You must be talking about points deducted after the season has finished, as that's the only way I can see how you can get relegated if you aren't in the bottom three!
There you have it. If you cannot see how stupid that statement is, then there is little hope for you, or anyone else for that matter, on this subject. I rest my case.
You didn't. You said it's still possible to get relegated and not be in the bottom 3 all season. Theoretically, had we been level on points with Hull yesterday and both drawing 0-0 and then Hull score a last minute winner, we drop into the bottom 3. Final whistle hasn't gone, henceforth we are in the bottom 3. If they don't score, final whistle goes, we stay up. I actually can't believe I have to explain the failings of your own statement to you when it's so simple. But...none of these things happened. We lost the last 6, like more or less everyone knew and said we would. But we came close to relegation in league placings only. We were clear by more than enough points, again like everyone said apart from you. You may not at any stage have said 'we ARE going down' but the tone of your posts and constant doom-mongering - along with your droning about 'probability' gets more and more tedious. Hence the way people reply to you, even when you post something readable or agreeable. The fact you've had the balls to come on here and claim you were right all along is just weird and everyone can see that. Probably best to just realise the season is over and take a breath now. Or you can carry on until this gets to obvious stage next season where you offer to meet fellow forum members before a game, with your abacus and betting slips in hand...might I suggest Oliver Grove as a venue? That's the last time I'm going to engage with you this season.
For next season I suggest for the forum a new "playpen" area where HB1 can conduct his childish spats and attention seeking and thus not devour every match thread like a plague of locusts .
Ok guys, we finished 17th, Mazzarri's gone, the season's over. Whether it's by a gnat's bullock or never in danger, the arguments are now moot. This bickering can stop as it's now irrelevant. Role on July 1st so we can discuss the future and put last season down to experience.
"But we came close to relegation in league placings only.". Seriously...did you really write that? The "doom mongering" as you call it, was actually a brutally honest appraisal of our situation. http://www.wfcforums.com/index.php?threads/watford-fc-1-0-sunderland-01-04-2017.52342/page-6 Here is my analysis after the Sunderland match. I think I was pretty much spot on, yet it was attacked by so many. Follow the conversation thread, and it's clear what my point-of-view was and it still holds true. You can see so many were telling how wrong I was, but actually it was they who were wrong. People just do not want to admit it, and will go to great lengths to twist things because they know others won't go back and check most of the time. It's all there in black and white if you care to read it.
You can wriggle, you can squirm but you cannot alter the fact you got it wrong We were in a relegation battle from January onwards - but always looked likely to win the battle - which we did. You said we wouldn't - did you do one of your famous bets on us being relegated then? How much did you lose for your lack of faith?
I never said we would be relegated. Post these links if you're so confident about what I said. I don't know who you are, and I've not seen you post before, but I'm guessing you are one of those that thought we'd end up in mid-table? At least you've admitted we were in a relegation battle from January, so at least I'm making some progress at last.
It's annoying when there are so many glaring errors in every response you get from a certain somebody, but you've already said you won't engage with him anymore... But I'd say that everyone can see we were close by league placings only. Performances were dire, we were losing every week but at no point were we close to ACTUALLY BEING RELEGATED. We were the next team placed ahead of the RELAGATUON ZONE - 38 games, 6 points clear, 15 goals better off - and that's the closest it has been all season and it's still a comfortable distance. Not acceptable, but comrtable enough. Had it been a 24 team league, and we have another 8 games to play, yes, we may have been in danger. But it's not and everyone on here, bar one, knew that.
I think you will find I was saying quite a lot of what you were saying, so you were not alone, as someone suggested earlier.
"last year we had 45 points and we survived. This year we really hoped we would push on. We’re not saying we want to conquer the Premier League but we do want to be more than just surviving, more than hanging on by the skin of our teeth." I agree with you, I believe the vast majority on this forum thought we'd finish mid-table, without a relegation thought in their heads all season. The above quote was taken from Scott Duxbury. So I guess just me, Scott and Gino were thinking it.
You said: "We’ve given ourselves a chance now of staying up, but we are nowhere near safe. Sunderland will not catch us now, and Boro have only an outside chance, but the third from bottom is still up for grabs and we are very much part of the group trying to avoid it." At that point we had already matched Hull's final total.
Do you not understand.....you're talking with hindsight. I was talking before the event....so there's a hell of a lot of difference. Even SD has said we stayed up by the skin of our teeth. Any rational person can see it, but reality and rationality gets suspended on this forum. I've never really understood why that is. Just because we stayed up, doesn't mean we weren't in trouble. Swansea finished above us.....but they were very much in a relegation fight....so how does that compute?
Man City were a good team though, looked like they could score every time they went forward. Leagues apart from us. Not withstanding the injuries, the makeshift nature of our team and the manner in which we approached it. Gives us something to aim for and a good yardstick in terms of where we are at this point. Can only get better you would hope.
HB - much of what you predicted regarding our final games were bang on. You weren't the only one that said there was a high possibility that we would not get another point from our final games but you were probably the most vocal. You weren't the only person that predicted we would not finish in the top 10/14 but, again, most vocal The bit almost everybody disagreed with was the fact you thought we were not safe when we hit 40 points. Although not mathematically, the vast majority of us saw the probabilities of what was needed to put us in the bottom 3 at the end of season and were quite comfortable about not being relegated. You didn't. You were wrong
We were never seriously threatened with relegation. We flirted on the edge of the fight but were always 8 to 10 points above real danger. Even with 6 defeats in a row at the end we finished 6 points ahead of relegation. Every side from 8th down was in a relegation fight this season because the top 7 creamed off so many points. The main point though is that the Pozzos replaced QSF to improve. We went backwards. We are a small club and will always have to fight for any success but the Pozzos are football savvy people and are prepared to make any changes they believe will improve the club. Mazzarri's nonsense about success being 40 points fools nobody. We could and should have done better this year. I believe the Pozzos will stress to any new manager that 40 points and survival is only the first objective in a season. Success is likely to be mid-table and 50 points or so, so that we can retain the manger for a further year and build from there.
My hindsight is irrelevant. You are the one that came onto the thread with a list of predictions that you claimed to get right. I'm only pointing out that objectively, we were very close to safety and your claim was wrong. To be honest you're projecting your arguments with others onto my post, I'm not sure I've said what you claim. However, to try and use a crap analogy as to what other people believe. It doesn't matter if you are 1cm or 1m above the high-water line, you wont get wet. We spent almost all the season above the line, and were never in risk of getting wet, Swansea spent most of the season below the line. Just because Swansea finish higher than us, does not negate the fact that we were above the line to begin with.
We can use as many analogies as you like, but the basic point was, the majority on here thought we were 100% safe. No one really thought we would end as badly as we did. No one could see it. I suggested we were not as safe as many are making out. This is all, but it was ridiculed. Now, the passing of time revealed my point was indeed correct. But, for whatever reason, people still want to make out we were never in any danger, without taking into consideration that Hull could have relegated us, had they not failed in their final games. We stayed up by 6 points, but no one could really know Hull would fail in the end. We were at their mercy. No one really thought we would be as bad as we were apart from me and maybe one or two others on this forum. Now all I'm reading is that people thought we would lose the final 6......but funnily they were not saying this before the event. They are only saying this now, once it actually became reality.
That's actually two points: whether we were safe, and whether we would end on terrible form. The conflation between the two is part of the entire muddle in this debate. I personally think you over-stated our risk of relegation to support your negative view on the season. The predictions you made about how we would end the season were close, certainly closer than mine. You were critical of Mazzarri long ago; I thought Mazzarri would turn it around and he didn't. Your views on these were much closer to reality than mine. However, form and safety are only linked so far. Many people that claimed we were 100% safe, in reality most never meant 100, but enough to not merit a serious discussion. They did so based on the points we had already accumulated, and the remaining fixtures of all teams involved - our form was largely irrelevant. Had the season been an extra 10 games I think we probably would have been relegated, but it wasn't, and this was factored in by most. We achieved enough to stay up with plenty of games to spare, to the point were our remaining form was of little consequence. Hull could have played better and relegated us but they didn't because they are a poor side. We weren't lucky or at their mercy, they got relegated because they deserved it over the course of the season. For Hull to relegate us would have required a record breaking season. Many people factored this into their predictions and felt safe because they thought Hull wouldn't get above 35/36 points. Do these people not deserve credit for their predictions like you? You say no one could know Hull would fail, yet you were happy to predict Swansea's performances and take credit. By the way, your predictions for Swansea's run in were very good. If the season was longer I'd probably agree with everything you say about relegation. But it isn't and we achieved 11 wins / 40 points with games to spare. It was highly unlikely that both Hull and Swansea would reach that, and that's how it played out.
A good reply, and one of the few that's actually given me a bit of credit, so I appreciate that. I think the main reason why people thought we were safe was because we had reached 40 points. They felt this made us safe no matter what, because we had reached 40 points and were in 9th place. They could not see the possibility that other clubs could overtake us......and they all did, apart from one. I never thought we would go down only we could go down, and I've stated that many times. I felt we were not as safe as people were making out. This opinion has proven to have been correct. This is the point people are trying to twist around, deliberately or unintentionally, to suit their perspective. I think it's fair to say we were not as safe as people predicted, and I think it's also fair to say our demise took a lot of people by surprise.
The fact we lost the last 6 and are still 6 points clear kinda shows what needed to happen for us to go down. Not going to pretend it didn't cross my mind at some point but let's be honest it's not really been close to happening.
Feck it, I now really wish we'd gone down, just so HB1 can say 'I told you so'...so we can just get it over and fecking done with. Ultimately, that's what he wants....so stop fecking disagreeing with him, concede he was right, then perhaps he'll move on. This petty and pointless back and forth is nauseatingly banal...bottom line...we didn't get relegated. End of discussion.
I wonder if on the Burnley/Palace/Bourmouth/Leicester/Stokd forums etc they are worrying about what Hul might done! Presume as Swansea finished above Burnley it's right to say the Clarets were in a relegation battle? Let's just move on and worry about next season!
If Hull's Dawson had scored his goal in October in our net instead of his own, the 6 point gap would be zero. The margins are that fine.
It was obvious by September that we would not find 2016/17 as entertaining or as secure as under Quique. Mazzari was a disaster in every way. Thank God we won at the Emirates!
