|
Post by ColonelMustard on Apr 18, 2013 13:23:15 GMT
I didn't name anyone gents. I would have thought either one accepts chance plays a significant part or that it doesn't. To get embroiled in never ending argument over minutiae seems a bit futile.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 13:33:17 GMT
I didn't name anyone gents. I would have thought either one accepts chance plays a significant part or that it doesn't. To get embroiled in never ending argument over minutiae seems a bit futile. Why get involved in one with that previous post then?
|
|
|
Post by snapper23 on Apr 18, 2013 14:52:57 GMT
all this talk about luck makes me puke. Football is a game about individual skill and team tactics. You should set out out to score as many goals as you can and concede as few as possible. If you score more than the opposition most of the time you will do very well. Our problem is that we have a manger who starts from the premise, if you concede none then one will do at the other end. Ok, but if you do concede one, you have to assume that you are set up to score two or three. We are not. We are barely capable of scoring one. Why? because most other teams are also set up not to concede and we dont have the gumption to do anything about it
|
|
|
Post by Stretfordpotterer on Apr 18, 2013 15:01:02 GMT
I didn't name anyone gents. I would have thought either one accepts chance plays a significant part or that it doesn't. To get embroiled in never ending argument over minutiae seems a bit futile. the fact is that this season, we have only given ourselves opportunity to be lucky at one end of the pitch. We simply haven't been in the opponents penalty area enough to be lucky at the other. For three seasons we would have 35% possession every game, but a substantial amount of that 35% was spent with the opposition penned into their own 18 yard box. Now we're having 10% more possesion but it's all in the middle of the opponents half, Basically this season we have gotten away with things but we haven't been able to steal anything. If you want things to drop, there simply HAS to be someone for it to drop to!
|
|
|
Post by Stretfordpotterer on Apr 18, 2013 15:01:25 GMT
I didn't name anyone gents. I would have thought either one accepts chance plays a significant part or that it doesn't. To get embroiled in never ending argument over minutiae seems a bit futile. the fact is that this season, we have only given ourselves opportunity to be lucky at one end of the pitch. We simply haven't been in the opponents penalty area enough to be lucky at the other. For three seasons we would have 35% possession every game, but a substantial amount of that 35% was spent with the opposition penned into their own 18 yard box. Now we're having 10% more possesion but it's all in the middle of the opponents half, Basically this season we have gotten away with things but we haven't been able to steal anything. If you want things to drop, there simply HAS to be someone for it to drop to!
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Apr 18, 2013 15:04:21 GMT
I didn't name anyone gents. I would have thought either one accepts chance plays a significant part or that it doesn't. To get embroiled in never ending argument over minutiae seems a bit futile. Why get involved in one with that previous post then? What you on about Rob? I didn't get involved in any details at all. I commented a general observation that to claim we have been lucky previously but not unlucky now is little odd. I still think it is so. As I say not going to get into a energy draining geek off about decisions, hit posts and so on over the past few years for that very reason. That was also directed generally. Should I not put a general comment next time?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:09:38 GMT
It just seems an unusually provocative statement to make for someone who doesn't want any follow up?
I don't see how it's an odd view either? Surely those people who believe we've been lucky in the past aren't going to suddenly think we've been unlucky of late because they never believed we were any good in the first place? It's entirely consistent with those views?
Personally I think there have been seasons in the past where we've been pretty unlucky and ones where we've been pretty jammy, and this season doesn't fall under either category.
Luck is so important to the manager because he plays a style of football that depends heavily on things 'dropping for us'.
This decline has been going on for a while. We've been desperately poor, have struggled to create chances and score goals, and we're getting punished for it.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Apr 18, 2013 15:10:19 GMT
snapper23, Isn't it normally the case in football that the team with the best players win most matches? I assume that's why every year Man. U., Chelsea, Man. City, Arsenal occupy the top positions. When a manager finds himself managing a team that does not have the best players in the league, or anywhere near the best, I would think he has to get his head around how he is going to compete. Pulis up to quite recently found that way. Stoke were physically hard, committed to a man and gave more skilful sides little chance to play. Recently their form has dropped and confidence has drained from the players. I believe Pulis can sort this and get Stoke back to winning ways. A new manager might get Stoke passing more and trying to attack more, but there's no guarantee he would keep them in the Premier League for another five years.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:12:41 GMT
snapper23, Isn't it normally the case in football that the team with the best players win most matches? I assume that's why every year Man. U., Chelsea, Man. City, Arsenal occupy the top positions. When a manager finds himself managing a team that does not have the best players in the league, or anywhere near the best, I would think he has to get his head around how he is going to compete. Pulis up to quite recently found that way. Stoke were physically hard, committed to a man and gave more skilful sides little chance to play. Recently their form has dropped and confidence has drained from the players. I believe Pulis can sort this and get Stoke back to winning ways. A new manager might get Stoke passing more and trying to attack more, but there's no guarantee he would keep them in the Premier League for another five years. There's no guarantee Pulis will do it for another five matches.
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Apr 18, 2013 15:13:50 GMT
We're obviously in a terrible run of form, not playing well and confidence looks very low, but I don't think we've had the breaks.
If Walters scores the pen against Fulham, KJ sticks his chance away v WBA, Charlie's last minute effort goes in instead of hitting the bar, I reckon that's 5 more points.
That would put us in 12th, safe and everything would look a lot different. Literally 3 seconds of football that didn't go our way.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Apr 18, 2013 15:17:23 GMT
It just seems an unusually provocative statement to make for someone who doesn't want any follow up? I don't see how it's an odd view either? Surely those people who believe we've been lucky in the past aren't going to suddenly think we've been unlucky of late because they never believed we were any good in the first place? It's entirely consistent with those views? Personally I think there have been seasons in the past where we've been pretty unlucky and ones where we've been pretty jammy, and this season doesn't fall under either category. Luck is so important to the manager because he plays a style of football that depends heavily on things 'dropping for us'. This decline has been going on for a while. We've been desperately poor, have struggled to create chances and score goals, and we're getting punished for it. I don't care about the football aspect, it's the chance aspect. I don't think it's provocative to suggest that you either think football is a game of skill and chance or just skill? And on the last point you could argue that the Pulis system is to minimise luck (chances if you like) for both sides. Like a rock in poker. However the lesser amount of chance magnifies it's impact. There was a good post by greyman commenting similar (but not the same) recently.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 18, 2013 15:17:46 GMT
We're obviously in a terrible run of form, not playing well and confidence looks very low, but I don't think we've had the breaks. If Walters scores the pen against Fulham, KJ sticks his chance away v WBA, Charlie's last minute effort goes in instead of hitting the bar, I reckon that's 5 more points. That would put us in 12th, safe and everything would look a lot different. Literally 3 seconds of football that didn't go our way. That's not bad luck though is it? Walters miss is down to him being toss at penos. KJ needs a lot of chances to take one, he's missed simpler ones than that. And Adam's was one of those of things, not bad luck just football.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:19:44 GMT
We're obviously in a terrible run of form, not playing well and confidence looks very low, but I don't think we've had the breaks. If Walters scores the pen against Fulham, KJ sticks his chance away v WBA, Charlie's last minute effort goes in instead of hitting the bar, I reckon that's 5 more points. That would put us in 12th, safe and everything would look a lot different. Literally 3 seconds of football that didn't go our way. But we were absolutely wank in all three games and deserved nothing from them okey. You can't fail to manage a shot on target at home to West Brom in 90 minutes, sneak a shot in injury time and then come away moaning about bad luck. We're not scoring because we're not creating.
|
|
|
Post by vinecent on Apr 18, 2013 15:20:41 GMT
Was never a penalty against United.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:21:43 GMT
It just seems an unusually provocative statement to make for someone who doesn't want any follow up? I don't see how it's an odd view either? Surely those people who believe we've been lucky in the past aren't going to suddenly think we've been unlucky of late because they never believed we were any good in the first place? It's entirely consistent with those views? Personally I think there have been seasons in the past where we've been pretty unlucky and ones where we've been pretty jammy, and this season doesn't fall under either category. Luck is so important to the manager because he plays a style of football that depends heavily on things 'dropping for us'. This decline has been going on for a while. We've been desperately poor, have struggled to create chances and score goals, and we're getting punished for it. I don't care about the football aspect, it's the chance aspect. I don't think it's provocative to suggest that you either think football is a game of skill and chance or just skill? And on the last point you could argue that the Pulis system is to minimise luck (chances if you like) for both sides. Like a rock in poker. However the lesser amount of chance magnifies it's impact. There was a good post by greyman commenting similar (but not the same) recently. It's far, far less about chance than about skill. We're not in this position due to the fickle finger of fate.
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Apr 18, 2013 15:23:08 GMT
Don't disagree with you Rob and Bayern. That's football. But if we had of got those breaks the pressure would be off. That's football too.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:24:40 GMT
Don't disagree with you Rob and Bayern. That's football. But if we had of got those breaks the pressure would be off. That's football too. But it's hardly a woe is us story is it? It's not a cruel divine conspiracy, we entirely deserve to be in this position.
|
|
|
Post by kingstokie on Apr 18, 2013 15:25:18 GMT
The only real moment where I feel we've been unlucky was Shottons red card at Aston Villa. But even that was in the last minutes and had no impact. Everything else we've deserved. If anything we've had quite a bit of luck!
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 18, 2013 15:25:38 GMT
Don't disagree with you Rob and Bayern. That's football. But if we had of got those breaks the pressure would be off. That's football too. Maybe we would if we had a player who could take a penalty and strikers that are more clinical? What's the reason we haven't? It's not luck!
|
|
|
Post by snapper23 on Apr 18, 2013 15:29:40 GMT
snapper23, Isn't it normally the case in football that the team with the best players win most matches? I assume that's why every year Man. U., Chelsea, Man. City, Arsenal occupy the top positions. When a manager finds himself managing a team that does not have the best players in the league, or anywhere near the best, I would think he has to get his head around how he is going to compete. Pulis up to quite recently found that way. Stoke were physically hard, committed to a man and gave more skilful sides little chance to play. Recently their form has dropped and confidence has drained from the players. I believe Pulis can sort this and get Stoke back to winning ways. A new manager might get Stoke passing more and trying to attack more, but there's no guarantee he would keep them in the Premier League for another five years. Yes of course it is but that is not inconsistent with what I am saying per se. The point we both agree on plainly is that we do not have the best players and I would also agree that players who lack confidence do not perform but that does not alter the fact that you have to score more goals than the oppo to win games. My point is its not about luck, its about being set up to win as opposed to being set up not to lose
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 18, 2013 15:32:58 GMT
I think stuff doesn't 'drop for us' the way it used to not because our luck has run out but simply because we don't get the ball in to the mixer like we used to do. Previously we had 3 methods of providing ourselves with an opportunity for something to 'drop for us': 1)Rory launches the ball in to the six yard box from a throw-in like a low, flat, tracer bullet 2)Ric Fuller produces a piece of skill which creates a free kick or a throw-in thus providing another opportunity to get the big fellas forward in the hope that something drops 3)Our wingers, Etherington and Pennant, either win a free kick or put some quality ball in to the mixer for someone to get on the end of if it 'drops' right. In Tone's simplistic world the wingers were a mere extension of the throw in. Problem now is not luck, it is that we don't have Rory, we don't have Ric, we don't have Pennant and Matty is struggling. I don't think our luck has run out but our routes for getting the ball in to dangerous positions where something may 'drop' have been torn assunder. It should have been replaced by Adam, Crouch, Palacios, Owen and the whole 'next level' thing but that hasn't worked. For me, I was quite happy with the previous level. I never cared what it looked like since it had the notable advantage that it actually worked
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 18, 2013 15:34:31 GMT
I think stuff doesn't 'drop for us' the way it used to not because our luck has run out but simply because we don't get the ball in to the mixer like we used to do. Previously we had 3 methods of providing ourselves with an opportunity for something to 'drop fo us': 1)Rory launches the ball in to the mixer from a throw-in like a tracer bullet 2)Ric Fuller produces a piece of skill which creates a free kick or a throw-in thus providing another opportunity to get the big fellas forward in the hope that something drops 3)Our wingers, Etherington and Pennant, either win a free kick or put some quality ball in to the mixer for someone to get on the end of if it 'drops' right. Problem now is not luck, it is that we don't have Rory, we don't have Ric, we don't have Pennant and Matty is struggling. I don't think our luck has run out but our routes for getting the ball in to dangerous positions where something may 'drop' have been torn assunder. It should have been replaced by Adam, Crouch, Palacios, Owen and the whole 'next level' thing but that hasn't worked. For me, I was quite happy with the previous level It's called rank bad management!
|
|
|
Post by snapper23 on Apr 18, 2013 15:38:37 GMT
I think stuff doesn't 'drop for us' the way it used to not because our luck has run out but simply because we don't get the ball in to the mixer like we used to do. Previously we had 3 methods of providing ourselves with an opportunity for something to 'drop for us': 1)Rory launches the ball in to the mixer from a throw-in like a tracer bullet 2)Ric Fuller produces a piece of skill which creates a free kick or a throw-in thus providing another opportunity to get the big fellas forward in the hope that something drops 3)Our wingers, Etherington and Pennant, either win a free kick or put some quality ball in to the mixer for someone to get on the end of if it 'drops' right. Problem now is not luck, it is that we don't have Rory, we don't have Ric, we don't have Pennant and Matty is struggling. I don't think our luck has run out but our routes for getting the ball in to dangerous positions where something may 'drop' have been torn assunder. It should have been replaced by Adam, Crouch, Palacios, Owen and the whole 'next level' thing but that hasn't worked. For me, I was quite happy with the previous level. I never cared what it looked like since it had the notable advantage that it actually worked Exactly, as per my previous we were set up and had the means to score more goals than the oppo whilst a tight rearguard made sure we conceded less. Now we conced e relatively few but aint set up to score
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 18, 2013 15:39:51 GMT
I think stuff doesn't 'drop for us' the way it used to not because our luck has run out but simply because we don't get the ball in to the mixer like we used to do. Previously we had 3 methods of providing ourselves with an opportunity for something to 'drop fo us': 1)Rory launches the ball in to the mixer from a throw-in like a tracer bullet 2)Ric Fuller produces a piece of skill which creates a free kick or a throw-in thus providing another opportunity to get the big fellas forward in the hope that something drops 3)Our wingers, Etherington and Pennant, either win a free kick or put some quality ball in to the mixer for someone to get on the end of if it 'drops' right. Problem now is not luck, it is that we don't have Rory, we don't have Ric, we don't have Pennant and Matty is struggling. I don't think our luck has run out but our routes for getting the ball in to dangerous positions where something may 'drop' have been torn assunder. It should have been replaced by Adam, Crouch, Palacios, Owen and the whole 'next level' thing but that hasn't worked. For me, I was quite happy with the previous level It's called rank bad management! Yeah, I guess, I prefer to think of it as Tone allowing himself to be bullied in to embracing the whole 'next level'thing which he never really either believed in or knew how to implement. Perhaps he should have said 'sorry fellas, if you want me andthe outcomes I can deliver, then it's more of the job in hand stuff' and let others decide.
|
|
|
Post by hollybush on Apr 18, 2013 15:40:08 GMT
I was watching Wet Sham last night and Blunderland at the weekend and I realised why we aren't lucky. We don't actually ever have more than one man in the opposition penalty area except for set pieces.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Apr 18, 2013 15:41:10 GMT
I don't care about the football aspect, it's the chance aspect. I don't think it's provocative to suggest that you either think football is a game of skill and chance or just skill? And on the last point you could argue that the Pulis system is to minimise luck (chances if you like) for both sides. Like a rock in poker. However the lesser amount of chance magnifies it's impact. There was a good post by greyman commenting similar (but not the same) recently. It's far, far less about chance than about skill. We're not in this position due to the fickle finger of fate. This thread is about luck after many about other asects and in my opinion you are right and wrong. This season we have had bad luck and due to Pulis playing the odds to 40 points we are going to struggle when that happens - so that's luck. However, it was pretty predictable to happen at some point.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 18, 2013 15:42:49 GMT
It's called rank bad management! Yeah, I guess, I prefer to think of it as Tone allowing himself to be bullied in to embracing the whole 'next level'thing which he never really either believed in or knew how to implement. Perhaps he should have said 'sorry fellas, if you want me andthe outcomes I can deliver, then it's more of the job in hand stuff' and let others decide. Tone has been "bullied"? I don't buy that at all. It's a problem of his making, it's a problem he needs to take the blame for. And if he can't implement it then we need someone who can. Bullied.....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:43:35 GMT
It's called rank bad management! Yeah, I guess, I prefer to think of it as Tone allowing himself to be bullied in to embracing the whole 'next level'thing which he never really either believed in or knew how to implement. Perhaps he should have said 'sorry fellas, if you want me andthe outcomes I can deliver, then it's more of the job in hand stuff' and let others decide. It's a bit of a myth though this. Pulis doesn't let himself be bullied by anyone for starters, and second the team was well on its way to evolving when he started to dismantle it with daft signings. With two wingers and some reasonably quick options up front we were playing the best football we had for years. His idea of 'better football', if we believe that, has been to get a deathly slow bloke leading the line and play either one winger or, as on Saturday, none.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 15:44:37 GMT
It's far, far less about chance than about skill. We're not in this position due to the fickle finger of fate. This thread is about luck after many about other asects and in my opinion you are right and wrong. This season we have had bad luck and due to Pulis playing the odds to 40 points we are going to struggle when that happens - so that's luck. However, it was pretty predictable to happen at some point. What bad luck have we had exactly? Does it outweigh the good luck?
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Apr 18, 2013 16:10:41 GMT
This thread is about luck after many about other asects and in my opinion you are right and wrong. This season we have had bad luck and due to Pulis playing the odds to 40 points we are going to struggle when that happens - so that's luck. However, it was pretty predictable to happen at some point. What bad luck have we had exactly? Does it outweigh the good luck? Rob, I fear being sucked into a never ending minutiae vortex. We'll agree to differ on the part luck has played. By the way, I think it in no way absolves Pulis, it just points the finger in a different way.
|
|