Cronky Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 We seemed to be changing formation on Sunday from the 4-4-1-1, to 4-3-2-1. With Ben Arfa going off, it didn't get a proper chance, but Jonas seemed to take to it well, even though Routledge looked all at sea. He seems to be an out and out winger or nothing. I'd take a punt on Ranger making a better fist of it, even though he's a bit raw. If nothing else, he's positive. So our front six would be - Barton Tiote Nolan Ranger Jonas Shola or Carroll * (*controversy avoidance device) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Nolan in midfield, that's all we need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Nolan in midfield, that's all we need. Guthrie and Gosling might challenge for that role, but as they're not available I can't see the alternative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 thought we passed the ball around well today, Ronaldo... We did in the first half, certainly. Sadly half-time included a team-talk, again. Yeah from City, who came out a much better side. Do you seriously expect us to outplay Man City away from home for 90 minutes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Anyway, 'rarely create chances' is just idiotic. How many saves from direct shots can you remember opposition keepers making in the past 3 PL games ? 4 on target v City (1 less than city) 7 on target v Stoke (more than stoke) 4 on target v Everton (more than Everton) I ask again - how many SAVES did we force their keeper to make ? Come on, stop hiding behind make-believe stats that can be made to prove anything. I cannot recall the Stoke keeper having to make more than 2 serious saves in the game - EXCLUDING the pen.How many saves did Everton's keeper make? Statistics could, if wanted, prove that a clearance by Krul was an 'attempt' on goal - doesn't mean he has a cat in hell's chance of scoring, does it? Unless we are forcing opposition keepers to save shots, we are NOT threatening their goal - defenders are there to block goal attempts, goal keepers are the last line. If you believe these stats, can you pls list the saves made by the keepers - and from whom - in the games you have listed ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Anyway, 'rarely create chances' is just idiotic. How many saves from direct shots can you remember opposition keepers making in the past 3 PL games ? 4 on target v City (1 less than city) 7 on target v Stoke (more than stoke) 4 on target v Everton (more than Everton) I ask again - how many SAVES did we force their keeper to make ? Come on, stop hiding behind make-believe stats that can be made to prove anything. I cannot recall the Stoke keeper having to make more than 2 serious saves in the game - EXCLUDING the pen.How many saves did Everton's keeper make? Statistics could, if wanted, prove that a clearance by Krul was an 'attempt' on goal - doesn't mean he has a cat in hell's chance of scoring, does it? Unless we are forcing opposition keepers to save shots, we are NOT threatening their goal - defenders are there to block goal attempts, goal keepers are the last line. If you believe these stats, can you pls list the saves made by the keepers - and from whom - in the games you have listed ? He's just gave you the stats, if the keeper never mad a save then it was obviosly a goal (otherwise it wouldn;t have been "on target"), so take of our goals scored from the total shots on target and you have your fabled "keeper saves" statistic. Jesus Christ man this is basic stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Anyway, 'rarely create chances' is just idiotic. How many saves from direct shots can you remember opposition keepers making in the past 3 PL games ? 4 on target v City (1 less than city) 7 on target v Stoke (more than stoke) 4 on target v Everton (more than Everton) I ask again - how many SAVES did we force their keeper to make ? Come on, stop hiding behind make-believe stats that can be made to prove anything. I cannot recall the Stoke keeper having to make more than 2 serious saves in the game - EXCLUDING the pen.How many saves did Everton's keeper make? Statistics could, if wanted, prove that a clearance by Krul was an 'attempt' on goal - doesn't mean he has a cat in hell's chance of scoring, does it? Unless we are forcing opposition keepers to save shots, we are NOT threatening their goal - defenders are there to block goal attempts, goal keepers are the last line. If you believe these stats, can you pls list the saves made by the keepers - and from whom - in the games you have listed ? Surely you're not that stupid. Shots on target - number of goals scored = number of saves Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Are you expecting us to be creating f*** loads of easy chances against those three teams like? Arguably three of the more organised defensive set ups in the league IF you wish to stay in the PL, the answer is YES, you DO have to create ENOUGH chances against all but the best sides - we are NOT. You may think Stoke are the UK answer to Catenaccio but I don't ; they are a physical side who we would have blown away in the mid-90s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 thought we passed the ball around well today, Ronaldo... We did in the first half, certainly. Sadly half-time included a team-talk, again. Yeah from City, who came out a much better side. Do you seriously expect us to outplay Man City away from home for 90 minutes? No, but making it easier for them wasn't ideal, funnily enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 thought we passed the ball around well today, Ronaldo... We did in the first half, certainly. Sadly half-time included a team-talk, again. Yeah from City, who came out a much better side. Do you seriously expect us to outplay Man City away from home for 90 minutes? No, but making it easier for them wasn't ideal, funnily enough. In which way did we make it easier for them? By dropping our high-line? Did you even watch the first half? They could have been about 4 up if Milner could cross a fucking ball Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Anyway, 'rarely create chances' is just idiotic. How many saves from direct shots can you remember opposition keepers making in the past 3 PL games ? 4 on target v City (1 less than city) 7 on target v Stoke (more than stoke) 4 on target v Everton (more than Everton) I ask again - how many SAVES did we force their keeper to make ? Come on, stop hiding behind make-believe stats that can be made to prove anything. I cannot recall the Stoke keeper having to make more than 2 serious saves in the game - EXCLUDING the pen.How many saves did Everton's keeper make? Statistics could, if wanted, prove that a clearance by Krul was an 'attempt' on goal - doesn't mean he has a cat in hell's chance of scoring, does it? Unless we are forcing opposition keepers to save shots, we are NOT threatening their goal - defenders are there to block goal attempts, goal keepers are the last line. If you believe these stats, can you pls list the saves made by the keepers - and from whom - in the games you have listed ? Surely you're not that stupid. Shots on target - number of goals scored = number of saves Can you read ? I asked you to name the player who had the shots saved...what does 'number of goals scored; have to do with anything ? We scored ONE against Everton, ONE against Stoke(a pen) and ONE against City...how is this related to SAVES by opposition keepers ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 thought we passed the ball around well today, Ronaldo... We did in the first half, certainly. Sadly half-time included a team-talk, again. Yeah from City, who came out a much better side. Do you seriously expect us to outplay Man City away from home for 90 minutes? No, but making it easier for them wasn't ideal, funnily enough. In which way did we make it easier for them? By dropping our high-line? Did you even watch the first half? They could have been about 4 up if Milner could cross a f***ing ball What's that got to do with it? We were dominating the game from bout the 20th to 45th minute. We came out and with no intention of keeping the ball in the same manner and were beaten partially because of that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Anyway, 'rarely create chances' is just idiotic. How many saves from direct shots can you remember opposition keepers making in the past 3 PL games ? 4 on target v City (1 less than city) 7 on target v Stoke (more than stoke) 4 on target v Everton (more than Everton) I ask again - how many SAVES did we force their keeper to make ? Come on, stop hiding behind make-believe stats that can be made to prove anything. I cannot recall the Stoke keeper having to make more than 2 serious saves in the game - EXCLUDING the pen.How many saves did Everton's keeper make? Statistics could, if wanted, prove that a clearance by Krul was an 'attempt' on goal - doesn't mean he has a cat in hell's chance of scoring, does it? Unless we are forcing opposition keepers to save shots, we are NOT threatening their goal - defenders are there to block goal attempts, goal keepers are the last line. If you believe these stats, can you pls list the saves made by the keepers - and from whom - in the games you have listed ? Surely you're not that stupid. Shots on target - number of goals scored = number of saves Can you read ? I asked you to name the player who had the shots saved...what does 'number of goals scored; have to do with anything ? We scored ONE against Everton, ONE against Stoke(a pen) and ONE against City...how is this related to SAVES by opposition keepers ? You also asked the question that i have answered. TBH I can't remember who had shots as I don't have a hard-drive for a memory unfortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 As I mentioned before, surely a shot heading towards the target but blocked or deflected away by a defender is classed as a 'shot on target'. Think it is anyway. So those stats don't necessarily tell you how many saves we forced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Are you expecting us to be creating f*** loads of easy chances against those three teams like? Arguably three of the more organised defensive set ups in the league IF you wish to stay in the PL, the answer is YES, you DO have to create ENOUGH chances against all but the best sides - we are NOT. You may think Stoke are the UK answer to Catenaccio but I don't ; they are a physical side who we would have blown away in the mid-90s. Are you a spin doctor? ------ and what the hell has that got to do with anything? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 thought we passed the ball around well today, Ronaldo... We did in the first half, certainly. Sadly half-time included a team-talk, again. Yeah from City, who came out a much better side. Do you seriously expect us to outplay Man City away from home for 90 minutes? No, but making it easier for them wasn't ideal, funnily enough. In which way did we make it easier for them? By dropping our high-line? Did you even watch the first half? They could have been about 4 up if Milner could cross a f***ing ball What's that got to do with it? We were dominating the game from bout the 20th to 45th minute. We came out and with no intention of keeping the ball in the same manner and were beaten partially because of that. It's very rare a team who dominates the game in the first half (especialy the underdog) comes out and does the same in the second, hense the phrase "they dont want the whistle to blow". We we're playing a squad of world cup internationals, there 2nd half dominance was much down to them coming out a better side than it was Hughton just letting them dominate us, what a gentleman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 As I mentioned before, surely a shot heading towards the target but blocked or deflected away by a defender is classed as a 'shot on target'. Think it is anyway. So those stats don't necessarily tell you how many saves we forced. They usualy classes as "shots blocked". They are on the SS website anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 As I mentioned before, surely a shot heading towards the target but blocked or deflected away by a defender is classed as a 'shot on target'. Think it is anyway. So those stats don't necessarily tell you how many saves we forced. The 7 v Stoke included 2 blocked iirc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Are you expecting us to be creating f*** loads of easy chances against those three teams like? Arguably three of the more organised defensive set ups in the league IF you wish to stay in the PL, the answer is YES, you DO have to create ENOUGH chances against all but the best sides - we are NOT. You may think Stoke are the UK answer to Catenaccio but I don't ; they are a physical side who we would have blown away in the mid-90s. Are you a spin doctor? ------ and what the hell has that got to do with anything? You really are struggling now, aren't you ? A Spin Doctor ? On what planet do you live ? Spin Doctors are people employed by New Labour ; I thought this was a football forum.....do you know what Catenaccio is(or was ?), Probably not because you are too young, but it was the art of defensive football perfected by Inter Milan in the 60's/70s- believe me, Stoke are NO Inter and if you can't see that instead of bigging them up to be a team we should be glad to squeeze a narrow defeat from, then its no wonder that people think the fans of this club are easily conned - you bring low expectation down to a new level - congratulations ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 As I mentioned before, surely a shot heading towards the target but blocked or deflected away by a defender is classed as a 'shot on target'. Think it is anyway. So those stats don't necessarily tell you how many saves we forced. They usualy classes as "shots blocked". They are on the SS website anyway. Well done - does that mean 'NEARLY a goal, VERY nearly a goal, or just that the person making the shot was too slow to get past the defender...!? Lies, Damned lies - then Statisitics ; Stoke - we LOST, Blackpool, LOST, Man C LOST - those are the facts,nothing will change them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 As I mentioned before, surely a shot heading towards the target but blocked or deflected away by a defender is classed as a 'shot on target'. Think it is anyway. So those stats don't necessarily tell you how many saves we forced. They usualy classes as "shots blocked". They are on the SS website anyway. Well done - does that mean 'NEARLY a goal, VERY nearly a goal, or just that the person making the shot was too slow to get past the defender...!? Lies, Damned lies - then Statisitics ; Stoke - we LOST, Blackpool, LOST, Man C LOST - those are the facts,nothing will change them. True, but surely results don't tell the whole story any more than statistics, do they? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Are you expecting us to be creating f*** loads of easy chances against those three teams like? Arguably three of the more organised defensive set ups in the league IF you wish to stay in the PL, the answer is YES, you DO have to create ENOUGH chances against all but the best sides - we are NOT. You may think Stoke are the UK answer to Catenaccio but I don't ; they are a physical side who we would have blown away in the mid-90s. Are you a spin doctor? ------ and what the hell has that got to do with anything? You really are struggling now, aren't you ? A Spin Doctor ? On what planet do you live ? Spin Doctors are people employed by New Labour ; I thought this was a football forum.....do you know what Catenaccio is(or was ?), Probably not because you are too young, but it was the art of defensive football perfected by Inter Milan in the 60's/70s- believe me, Stoke are NO Inter and if you can't see that instead of bigging them up to be a team we should be glad to squeeze a narrow defeat from, then its no wonder that people think the fans of this club are easily conned - you bring low expectation down to a new level - congratulations ! If you could point out where I said Stoke were the equivliant of Catenaccio and also please remind me where did i say the part highlighted because I'm fairly certain I didn't. And like a spin doctor you've taken what I said and twisted it further than I could have imagined to fit your agenda. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Hughton doesn't deserve too much stick because of the way we played yesterday, I though that he got most things right and deserves a bit of slack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Hughton doesn't deserve too much stick because of the way we played yesterday, I though that he got most things right and deserves a bit of slack. If the ref wasn't so inept we would have got at least a point (but probably won), away to Manchester City that would have been a very good result. Obviously he didn't get everything right but I can't see how he can get any stick for yesterdays game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 I'd give him a stick to beat Martin Atkinson to death with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now