Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Again: agreed but you''re missing my point... Even if it is 1 or 2 less, less goals conceded IS less. And I can''t believe I''m saying this as I''m usually arguing against clean sheets being used as a means to defend Hughton (this is not what I''m doing, mind) but: having to been able to stop a team from scoring so many more times IS an improvement! Even when we last got relegated from top flight we posed a better goal threat than currently! But we''re talking about defence... Hughton has indeed cost us badly in the attack front but as proven before: a good manager gets the attacking as best as possible, then tries to get the defence to at least match that
  2. Agreed mostly. But even though 1 less at mo, it ended 8 less (if I remember rightly) and the clean sheet frequency has rocketed which translates to when we do concede at present, we tend to get kicked in. Hence it''s not great but IS better
  3. That''s fair enough. The "in director''s shoes" thing: agreed that not being something means you can only try to imagine being them, but we can all form opinions on what evidence we do have AND judgements/opinions on the actions of others... For me, it would be absolutely barmy to have him here as manager next season and would be rather disappointed in the board''s decision
  4. I forgot to say: "Changing the manager doesn''t wave a magic wand: all 3 relegated clubs changed manager" This would be a silly thing to say. That would also mean 3 clubs survived despite changing. As with most things you have to look at each case to review if the change had any bearing....
  5. Anyway... nothing "gut feeling" about the first part ... very reassuring that was, I thought
  6. I have agreed with everything Purple has said. I enjoyed it when Ricardo said "any sensible manager would have gave them from the start" ... illustrates exactly what he''s arguing against haha .... doing noticeably better is slightly different to not doing as bad and the change of managers was not only sensible in those cases but worked too... I disagree with Purple on one thing though: Hughton. I wanted him sacked games ago. Now it''s so late, I still wouldn''t object to him being replaced now, but am waiting for after the next 2 games to re decide if I actually want that again or not. I just think that the regression as opposed to progression under Hughton is clear to see and unacceptable... because so much has gone wrong already, I want him replaced at end of season no matter what... only going undefeated the rest of this season might absolve him enough to consider at least giving him more time. While our defence is still far from great... It is better than when under Lambert. And some of the players he has brought in have been great (some not so) so despite what OP and others seem to think: I wouldn''t mind if the man stayed on as something else.... I would just hope there''s someone out there that''s better at doing everything a manager does than Hughton (there''s bound to be plenty ;-p)
  7. Yeah... science batch haha On thinking about it.... It is a bit like science: research and experiment to draw conclusions from your theories
  8. OK. I''m making a conscious effort to be less verbose. So any questions: ask. Any issues: email me your complaint ;-) I think Cardiff and Fulham are screwed now (they both need 2 wins and then some [plus us losing] to catch us up) and through much consideration: 18th place is between us at 13th and everyone currently below us to Sunderland @18th. Compare us with these 5 other teams and we actually come up top! P W D L F A GD Pt PPG 1 Norwich 8 4 3 1 10 5 +5 15 1.88 2 Swansea 8 3 3 2 11 6 +5 12 1.50 3 WBA 7 3 1 3 11 11 --- 10 1.43 4 Palace 9 3 3 3 9 9 --- 12 1.33 5 West Ham 7 2 3 2 8 7 +1 9 1.29 6 Sunderland 7 0 3 4 1 12 -11 3 0.43 I know that this is just looking at versus each other.... but that does give a good indication of who is the "better" team and ergo should finish higher... plus: they''re all below us so you know their season performances is inferior to ours. Even looking at the league progress chart is reassuring: we''re pretty consistently above West Ham, Sunderland and Palace! We stand on 32 points with 21 points available.... seeing how the league is this year: we could expect a record low survival points tally... say 35 .... so if we give an extremely generous worst case scenario as lose 4 and draw 3 ... that may even be enough to scrape survival still! Sunderland''s 3 games in hand are Man C, Liverpool and WBA. Plus, my ok (ish) accuracy (31 games from 69 right - 44.93%) now means that we are back out of the bottom 3 if my remaining predictions turned out right! I made my predictions with depleted faith and as a means to see "what if we lose last 5" with 15 games to go.... I was surprised we ended up 13th with 36 points... It may seem I was involuntarily harsh on others to suit my agenda but I wasn''t.... turns out there''s a lot of correlations between my predictions and how it''s turning out... anyway .... here is my final table after results in mind.... (+/- league position from original then points tally). = 01 Man C 88 -3 = 02 Chelsea 86 -1 = 03 Arsenal 81 -2 +2 04 Liverpool 78 +6 ----------------------------- -1 05 Spurs 71 -4 -1 06 Man U 70 -4 = 07 Everton 65 -1 = 08 Southampt. 55 -1 = 09 Newcastle 52 = +110 Hull 43 +3 +511 West Ham 41 +7 +312 Villa 40 +6 +713 Stoke 39 +9 -4 14 Swansea 37 -4 -3 15 Palace 37 = -2 16 Sunderland 34 -1 -4 17 NORWICH 34 -2 ----------------------------- -1 18 Cardiff 34 = -1 19 Fulham 33 = -1 20 WBA 32 +1 Well there it is .... I still want Hughton gone but as to whether I think getting rid now will actually do any harm: I''ll wait until after the next 2 games before settling my mind again .... damn Hughton and his pull-it-out-of-the-bag-ability lol While our home form is what''s saving us (not lost in last 6 and conceded once), our away form is 19th (not won in last 7)! What''s present in both though is the struggle (usually!) for goals...5 goals in our last 6 away games (11 from all 15).... and 5 goals from last 6 home games (10 from all 16) .... not great!
  9. [quote user="hogesar"]All the ''hoots haters'', by which i presume you simply mean people who think a change of manager is needed, are probably enjoying the win rather than posting a thread criticising fans, irony ''eh?[/quote] This. Sums up my view perfectly... to answer your question though: hi, I''m an outer.... I would be willing to chat more but frankly... going from your phrasing: you''re a complete ooger-booger (darn sencorship) and don''t deserve much time of day
  10. You''re welcome btw... I always feel obliged when someone asks if they''re misunderstanding the point... Aggy: we are, obviously, comparable to more teams... I''d say: the best we should/could achieve, with a good season, is maybe 8th... so that would give me 12 other teams I''d say we''re on par or better than... but... For the 1000th time: it''s not NCFC I''m comparing Hughton''s results ... or if you like to be kinder: NCFC results under our current manager... and the only teams that have had the same manager since Hughton came in are the aforementioned... hence the point of the post. I also think should consider championship clubs (at least in the current EPL) too... being league 1 was far unsuited for us and for a long time: championship standard was our standard. And lol... ya grrreat plumb... you are right, duh, but I think if I writ about how "if they fail to win their games in hand, their accuracy won''t be as ahead" that wouldn''t really make sense or suit the tone..... even if they do FTW... all their win percentages would still be better than ours!
  11. Ricardo: just overlook I chose those teams Specifically because their managers have been in the top flight as long and similar size clubs.... kinda the whole point of the post.... plumb Yobocop: 1st is better than 2nd and 3rd-6th is better than 7th-10th, 11th-17th is better than 18th- 20th. I don''t just mean the obvious sense... but within those parameters the result is the same thing
  12. ... lol ... and so determine what place you finish by comparing to how other teams did THAT season, you could say points, GD and goals matter more then the ultimate position
  13. [quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]Progression? Under Lambert we finished on more points, won more games, scored more goals, were mentally stronger, could win on the road, and were a far better side. Under Hughton we have been regressing for over 12 months with no end in sight. Yet he''s still backed by the board and a few deluded supporters. Amazing really.[/quote] And despite conceding more, we also had a better GD our first season up... points then GD then goals scored... as these determined where one finishes in the league
  14. I agree completely with both your comments Tony Cottee
  15. From the "bottom" teams, only Sam Alladyce, Alan Pardew and Paul Lambert are comparable to Chris Hughton. CH win % is 25% (17/68) SA win % is 30% (20/67) AP win % is 36% (24/66) PL win % is 28% (19/67) Games in hand could only make it worse... Last season CH won 10 this season 7 Last season SA won 12 this season 8 Last season AP won 11 this season 13 Last season PL won 10 this season 9 Newcastle have already won more games and Villa very nearly have too! CH loss % is 43% (29/68) SA loss % is 45% (30/67) AP loss % is 44% (31/66) PL loss % is 45% (30/67) While Hughton''s loss record is slightly best overall.... The actual "current" loss record is the opposite. ... Last season CH lost 14 this season 15 Last season SA lost 16 this season 14 Last season AP lost 19 this season 12 Last season PL lost 17 this season 13 So much for progression... already have lost more games than last season And from those 3 teams in the past 2 seasons, we''ve mustered 7 points from 18... that''s 1/12 wins (West Ham, this season) and 7/12 losses (each team both seasons, + Villa, twice this season) :-/
  • Create New...