What in the what now? If you're not deliberately being obtuse then you're doing a damn good impression of it. Our dismal run dates back to last season. Over 3 coaches, numerous line ups, various different strategies and so on, we have consistently been one of the worst sides in the league. Winning 7 games in that time is an an outlier. An anomaly. A blip. Law of averages. We've consistently shown what we are and that is why anyone who is paying attention can see how this turns out.
The defence can be coached, as seen by the dramatic improvement since Pearson and Shakespear's effective first game against Man Utd in December, since which we have conceded about one goal a game on average, something only two teams have a better record than over the season. Those two teams are Liverpool and Sheffield Utd, the latter's whose defenders mainly came up from the Championship and cost relative peanuts. Our defence is really pretty good, when organised and coached well. But strikers can't be coached to stick a chance in the back of the net, not in the course of a season or two. It has to be more natural, and that is why we need strikers far more than defenders.
Having to reflect on that now, we're always going to struggle against cloggers and anti footballers with our style. We need to play teams with class and ability that want to bring the game to us. Kicking us up in the air and getting in our faces to constantly disrupt our play is their whole game plan and it works against our more volatile players. We shine when we play against class. I fully expect a decent game against Leicester who we know will play with much more finesse and ability. Let's put this one behind us like we do with the likes of Burnley.
A club officially and deliberately putting someone at risk by showing their identity on the big screen is one of the worst things I've seen a club do, yes. I guess in your fun 'disagree with everyone' Saturday evening, you disregarded the 'one of' part of my post. Some 'statto'. I guess Excel can't read for you as well.
That post is a bit disappointing from a sports coach. I think ones current place in a performance table is far less simplistic that that.
What in the what now? If you're not deliberately being obtuse then you're doing a damn good impression of it. Our dismal run dates back to before Pearson. Before Pearson this season = 16 games, 9 points. 0.6 points on average with Pearson this season = 13 games, 18 points. 1.4 points on average I know you will say i should ignore every game we have won under Pearson. That is fine. That is your view. Pearson is an anomaly and a blip, a law of averages. I think maybe he has helped us.
Yep he’s just a side product of Pozzo utter incompetence. Needs a home for 6 months until our idiot owners decide what to do next.
Do you not think that disclosing Harry's ID on the big screen, causes him potential risk from some bunch of drunken Palace fans?
You keep saying stuff like this. A few weeks ago, you got into a debate about whether points were the correct way by which performance should be assessed. I genuinely don’t understand what you mean. Whether you like it or not, our position in the football hierarchy will be determined by points won, or not won. “Worth”, or some sort of notion of “desert”, is utterly irrelevant at the end of the day.
I never said I agreed with what Palace did. Just that many worse things have been done by many clubs.
I really can’t be bothered with any more of this. But if you check my post you will notice I did say ‘one of’, as far as I’m aware I didn’t misquote you.
I say it because the number of points does not, on it's own, determine how good a team is. It is just one of my personal mantras, something I feel strongly about it, and it follows through into my outlook in life and in work. I don't judge people by their outward achievements. Just because someone is a higher rank, does not mean that he/she is better at the job, even though the chances are that they may well be better. It isn't a given. Yes, points make prizes, just like a higher ranked job means a better salary, but that is as far as it goes for me, as so many people, and so many sportspeople, and sports teams are, for one reason or another, are better than where they are performing at a particular time. But, honestly Keighley, it isn't worth arguing about, it is just the way I am. Something personal.
That’s all very well as a mantra but that’s not how it works in competitive professional football, is it? I’m not arguing. It’s quite commendable as a watchword for life on the whole. But I’m just pointing out that you are being a bit rose-tinted in respect of the harsh reality in this particular context.
Football is part of our life, it isn't separate. As I acknowledged in the last paragraph, points make prizes, but I believe teams can under-perform - below what their quality is, and I think that is what is happening with us at the moment. Do you honestly expect a football coach to say to their team. "Ok lads, they have more points than us so they are obviously of higher quality and will likely get the win, so it is hardly worth bothering. We'll have to hope they just have a bad day."
I would say us and West Ham are both lower than we should be. Both in team quality and also performances. The question is... can either of us turn it around?
I for one am warmed by the fact Sheff Utd should be down with us. Honestly we have some idiot fans. We are where we deserve to be with our coward mercenary squad.
If we had lost 2-0 rather than 8-0 to Man City then 10 teams would have let more goals in than us. As it stands 5 teams have let in more goals. Only 3 teams have scored less goals than us,
Simplistic post of the season, don't be so harsh on yourself, you are not alone. GD at least agrees with you, as he will with anything that knocks our club.
No, of course not. If that was the case, we wouldn’t have won last week. But IBB said that “the table is based on fact”. And pretty much every manager I have ever heard speak, over 35+ years of following football, has said something similar, viz “the league table does not lie”. I don’t believe they only say that to the media, and dress up their comments to the players in completely different terms, overlooking the table and claiming they are much better than statistics would suggest. Of course coaches encourage their players to perform to the best of their ability. But they also accept reality. I think you are attributing something to that realistic approach which it doesn’t imply, that is “let’s give up because we are obviously worse than them”. I don’t imagine any coach has ever thought that. Well, maybe QSF v Citeh.
Wow massive misquote and misrepresentation of what I said. 1. I did not mention Sheffield United at all and have no reason to think they shouldn’t be where they are. They have had an awesome season playing good football with a squad that is clearly more than the sum of their parts. 2. If you look at the XG table which is the good approximation of performances then we would be much higher up. We miss a lot of shots in good opportunities. Our position does not reflect the quality of our squad in my opinion. I’m not saying we would be in 7th place, but a few points better. 3. This is not to say we don’t deserve to be where we are. Once again I never said this. We have thrown away points we shouldn’t have. We deserve to be where we are, as do West Ham. I just happen to think both squads are better than the others around them. I’m not sure why that means you need to call me an idiot. I’m too old to be a snowflake, but I’m really getting tired of this forum now. It is the complete opposite of what you would expect of a group of people with a common aim or interest.
Jesus - adjusting a single result and then comparing them to other teams unadjusted results? You are better than this. And this is before factoring in our idiot manager that played 8 at the back at home.
It seems you didn’t understand I was referring to other posters. The clue is in the fact I liked your post. Engage brain?
Yes, of course the table is based on fact, the fact being the number of points a team has got. But a table isn't based on quality as there are other factors that affect results, in my view. Those factors will include injuries, weather referee decisions, poor tactical decisions, VAR decsions, poor coaching, poor mindset/attitude, the weather, and a host of other factors. Remember, the difference between 1 point and 3 points can be a matter of millimetres, So, your coaches may want to accept "a reality" that the team with most points has the better quality, but if I was a coach, I wouldn't. As I say, it is a personal thing.
It was a quick attempt at the median average, which is often used to remove outlier results in any statistical analysis. The other big outlier result was of course Southampton (vs Leicester), who were not impacted by my adjustment. I then also quoted the numbers without the adjustment so that it would be clear what the numbers would be without that adjustment. I did this intentionally to be clear and transparent. should I factor out our so called idiot manager? I assume you mean QSF? You imply he skewed our defence by playing 8 at the back. Yet we let in 20 goals over 10 games with him, or 14 goals over 10 games if I were to do my cheeky -6 Man City goal trick. Under Pearson we have let in 14 goals over 13 games.
I would agree I’m a loser in the football fan sense. I’m not sure I can ever change from supporting Watford. I have an relatively potless owner who ramps up debt for my club while leaving a really poor 1st team squad. He Values his own player trading above my own club and is getting found out. So yes. I think I am a loser football wise. Pozzo will make a lot of money. Watford will be left derelict in my view.
