Is this true? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ccfc_jj
- Start date
skyblue_dan
New Member
Who cares if this is true? That's like saying if the season finished in October when we were 21st we would have stayed up! Absolutely meaningless statistic. Games last 90 minutes not 70!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Bit harsh, would be interesting, if true than you have too wonder is it mental strength or fitness that lets us down. Or having a shit bench other teams make changes we dont or when we do they get stronger we get weaker.
I dont think it is true though
ccfc_jj
Member
I think it is a mixture of the lot. But tactics definitely play a part, sometimes just a substitution when were under pressure in the final minutes can make a big difference
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Or maybe other clubs stronger benches give them the edge?
Our investment in our playing squad is in the bottom three in the league. We are in the bottom three in the league. Maybe we've just got what our owners deserved?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Without looking name the subs bench typically at Peterborough, Barnsley, Millwall, Doncaster. I don't know them but you must as you know they are stronger. I doubt it.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
I doubt is true tbh, I would guess if games ended at 70 mins we would maybe be between 11-14th
Sky Blue Sheepy
New Member
Well not sure about that, but I do know that, before Reading away, we would have been 6th if games finished as they were on 80mins. That said we've also beaten Leeds and Barnsley after that in recent weeks so we would have dropped since
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Whichever way you try and turn it, or ignore exhaustive research from other threads which have proven points; two facts are inescapable - compared to the teams you list, and the balance of the league:
We invest a value in the playing squad that ranks us within the bottom three teams in the league
We play more inexperienced youngsters, more often than any other team in ths league
That's why costly mistakes and less impact later on in games has been a characteristic all season
Nick
Administrator
Why are swansea and norwich not bottom? Management has a lot to do with it!
Why do we win at home if the squad is so poor?
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Again I answer the same question with the same answer; their managers have over performed. However, you can't expect a a manager to over perform. You can hope, but not expect. We have an investment in the first team squad that's in the bottom three in the division. To expect to finish anywhere other than the bottom three is therefore to expect the manager to over perform. Which you can't do. Especially when he's not a proven manager in any case. It really, really is so very, very simple
Nick
Administrator
I wouldnt say they are over performing at all! They just get the best out of what they have!
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
They are getting a performance which is not proportionate to the investment made. That's over performing.
In every sport there's a huge correlation between money spent and results achieved. In football, rugby, Formula 1, etc. Everyone is looking for the Holy Grail of a manager, coach, team principal or trainer that can buck this trend. They're rare. And in demand.
You can hope Thorn is one. You can hope our next manager is one. You have no right to expect it
Nick
Administrator
Of course money helps, but it doesnt mean they are over performing. It just means they are good managers! Lambert has done it 3 years on the bounce? It means they can get players motivated and playing for them.
It is clear Thorn isnt one (a good manager) just by watching how we play football.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
It means that Lambert is therefore over performing. Great for him, but not a per se yardstick by which to constantly and incessantly judge Thorn.
Why can't you see that to get a result that does not bear relationship to investment is an over performance?
Why can't you see that to get a result that does not bear relationship to investment is an over performance?
Disorganised1
New Member
So how come managers who have previously been good just die at Cov ?
Nick
Administrator
So why have we won the last few at home and then lose away with the same players? We can judge Thorn because of the way he sets us out away for a start, his stupid substitutions and lack of bottle.
Other managers over perform when they do well but thorn isnt under performing when he does awful?
Does that mean if a player who is worth less scores more goals than somebody worth more in the same league they are over performing, or just that they are better players?
Is it so hard to accept Thorn is a poor manager?
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
With the greatest of respect Nick, how can you comment about the way the team is set up? I don't know if you were streaming yesterday's game, or listening to another persons interpretation of events over the radio; but when the midfield changes were made, your comments on the game thread were all about a like-for-like change. No it wasn't. It was to change formation. I could see the change with my eyes. If you can't see a change in formation, I'll take what you type with a pinch of salt if you don't mind.
A bit like the Barnsley game when you accused us of settling for a draw in a game when we had 19 shots compared to 3, and got a late winner.
Rather like your refusal to see that some managers over perform, your blinkered and jaundiced view does you no favours
Nick
Administrator
Did the keeper make 19 saves to keep them in the game? I cant remember the keeper doing any world class saves to keep them in the game? Funny how bbc stats are wrong when we lose.
It was a like for like sub and yes they changed the formation as Mcsheffrey went more central and baker on the left! By like for like I meant baker for bell rather than striker for midfielder to go for it.
Why did clingan come on to hold keoghs hand in defence if we were going for a result? If we wanted a result we would go all out for it, not shuffle the midfield about!!
It is quite clear we are too negative, leicester passed and moved yesterday all the way up the pitch and scored.
We played it backwards all the way to the keeper who miskicked and conceded from it.
Are you saying we dont play negative football?
Going for it is what blackpool did against us by going all out.
I agree that people can over perform, but there is a point where people are good or bad at their job.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
If your definition of extensive research involves turning up at games and taking a balanced view of what's there to be judged, I'd tend to agree
Nick
Administrator
So it isnt a balanced view that we have been playing very negative football recently? I am not saying I am the next fergie or mourhino but surely if we want to get back into a game we need to go shit or bust? Not bring on a holding midfielder and play across the back at 2 0 down?
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
So 19 shots against Barnsley is negative then? What's positive in your esteemed view? 20? 25?
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
And from what I recall yesterday's changes immediately preceded the penalty. Maybe it did work?
Nick
Administrator
Positive is throwing the kitchen sink at teams and going for it. Being at the game the keeper did not make any hard saves and wasnt tested. What about forest and leicester, was that positive attacking football? Bbc stats mean nothing, the results do! Even if the barnsley, forest or leicester keepers made 10 world class saves i could understand also, but they didnt need to!
The penalty came from nimely chasing down and giving a shit which he has done since he came in!
We lost 2-0, obviously these positive changes didnt work? If Leicester had more shooting practise it would have been more.
Negative football cost us for their second by playing it all the way back and putting murphy under pressure.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
What? Throwing the kitchen sink at teams and blowing our goal difference? Good thinking....
Grendel
Well-Known Member
If you define positive as 7 goals in 1,530 minutes of league football please dont come on here when you're having an off day.
bulkingtonskyblues
New Member
if teams didnt attack us in second halfs and werent allowed to shoot at goal we would be 2nd, and if teams werent allowed to play their best teams against us we would be 2nd. your post is possibly the most ridiclious i have ever heard,
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
I thought the mantra of posting poor quality fare shouldn't embarrass me from putting me thoughts on here, as it's evidently not a matter that others take account of - currently company included.
The issue behind my post, if you're struggling, isn't anything to do with goals scored; its 'throwing the kitchen sink' at clubs to the potential detriment of our goal difference - which could be crucial in our comparison post-season with Bristol City.
You want to talk to me about goals scored, and I'll raise the spectre of the wisdom of selling your leading scorer. This season and last. But we'll deal with one issue at a time to keep things easy for you, eh?
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
This type of comment makes me laugh....admittedly, we have had less investment than most teams, but you'd think we were in the same league as Man City, Barcelona and Real Madrid....not Peterbrough, Barnsley, Doncaster and Watford!!
Investement is needed, we all appreciate that...but in this league, many are having to do with scraps...we are little different to many teams in the Championship. We have 3-4 teams who can spend money(i.e West ham), another 5-6 who cannot spend on transfer fees, but have high earners who can ease the staffing budget if offloaded (i.e Blues)....but that still leaves about 12 teams we should at least be COMPETING with....ffs!:facepalm:
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Watford's wage bill is twice ours. You say 'little different'; but how does a factor of two do then?
Ditto Forest. We are paying less wages than Millwall and Barnsley. You get what you pay for.
We are in the bottom three when it comes to investment. How do you then skew that to state that we should be competing with 12 others? Unless you expect the manager to over-perform, which was the central point of my debate. Over to you...
Watford's wage bill is twice ours. You say 'little different'; but how does a factor of two do then?
Ditto Forest. We are paying less wages than Millwall and Barnsley. You get what you pay for.
We are in the bottom three when it comes to investment. How do you then skew that to state that we should be competing with 12 others? Unless you expect the manager to over-perform, which was the central point of my debate. Over to you...
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
MMM, I accept your argument....yes, we have had little investment.
However, this is not on a scale of so much less than some in this league that we should be the 2nd worst team in this league....assuming that Pompey have won 36 points, prior to their deduction.
The issue is that we have senior pros who should be doing much better, some signings which have been a flop, and a good crop of youngsters who have played enough games to know their way around this league.
The post-mortem, regardless of the end result on 28 April will focus on who should carry the can for the failure....as surely even you would have to express disappointment at what we have seen/'achieved' this season???
However, this is not on a scale of so much less than some in this league that we should be the 2nd worst team in this league....assuming that Pompey have won 36 points, prior to their deduction.
The issue is that we have senior pros who should be doing much better, some signings which have been a flop, and a good crop of youngsters who have played enough games to know their way around this league.
The post-mortem, regardless of the end result on 28 April will focus on who should carry the can for the failure....as surely even you would have to express disappointment at what we have seen/'achieved' this season???
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
Oh, and wankers like Freddy who don't give a shit and are the ones really taking the piss out of the fans and club. :jerkit: