Bizarre last 6 games table

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

The team in 11th place has achieved 1.66 points per game which would generally be enough for a play off place. Coventry in 9th are a fraction short of 2 points a game. 

[Fen Canary 832]

I don’t think it’s that bizarre. I’d wager it’s quite common for multiple teams to be on reasonably good runs. However this usually averages out over a season when they have little blips to balance it out 

[GenerationA47 754]

‘Farke on a course’.. to something good. 12 for, 1 against

[Badger 2,406]

Interesting to see QPR in 7th with only one defeat but Wagner was given dog's abuse for "only" getting an away draw.

[Northluck C 29]

9 of the 13 teams we have left to play are in the bottom half of that form table. Form can change of course but it’s there for the taking. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

11 minutes ago, Northluck C said:

9 of the 13 teams we have left to play are in the bottom half of that form table. Form can change of course but it’s there for the taking. 

Yes! And we probably need to win 8 games to ensure the play offs. Keeping Sargent fit is vital so I'd support Wagner using him as sparingly as possible. 

[Creedence Clearwater Couto 1,288]

28 minutes ago, Northluck C said:

9 of the 13 teams we have left to play are in the bottom half of that form table. Form can change of course but it’s there for the taking. 

A lot of them also have to turn it around and start winning to avoid relegation… but I agree it’s a favourable run on ‘paper’

One thing I guess we may need to be careful of is being hot too early and running out of steam! We’re on great form beating those around us… let’s hope we have the legs for it! Wasn’t  it about 13 games left after we beat Millwall away last season?? 

Edited February 20 by Creedence Clearwater Couto

[Creedence Clearwater Couto 1,288]

2 hours ago, GenerationA47 said:

‘Farke on a course’.. to something good. 12 for, 1 against

I wouldn’t rule them out catching Leicester! Imagine 3 Championship titles for Farke! The champs cheat code. 

[GenerationA47 754]

1 hour ago, Creedence Clearwater Couto said:

I wouldn’t rule them out catching Leicester! Imagine 3 Championship titles for Farke! The champs cheat code. 

Just checked, if he keeps it up he’ll equal Warnock in record promotions to the PL (although the latter had 4 lower league promotions.. Farke doesn’t bother with that level…)

[Jim Smith 2,322]

Be prepared for Ipswich to go on another good run for a few weeks. They’ve hit easy fixtures up until April. Could pop back into the top two temporarily. 

[Terminally Yellow 2,458]

1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

Be prepared for Ipswich to go on another good run for a few weeks. They’ve hit easy fixtures up until April. Could pop back into the top two temporarily. 

Who cares? Focus on us, not them

[hogesar 9,683]

3 hours ago, Badger said:

Interesting to see QPR in 7th with only one defeat but Wagner was given dog's abuse for "only" getting an away draw.

As long as we got our home results which we did (with some style too) then a point away is always a good point. It was made better by the fact QPR had hit a little form too. 

It was just an anti-wagner thing to complain so much about it as opposed to purely a result thing 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,165]

4 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Yes! And we probably need to win 8 games to ensure the play offs. Keeping Sargent fit is vital so I'd support Wagner using him as sparingly as possible. 

That of course is what Wagner was trying to do when he took Sargent off against Watford - and he was roundly booed for it. 

[RobJames 881]

5 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Yes! And we probably need to win 8 games to ensure the play offs. Keeping Sargent fit is vital so I'd support Wagner using him as sparingly as possible. 

8 wins !

Assuming that would also include a couple of draws that would mean ending up on 77 points, when the average points accumulated for 6th (since Xmas), has been around 70.

To achieve those 77 points would mean an average (over the remaining games) of 2 points per game ie 92 over the season.

Any 6 game snapshot will throw up the figures you quote. They are not any realistic indication of how things will finish. Otherwise you would have teams finishing on 23 points and even 8 points.  City have pretty much put things into where it is their hands, Our good run since the New Year would certainly have us finishing easily 5th were it to continue.

However, I doubt it will so I suggest the average over 33 games is a better indication of how things will end up. All we can do is to hope we pick up enough points over these remaining 13 games.

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

6 minutes ago, RobJames said:

8 wins !

Assuming that would also include a couple of draws that would mean ending up on 77 points, when the average points accumulated for 6th (since Xmas), has been around 70.

To achieve those 77 points would mean an average (over the remaining games) of 2 points per game ie 92 over the season.

Any 6 game snapshot will throw up the figures you quote. They are not any realistic indication of how things will finish. Otherwise you would have teams finishing on 23 points and even 8 points.  City have pretty much put things into where it is their hands, Our good run since the New Year would certainly have us finishing easily 5th were it to continue.

However, I doubt it will so I suggest the average over 33 games is a better indication of how things will end up. All we can do is to hope we pick up enough points over these remaining 13 games.

Never assume. I simply said 8 wins would ensure the play offs. 

This season will it maybe less than 75 points because there are 4 teams currently averaging more than 2 points a game which is unusual. But it is a very strange season and like the Premier League it is now 2 divisions in 1.

I would say we are currently the 4th best team in the division (behind Soton, Leicester and Leeds). That is purely because Sargent is fit. Take him out of the equation and we drop a few places. 

[RobJames 881]

So would 10, or even 13 wins ☺️

Sergeants contribution has been overrated, as there has been a need to have some explanation for our recent success.  Look how the team on the pitch has improved massively over the pitch. It is that determination to win that has been the key factor. A winning (at all cost) mentality that has put us where we are now, not the efforts of one individual.

 

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

3 hours ago, hogesar said:

As long as we got our home results which we did (with some style too) then a point away is always a good point. It was made better by the fact QPR had hit a little form too. 

It was just an anti-wagner thing to complain so much about it as opposed to purely a result thing 

I'd say that's a little disingenuous. Anyone who had travelled to QPR would tell you that his substitutions that day were a direct contribution to letting them back into the match at a point when we were totally in the ascendancy. I was fuming at the time and fuming afterwards, we really did chuck two points away that day. Obviously in the context of our recent run it's totally forgiveable, but it was still two dropped rather than one won in the context of the match.

[hogesar 9,683]

16 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

I'd say that's a little disingenuous. Anyone who had travelled to QPR would tell you that his substitutions that day were a direct contribution to letting them back into the match at a point when we were totally in the ascendancy. I was fuming at the time and fuming afterwards, we really did chuck two points away that day. Obviously in the context of our recent run it's totally forgiveable, but it was still two dropped rather than one won in the context of the match.

I think its really easy for fans to fall into that trap. Of course, QPR had started to get a bit more a foothold just before those subs anyway. There's certainly no guarantee we win by not making those subs. No guarantee Sargent doesn't pull his hamstring from being worked too hard, etc etc.

No one can say the subs = goals conceded. We can all think it - I happen to agree on a really basic level that it let the QPR defence sit a yard higher up the pitch.

However, the argument was that Sydney should have come on. From what I've seen he wouldn't have helped that issue because he has very little pace and can only play with his back to goal. So I suspect with him on the pitch it would have been a massively similar outcome.

[Nuff Said 5,146]

18 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Never assume. I simply said 8 wins would ensure the play offs. 

This season will it maybe less than 75 points because there are 4 teams currently averaging more than 2 points a game which is unusual. But it is a very strange season and like the Premier League it is now 2 divisions in 1.

I would say we are currently the 4th best team in the division (behind Soton, Leicester and Leeds). That is purely because Sargent is fit. Take him out of the equation and we drop a few places. 

Wouldn’t we have said the same about Jonny Rowe earlier in the season? 

[BigFish 1,988]

24 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I think its really easy for fans to fall into that trap. Of course, QPR had started to get a bit more a foothold just before those subs anyway. There's certainly no guarantee we win by not making those subs. No guarantee Sargent doesn't pull his hamstring from being worked too hard, etc etc.

No one can say the subs = goals conceded. We can all think it - I happen to agree on a really basic level that it let the QPR defence sit a yard higher up the pitch.

However, the argument was that Sydney should have come on. From what I've seen he wouldn't have helped that issue because he has very little pace and can only play with his back to goal. So I suspect with him on the pitch it would have been a massively similar outcome.

It is received wisdom among the glass half empty brigade the Wagner's substitutions cost us two points. We don't know the alternate histories if he had made a different choice, it could be the same or even worse. It could be on a different night it might have worked. What we do know is we are 8th, we have a head of steam form wise and if we maintain that we will be in the play-offs. At the moment some posters are using this to take the edge off that and use it as a stick to beat a coach they don't rate anyway, whatever he does.

[shefcanary 2,410]

Is it also received wisdom, that sitting 8th currently with an on-form 1p5wich, WBA, Hull and Coventry all above us, that the period without Sargent when Wagner could not find a way to play without him, will ultimately cost us a chance at the play-offs as we have lost too much ground on those teams. 

I'm just adding a bit of dark shade here, yes to be provocative, but also in an attempt to calm people down that somehow we'll walk into the play-offs from here. I still have a very negative view of Wagner, at the moment it all seems one trick pony rather than being a proactive approach to coaching. I hold a suspicion that it was Knapper's arrival and him presenting data to Wagner that showed McLean could play at centre half and Nunez can play the deeper holding role in midfield that changed things. 

All received wisdom, but who knows the truth? 

Come on journo's, do some digging over what has really happened since Knapper's arrival to set us on this positive run. It is too much of a coincidence that there has been a turnaround since his arrival for him not to have played a significant part in the revival. I remain of the view Wagner and the return of Sargent is not the sole reason, but the latter is very welcome. If he gets injured again I strongly fear we'll only be playing tombola with players again, resulting in snakes rather than ladders in our performance. More positively he may yet play every match in our run in.

It is a team game, whatever the reason for the upturn we have a lot to play for this season. It's going to be a damn hard job to get anything from it, so let's keep supporting the boys and praying Sarge stays fit, you never know two of those teams above us may go on a bad run yet.  

[Thirsty Lizard 3,165]

56 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I'm just adding a bit of dark shade here, yes to be provocative, but also in an attempt to calm people down that somehow we'll walk into the play-offs from here. I still have a very negative view of Wagner, at the moment it all seems one trick pony rather than being a proactive approach to coaching. I hold a suspicion that it was Knapper's arrival and him presenting data to Wagner that showed McLean could play at centre half and Nunez can play the deeper holding role in midfield that changed things. 

So just out of curiosity, how do you explain our red-hot start to the season when nobody even knew who Ben Knapper was? Our red-hot start which crashed into the buffers the moment Sargent got injured?

 

[shefcanary 2,410]

Good question.

I'd argue that the system that Wagner used in those first four games, which he had been able to focus on for the first time since his arrival without actual match days getting in the way, he wasn't playing too many players in their wrong position and Rowe was a real eye opener. Once we suffered a few injuries to key players, Wagner failed to adapt to the players he had remaining, resulting in increasingly bizarre starting line-ups with players being played in positions that didn't fit their preferred style of play. And lots of defeats, in matches we should really have won!

I'd also argue no manager can defend themselves that it was just down to bad luck with injuries. A good manager adapts his tactics to find the best system for the players he has available. What it seems to underline is that Wagner has to have a settled line-up that he can intensely coach to get them to play well. Again, a better manager shouldn't require such intensity on the training pitch.

It has taken a sharp eye from someone to re-focus him from late November onwards. In the absence of other evidence, I lay that at Knapper's door.

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,138]

The only real difference between this and previous Championship seasons is that I'd argue the 3 relegated teams are the 3 strongest who have even come down as a whole. You normally get one who blows the league away but all three are a cut above this division and it's going to lead to a higher than usual total for the auto's and a lower than usual total for survival.

Next season is going to give us and everyone else in this division a real opportunity. If Leicester, Leeds and Southampton go up, Burnley, Sheff Utd and Luton come down and Ipswich lose McKenna then it's anyone's game next year because I don't think the quality at the top of the league will be as strong. Few if's and but's there but it's a very likely scenario. 

[Robert N. LiM 4,392]

3 hours ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

Next season is going to give us and everyone else in this division a real opportunity. If Leicester, Leeds and Southampton go up, Burnley, Sheff Utd and Luton come down and Ipswich lose McKenna then it's anyone's game next year because I don't think the quality at the top of the league will be as strong. Few if's and but's there but it's a very likely scenario. 

Corollary of that is that it would be better for us not to sneak up this year...though of course that ignores the prospect of losing quite a few key players in the summer.

Looks worryingly like the other corollary of that is that I have to start hoping Everton survive, which will come very unnaturally to me.

[BigFish 1,988]

4 hours ago, shefcanary said:

Good question.

I'd argue that the system that Wagner used in those first four games, which he had been able to focus on for the first time since his arrival without actual match days getting in the way, he wasn't playing too many players in their wrong position and Rowe was a real eye opener. Once we suffered a few injuries to key players, Wagner failed to adapt to the players he had remaining, resulting in increasingly bizarre starting line-ups with players being played in positions that didn't fit their preferred style of play. And lots of defeats, in matches we should really have won!

I'd also argue no manager can defend themselves that it was just down to bad luck with injuries. A good manager adapts his tactics to find the best system for the players he has available. What it seems to underline is that Wagner has to have a settled line-up that he can intensely coach to get them to play well. Again, a better manager shouldn't require such intensity on the training pitch.

It has taken a sharp eye from someone to re-focus him from late November onwards. In the absence of other evidence, I lay that at Knapper's door.

What fans miss is that a coach can be a good coach, the tactics can be good but the team could still lose. In many cases the coach has to play the cards he has been dealt and the injuries to Barnes/Sargeant ripped a hole in Wagner's hand (and it wasn't a very good hand in the first place). That is not even to say Wagner is a good coach, but the criticism is massively overblown and out of all proportion.

Should we hit the play-offs Wagner would have pretty much met expectations of this particular squad of players. Should we miss out, we will have under-performed. It is really all to play for.