Long - time for a change?

[Snowball]

I fink Shane's ace.

[brendywendy]

Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in (ha-ha) and noticed how many had a number of penalties as part of their tally.


There are five with higher percentages than Long,
one with the same, five more within a couple and a half percent


10 (5) 50.0% Rankine (York )
12 (5) 41.7% Taraabt (QPR)
12 (5) 41.7% Jones (Rochdale)
13 (5) 38.5% Wright-Phillips (Plymouth)
16 (5) 31.3% Reid (Newport)


09 (4) 44.4% Rendell (Wycombe)
09 (4) 44.4% McPhee (Kidderminster)
10 (4) 40.0% Sharp
10 (4) 40.0% Long
11 (4) 36.4% Walker (Barrow)
18 (4) 22.2% Connell (Grimsby)
21 (4) 19.0% Tubbs (Crawley)


08 (3) 37.5% Hoolihan
08 (3) 37.5% Pitman
08 (3) 37.5% Wilmott (Kettering)
10 (3) 33.3% Drogba
10 (3) 33.3% Bent
09 (3) 33.3% Mohamed (Bath)
13 (3) 23.1% Nasri
14 (3) 21.4% Lowe (Bury)

09 (2) 22.1% Holt
09 (2) 22.1% Pavlychenko
10 (2) 20.0% Van de Vart
08 (2) 25.0% Balotelli

10 (2) 20.0% McGugan
12 (2) 16.7% Tevez
13 (2) 15.4% Commons

Oh look, yet another utterly pointless Snowball stat oxf*rd-fest.

its not pointless in the face of loads of people saying shane is crap cos of all his penaltys
whereas the stats show that he has about the same percent of pens as any one on the list.
therefore the stats arent pointless.they demonstrate a clear point, that rebuffs alot of the anti Shlong guff that was spouted on here.

[Wycombe Royal]

whereas the stats show that he has about the same percent of pens as any one on the list.
therefore the stats arent pointless.they demonstrate a clear point, that rebuffs alot of the anti Shlong guff that was spouted on here.

It is all about timing, just think back to WHEN people were moaning about that.....

[Snowball]

whereas the stats show that he has about the same percent of pens as any one on the list.
therefore the stats arent pointless.they demonstrate a clear point, that rebuffs alot of the anti Shlong guff that was spouted on here.

It is all about timing, just think back to WHEN people were moaning about that.....

No, that just shows that the Long-haters and Knee-Jerkers were doing their usual and thinking in narrow and short terms.

Before the first X games of this season, Long was scoring 90+% of his goals in open play. NOW he's back up there.

He had a short spell where he was being chopped before he might well have scored, so accrued a few penalties. Big deal.

His total career 7 pens out of 44 goals, less than 16%. 25 of the 26 strikers posted in that list (sans Long) have, this season, a higher percentage of their goals as penalties

[Wycombe Royal]

His total career 7 pens out of 44 goals, less than 16%. 25 of the 26 strikers posted in that list (sans Long) have, this season, a higher percentage of their goals as penalties

His career total is only that low because he never used to be the penalty taker. But I really can't be bothered to go down this argument again.

[Snowball]

His total career 7 pens out of 44 goals, less than 16%. 25 of the 26 strikers posted in that list (sans Long) have, this season, a higher percentage of their goals as penalties

His career total is only that low because he never used to be the penalty taker. But I really can't be bothered to go down this argument again.

Well hold on. If he HAD been the penalty-taker his goals total might now be higher than Doyle's for RFC

He's already up to 39 v 55

[Ian Royal]

Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in (ha-ha) [b]and noticed how many had a number of penalties as part of their tally.

*hack*

Oh look, yet another utterly pointless Snowball stat oxf*rd-fest.

its not pointless in the face of loads of people saying shane is crap cos of all his penaltys
whereas the stats show that he has about the same percent of pens as any one on the list.
therefore the stats arent pointless.they demonstrate a clear point, that rebuffs alot of the anti Shlong guff that was spouted on here.

Except, Brendy, that people were saying that about him when he wasn't scoring goals from open play, at which point it was relevant. Now he's learnt how to head and kick at goal again it's less relevant. Although anyone crowing about how he's come good is rather premature in my opinion given his previous brief purple patches followed by extended brown ones.

[Snowball]

A player shows deadly shooting and 90%+ open play goals for four seasons.

Then for a dozen games he only gets 1 open play goal

Rational people look at his career and say "He's good at scoring goals in open play"

Numpties look at a narrow run of games and bleat like stuck pigs.

What's his ratio, today for this season? 11 goals, 7 in open play

What's his ratio today, for his whole career? 45 goals, 39 in open play

[SLAMMED]

I think Snowball has finally been silenced

So how's things, Slammed?

Pretty good.

[Snowball]

Me too,

[Snowball]

A player shows deadly shooting and 90%+ open play goals for four seasons.

Then for a dozen games he only gets 1 open play goal

Rational people look at his career and say "He's good at scoring goals in open play"

Numpties look at a narrow run of games and bleat like stuck pigs.

What's his ratio, today for this season? 11 goals, 7 in open play

What's his ratio today, for his whole career? 45 goals, 39 in open play

Edit, after the WBA game

[readingbedding]

Would have added this to the original thread but it appears to have been locked.

Another game, another two points spaffed away due to Long's inability to hit the target. His workrate up to the 18 yard line is unquestionable and often is performing a thankless task, however he is first a foremost a striker and a striker's ultimate role is to score goals.

It appears the cliched nickname of "Jigsaw" is currently the most accurate summation of his efforts this season in front of goal - 4 goals in 19 league games is atrocious (especially when 3 of those goals were from the penalty spot) for the "number one striker" at any football club.

No doubt Snowball will be all over this thread like a rash stating how Long is actually not going through a bad patch and that he's actually in good form, but the biggest thing for me is the number of points we have failed to pick up recently due to Long's poor finishing. He's missed glorious chances against Cardiff, Norwich, Watford and now Coventry and, as 2-0 alludes to on another thread, it looks more and more like we are going to have to settle for a season of mid table mediocrity.

Time for a change? Well, I certainly think so and I'd venture I'm not in the minority. Whether Brian McDermott agrees remains to be seen but I'm sure there's many a Reading fan that is hoping that Santa brings them an early Christmas present - that being Shane Long being dropped to the bench at Pride Park next Saturday.

Time for you to shut the phuck up methinks.

Oh yes!

Indeed!

[Snowball]

Great Thread.

[SLAMMED]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

[Snowball]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Not "hindsight" on my part. I've been defending Shane and saying how good he was going to be
for the best part of 5 years. I was ridiculed for saying he would be a 10-goal a season player
in the Prem, or 20 a season in the CCC or 30 a season in League 1.

Only serious injury will stop him being a player in the English Premiership.

[Wimb]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Not "hindsight" on my part. I've been defending Shane and saying how good he was going to be
for the best part of 5 years. I was ridiculed for saying he would be a 10-goal a season player
in the Prem, or 20 a season in the CCC or 30 a season in League 1.

Only serious injury will stop him being a player in the English Premiership.

I think what niggles at some people is that you're accusing the majority of people of crimes they didn't commit.

During Long's barren run he wasn't being criticised for being a bad player it was his scoring rate in open play and his streaky nature. It's only been a minority of posters that have said 'Long out' or 'Long's useless'. Just look at the OP, it was suggested we change it up to give Long a break, not kill him off or sell him.

More to the point Snowball, you might be wise to hold off on the coronation until the end of the season. Shane has shown in the past how he's capable of going on a scoring burst and then drying up for a number of matches. That in itself doesn't make him a bad player, but until he answers the question of consistancy it does mean that people have a right to have some reservations over the player.

Despite that however Long has in my opinion certainly proved his worth this season and now and if he continues at this rate, or even 1 in 2/3 then we really do have a player that could contribute at the top end of the CCC and higher. All he needs to do now is sustain the form of the past few months over another season or so and we could well be talking about him in the same bracket as Forster, Kitson and Doyle.

[Wimb]

Oh and a minor point Snowball but you crucified Ian Royal for using the word WILL when he was talking about goalkeepers and now you're using that same word to talk about Long's future....

[Snowball]

Oh and a minor point Snowball but you crucified Ian Royal for using the word WILL when he was talking about goalkeepers and now you're using that same word to talk about Long's future....

Er, I'm talking about Shane Long, who I have seen play, I dunno, say 100 times.

Yes I'm saying barring injury he will, WILL be a Premiership player, judged on 50+ years of watching the game,
playing in the position, and "scouting" Shane for 5 years plus.

My criticism of Ian Royal was that he was saying one or more of the three
back-up keepers "probably WILL be" better than Federici, but when had he
seen them play, for how many games? Federici is close to being a Premiership
goalkeeper. Ian is therefore saying they probably will be Premiership keepers.

They MAY be, but only a very, very experienced goalkeeping coach would wish
to make that prediction now, and then, only if he'd watched them over an
extended period of time and games.

[Snowball]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Not "hindsight" on my part. I've been defending Shane and saying how good he was going to be
for the best part of 5 years. I was ridiculed for saying he would be a 10-goal a season player
in the Prem, or 20 a season in the CCC or 30 a season in League 1.

Only serious injury will stop him being a player in the English Premiership.

I think what niggles at some people is that you're accusing the majority of people of crimes they didn't commit.

During Long's barren run he wasn't being criticised for being a bad player it was his scoring rate in open play and his streaky nature. It's only been a minority of posters that have said 'Long out' or 'Long's useless'. Just look at the OP, it was suggested we change it up to give Long a break, not kill him off or sell him.

More to the point Snowball, you might be wise to hold off on the coronation until the end of the season. Shane has shown in the past how he's capable of going on a scoring burst and then drying up for a number of matches. That in itself doesn't make him a bad player, but until he answers the question of consistancy it does mean that people have a right to have some reservations over the player.

Despite that however Long has in my opinion certainly proved his worth this season and now and if he continues at this rate, or even 1 in 2/3 then we really do have a player that could contribute at the top end of the CCC and higher. All he needs to do now is sustain the form of the past few months over another season or so and we could well be talking about him in the same bracket as Forster, Kitson and Doyle.

But I showed that his OVERALL goal-scoring record was comprised of a very high percentage of open-play goals.

IT IS NOW HIGHER THAN DOYLE'S. Doyle has scored a higher percentage of penalties than Long.

And I also showed that apart from the beginning of this season (when IMO we were using Shane in 451 and that was not suiting his game)
he has not been that streaky, that in fact it's been minutes played. If a player doesn't play for 4 games he probably won't score in them.

[Wimb]

One of Hamer, McCarthy and Andersen probably will be better than Federici, in the future. But the fact is Federici is the best 'keeper we have at the moment. Hamer needs games at League One after a season sitting on the bench. He's only played at League Two and looked very nervy in his one appearance.

Nothing PETTY about it. You deliberately BOLD that "will" as if it's written in stone, and act as if you actually understand goalkeepingl

I have absolutely NO specific reason for being able to say ANY of our back-up keepers "probably WILL be better" ( I notice, as usual you hedge every bet you post by adding "probably").

Face it you know absolutely nothing about what characteristics in a young keeper mean he'll be a top keeper in his mid-twenties.

For them to be clearly BETTER than Federici means they will be Premiership quality.

They MAY be, but because I have not been a goalkeeper or a goalkeeping coach I'm not dumb enough to pontificate about them.

And Ian may well have watched goalkeepers for 20+ years and how are you to know how many time's he's seen our younger keepers play?

But that's beside the point, it's all opinion isn't it? just because you've seen Long 100 times doesn't mean you WILL be right, you can say 'I expect' or 'I strongly believe' but you have no more right to say WILL then anyone else.

I personally don't have a problem with using the word will as it's inferred that it's an opinion of the poster. What I do have a problem with is your inconsistancy and general moving of the goalposts