Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dean Coneys boots

Statistics do not lie

Recommended Posts

Statistics do not lie.

We are a side that does not score goals and does not win enough games. Millions were spent the result is the same. Frustrating. Even our best striker in years left having a massive pop at the negative tactics and refusal to let players express themselves.

How much longer does the man get? It is SO boring suffering a team famed for attractive football that now view as the most boring in all four divisions. Sorry but feeling as negative as the tactics tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Statistically 42% of football fans are of lower than average intelligence.Theres a stat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And neither did it provide the points we need. Or the goals. If you don''t beat the promoted teams, you struggle. We''ve taken 1 point from 2 of them. They''ve taken 4 points from us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="EGGY a Gibraltar Canary"]31 shots on goal and none scored is enough to make anybody feel negative!![/quote]Depends how much you understand the game really.Take the emotion out of it, ask someone neutral to analyse this, and I just bet they would class this as Cardiff being lucky to leave with a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Angry wrote the following post at 2013-10-26 11:35 PM:

31 shots at goal? That''s negative? Jeez, you''re hard to please!

Ridiculous. We didn''t score, no matter how many shots we had. Stats can show we had 1 shot on goal or even 100 or 1000, but if it doesn''t hit the onion bag SO WHAT!

No goals = No win = bottom 3 still.

Mr McNally will still be embarrassed tonight even if we did have 30 shots at goal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City 2nd"]Mr Angry wrote the following post at 2013-10-26 11:35 PM:

31 shots at goal? That''s negative? Jeez, you''re hard to please!

Ridiculous. We didn''t score, no matter how many shots we had. Stats can show we had 1 shot on goal or even 100 or 1000, but if it doesn''t hit the onion bag SO WHAT!

No goals = No win = bottom 3 still.

Mr McNally will still be embarrassed tonight even if we did have 30 shots at goal![/quote]Is this Hughtons fault? Surely it can''t be negative tactict if we had that many shots on goal?You sound like a child who has had his lollipop taken away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="can u sit down please"][quote user="morty"]Statistically 42% of football fans are of lower than average intelligence.Theres a stat.[/quote]

76% of stars are made up.[/quote]Stats too[Y]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mr Angry"]So what? Criticising negative tactics when we''ve had 31 attempts is so what.[/quote]What an amazingly insightful analysis, well played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

morty wrote the following post at 2013-10-26 11:46 PM:

City 2nd wrote:

Mr Angry wrote the following post at 2013-10-26 11:35 PM: 31 shots at goal? That''s negative? Jeez, you''re hard to please! Ridiculous. We didn''t score, no matter how many shots we had. Stats can show we had 1 shot on goal or even 100 or 1000, but if it doesn''t hit the onion bag SO WHAT! No goals = No win = bottom 3 still. Mr McNally will still be embarrassed tonight even if we did have 30 shots at goal!

Wasn''t suggesting it was Hughtons fault a all, in fact my pist did not mention FAULTS at all, it just pointsout that the stats could state anything - we still didn''t score enough to win, so McNally will still be embarrassed with our position tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mr Angry"]What do you mean Morty?[/quote]What did you mean, your post actually makes no sense whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="can u sit down please"]4 inside the box. 9 blocked. Stats can mislead.

Save of the game was ruddy by a mile[/quote]

How many of those blocked were inside the area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cardiff were hardly hard pressed to keep us out were they , two teams look poorer than us so far this season Sunderland and Palace . We could have had 100 shots blazed into the stands but if you dont score you dont win simple as that , and we have won 6 of the last 30 and thats pathetic by anyones standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pitchforks & Torches wrote the following post at 2013-10-26 11:51 PM:

We did score! Ruled out for what reason within the laws of the game?

We didn''t score - it was 0 0!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Football is a results business. Our results suck.

Something has to change. I say the manager. With heavy heart as it happens- he seems a good chap but it is just not working for him here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="CanaryOne"]Cardiff were hardly hard pressed to keep us out were they , two teams look poorer than us so far this season Sunderland and Palace . We could have had 100 shots blazed into the stands but if you dont score you dont win simple as that , and we have won 6 of the last 30 and thats pathetic by anyones standards.[/quote]Dear oh dear, I give up. Cardiff were the poorest Premier side I''ve seen in years. They may be a point ahead at this stage but we will finish around 10 points clear of them come May. They got lucky today, it won''t last the entire season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scoreline today doesn''t bother me too much. Hughton got everything pretty much spot on - we dominated the game and should have scored 6 or 7. No different manager would have been able to dominate the game today more than we did.

However, the substitutions showed why we should be worried. We had RVW - our transfer record breaking striker - sat on the bench until the 86th minute, whilst Elmander - who averages 1 goal ever 4 games or so throughout his career came on in the 70th. What was that all about?

Now, obviously we wouldn''t have necessarily won the game had RVW come on at the 70th minute, or even had he come on earlier. But it would then have been one of those days where you just have to concede it wasn''t going for you and take the positives in that if you create that many chances every week, you''ll win the game 9 times out of 10. However, the substitutions at the end of the game just suggest Houghton hasn''t really got a clue. I mean, if you''re going to bring on RVW for 5 minutes at the end anyway (so clearly you''re not protecting him from that injury he is coming back from), why would you not bring him on before Elmander in the 70th?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="CanaryOne"]Cardiff were hardly hard pressed to keep us out were they , two teams look poorer than us so far this season Sunderland and Palace . We could have had 100 shots blazed into the stands but if you dont score you dont win simple as that , and we have won 6 of the last 30 and thats pathetic by anyones standards.[/quote]Dear oh dear, I give up. Cardiff were the poorest Premier side I''ve seen in years. They may be a point ahead at this stage but we will finish around 10 points clear of them come May. They got lucky today, it won''t last the entire season.[/quote][Y]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totally agree with the ruddy comment. Cardiff had two decent shots matched by John ruddy.

We may have had all those shots. But they were all within the keepers safe zone.

Marshall made them look close.

Proper quality would have won that game. We had nothing upfront as usual. Might as well have had no shots on target

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="alartz"]Totally agree with the ruddy comment. Cardiff had two decent shots matched by John ruddy.

We may have had all those shots. But they were all within the keepers safe zone.

Marshall made them look close.

Proper quality would have won that game. We had nothing upfront as usual. Might as well have had no shots on target[/quote]0845 790 9090

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="CanaryOne"]Cardiff were hardly hard pressed to keep us out were they , two teams look poorer than us so far this season Sunderland and Palace . We could have had 100 shots blazed into the stands but if you dont score you dont win simple as that , and we have won 6 of the last 30 and thats pathetic by anyones standards.[/quote]Dear oh dear, I give up. Cardiff were the poorest Premier side I''ve seen in years. They may be a point ahead at this stage but we will finish around 10 points clear of them come May. They got lucky today, it won''t last the entire season.[/quote]Thats your opinion nothing more than that , if we cannot beat the likes of Hull, Cardiff (the poorest side you have seen in years) and Villa just what Premiership teams do you think we will amass all these points from ? . How many real clear cut chances did we actually create today ? Fers tame header near the end was about it the rest were scrambles and long range pops that were never going in .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="alartz"]Totally agree with the ruddy comment. Cardiff had two decent shots matched by John ruddy.

We may have had all those shots. But they were all within the keepers safe zone.

Marshall made them look close.

Proper quality would have won that game. We had nothing upfront as usual. Might as well have had no shots on target[/quote]

Take Morty''s advice, your argument is becoming more and more ridiculous by the minute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...