Alejandra 0 Posted January 18, 2014 What would you honestly take.. and be honest.1. Gun-ho attacking football (like Blackpool tried) and potentially go down fighting and probably take years to come back up2. Defensive management that whilst not pretty, keeps us up every single year and finishes between 15-12Don''t turn this thread into a Hughton argument thread please, because it''s getting very old very quick [sn]I''ve said my views on him already, I''m not going to keep repeating it like everybody else as I''m not a skipped record.Just answer 1 or 2 [:P] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted January 18, 2014 I think most people would want a mix of the two ( Sorry to not pick just 1)A clever manager knows when to attack, and when to shut up shop.I think what would be acceptable would be number 2 until you can build a quality enough squad to earn the right to play some number 1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tetteys Jig 830 Posted January 18, 2014 I''d obviously pick results over performance, but we still look impotent up front. Until a deflected header, we didn''t look like scoring which would have been a shame as we''d dominated the game and it nearly went down as another Cardiff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
star_manic 0 Posted January 19, 2014 25 shots at goal, but only 4 on target. A rather worrying statistic, or just one of those days? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tetteys Jig 830 Posted January 19, 2014 I think it shows how we played and how Hull defended. We only really looked like scoring in the final few minutes. A few too many of our lads were looking at their name in lights when having a go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lowlyfendweller 0 Posted January 19, 2014 Ideally 1 and 2. But if I had to choose... I would like to see us win, as I enjoy it even if its ugly. (Armchair viewer mind you) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Surfer 1,547 Posted January 19, 2014 " 25 shots at goal, but only 4 on target. A rather worrying statistic, or just one of those days? " Misleading (or stupid?) statistic. - so a scuffed shot from the 6 yard line that bobbles straight to the keeper is "on target" and a 25 yard screamer that has the keeper beaten all ends up and goes a foot wide of the post is "off target" ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
priceyrice 123 Posted January 19, 2014 [quote user="Surfer"]" 25 shots at goal, but only 4 on target. A rather worrying statistic, or just one of those days? " Misleading (or stupid?) statistic. - so a scuffed shot from the 6 yard line that bobbles straight to the keeper is "on target" and a 25 yard screamer that has the keeper beaten all ends up and goes a foot wide of the post is "off target" ?[/quote]Yes, you pretty much have the gist of on and off target there ;P I would guess 15 or so of those shots were from corners and the resulting scramble in the box.Would love to see a chances created stat, i imagine it is about 2.Happy with the win none the less Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy_Bones 441 Posted January 19, 2014 [quote user="morty"]I think most people would want a mix of the two ( Sorry to not pick just 1)[/quote]Nail on head Morty.I can accept us deciding to play more defensively against the better teams in the league, but we shouldn''t be showing the same sort of respect to the teams like Palace and Cardiff along with it.I think most reasonable fans would accept maybe a third of the games a season being much more defensively focused, with another third being much more attacking and the remainder a careful blend of the two.It''s mainly because we''ve seemingly been having 30+ games a season of the defensive focus, that issues are being raised about the football on display, rather than some blinkered, insane, hate campaign against the guy in charge... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salopian 1 Posted January 19, 2014 It depends what you mean by "defensive management (which) keeps us up", and are we talking about the present squad or some hypothetical squad purposefully constructed? With our present squad, and lack of cover, I wouldn''t give us much chance. In fact some people say a policy of defence plus a hope nicking a goal is possibly what we have done to disappointment this season. Does Gun Ho mean attractive but likely to fail ultimately, and is it the same as "good passing football"? Blackpool failed, but Swansea succeeded.I think that most would go for the defensive option if there was some certainty about it. Given that we are not likely to hold out against the big boys away from home, and probably in most cases at home, there would be thus something like 10 matches where we could expect no points.So a point a match in the other 28, would require us to turn at least five or six of them to wins. It could be done but, as Wet Spam showed when playing without a striker, success is not guaranteed.Other things being equal, most of us would like attractive attacking football, I think, but this would require a good squad which is available only to the big money boys. So it comes down to probabilities. If the attractive football has a 60% chance of continuing Premiership status, and the defensive management only a 40% percent chance of relegation, it may come down to personal preferences, and we all differ. With those odds I might prefer the "live now, pay later" attacking football, but it depends on my subjective evaluation of the probabilities. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites