Clean Sheet Statistic (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Otis
Well-Known Member
That can't be right though. We're a terrible side and Robins is a very bad manager.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
in the NFL they say defence wins championships and i would say thats probably true in football too for the most part.
very very impressive start to season
very very impressive start to season
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
3 our of the 4 that went up last season had some of the best defence records in the league.
However they all scored more goals than any team outside the top 7.
So in that theory you don’t get promoted by having an amazing defence but a poor attack.
I am confident Robins will address the goal scoring in January and we will achieve.
Last edited:
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Yep, pretty much sums up my defensive thread. Great work.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Why not try and go on the front foot rather than doing defensive threads, weeman?
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Sorry mate...it's like an automatic mechanism after spending too much time on here ;-)
Sky Blues
Active Member
Nice to see a positive stat about City.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
You won't miss Aaron Rodgers then
they also say Rodgers wins nothing....
Ranjit Bhurpa
Well-Known Member
Stats can be selected to shape any argument. I could point out that in our most successful season 1969-70 when we finished 6th in the old First Division, only 58 goals were scored over 42 league games. We also had 15 clean sheets but neither stat proves anything. You still need to score one more than the opposition, so if we're keeping so many clean sheets then very often we will only need to score 1 to win.
Also I think you may be disappointed if you think a goal machine will join the payroll in January, whoever and wherever he is. Saturday showed us there are goalscorers already at the Club, we are still very much a work in progress and the most pressing task is to find a way with the players we already have to beat teams who park the bus for a 0-0.
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
You do need to score one to win your correct. The good point about this stat though is that with such a rigid defence, we often only need to score one goal...not two, three, four etc. Such a great defence won't win you games...but it gives a great foundation for at least a point.
Ranjit Bhurpa
Well-Known Member
Think that's what I was trying to say WM
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
I've been banging on about this for ages but when we were drawing 0-0's people were getting impatient. Many also telling me the world was about to end!
This stat is not only good, it's actually phenomenal. We are completely consistent and have just needed a bit more chemistry and killer instinct in the final third. We saw that on Saturday.
I really have a positive outlook on the rest of the season.
This stat is not only good, it's actually phenomenal. We are completely consistent and have just needed a bit more chemistry and killer instinct in the final third. We saw that on Saturday.
I really have a positive outlook on the rest of the season.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Is his brother, Brendan?
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
No they didnt
And hes won a superbowl
But keep watching nfl, its a great sport and newbies like you are welcome
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Spot on - strikers require several chances to concert goals - a top striker will expect to score 1 in 6 so we need to create far more against negative teams.
Londonccfcfan
Well-Known Member
Agree....but it's soooo frustrating at times. Cos we should be battering teams.
itsabuzzard
Well-Known Member
You're determined to get your money's worth, aren't you Otis?
Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk
no_loyalty
Well-Known Member
Willis and McDonald, best centre back pairing since Breen and Daish
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Ranjit great stat to go that far back fair play.
However in that season only one team below us had scored more goals than us.
The rest all scored the same or less.
We were the 7th highest scorers in the league.
This season so far we are the 16th highest scorers.
It has to change otherwise we will be very lucky to get in the play offs.
Sign a better striker or Ponti turns out as good as his potential and we could get top three.
Saturday showed as against Notts Country that we can beat anyone who comes out swinging and goes toe to toe with us.
Where we struggle is against how most teams play against us (defensively). That is when you need that striker who turns a point into three, more often than not.
The defensive work is awesome now we just need the one goalscorer who can get the one goal.
skybluegod
Well-Known Member
But that doesn’t sound like it’s a goal scoring problem, thats a creativity problem. When teams park the bus we don’t create enough chances it’s not that we aren’t taking them, it’s that more often than not we are not giving our strikers much of any service.
As many people have said to you before there is no such thing as a guaranteed goal scorer, because the person you have might have the best stats ever but if he breaks his leg, don’t think he will score many
McNulty will score goals, as will ponti when called upon, they just need better service.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Only time will tell.
I hope Ponti is the answer. However I genuinely believe McNulty is not. He is a good player in many areas just not finishing.
I hope Ponti is the answer. However I genuinely believe McNulty is not. He is a good player in many areas just not finishing.
Hobo
Well-Known Member
Well Nazon is scoring and we might see a different McNulty now? It might be that our strikers have their best form ahead of them. I would rather see the goals spread across the team anyway, rather than rely on one prolific striker.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
This is just the Colchester game as an example. I choose this game as It is arguably the game that most would say exemplifies the point that we lack creativity and create no chances. The game that shows that it is not the strikers but the formation and style of play.
However just some of the comments below show also that we were getting decent crosses into the box.
My belief is that we can still keep this defensive solidness that comes from our formation and nick 1-0 wins from games like this if you have the right striker. Who may not get many chances. He wont get the unrealistic 6-7 chances that some are asking for. He may only get 2 or 3 chances. He gets himself in the right spot when the cross comes in. He does not hesitate when the ball drops to him. He makes such good runs that he forces the through ball to be played to him. He consistently scores and this affects the phycology of Jones and the Duck that their first thought Is to look for him, their second thought is to shoot. He gets a reputation and starts to get man marked by two defenders leaving space for others to exploit.
That is how I feel the right striker would turn this defensive solidity and draw into three points more often than not.
This was the hardest game to choose others games would be much easier to find such quotes......
Sky Blue PeteWell-Known Member
Great play by duck no one there to tap in
ccfcwayWell-Known Member
great play by nazon, gets to the line, cuts it back to 6 yard box and no one there
shmmeee said:
See the problem is we don’t create chances so no pointicelli in playing any striker.
stupot07Well-Known Member
We had 3-4 decent balls in the box tbf. Shame the only 2 strikers who attack crosses are on the bench.
torchomatic and Nick like
( a decent goalscorer can attack crosses and score with their feet, not just one or the other)
According to CWR when Nazon crossed it across the box the nearest player we had to it was a holding midfielder. Tells you a lot about why we’re not scoring right there.
( a goalscorer would be there)
Adams very critical of McNulty today,
Saying he should be getting in the box.
sw88Chief Commentator!
Ball into the box, headed down, McNulty hesitates and by the time he connects the chance has gone
(In a game like that where clear cut chances are not plentiful you can’t afford to hesitate)
Kingokings204Well-Known Member
Haynes misses a glorious chance at the death
(Not a striker but would a decent striker, with their movement get a glorious chance like Haynes did)
As I say the worst game for me to find examples to make my point yet they are still there.
I believe that striker is out there and I think come January if we are in the mix near the play offs we will sign him.
However just some of the comments below show also that we were getting decent crosses into the box.
My belief is that we can still keep this defensive solidness that comes from our formation and nick 1-0 wins from games like this if you have the right striker. Who may not get many chances. He wont get the unrealistic 6-7 chances that some are asking for. He may only get 2 or 3 chances. He gets himself in the right spot when the cross comes in. He does not hesitate when the ball drops to him. He makes such good runs that he forces the through ball to be played to him. He consistently scores and this affects the phycology of Jones and the Duck that their first thought Is to look for him, their second thought is to shoot. He gets a reputation and starts to get man marked by two defenders leaving space for others to exploit.
That is how I feel the right striker would turn this defensive solidity and draw into three points more often than not.
This was the hardest game to choose others games would be much easier to find such quotes......
Sky Blue PeteWell-Known Member
Great play by duck no one there to tap in
ccfcwayWell-Known Member
great play by nazon, gets to the line, cuts it back to 6 yard box and no one there
shmmeee said:
See the problem is we don’t create chances so no pointicelli in playing any striker.
stupot07Well-Known Member
We had 3-4 decent balls in the box tbf. Shame the only 2 strikers who attack crosses are on the bench.
torchomatic and Nick like
( a decent goalscorer can attack crosses and score with their feet, not just one or the other)
According to CWR when Nazon crossed it across the box the nearest player we had to it was a holding midfielder. Tells you a lot about why we’re not scoring right there.
( a goalscorer would be there)
Adams very critical of McNulty today,
Saying he should be getting in the box.
sw88Chief Commentator!
Ball into the box, headed down, McNulty hesitates and by the time he connects the chance has gone
(In a game like that where clear cut chances are not plentiful you can’t afford to hesitate)
Kingokings204Well-Known Member
Haynes misses a glorious chance at the death
(Not a striker but would a decent striker, with their movement get a glorious chance like Haynes did)
As I say the worst game for me to find examples to make my point yet they are still there.
I believe that striker is out there and I think come January if we are in the mix near the play offs we will sign him.
Last edited:
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
You really can’t handle someone having a different opinion to you can you?
I was at work as I have told you. So I had to listen on the radio as and when I could.
I won’t be told that my opinion counts for nothing because you have the luxury that you were there and I wasn’t. If that means you don’t value my opinion then that is your problem not mine.
Oh and it’s actually like Gary Neville giving his opinion about what a team needs to change after listening to the match on the radio, reading match reports and listening to the views of others who went.
Which a lot of pundits do they can’t be in two place at once.
I have replied to the people above as they know how to have a sensible debate.
I refuse to engage any further with you as it’s always the same old thing.
You always think you are never wrong we will go round in circles for 20 pages with you asking me for examples of how a better striker will score goals in this team.
I will quite rightly point out that those examples can only happen when that striker is there.
You won’t have it and will make some snidey remarks and so on and on and on we go.
What I call the NINW merry go round.
Which as I have pointed out to you a few times. I am not going to be customer of.
Nick
Administrator
It's not about a different opinion, it's that you will happily keep telling everybody else they are wrong who have been there and seen it with their own eyes based on some posts on a match thread.
If you want to point out examples, why not post up screenshots / videos to see exactly what has happened like Gary Neville would use?
Some of the quotes you have used, you clearly don't actually understand the context of them and why they were said.
ie. At the time it was posted about McNulty not getting in the box, he was actually playing on the right of midfield rather than up front.
You are trying to use posts from others from the match thread, I have used actual video / screenshots / views from matches to show you various things.
I am trying to have a sensible debate, somehow though you don't seem to engage when it gets to things that actually happened on the pitch in our games? It's all well and good going on about me always being right, feel free to prove me wrong with things other than quotes from the match thread, that are actually quoting people off the radio you have no idea about or what was going on at that time.
I've never seen Star Wars, I'm pretty sure if I want on a Star Wars fansite trying to argue with them about what happens in films based of tweets / posts of others without seeing it myself it wouldn't really work at all.
If you want to point out examples, why not post up screenshots / videos to see exactly what has happened like Gary Neville would use?
Some of the quotes you have used, you clearly don't actually understand the context of them and why they were said.
ie. At the time it was posted about McNulty not getting in the box, he was actually playing on the right of midfield rather than up front.
You are trying to use posts from others from the match thread, I have used actual video / screenshots / views from matches to show you various things.
I am trying to have a sensible debate, somehow though you don't seem to engage when it gets to things that actually happened on the pitch in our games? It's all well and good going on about me always being right, feel free to prove me wrong with things other than quotes from the match thread, that are actually quoting people off the radio you have no idea about or what was going on at that time.
I've never seen Star Wars, I'm pretty sure if I want on a Star Wars fansite trying to argue with them about what happens in films based of tweets / posts of others without seeing it myself it wouldn't really work at all.
better days
Well-Known Member
Goals will come and from all over the pitch
I'm sure Robins knows that we have to score early against teams who just want to defend. It's coming up with a strategy to do this
He seems to be working on this with his formations and better use of the full backs especially the more attack minded Haynes.
I'm sure Robins knows that we have to score early against teams who just want to defend. It's coming up with a strategy to do this
He seems to be working on this with his formations and better use of the full backs especially the more attack minded Haynes.
sw88
Chief Commentator!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
I am fully aware of where Mcnulty was playing and how that changed with Jones’ injury. . It was Micky Adams who was criticising him for not getting in the box.
As much as Micky has his faults he does know a little bit about football. I heard his comments and he was not confused that Mcnulty was playing as the main striker.
He just felt that McNulty should be getting in the box more with the way the game was flowing. As Jones does playing that role.
Schmee suggested it doesn’t matter which strikers are playing as we are not creating chances.
Stu pointed out to him that we got 3-4 decent crosses in tbf (a comment you liked)
You and others felt the game was more suited to a striker who can get his head on the end of those crosses. (Which means we are creating but the strikers on the pitch at the time are not making the most of it.
This is where we disagree, you feel we have that option. I feel we need to sign a striker who can do both. Be there to get his head on the end of it. Also be a poacher. However also make good runs that when played in he finishes. So people will play him in.
That striker can play alongside any of the other strikers who I feel all are the second man type strikers not the main man.
What is the context of a few people saying Duck has put it across the six yard box and nobody is there.
In my opinion Beavon made the wrong run in the circumstances to the bear post.
You may feel the run should have come from a midfielder.
I feel a better striker will be in the right place and Duck will be finding him not putting it where he expects someone to be.
Why do I need to post pictures. I take it my point is not valid if I don’t post pictures?
This was the hardest game to analyse like this as it is the one where we created the fewest chances. Yet it still wasn’t that hard.
When we sign a better striker in January. I will be able to make comment on the amount of 1-0 and 2-0’s we get. That without that striker would have been draws.
It will be the same formation the same style of play. We will just all of a sudden become creative.