Rather lose 6-0 and have a go.

[ron obvious 1,502]

CJF

We DID NOT sit back. We were FORCED back.

I saw some good attempts at good, passing football from us at first. We got swamped.

Incidentally, I don''t agree with everything Hughton does, not by a long chalk. I''d start Tettey over Johnson, for example, & try to get Wes in wherever possible.

Tactics weren''t the problem. Spurs on fire (& some indifferent performances) were the problem.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

--- T(wonk): Football results are largely determined by money not the manager. Spurs budget is about 100m more than NCFC. Unfortunately due to poor education and or low intelligence there are some fans who are still unable to grasp these basic facts.

Well why did we line up so cautiously against Hull who spent far less than us if it is all about money.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="T"]Football results are largely determined by money not the manager. Spurs budget is about 100m more than NCFC. Unfortunately due to poor education and or low intelligence there are some fans who are still unable to grasp these basic facts.[/quote]

Steady, T. That, I suppose is why Wigan beat Man City in the FA Cup final then ?

[ReadingCanary 0]

Evidence that Hughton does not play defensive footballHappy Now?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

-- ron obvious: CJF, We DID NOT sit back. We were FORCED back.

You are partly right. We always sit back away from home. We are nothing if not predictable. Spurs played well, they knew we would sit back and penned us in by pressing high up the pitch forcing the defenders and keeper to play it long to RvW. The whole team defended so deep that we had nowhere to go when we did receive the ball.

[snake-eyes 13]

We are in a league where in most away games we are going to be the underdog (look at the bookies odds). It should be no surprise that away wins will always be in short supply. Those that followed us away in League one and The Championship saw plenty of wins but this is a whole different ball game and they better get a handle on reality or they are in for a lot of disappointment.

Then you have given up already?  Spurs did play very well and did push us back, but we also surrendered so much of the pitch and allowed them so much time on the ball.  Give that to a talented midfield and the result is inevitable.  There was no pressure on their defense and midfield when they had the ball.  They played from the halfway line and were never really forced to turn and play from deeper.Yes teams will outplay you and beat you comprehensively, but they never got out of 2nd gear.  There was no drive to pressure the ball. 

 

You are right when you say that a different set up, different subs or different approach may not have produced a different result.  But we will never know! The problem is that we didn''t give it a try and since the turn of the year the stats and performances speak for themselves!  Would you agree that our away form is shocking!  Please answer me this;

 

Why are we so bad away from home?  Why are our results and performances so poor?  Why have we managed to only score 5 goals away from home this calender year? Or do you think everything is rosy and that on current form we will be ok?

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Again , Ricardo, you totally miss the point. No one is suggesting that in all areas Spurs etc don''t have a better squad than us . Just as we did in Lge One and the Champ. The analogy is a good one because, in the main, the teams that got the best results against us in both leagues were the ones who employed tactics to either stifle us or take us on at our own game (eg MK Dons, Tranmere and Southampton in Lg 1 ) We patently failed to even set out to achieve that yesterday, and the result was thus never in doubt.[/quote]It seems to boil down to your contention that we didn''t try to win and mine that we weren''t good enough. I don''t really know if it''s possible to resolve that argument but if you are going to away games expecting anything like the number of wins as we achieved in lower divisions you are in for a rough time.I get the feeling that large numbers were expecting a bit of plain sailing this season. If so, then they should have known better because there will always be bigger fish than us in this pond. Our away crowds will no doubt drop off but it''s happened before and will no doubt happen again when the novelty of the Premier league wanes. Having watched lots of seasons in the top division with 13k-14k gates I am not surprised that some people lose heart quite quickly when things turn down. Perhaps we aren''t all cut out to be long term supporters.

[nutty nigel 7,532]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]--- nutty nigel: We didn''t win them all but the managers guile caused all those teams problems in the games listed. Is there another comparable manager with a comparable record against the top clubs?

Just unfortunate that employing the same cautious tactics meant we picked up so few points against the rubbish sides. I wonder if we will be able to match last seasons record against the good teams again.[/quote]

 

I keep saying that it''s my belief we play the same system and same tactics against whoever we are playing at home and away. That''s what I see with my own eyes. I think away from home the momentum of the home side pushes us further back than the manager would like. He does afterall keep urging us forward. I think at 0-2 he didn''t go for the game yesterday keeping it tight and hoping to sneak something. In other games he has gone for it by bringing on attacking players i.e Everton away last season where at 0-1 we finished the game with Holt, Morison and Jackson on the field. I believe he recognised that game as one he could salvage something where as yesterday the game was gone.

 

I don''t particularly like the tactic we play but if we remain in the Premier league they will be vindicated. I think we will improve over the course of the season but wll carry on with the same tactics and finish somewhere between 12th and 16th. I think if we wanted to change the way we play and or change the manager then last may was the time. I think changing the manager/players/the way we play now would probably result in relegation. I don''t think we''ll get much of a change until we either are established enough to move up in to a stable top half side or get relegated. I believe that''s the cost of playing in this league. 

 

 

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

That''s pretty much the same as I feel, Snake. What''s the old maxim?..... If you are in a hole; STOP DIGGING. If , as you say so rightly, the CH away mantra for NCFC was working, and we were scoring goals and grinding out ugly wins and a few draws, then the Hughton apologist would have a fair point. But we aren''t . If we set out the waty we did at WHL, and several other grounds, is it any surprise that we will be "pinned back". What was so disconcerting was that Spurs really did not need to break sweat to beat us. I don''t believe, Snake that you will ever get these guys to agree that our away form is shocking. Unfortunately, the facts don''t fit in with their Hughton love in.

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]

We are in a league where in most away games we are going to be the underdog (look at the bookies odds). It should be no surprise that away wins will always be in short supply. Those that followed us away in League one and The Championship saw plenty of wins but this is a whole different ball game and they better get a handle on reality or they are in for a lot of disappointment.

Then you have given up already?  Spurs did play very well and did push us back, but we also surrendered so much of the pitch and allowed them so much time on the ball.  Give that to a talented midfield and the result is inevitable.  There was no pressure on their defense and midfield when they had the ball.  They played from the halfway line and were never really forced to turn and play from deeper.Yes teams will outplay you and beat you comprehensively, but they never got out of 2nd gear.  There was no drive to pressure the ball. 

 

You are right when you say that a different set up, different subs or different approach may not have produced a different result.  But we will never know! The problem is that we didn''t give it a try and since the turn of the year the stats and performances speak for themselves!  Would you agree that our away form is shocking!  Please answer me this;

 

Why are we so bad away from home?  Why are our results and performances so poor?  Why have we managed to only score 5 goals away from home this calender year? Or do you think everything is rosy and that on current form we will be ok?

[/quote]LOL LOL LOLI''ve been doing this since 1953 mate, I think you''ll be hard pushed to accuse me of giving upAs for being ok? I don''t know yet but I''ll be able to give you a fair idea after a dozen games.This is a hard league to be in and we are only middle size fish and if we have a poor run we could be in trouble. In any event I don''t expect it will be anything other than a hard fight. One thing I can assure you of though is that I won''t fall by the wayside if we fail.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Again , Ricardo, you totally miss the point. No one is suggesting that in all areas Spurs etc don''t have a better squad than us . Just as we did in Lge One and the Champ. The analogy is a good one because, in the main, the teams that got the best results against us in both leagues were the ones who employed tactics to either stifle us or take us on at our own game (eg MK Dons, Tranmere and Southampton in Lg 1 ) We patently failed to even set out to achieve that yesterday, and the result was thus never in doubt.[/quote]It seems to boil down to your contention that we didn''t try to win and mine that we weren''t good enough. I don''t really know if it''s possible to resolve that argument but if you are going to away games expecting anything like the number of wins as we achieved in lower divisions you are in for a rough time.I get the feeling that large numbers were expecting a bit of plain sailing this season. If so, then they should have known better because there will always be bigger fish than us in this pond. Our away crowds will no doubt drop off but it''s happened before and will no doubt happen again when the novelty of the Premier league wanes. Having watched lots of seasons in the top division with 13k-14k gates I am not surprised that some people lose heart quite quickly when things turn down. Perhaps we aren''t all cut out to be long term supporters.[/quote]

Certainly not me, Ricardo. I''ve been predicting that this season is going to be a struggle right from the off, despite our lavish spending. Simply because others have spent just as lavishly. In many cases more so. So you will see that I''ve definitely not been of the opinion that we will get the sort of wins that we achieved at Yeovil, Stockport, Ipswich and other such third rate outfits.

But, your first point is a fair one. I guess there''s an element of both views. Yes, we were not good enough, but, when that''s the case, the least you can do is go out and give it a shot. Which, I''m sorry, I maintain we all too rarely do.

[The Great Wall Of Tettey 0]

I was at the game and to some degree understand why he made his changes and didn''t ''have a go''. Quite right with most of you, losing a game 5/6 playing a ridiculous formation trying to nick a goal isn''t going to happen.

We had literally NO control over the game, didn''t even have the ball for any sustained amount of time to build a decent attack. Getting completely overrun in midfield and without bassong it would have been considerably worse. RvW runs and runs and runs but was so isolated. Elmanders trying to win the ball and virtually played CM all game and even then we still got overrun.

Although we''d all like to see it I think hooper would have just got lost being ''stuck'' upfront wuth RvW when the service was dire.

Howson came on because everyone Johnson occasionally didn''t foul his man and win the ball he simply lost it. Snodgrass was arguably the worst of the bunch and should have been subbed off, probably even at half time.

It''s possibly the most helpless I''ve felt as a fan yesterday. It just looked like we were outclassed by a very very good 5 man midfield, and to be honest I don''t think anyone we could bring on could have changed the game because we never actually had the ball.

I think we need to understand hughton is a different manager to lambert with a completely different style. Hughton sets up not to lose. Several times we looked hopeless under lambert and he made some pretty questionable subs too, for example man city away. It''s not exciting football but I think it''s football that will keep us in the premier league once again.

[T 190]

I said largely. Studies show money is 70 to 80 % for results over the long term and the manager at most 15%. The responses merely further demonstrate my point that they are some people who are unable to grasp this reality just as most people can not understand basic concepts such as the monty hall problem 

[snake-eyes 13]

I said that tongue in cheek Ricardo! [:P]

 

I know you will not fall by the wayside! Neither will I.  I know this league is tough and under no illusions results are not guaranteed.

 

I was going to go off on another ramble, but i am beginning to hit my head against a brick wall!  The same people who complain that the media treat us as ''Lil ''ol Norwich'' then say that we can''t compete against a £100m midfield.  Which is it? Please don''t get me started on the Influence of Money!

 

Some say we should know our place. Why should we?  If you don''t aim for the stars you will never get off the ground! 

 

I don''t expect miracles or for us to be whipping every team in the league!  I would just like us to compete and if we lose to know that the opposition really had to work for it!

[snake-eyes 13]

[quote user="T"]I said largely. Studies show money is 70 to 80 % for results over the long term and the manager at most 15%. The responses merely further demonstrate my point that they are some people who are unable to grasp this reality just as most people can not understand basic concepts such as the monty hall problem [/quote]

 

Where are these so called studies T?

 

I have seen studies that say the Arctic Ice was going to dissappear by this year and that the magic bullet really happened!

Why did QPR get relegated last year?  What is happening to Man City?  Bayern Munich would never have won the Champions League and Wigan stood no chance of winning the FA Cup!

 

Oh and yes I fully understand the Monty Hall conundrum!

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]

I said that tongue in cheek Ricardo! [:P]

 

I know you will not fall by the wayside! Neither will I.  I know this league is tough and under no illusions results are not guaranteed.

 

I was going to go off on another ramble, but i am beginning to hit my head against a brick wall!  The same people who complain that the media treat us as ''Lil ''ol Norwich'' then say that we can''t compete against a £100m midfield.  Which is it? Please don''t get me started on the Influence of Money!

 

Some say we should know our place. Why should we?  If you don''t aim for the stars you will never get off the ground! 

 

I don''t expect miracles or for us to be whipping every team in the league!  I would just like us to compete and if we lose to know that the opposition really had to work for it!

[/quote]I know it''s painful mate, Ive lost count of the times I''ve kicked the garage door and swore I''d never go again. Supporting NCFC has always been about aiming for the stars but yesterday was one of those days when the rocket exploded before take off. It''s happened before and it will happen again.But there will also be times when the miracle happens and if I didn''t sincerely believe that then I would have jacked it long ago. I believe we can compete in this league but bad games like yesterday happen every now and then. The secret is not to let the memory of it drag you down. Roll on the Villa and hopefully another 3 points.

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]

[quote user="T"]I said largely. Studies show money is 70 to 80 % for results over the long term and the manager at most 15%. The responses merely further demonstrate my point that they are some people who are unable to grasp this reality just as most people can not understand basic concepts such as the monty hall problem [/quote]

 

Where are these so called studies T?

 

I have seen studies that say the Arctic Ice was going to dissappear by this year and that the magic bullet really happened!

Why did QPR get relegated last year?  What is happening to Man City?  Bayern Munich would never have won the Champions League and Wigan stood no chance of winning the FA Cup!

 

Oh and yes I fully understand the Monty Hall conundrum!

[/quote]Look at the history of the Premier league since it started in 1992.Show me the financially disadvantaged team that won it.

[T 190]

I''ve just said largely and over the long term so to quote specific clubs or specific games is to totally miss the point as it is a standard distribution probability curve which means all results are possible but some a lot more probable than others over the long term. There are some books on footballs stats that have been quoted on here and some some recent articles on the bbc. It also very easy to prove to yourself by comparing wages and league points which gives a 70 to 80 pc correlation co-effecient. Those who think stats are nonsense are merely highlighting that they don''t understand them. The recent bbc article on the monty hall problem for instance highlights that becasue there are 2 teams in a game a lot of people think that the odds are more even than they actually are in reality. People are not very good at understanding probability and as probability is merely a model of reality they are not very good at comprending reality as this message board demonstrates every saturday. I''ve no doubt as a professional coach that CH understands these probabilities far better than most fans which I suspect is one reason that he takes a more defensive approach in certain games as it increases the odds of points.

[ron obvious 1,502]

Binner (sorry)

[Badger 2,405]

T - very few people understand statistics, including journalists, which is why they tend to publish such rubbish - e.g. on the latest health scare; economics etc. As you say, the more that they argue against statistics, the more they demonstrate, their inability to understand stats. There is a very good book on this, in the unlikely event that anyone still reading is interested - "The Tiger That Isn''t" - Rory Bremner reviewed it and said that it "makes statistics far, far too interesting" and I would concur.

There was a study which correlated Premier League position with money spent on wages - from memory, as you say, the correlation was between 0.7 and 0.8. I think that I recall a study at the end of last season which used a similar methodology to identify which teams under/ over achieved, comparing final position to wage expenditure: Norwich were near the top.

Of course, to maintain strict objectivity, we should say that a strong correlation might suggest a causal connection but does not prove one. If the report published above is both reliable and valid, it would suggest that CH did a great job for us last year, based on our "over-achievement" - those suggesting that we should replace him can only base their case on aesthetics not performance.

Of course, it is impossible for a manager of a big spending club to over-achieve as much and of course we have to be aware of the danger of reversion to the mean - ie over-achieving in one year is easier than continue to defy the gravity of probability!

[RvWs 4 year contract 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]We finished with more points under Lambert, ellis. We played with balls under Lambert. The games were fun under Lambert. Our road fans made noise under Lambert. We sure as shipt wouldn''t have lost at 10-man Hull without scoring a goal under Lambert.

We gave it a go every week regardless of the venue under Lambert and comfortably avoided relegation.[/quote]

Road fans? What even...

[Houston Canary 0]

What????

[snake-eyes 13]

T I have a scientific background and I work with data and statistical analysis for a living.  The use of such analytical language is all well and good, but without the actual data pool, context, timescales and recognition of other variables it is hard to justify the conclusions stated.

 

I know full well that over the long term the richer clubs will have the greater amount of success and no-one is suggesting that we can compete over an entire season with the Richer clubs!  What we are saying that we should be able to compete on individual games!  Yes we are underdogs, but what some are saying is that we should not expect to even compete in isolated games.  My argument is, why not?

 

However, I will say that if  a manager is only 15% of effect on success, how come Man Utd have won so many Championships when others have spent far more over the last few seasons? Don''t forget at the start of the AF reign, the team was built on Youth team players and less on many expensive purchases.

 

Are you saying AF had only a 15% impact on that. I agree that being able to buy better players gives you a significant advantage, but the money they are paid has no effect on what they do on the pitch.  That is the players attitudes, skills and the Manager''s abitlity to harness them., develop them and getting large egos to play together! 

What a lot of these studies fail to take account of are the variables that are less predictable.  Human Behaviour.  Although measurable, many statisticians struggle to understand why so many anomolies occur within sport.

 

As for probability, answer me this..does it not make sense that the more attempts at goal increases the probability of scoring a goal?

I do not believe Chris Hughton is using such statistics to base his strategy for each game on.

 

It is an interesting debate, but I generally skeptical of studies published in Newspapers as the source of the information is often unclear and usually has some agenda attached to it.  I know how easy it is to manipulate statistics to prove what ever point you want!

[Badger 2,405]

Snake Eyes, I agree with you about mistrusting the press but the report seems quite good. As I have posted above, it correlated wage expenditure against Premier League position and found, from memory, a correlation of between 0.7 and 0.8. This isn''t very complicated to do and the data is fairly reliable given that accounts are published.

[snake-eyes 13]

Badger I have seen this report and it was based over one season and is just a simple correlation between wages and league position.

 

This is a very narrow dataset.  I am sure we can extrapolate and get similar stats in the future, but for me I usually don''t accept a data set that is over such a short period of time and uses so few subjects.  It is too simplistic!

 

I have the same problem at work when senior managers look at data see some sort of correlation and then make knee jerk reactions according to what they see.  Without fully appreciating what they are looking at!  The problem is I am slowly building up the database such that the data can be used for more accurate analysis and better long term planning. At present I am working with only 3&1/2 years worth of results.  I would not even dream of truly trusing the fugures until I had at least 5 years worth!

 

The report makes interesting reading and comparisons, which is why the press publish it as it is easy to understand and eyecatching to the reader.  However for me it is only a small part of a far mor complex analysis!

[morty 0]

[quote user="RvWs 4 year contract"][quote user="Houston Canary"]We finished with more points under Lambert, ellis. We played with balls under Lambert. The games were fun under Lambert. Our road fans made noise under Lambert. We sure as shipt wouldn''t have lost at 10-man Hull without scoring a goal under Lambert.

We gave it a go every week regardless of the venue under Lambert and comfortably avoided relegation.[/quote]

Road fans? What even...[/quote]^^^This.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

If success was based on logic Mr. Spock would be the captain of the starship Enterprise.

[basil brush 0]

Ruddy''s comments after the game are in my view openly critical of the style that Hughton is playing

''With the money we''ve spent and the signings we''ve made we could be more aggressive in our approach''

Other players such as Bassong and Elliot Bennett were critical of Hughton''s tactics in guarded ways towards the end of last year, but Ruddy comments I find may be the tip of the iceberg.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="ricardo"]I''m sorry but I just don''t get this "have a go" stuff.In what way would we have had to play to be able to find our passes better or hold the ball better against Spurs superior pressing game?We couldn''t keep the ball playing short, the front men couldn''t hold it up when we went long. All the "having a go" in the world won''t make a difference if you are unable to get hold of the ball and put some passes together.I am sorry but IMO the "having a go " theory is just code for the disappointment of being so comprehensively outplayed.[/quote]What is that when it is at home ?Marking the player perhaps ............................ not some great new tactical innovation or something that requires tremendous skill either - not when our players remain static.We will find our players with passes when our players are making space and moving about. We will always been unable to hold the ball unless forced to when we are playing a style of play that requires an instant pass. If you watched the game you will see that we were able to get the ball quite frequently but there was little we could do with it.Spurs did what other teams do to us and what we used to do to them. Close them down very quickly. Spurs also played to their strengths but using accurate passing, something that was made possible by their players running off the ball. We were stuck with trying to pass to immobile and marked players.As to the ''have a go'' then it has it''s merits. Sute you can lose a hideous amount og goals but but goal difference only counts if you are level on points with another club. then if it is a worse goal difference it matters little if it is 1 goal or 100 goals - whereas one point gained from that ''have a go'' approach wipes out that goal difference totally.Rather like losing then offering your opponent double or quits. Keep going long enough and you will cancel out that loss.Much as those last minute goals and gung ho charges achieved in League 1 and the Championship .................. and at home to Everton last season.

[Highland Canary 76]

I''m hoping for a miraculous change in approach at Stoke, especially as it''s an early start coupled with the fact that our last visit was a step change more disappointing than Spurs yesterday.