8 games we could have won

[Making Plans 936]

The following games are those that, in my opinion, were winnable

& there for the taking if we had shown a bit more intention to win them.

QPR (H) 1-1 (2  tactical subs used before 90 mins - both at 87 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 6 mins)

Villa (A) 1-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins – 64 & 70 mins.

Tactical subs time on pitch = 46 mins)

Reading (A) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, both at 86 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 8 mins)

Southampton (A) 1-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 81, 88 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 11 mins)

WBA (A) 2-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 73 & 86 mins.

Tactical subs time on pitch = 21 mins)

Newcastle (H) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 68 & 77 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 35 mins)

QPR (A) 0-0 (1 tactical sub used before 90 mins, 87 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 3 mins)

Fulham (H) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 76 & 86 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 18 mins)

Games played = 8

Points won = 7

Points surrendered = 17

Goals scored = 4

Goals conceeded = 5

Total tactical subs used = 15 (up to 90 mins)

Total tactical subs time on pitch = 150 mins (up to 90 mins)

Average tactical sub time on pitch per player = 10 mins (up to 90 mins)

Average tactical sub time on pitch, per player, per game = about 1.5 minutes (up

to 90 mins)

 

So, what would have been the benefits of going for the win,

but possibly losing, these games.

Let’s assume that we were never going to win, or lose, all

those games but..........

If we had won 1 but lost 7 we would be 4 points worse off

If we had won 2 but lost 6 we would be 1 point worse off

If we had won 3 but lost 5 we would be 2 points better off

If we had won 4 but lost 4 we would be 5 points better off

If we had won 5 but lost 3 we would be 8 points better off

A risk worth taking, I think so.

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

Interesting.

 

It almost seems as if our three ''managers'' on the bench are collectively incapable of thinking on their feet.

 

A severe case of tactical constipation.

 

I would hope this changes for the better now with more options up front and perhaps in midfield. What is the situation with Butterfield atm? I presume he''s back with us and available for use. I had high hopes of this boy at first but he''s been criticised a bit on here, despite only having limited opportunities to show his worth.

[Butterbean_Canary 0]

[quote user="Making Plans"]

The following games are those that, in my opinion, were winnable

& there for the taking if we had shown a bit more intention to win them.

QPR (H) 1-1 (2  tactical subs used before 90 mins - both at 87 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 6 mins)

Villa (A) 1-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins – 64 & 70 mins.

Tactical subs time on pitch = 46 mins)

Reading (A) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, both at 86 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 8 mins)

Southampton (A) 1-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 81, 88 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 11 mins)

WBA (A) 2-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 73 & 86 mins.

Tactical subs time on pitch = 21 mins)

Newcastle (H) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 68 & 77 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 35 mins)

QPR (A) 0-0 (1 tactical sub used before 90 mins, 87 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 3 mins)

Fulham (H) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 76 & 86 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 18 mins)

Games played = 8

Points won = 7

Points surrendered = 17

Goals scored = 4

Goals conceeded = 5

Total tactical subs used = 15 (up to 90 mins)

Total tactical subs time on pitch = 150 mins (up to 90 mins)

Average tactical sub time on pitch per player = 10 mins (up to 90 mins)

Average tactical sub time on pitch, per player, per game = about 1.5 minutes (up

to 90 mins)

 

So, what would have been the benefits of going for the win,

but possibly losing, these games.

Let’s assume that we were never going to win, or lose, all

those games but..........

If we had won 1 but lost 7 we would be 4 points worse off

If we had won 2 but lost 6 we would be 1 point worse off

If we had won 3 but lost 5 we would be 2 points better off

If we had won 4 but lost 4 we would be 5 points better off

If we had won 5 but lost 3 we would be 8 points better off

A risk worth taking, I think so.

[/quote]

Are you also going to talk about the points that we shouldn''t have got anything at all, Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs.....

[ellis206 0]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]

Interesting.

 

It almost seems as if our three ''managers'' on the bench are collectively incapable of thinking on their feet.

 

A severe case of tactical constipation.

 

I would hope this changes for the better now with more options up front and perhaps in midfield. What is the situation with Butterfield atm? I presume he''s back with us and available for use. I had high hopes of this boy at first but he''s been criticised a bit on here, despite only having limited opportunities to show his worth.

[/quote]

 

He''s been at Palace for over a month..........

We haven''t had much strength on the bench this season so I understand why he isn''t making early subs. Wait till we bring in some true quality in the summer and have a much stronger strength in depth

[ZLF 274]

if but and maybes  - we could have won them all and been 17 points better off pushing for europe or lost them all and been in the bottom 3 - the league is that tight.

 

The alternative view is that our approach  has secured us 3-6 points more than we could have got otherwise - leaving us in 16-18th place.  we simply dont know

 

 

what is true is we get more points for a win.   over three games with three drawers we feel good for being un beaten but only have 3 points - converting one to a win and losing one leaves us a point better off.

 

The squad showed last year we had the ability to win, be creative and score goals - we strengthed both the attacking and defensive options yet are conceding as many goals and scoring less.  

[Joanna Grey 0]

Obviously people are running out of ways to run down the Club. It''s getting quite pathetic now.

[Making Plans 936]

[quote user="Joanna Grey"]Obviously people are running out of ways to run down the Club. It''s getting quite pathetic now.[/quote]Not running down the Club at all - just pointing out a few facts.

[Nick 0]

It''s getting a bit worrying now that Villa seemed to have turned a corner. The gap is now 6 points whereas before the villa game it was 8

[Mervmeister 18]

[quote user="Butterbean_Canary"][quote user="Making Plans"]

The following games are those that, in my opinion, were winnable

& there for the taking if we had shown a bit more intention to win them.

QPR (H) 1-1 (2  tactical subs used before 90 mins - both at 87 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 6 mins)

Exactly

Villa (A) 1-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins – 64 & 70 mins.

Tactical subs time on pitch = 46 mins)

Reading (A) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, both at 86 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 8 mins)

Southampton (A) 1-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 81, 88 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 11 mins)

WBA (A) 2-1 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 73 & 86 mins.

Tactical subs time on pitch = 21 mins)

Newcastle (H) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 68 & 77 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 35 mins)

QPR (A) 0-0 (1 tactical sub used before 90 mins, 87 mins. Tactical

subs time on pitch = 3 mins)

Fulham (H) 0-0 (2 tactical subs used before 90 mins, 76 & 86 mins. Tactical subs

time on pitch = 18 mins)

Games played = 8

Points won = 7

Points surrendered = 17

Goals scored = 4

Goals conceeded = 5

Total tactical subs used = 15 (up to 90 mins)

Total tactical subs time on pitch = 150 mins (up to 90 mins)

Average tactical sub time on pitch per player = 10 mins (up to 90 mins)

Average tactical sub time on pitch, per player, per game = about 1.5 minutes (up

to 90 mins)

 

So, what would have been the benefits of going for the win,

but possibly losing, these games.

Let’s assume that we were never going to win, or lose, all

those games but..........

If we had won 1 but lost 7 we would be 4 points worse off

If we had won 2 but lost 6 we would be 1 point worse off

If we had won 3 but lost 5 we would be 2 points better off

If we had won 4 but lost 4 we would be 5 points better off

If we had won 5 but lost 3 we would be 8 points better off

A risk worth taking, I think so.

[/quote]

Are you also going to talk about the points that we shouldn''t have got anything at all, Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs.....

[/quote]

[Mervmeister 18]

Sorry I don''t understand how to qoute properly on here lol.

Was trying to qoute butterbean, as he makes the point I was going to.

[ricardo 7,385]

If my Aunt had balls she''d be my Uncle.

[ZLF 274]

ifs buts and maybes - we could be 17 points better off and pushing for europe or 7 points worse off and in 18th place and facing relegation.

 

Alternatively we can accept that in between 4-7 of the 11 drawers we were the worse team and are actuall 4-7 points better off than we could have been.

 

None of us will know which - so discussing its does not really help.

 

 

However 3 drawn games is maorale boosting for being unbeaten - yet converting one each to a win and a defeat would leave us a point better off.

 

We have strengthened our attacking options (from a squad that could score goals last year) and, more importantly, have significnatly improved our defence from last season, in theory to enable us to conceed less while scoring the same.    Yet we are conceding more,  scoring less,  have less points and are lower in the table.     

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

There was considerable discussion between the three wise men before Kamara came on last Saturday and as usual more than enough before other substitutions. I do see consultation as a strength but it can underlie other issues and be stifling.

 

Lambert occasionaly sat on the bench and spoke to Culverhouse about tactics in certain games, but generally seemed to follow his own instinct. He apparently kept a distance to the players; coaches tend to be much more inclusive and for me nice guy Hughton behaves like a coach. Having said that, the players are clearly giving him everything in effort within a constricting system.

 

The OP presents a constructive argument and shouldn''t feel detracted by the one line responders who criticise but seldom contribute. The point is a good one.

 

All the sides down the bottom are going for it because they have to and some will get the wins to bring them perilously close to us as Southampton has done and as, rest assured, Villa will do. They will get momentum from this.

 

Norwich City needs the win but finds itself in the situation where it dare not lose. Heavy defeats have over-weighed and sides are coming to Carrow Road looking to stifle the game and hoping to snatch a win, they will wait until we open up and try to cut us down. The shame of the Fulham game is we missed early chances which would have transformed the match, same at QPR. In fairness to Hughton we come out of the blocks well.

 

As for Fulham, they were especially drilled to grind us down and this was exampled to me by their over-reaction to every injury situation and the time taken by their physio. It was a credit to our players they kept up their concentration and discipline because Fulham were artifice muggers. Bit the question presented is whether Hughton is costing us points because of his conservatism and his style has been the same ever since that heavy defeat at Fulham on the opening day. The OP makes valid and worthwhile arguments.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

[quote user="Nick"]It''s getting a bit worrying now that Villa seemed to have turned a corner. The gap is now 6 points whereas before the villa game it was 8[/quote]

To be fair beating West Ham at home is hardly "turning a corner." They are a very poor side away from home, and don''t really have much to play for as they should get enough points at home to stay up. I always fully expected Villa to win that game and if any of our relegation rivals are playing West Ham at home for the remainder of the season we should expect a similar outcome. In fact the only one of the relegation condidates who probably would not beat them at home is us as we would settle for a dull 0-0 draw on the basis that "these are a good side with great players."

[AJ 1,218]

Our use of substitutions are just embarrassing.

Nothing says "no plan b" than making subs around the 87-90 minutes mark

And nothing says "found out" like 3 points from 7 games, or whatever it is now

[CDMullins 436]

8 games we could have lost aswell then?

Forget the current run,

Ask yourself if someone had offered you 14th, 6 points off the drop, would you have taken it?

[Nick 0]

[quote user="Jim Smith"][quote user="Nick"]It''s getting a bit worrying now that Villa seemed to have turned a corner. The gap is now 6 points whereas before the villa game it was 8[/quote]

To be fair beating West Ham at home is hardly "turning a corner." They are a very poor side away from home, and don''t really have much to play for as they should get enough points at home to stay up. I always fully expected Villa to win that game and if any of our relegation rivals are playing West Ham at home for the remainder of the season we should expect a similar outcome. In fact the only one of the relegation condidates who probably would not beat them at home is us as we would settle for a dull 0-0 draw on the basis that "these are a good side with great players."[/quote]

Thing is though we don''t seem to be picking up many points either. They are catching us up whatever way you look at it

[Gnasher 0]

I would add West Ham at home too, was screaming for earlier subs and as we all know that didn''t happen.

Whilst I admit making subs doesn''t guarantee changing the game, it can make a crucial difference. In games like Newcastle we played poorly first half and the second half was looking the same after 10-15 minutes. Thats when we need to at least try change the game, leaving things as they are isn''t likely to help change the game.

Most other managers recognise the use of subs but we are yet to see that tactical awareness from Hughton

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

I wonder if we are going to see any subs, other than those forced by injury, before the 80th minute this season?

[Making Plans 936]

[quote user="Butterbean_Canary"]Are you also going to talk about the points that we shouldn''t have got anything at all, Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs.....[/quote] Surely this demonstrates that our formation/tactics is works against better teams but it doesn''t work against weaker teams when we should be more positive. Perhaps you might like to explain why you think we shouldn''t have won those games as I''m not really seeing what your point is in relation to my original post.[quote user="CDMullins"]8 games we could have lost aswell then?[/quote]I think if you read my original post, that''s exactly what I said[quote user="CDMullins"]Ask yourself if someone had offered you 14th, 6 points off the drop, would you have taken it?[/quote]Yes I would, but that doesn''t mean that things couldn''t be even better, does it?[quote user="Gnasher"]I would add West Ham at home too[/quote]Yes, looks like I missed that one

[Butterbean_Canary 0]

I agree with you regarding the formation against ''lesser'' teams but that''s not what your post was about.

The points from your original post can be used for the man utd and arsenal games as well. Hughton didn''t make any changes in the games until the last five to ten minutes in either of the games, in both we kept clean sheets and beat champions league teams. Would you have liked some early changes in them games and for us to have maybe lost the stability within defence, or maybe change it up front to beat them two or three nil? Not likely

[Syteanric 1]

it''s like we are rigging our way to relegation!Malaysian betting syndicates rejoice!!!!