agreed.

I think the sooner a replacement for Edj the better.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
I think Christie and Clarke could step up, they did well (ish) last season.

Even Adams gets skinned sometimes too much.

He's our best defender though.

Christie is poor defensively, and Clarke hasn't played enough this season to develop. I think both would struggle in the championship at present.

It's quite funny really, I can remember a thread pre-season lauding Clarke and Hussey as the best fullbacks in the league, ones now playing league two football and the other's on the bench.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top