Successful transfer window. Play-off push on!

[Snowball]

His point about not having enough in the middle of the park is completely true. I can't remember a centre midfield pairing as weak as we have currently have since the old division two days.

Obviously it's REALLY bad, which is why we've won 8 of our last 11 games

Jesus, you make some good points at times but equally some cretinous ones. How many of those goals were created or scored by our centre mids? If you put me in the team and we happened to fluke a 1-0 win after being hammered and I performed out of my depth as expected, would you come back and say ' well finerain has a 100% win record in the team, we need to start him" no, you wouldn't. Stats don't tell the whole story and you need to stop treating them like they do. You've been told about this 100's of times on the forum.

How can a system that gets us 8 wins in 11 be a BAD one
How can a system that gets us to the top of the form tables for the last FOUR months be a bad one?

As for "Stats don't tell the whole story" in this case they DO.

Are you telling me that if we continue at the point-winning rate of the last four months 22 games (18 games more) and we will have won 1.86 ppg or better for FORTY consecutive games, that this is FLUKEY? A six game run MIGHT be flukey, not so much an 8 game run, definitely not a 12 game run, but TWENTY-TWO games?


I watched us over-run by Bristol City, but we won 1-0. You don't win 8 from 11 with a crap midfield, you just DON'T.

OF COURSE you can bolster the midfield, play an extra man there BUT AT THE EXPENSE OF SOMETHING ELSE (eg going 451), or you can play your midfield narrower, make the centre safer but then lose your wing outlets. You think I don't know that or McDermot doesn't know it?

The central midfield has been excellent this season. Of course sometimes they'll be over-run. 3 v 2 is a tough one. But the WINGERS have not been on top form all season. I can't remember a single game where BOTH played well. If Kebe was to play at his best for 9/18 games to come and "OK" for the other 9, then provided the defence/midfield play at the same level, we will win automatic.

It's not the central midfield that's a problem. For the first six games it was the defence that was at sea and the wingers were off form, the strikers a bit meh.

Now we have a solid defence.

We are second in the league (to Hull) on defence INCLUDING the disastrous first six games, and over this last 22 games we are joint top defence but beating Hull on goals scored. Hull are boring and unexciting but they are 6th and equal points with fourth and fifth places.

1 22 12-5-5 10 Clean Sheets 30-19 +11 41 1.86 ppg Reading
2 22 11-4-7 09 Clean Sheets 24-19 +05 37 1.68 ppg Hull
3 22 11-6-5 07 Clean Sheets 38-20 +18 39 1.77 ppg Birmingham
4 22 12-4-6 10 Clean Sheets 29-22 +07 40 1.82 ppg West Ham United
5 22 10-9-3 08 Clean Sheets 36-24 +12 39 1.77 ppg Cardiff City

[Snowball]

[

Had to drive to Liverpool yesterday with a colleague who's a QPR fan, so we naturally spent a bit of time talking about our respective teams and their fortunes. I mentioned our seemingly toothless centre midefield and his take as an outsider looking on (and I'm not saying this is 100% correct, just repeating what he said) is that we're "set up like a lot of Italian teams - defensive midfield pairing who's job is largely to help protect the back five and prevent leaking goals, with a reliance on creating goals through the wingers and strikers, or at set pieces."

I wonder if he has a point? Moreso, I wonder if we were to put an attacking/creative player in the centre, then this might bugger the system, and see us shipping as many goals as the new approach creates?

Perhaps this is why McD didn't play Howard, and apparently didn't put a creative midfielder at the top of his shopping list in the January window? After all the same system got us to the playoff final last year, we're in and around the playoff positions this year, and currently top of the form table. Changing the system now might just be considered too much of a risk.....

Just thought I'd look at the "mad rush of goals" period last season

A 4-0 Burnley
H 4-3 Doncaster
A 1-3 QPR
H 1-1 Cardiff
H 3-3 Norwich

Howard also started when we lost 3-1 at Boro

He had 19 starts overall and I don't have time to check them all. I just looked at the "mad rush" games, but in four of those we conceded 3 goals. Prior to Burnley we were complaining that we couldn't score. McD went for goals and we started conceding!

This ISN'T a careful statistical analysis and I'm not trying to defend it
except to say it was always my subjective opinion that we leaked goals
when Howard started "because he was powder-puff defensively."

So I just asked, "Did he play in those games where all the goals came in a rush?"

He did

[Snowball]

Southampton are faltering. They have 12 points from the last 11 games and that is relegation form. On the current form table (8 games) we are top with 18 points which is one more than Birmingham. Cardiff, Hull and West Ham are all on 13. Saints are on 9 points which places them in 16th place on current form.

That's the thing.

I watch Saints and think, "Wow!"

They have some great players a damn good manager. Surely there are a lot of their players we would like to have?

Someone said "they've been sussed". Maybe, or maybe they've lost a key player, I dunno, but over the last 11 games you mention the table is horrendous for them.

It's not just about good players or pretty football, is it?

PS our next two opponents are 18th and 22nd for the same period.




1 11 8 0 3 18 10 +08 24 2.18 ppg Reading
2 12 8 1 3 20 08 +12 25 2.08 ppg Burnley
3 13 7 3 3 27 12 +15 24 1.85 ppg Birmingham
4 11 5 5 1 14 09 +05 20 1.82 ppg Cardiff
5 11 5 4 2 17 14 +03 19 1.73 ppg Blackpool
6 11 6 1 4 12 10 +02 19 1.73 ppg Brighton a
7 11 6 1 4 14 15 -01 19 1.73 ppg West Ham
8 11 6 0 5 22 23 -01 18 1.64 ppg Barnsley
9 12 6 1 5 12 10 +02 19 1.58 ppg Hull

14 11 4 3 4 11 16 -05 15 1.36 ppg Middlesbrough
15 11 4 2 5 16 16 +00 14 1.27 ppg Leeds United

17 11 3 3 5 11 14 -3 12 1.09 ppg Southampton <<<<<<<<<<<<<
18 11 3 3 5 10 15 -5 12 1.09 ppg Doncaster Rovers
22 11 3 1 7 10 12 -2 10 0.91 ppg Coventry City

[Snowball]

PS our next two opponents are 18th and 22nd for the same period.

IF we can beat both that would be 10 wins from 13 games, 30 points at 2.31 per game
exactly the same ppg as the 2005-6 winning side

[Vision]

His point about not having enough in the middle of the park is completely true. I can't remember a centre midfield pairing as weak as we have currently have since the old division two days.

Obviously it's REALLY bad, which is why we've won 8 of our last 11 games

If you put me in the team and we happened to fluke a 1-0 win after being hammered and I performed out of my depth as expected, would you come back and say ' well finerain has a 100% win record in the team, we need to start him" no, you wouldn't. .

I think he probably would you know.

[Snowball]

His point about not having enough in the middle of the park is completely true. I can't remember a centre midfield pairing as weak as we have currently have since the old division two days.

Obviously it's REALLY bad, which is why we've won 8 of our last 11 games

If you put me in the team and we happened to fluke a 1-0 win after being hammered and I performed out of my depth as expected, would you come back and say ' well finerain has a 100% win record in the team, we need to start him" no, you wouldn't. .

No, but...

If I had played the same system for 22 games and it got me to the top of the form table for those 22 games
I would consider that something like 1,000,000 times more powerful evidence than a single game.

Why are you raising stupid 1-game stats as if they are indicative of something?

[Snowball]

Just looked at the spread betting odds on line.

Bookies now expect second place to be 80 points.

They have our spread indicating us in 5th

85 West Ham
80 Saints
79 Cardiff
76 Birmingham
72 Reading
71 Blackpool

We are currently on track for "78.35" and I think we are a HELL OF A GOOD BET to beat 73 points

A win on Saturday would take us to 44 points from 23 games, 1.91 ppg in this run
and that would have us on track for

"80.52"

Win our next two games 47 from 24 = 1.96 ppg, predicted final total then 81.33



In the unlikely event that we win our next THREE games we'd go to 50 points from 25 games
and would be on target for 84 points at the end of the season



and YES I know things change, unlucky losses or lucky wins can happen, people get injured,
clubs are decimated by flu, coaches crash...

[Mr Angry]

Had to drive to Liverpool yesterday with a colleague who's a QPR fan, so we naturally spent a bit of time talking about our respective teams and their fortunes. I mentioned our seemingly toothless centre midefield and his take as an outsider looking on (and I'm not saying this is 100% correct, just repeating what he said) is that we're "set up like a lot of Italian teams - defensive midfield pairing who's job is largely to help protect the back five and prevent leaking goals, with a reliance on creating goals through the wingers and strikers, or at set pieces."

I wonder if he has a point? Moreso, I wonder if we were to put an attacking/creative player in the centre, then this might bugger the system, and see us shipping as many goals as the new approach creates?

Perhaps this is why McD didn't play Howard, and apparently didn't put a creative midfielder at the top of his shopping list in the January window? After all the same system got us to the playoff final last year, we're in and around the playoff positions this year, and currently top of the form table. Changing the system now might just be considered too much of a risk.....

I think its a fair point you colleague makes tbh; McD clearly believes in a "don't cencede you don't lose" philosophy, and the risks of change not paying off are always there (Newcastle bringing in Asprilla comes to mind...)

However, I understand that he chooses not to employ a 451 (or more properly, a 4411) formation as he didn't feel he had the resources capable of playing/supporting the lone striker, and I suspect that, after the window has shut, he now believes that he has the players capable of changing the system should he feel it is required, either at the start of a specific game or to change the shape during a game.

Thats not to say that he WILL change, just that he now has the option to, whereas before, he didn't feel he did.

[Ian Royal]

His point about not having enough in the middle of the park is completely true. I can't remember a centre midfield pairing as weak as we have currently have since the old division two days.

Any one involving Cisse.

[Hoop Blah]

Had to drive to Liverpool yesterday with a colleague who's a QPR fan, so we naturally spent a bit of time talking about our respective teams and their fortunes. I mentioned our seemingly toothless centre midefield and his take as an outsider looking on (and I'm not saying this is 100% correct, just repeating what he said) is that we're "set up like a lot of Italian teams - defensive midfield pairing who's job is largely to help protect the back five and prevent leaking goals, with a reliance on creating goals through the wingers and strikers, or at set pieces."

I wonder if he has a point? Moreso, I wonder if we were to put an attacking/creative player in the centre, then this might bugger the system, and see us shipping as many goals as the new approach creates?

Perhaps this is why McD didn't play Howard, and apparently didn't put a creative midfielder at the top of his shopping list in the January window? After all the same system got us to the playoff final last year, we're in and around the playoff positions this year, and currently top of the form table. Changing the system now might just be considered too much of a risk.....

I'd never really thought of it as being an Italian-esque set up, but yes, I think he's got it pretty spot on in the way we approach games. It's not really news though, we've been saying it (well at least I have) for a long time and how it contributes to making us a pretty dour and direct side which makes us pretty dull to watch.

Why are we set up quite so defensively? Probably because McDermott is aware that we haven't got enough guile or threat upfront to score enough goals if we played a little more openly. It was much the same last year where we adapted our style to make the most of Longs running and hardwork. We stick it down the channels and hope for something to happen, either by the forwards capitalising on defensive mistakes brought about by our pressure or by the wingers doing something.

The other reason might be that McDermott isn't convinced that we're quite solid enough defensively and so the extra defensive midfielder is required to give further protection to the back four.

Alternatively he may just think that it's the most productive way to play. Personally I think that, long term, you're better off being a little better on the ball and having a bit more attacking influence and composure in your team. Obviously my livelihood isn't on the line with results so it's a bit easier for me to say.

[Terminal Boardom]

The last time that we had any flair and creativity in CM was in the days of Darren Caskey. I don't recall those years as being successful. Prior to that, and the only time that we did have flair and creativity in the middle of the park was when we made the play offs in 94/95. But to accommodate that, we played with 3 central defenders and wing backs.

The comparison to Italian football is certainly valid.

[Hoop Blah]

I'd argue that the combination of Sidwell and Harper wasn't just about having two defensively minded players protecting the back four.

As I said (or tried to at least) elsewhere the other day, Harper wasn't a creative 'flair' player like Sigurdsson or even Caskey, but he was a composed player who was good on the ball and created a lot from his deeper position. He had the ability to beat players and attack teams when either allowed or when the time was right.

Sidwell was much more of an attacking player than either Karan or Legiertwood are by nature, let alone how they allowed to play by McDermotts tactics.

[melonhead]

both box to box, sids with the shots from edge of area, harper keeping the ball moving
agreed it was more creative, but not particularly so

[Mr Angry]

The big difference is in the fullbacks; with Shorey and Murts, you had 2 fullbacks constantly bombing forward and supporting Little & Convey - thats where a lot of chances were created from; it allowed Harper and Sidwell to sit back, or have one of them go forward behind the 2 strikers in case something came out to the edge of the box.

This team simply don't have 2 full backs to do that job; Cummings shows the odd sign he might, but part of our problem in creating chances has been that our 2 wingers are usualy double-marked when they get the ball, and not having an over-lapping full back they are restricted with what they can do with the ball. This also means that the 2 central midfielders can't venture as far forwards otherwise they are horribly exposed if we lose the ball in the wrong place and huge gaps are left in the middle (the offside Hull goal being an example of what can happen....)

[melonhead]

just a quick assessment now weve seen a little of our new players since january

Roberts- has class. a proper forward, who makes us realise what it is weve missed with the other lads(no offence- i like em all, but.....)
he can hold it up, lay it off, has real nous, decent control, knows where the goal is, and looks a really clever purchase for this team- exactly what we needed. 8/10

Connolly- assured debut, though it took him a while to get the pace of the game after not playing for ages. 1 short back pass apart he was very solid at the back, and played a number of great long passes to feet along the deck, including the pass to roberts which should get the patented snowball half assist,and ghosted into a great position and set up roberts goal for the 2nd.
not only that he is young, hungry, and its probable we'll get him in the summer. 7.5/10
but potentially better than roberts for us.

Cywka- only had two 15 minute cameos, but has already showed a really decent touch, strength, can cross a ball, can lay on a forward pass, has a trick, abnd is willing and able to track back. would like to see him play a full game. 7/10

sheppard- not seen him yet ?/10


all in all- a very decent window, and it shows that brian is well skilled to make the most of the different financial situation at the club moving forward.

[Hoop Blah]

Roberts- has class. a proper forward, who makes us realise what it is weve missed with the other lads(no offence- i like em all, but.....)
he can hold it up, lay it off, has real nous, decent control, knows where the goal is, and looks a really clever purchase for this team- exactly what we needed. 8/10

Sorry come over all snowball on you brendy, but some of us knew that and have been telling you for ages that what we had wasn't quite enough.

Roberts just brings it home to those who were too blinded by their mind numbing positivity that what we had was missing a key ingredient.

[melonhead]

Roberts- has class. a proper forward, who makes us realise what it is weve missed with the other lads(no offence- i like em all, but.....)
he can hold it up, lay it off, has real nous, decent control, knows where the goal is, and looks a really clever purchase for this team- exactly what we needed. 8/10

Sorry come over all snowball on you brendy, but some of us knew that and have been telling you for ages that what we had wasn't quite enough.

Roberts just brings it home to those who were too blinded by their mind numbing positivity that what we had was missing a key ingredient.

except i never said our strikers were the best, or that i wouldnt like better.
just that they werent all always dogshit.
ive been mentioning concern over church for months.while always supporting him, and hoping he comes good.

[Friday's Legacy]

Tuesday 14th February



3rd place if we win on friday!

Form Guide

[melonhead]

2 points of 2nd if we win our game in hand


tasty

[Friday's Legacy]

5 wins in a row, 5 clean sheets in a row.

back to 3rd place and have a game in hand on 4th place blackpool.

onwards and upwards.