Newcastle United 4-3 Notts Forest - 23/02

[Andy]

I'm not really sure how to assess this match tbh.

 

First half was excellent at times, but on another day we aren't getting the luxury of all four of those goals going in, there was definitely a slice of fortune but we did earn it for our intensity and drive. 

 

It's hard to say whether the second half performance would've been that abject if it had been say 2-1, but we looked like we thought we'd won the game and played with absolutely no control or intensity whatsoever. Really annoying to watch and I was extremely relieved to see 3 minutes added on. 

 

Pretty much every player bar Hall was culpable of lazy, slack play as the match went on, but Burn and Schar in particular were rank. 

 

Good win overall but Eddie needs to give the players a right kick up the arse after that second half. 

[bobbydazzla]

14 minutes ago, nufcjb said:

Can we fucking stop playing uphill in the second half please? Whose bright idea is it this season we do that? Look at our league games and look at our Carabao Cup games. We are fucking spent in the second half and we're playing uphill in the league yet have been better on our road to the final.

That’s hill-arious

[Lush Vlad]

Howe’s interview with our in house media was spot on. Pulled no punches about the second half and seemed like he was fuming. Something to work on. 
 

I thought Willock was much better today. To the point where he was one of our better performers. Tino was too, apart from still being a bit clumsy on the ball when the game state called for being sensible. 

[Conjo]

Feel a lot better and validated after hearing how dissapointed Howe was with that 2nd half too.  3 points the most important thing obviously but we can't let the players heads fall (or move over to thinking about staying in shape/be healthy for a cup final or whatever it is that lowers our level so much) with 40 minutes left of a game.

[Shush]

15 minutes ago, Andy said:

I'm not really sure how to assess this match tbh.

 

First half was excellent at times, but on another day we aren't getting the luxury of all four of those goals going in, there was definitely a slice of fortune but we did earn it for our intensity and drive. 

 

It's hard to say whether the second half performance would've been that abject if it had been say 2-1, but we looked like we thought we'd won the game and played with absolutely no control or intensity whatsoever. Really annoying to watch and I was extremely relieved to see 3 minutes added on. 

 

Pretty much every player bar Hall was culpable of lazy, slack play as the match went on, but Burn and Schar in particular were rank. 

 

Good win overall but Eddie needs to give the players a right kick up the arse after that second half. 

 

Hopefully Eddie gets a grip of the issues in thar second half. Cant help but feel it doesnt help that too many first teamers are not under any threat for someone taking their spot too.

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Shush

[Kaizero]

13 minutes ago, TRon said:

They've had a good season but they won't finish in a CL position. They are in a false position and I said it before today's game FWIW.

 

 

Your belief in Forest being in a "false position" in the league table after 26 out of 38 matches has been played is a statement that doesn't have any empirical evidence for it. Looking through the PL seasons going back to the first with 20 teams in 95/96, I count a grand total of five times out of a possible twenty-nine, and none of the teams that fell below the "top four" in that time finished lower than 6th when all was said and done*. 

 

They're in the position they're in because they deserve to be in it, as whilst it's of course theoretically possible to "luck" your way through 26 matches – the chances of that actually being the case doesn't feel realistic whatsoever. I'd argue that the reason you, as well as countless others, keep claiming that Forest's in a "false position" they don't "deserve" to be in, is simply because they're Forest. Just as the season Leicester went all the way, everyone sat around waiting for the moment they'd start to trail off as they, like Forest, apparently were in a "false position" they actually didn't deserve to be in   

 

 

* I only skimmed through the seasons, so I'm aware I might've missed out on a team or two when skimming through it. I don't feel like I did, but I know it's a possibility, so wanted to acknowledge that in the event that's the case and someone would rather approach a discussion about this by dismissing the actual point I've tried to make in this post in favour of trying to start a back-and-forth about the number of time's it's happened  

[Fak]

Ffs. 

[Turnbull2000]

You's need to stop belittling Forest, they deserve to be where they are. And they've achieved a lot more than us these past 50 years.

[The Butcher]

[samptime29]

Absolutely radge game like. Massive win though.

[Lush Vlad]

10 minutes ago, Andy said:

I'm not really sure how to assess this match tbh.

 

First half was excellent at times, but on another day we aren't getting the luxury of all four of those goals going in, there was definitely a slice of fortune but we did earn it for our intensity and drive. 

 

It's hard to say whether the second half performance would've been that abject if it had been say 2-1, but we looked like we thought we'd won the game and played with absolutely no control or intensity whatsoever. Really annoying to watch and I was extremely relieved to see 3 minutes added on. 

 

Pretty much every player bar Hall was culpable of lazy, slack play as the match went on, but Burn and Schar in particular were rank. 

 

Good win overall but Eddie needs to give the players a right kick up the arse after that second half. 

Agreed.

 

But Howe did genuinely seem fucked off and seething with that second half. Not the first time we’ve dropped off. But not to that degree. 

Hopefully he sorts it. 

 

 

[Kid Icarus]

3 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

doesn't have any empirical evidence for it.

 

it's of course theoretically possible to "luck" your way through 26 matches – the chances of that actually being the case doesn't feel realistic whatsoever.

Ah well, thanks for clearing that up with some empirical evidence.

[Kid Icarus]

3 minutes ago, Turnbull2000 said:

You's need to stop belittling Forest, they deserve to be where they are. And they've achieved a lot more than us these past 50 years.

Wew don't shag Nottingham Forest or nowt.

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[Kaizero]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

Ah well, thanks for clearing that up with some empirical evidence.

 

Ah well, thanks for engaging in discussing any of the actually relevant topics raised rather than pointing out the fact English is my second language  

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Kaizero

[Kid Icarus]

Just now, Kaizero said:

 

Ah well, thanks for engaging in discussing any of the actually relevant topics raised rather than pointing out the fact English is my second language  

Ye what?  You denounced the opinion that Forest are in a false position because there's no empirical evidence to back it up, but then the basis of your own argument was your own feelings. Nothing at all to do with language.

[Kaizero]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

Ye what?  You denounced the opinion that Forest are in a false position because there's no empirical evidence to back it up, but then the basis of your own argument was your own feelings. Nothing at all to do with language.

 

I literally pointed out how rarely it's happened that a team placed in the top four after 26 matches ended up outside the top four, I just added the * part to avoid ending up having to deal with someone deciding to start this exact kind of interaction! 

 

5 times out of 29 returns the an historical mathematical probability of 17.2% that Forest will finish the season outside the top four when all is said and done. Essentially meaning 4 times out of 5 they'd finish there based on how teams before them fared when they found themselves in the same position on the table at the same time of the season. In addition, 29 times out of 29 no team that found themselves in the top four at this stage of the season ended up finishing lower than 6th. 

 

I genuinely don't think I've missed out on anything when I looked through past seasons, but from experience I'm aware that in the event I'd actually done it, I'd get stuck discussing something completely irrelevant to the topic I wanted to discuss when I made the choice to engage. Instead, as has been the case for a long time now, the only thing that happens on here when trying to actually discuss a topic relevant to its thread is that I end up in a meaningless discussion about something obviously irrelevant for the topic being discussed. You're genuinely one of the brightest people I've had the pleasure of discussing shit with on here over the past 19+ years, so I can't make myself believe you'd not understand the intent behind the * inclusion, and rather chose to do the exact thing I included the * part in my post trying to avoid  

 

[Fak]

3 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

I literally pointed out how rarely it's happened that a team placed in the top four after 26 matches ended up outside the top four, I just added the * part to avoid ending up having to deal with someone deciding to start this exact kind of interaction! 

 

5 times out of 29 returns the an historical mathematical probability of 17.2% that Forest will finish the season outside the top four when all is said and done. Essentially meaning 4 times out of 5 they'd finish there based on how teams before them fared when they found themselves in the same position on the table at the same time of the season. In addition, 29 times out of 29 no team that found themselves in the top four at this stage of the season ended up finishing lower than 6th. 

 

I genuinely don't think I've missed out on anything when I looked through past seasons, but from experience I'm aware that in the event I'd actually done it, I'd get stuck discussing something completely irrelevant to the topic I wanted to discuss when I made the choice to engage. Instead, as has been the case for a long time now, the only thing that happens on here when trying to actually discuss a topic relevant to its thread is that I end up in a meaningless discussion about something obviously irrelevant for the topic being discussed. You're genuinely one of the brightest people I've had the pleasure of discussing shit with on here over the past 19+ years, so I can't make myself believe you'd not understand the intent behind the * inclusion, and rather chose to do the exact thing I included the * part in my post trying to avoid  

 

Kaizero?

[Kaizero]

Just now, Fak said:

Kaizero?

 

Just gonna stop posting tbh, not been able to participate in any discussions on here without immediate derailment for eons now.

[Displayname]

Surprised people are so negative after what has been a pretty much perfect weekend. 

This close to the end of the season a win is whats most important by far. Sure shitty second half to put it mildly, but overall a better performance than what i expected atleast.

[Fak]

Just now, Kaizero said:

 

Just gonna stop posting tbh, not been able to participate in any discussions on here without immediate derailment for eons now.

ah, I was just gonna say “stinks” if you had replied with “what?”

 

never mind

[Rod]

2 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

Just gonna stop posting tbh, not been able to participate in any discussions on here without immediate derailment for eons now.

No don't stop posting.  You are very good and your English is better than some of the morons on here.  😉

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Rod

[OCOCOL]

56 minutes ago, nufcjb said:

Can we fucking stop playing uphill in the second half please? Whose bright idea is it this season we do that? Look at our league games and look at our Carabao Cup games. We are fucking spent in the second half and we're playing uphill in the league yet have been better on our road to the final.

We lost the toss didn’t we …

[Scoot]

Proper game of 2 halves that. 1st half, very good, second half was nothing short of abysmal. Literally could string 3 passes together or hold onto the ball. 

 

I'm not going to go into detail on the game as I'd be here all day but I hope we get these shit performances out of our system soon. When we're bad, we're off the scale bad!

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Scoot

[SAK]

Noticed we were pretty crap at defending corners which is strange as we did really well against the new Stoke City (Arsenal). 

[Pancrate1892]

I remember the 4-3 game against villa under Keegan. Was similar, we went a goal down, went 3-1 up at halftime and looked ridiculously comfortable (think villa lost a man too). But despite the man advantage we lost control of the second half and let Dwight yorke go on the rampage.

To echo Keegan's words 'it took a while for us to realise we won the game'