| Ipswich are playing Ruskball – and it won’t succeed 11:44 - Feb 5 with 8831 views | NorrisHatter |
Just over three years ago Stockport County was bought by a very wealthy local businessman. After ten years of languishing in non-league (much of it at tier 6) he announced after taking over that the club was capable of playing at a much higher level; that challenging to reach the championship was the aim and that he was in a hurry.
Substantial investment in the stadium, which had been decaying for two decades followed immediately. The entire off-field set up was professionalised with a proper management structure staffed with people of quality. Quality was the watchword on the field too with players of pedigree from higher divisions being signed.
The most radical move they made was to sack the long serving manager. Modern thinking off the field had to be matched with modern thinking on it, it seemed. None of the fans had heard of the new man, Simon Rusk.
He had been plucked from Brighton’s player development set-up where he had an outstanding reputation for bringing young players through. For years this had been a gripe of the supporters — “we don’t see enough of our young lads make it”.
Does any of the what I’ve just written seem familiar to Ipswich fans?
So — premier league style thinking and the promise of youth players coming through. It all seemed wonderful.
Except it wasn’t. A new possession-based style was introduced. We dominated matches, but there were too many draws and by the end of the season Rusk hadn’t improved the club’s league position from when he had taken over and County ended in the play-offs.
They lost timidly to Hartlepool, the team who finished below them. Pools had much lesser resources but were managed by Dave Challinor, a man in his mid-forties who had been successful at this level with Fylde and blended modern style with old school nous about what it takes to get out from this level. Hartlepool went up to league 2.
The next season, things got much worse. Other sides had worked County out. They sat back. More draws but defeats too. County had developed a bad habit of dominating but then lapsing momentarily and giving bad goals away, from stupid back passes and he like. The fans had a name now for the endless backwards and sideways passing with no penetration — “Ruskball”
The owner didn’t mess around. Rusk was removed and replaced with…… Dave Challinor!! The transformation was staggering. Just a few weeks after being incapable of beating struggling Barnet, County smashed league 1 Bolton 5-3 in a cup replay (watch the video on BBC if you can find it — an FA Cup classic).
Challinor proved what the fans knew all along — we had very good players; but they hadn’t been allowed to play how they could. County were a country mile behind Wrexham and Chesterfield at the top when Challinor took over, but they were reeled in and Stockport were promoted with six points to spare.
This season the progress has continued after a period of early adaptation to the new level. County hit the play off places yesterday and a second promotion in two seasons is not unimaginable. Stockport, with new wealthy owners in a hurry have succeeded:
Not just because of the off field professionalisation
Not just because of heavy investment in good players
But because the owners were savvy enough to realise that at lower league level you need a manager who wants to play cultured stuff (County are a joy when they can get it down on the grass), but who knows how to mix it up and hand it out to the sides who don’t want to play.
And because the owners acted quickly enough to make the change before the opportunity to progress was lost.
|  | | |  |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 11:53 - Feb 5 with 6364 views | backwaywhen |
Excellent description of what is possibly happening at Town , the comparison are uncanny , we must be very wary of making rash managerial changes though , I still think KM is the man to take us forward IMHO. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 11:54 - Feb 5 with 6363 views | Ryorry |
Great post, thank you & welcome to TWTD ðŸ‘
I have a very soft spot for County, having thoroughly enjoyed a visit to Edgeley Pk in April 2000 for our 0-1 away win. Visited some shops near the park, including an ironmongers, before k/o - everybody was extremely friendly, even wished us luck in the play-offs! |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:17 - Feb 5 with 6257 views | Steve_M |
Thanks but that’s really not the same as is happening here despite some similarities. What we’re doing is working well enough at home and was away at the start of the season, it needs some refinement but it’s not true that the only way to get out of this division is the Gareth Ainsworth way.
And frankly if the answer for us is to give up everything we’ve done positively over the last year and revert to sh1t, attritional football then I’m not interested. We’ve tried the old school manager approach here multiple times and only one of them was any good. |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:30 - Feb 5 with 6183 views | AlanG296 |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:17 - Feb 5 by Steve_M |
Thanks but that’s really not the same as is happening here despite some similarities. What we’re doing is working well enough at home and was away at the start of the season, it needs some refinement but it’s not true that the only way to get out of this division is the Gareth Ainsworth way.
And frankly if the answer for us is to give up everything we’ve done positively over the last year and revert to sh1t, attritional football then I’m not interested. We’ve tried the old school manager approach here multiple times and only one of them was any good. |
Just 8 wins in 14 at home suggests it is not working well enough at home. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:33 - Feb 5 with 6173 views | NorrisHatter |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:17 - Feb 5 by Steve_M |
Thanks but that’s really not the same as is happening here despite some similarities. What we’re doing is working well enough at home and was away at the start of the season, it needs some refinement but it’s not true that the only way to get out of this division is the Gareth Ainsworth way.
And frankly if the answer for us is to give up everything we’ve done positively over the last year and revert to sh1t, attritional football then I’m not interested. We’ve tried the old school manager approach here multiple times and only one of them was any good. |
Hi Steve
I probably wasn't clear enough. When circumstances allow County play some wonderful on the floor football - for instance against Northampton a couple of weeks back. They are near the top and came to play, so so did County. My point is that against the more agricultural sides Challinor knows how to adapt, like yesterday against Tranmere. A real battle of a game. But County won that one too. What makes Challinor a popular manager is that he WANTS to play decent football. He just knows what to do when circumstances don't allow it.
From reading your board it sounds like McKenna wants to play the right way, which will be great if Ipswich are promoted to a higher level, but in League 1, being effective is as important as being nice to watch. Doesn't seem that Ipswich are very effective right now. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:59 - Feb 5 with 6039 views | JakeITFC |
The analogy breaks down when you talk about us being a possession for possession sake team - we are the league's top scorers (and that isn't a false stat based on us battering sides really, we've scored in all but two games).
Ultimately we've had a few disappointing performances in recent times and there maybe a question of fire/desire/other cliches but in a pure footballing perspective we are the best team in the league and are unlucky to not be in a better position points/league wise. I don't think we should throwaway both the most attractive and effective manager we've had in years in place of some hard-nosed League One manager. |  | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:06 - Feb 5 with 5983 views | pointofblue |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:33 - Feb 5 by NorrisHatter |
Hi Steve
I probably wasn't clear enough. When circumstances allow County play some wonderful on the floor football - for instance against Northampton a couple of weeks back. They are near the top and came to play, so so did County. My point is that against the more agricultural sides Challinor knows how to adapt, like yesterday against Tranmere. A real battle of a game. But County won that one too. What makes Challinor a popular manager is that he WANTS to play decent football. He just knows what to do when circumstances don't allow it.
From reading your board it sounds like McKenna wants to play the right way, which will be great if Ipswich are promoted to a higher level, but in League 1, being effective is as important as being nice to watch. Doesn't seem that Ipswich are very effective right now. |
Welcome to the forum and thanks for the post; it makes for an interesting read.
I think the bit where we diverge is -
“The most radical move they made was to sack the long serving manager. Modern thinking off the field had to be matched with modern thinking on it, it seemed. None of the fans had heard of the new man, Simon Rusk.”
We sacked Cook for McKenna. Cook, a very successful and experienced manager, was making an even bigger mess of it than even Lambert managed, when you consider the plays at his disposal. He was not popular nor long serving. So there are concerns from fans when people pipe up and say sack McKenna and bring in a manager who has been there and done than because, since the days post Joe Royle (Hurst possibly aside) we’ve done that and, other than a season of relative success under Mick McCarthy, it has taken us in the wrong direction. | |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:38 - Feb 5 with 5780 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:59 - Feb 5 by JakeITFC |
The analogy breaks down when you talk about us being a possession for possession sake team - we are the league's top scorers (and that isn't a false stat based on us battering sides really, we've scored in all but two games).
Ultimately we've had a few disappointing performances in recent times and there maybe a question of fire/desire/other cliches but in a pure footballing perspective we are the best team in the league and are unlucky to not be in a better position points/league wise. I don't think we should throwaway both the most attractive and effective manager we've had in years in place of some hard-nosed League One manager. |
Is it not a false stat?
20 odd of the goals scored are from a handful of games out of 29 played.
in the last 5 league games for example, we've scored 4 in 4 of the games and 4 in one of them. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:50 - Feb 5 with 5666 views | cressi |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:38 - Feb 5 by FrimleyBlue |
Is it not a false stat?
20 odd of the goals scored are from a handful of games out of 29 played.
in the last 5 league games for example, we've scored 4 in 4 of the games and 4 in one of them. |
For anybody to say we have had old school managers, let's be real nobody in 20 yrs except Keanes first 12 month have had bug*er all resources, either on the players or facilities. We will wait and see where this all leads to. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:57 - Feb 5 with 5626 views | NorrisHatter |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:38 - Feb 5 by FrimleyBlue |
Is it not a false stat?
20 odd of the goals scored are from a handful of games out of 29 played.
in the last 5 league games for example, we've scored 4 in 4 of the games and 4 in one of them. |
And its in those low scoring games that a big difference emerges. In the league games where Wednesday have only scored once (12 games) they have emerged with 27 points (2.25 per game). For Ipswich its 12 points from 10 such games (1.2 per game).
Ipswich have scored twice in 9 games and amassed 21 points from those matches. For Wednesday its 13 points from 5 such games. Still better but not by much.
Clearly Wednesday are much better at defending slender leads, so presumably better at not giving away chances to the opposition. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:59 - Feb 5 with 5615 views | Wickets |
Much much to early to be talking about changing the manager for me although i do worry that we start so many games seemingly unmotivated . |  | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 14:07 - Feb 5 with 5563 views | homer_123 |
Our current style under KM is possession based but anyone who thinks it's possession for possessions sake is mistaken.
There is real purpose with the way we move and use the ball...probing and stretching the opposition to create space or overloads.
In addition we use direct balls to our wide players very effectively with bothe defenders and deep lying midfielders encouraged to pick longer more direct passes.
The difference in effectiveness when compared to previous managers is night and day.
We are struggling, no question but I would not want to see any changes in personnel at all. |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 14:15 - Feb 5 with 5493 views | Keno |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 14:07 - Feb 5 by homer_123 |
Our current style under KM is possession based but anyone who thinks it's possession for possessions sake is mistaken.
There is real purpose with the way we move and use the ball...probing and stretching the opposition to create space or overloads.
In addition we use direct balls to our wide players very effectively with bothe defenders and deep lying midfielders encouraged to pick longer more direct passes.
The difference in effectiveness when compared to previous managers is night and day.
We are struggling, no question but I would not want to see any changes in personnel at all. |
Homey the voice of reason**
** I dont mean the eejit who used to post as that who makes Frimmers look sane and sensible |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 14:25 - Feb 5 with 5436 views | Ryorry |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:59 - Feb 5 by JakeITFC |
The analogy breaks down when you talk about us being a possession for possession sake team - we are the league's top scorers (and that isn't a false stat based on us battering sides really, we've scored in all but two games).
Ultimately we've had a few disappointing performances in recent times and there maybe a question of fire/desire/other cliches but in a pure footballing perspective we are the best team in the league and are unlucky to not be in a better position points/league wise. I don't think we should throwaway both the most attractive and effective manager we've had in years in place of some hard-nosed League One manager. |
"in a pure footballing perspective we are the best team in the league and are unlucky to not be in a better position points/league wise."
Sadly, a "pure footballing perspective" may not be enough to get us promoted.
Clearly we are the 3rd-best team in the league for the only stat that counts in the promotion race, & have played a game more than the two teams above us as well as the one below. | |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 15:08 - Feb 5 with 5183 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 12:59 - Feb 5 by JakeITFC |
The analogy breaks down when you talk about us being a possession for possession sake team - we are the league's top scorers (and that isn't a false stat based on us battering sides really, we've scored in all but two games).
Ultimately we've had a few disappointing performances in recent times and there maybe a question of fire/desire/other cliches but in a pure footballing perspective we are the best team in the league and are unlucky to not be in a better position points/league wise. I don't think we should throwaway both the most attractive and effective manager we've had in years in place of some hard-nosed League One manager. |
But we aren't the best team in the league.
Being unlucky would be a couple of results not going our way. But 3 months worth isn't unlucky.
Derby and Wednesday 24 points out of the last 30
we have 14
" best in the league"
not a chance
which side plays the nicest looking football sometimes.. ipswich | |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 15:11 - Feb 5 with 5165 views | Herbivore |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 13:57 - Feb 5 by NorrisHatter |
And its in those low scoring games that a big difference emerges. In the league games where Wednesday have only scored once (12 games) they have emerged with 27 points (2.25 per game). For Ipswich its 12 points from 10 such games (1.2 per game).
Ipswich have scored twice in 9 games and amassed 21 points from those matches. For Wednesday its 13 points from 5 such games. Still better but not by much.
Clearly Wednesday are much better at defending slender leads, so presumably better at not giving away chances to the opposition. |
On the last paragraph, they are better at not conceding but based on xG against, they are not better at not giving away chances. We give away very few chances, and many of the goals we've conceded have been low percentage efforts from outside the box that always seem to find a way in against us. |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 16:23 - Feb 5 with 4964 views | JakeITFC |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 14:25 - Feb 5 by Ryorry |
"in a pure footballing perspective we are the best team in the league and are unlucky to not be in a better position points/league wise."
Sadly, a "pure footballing perspective" may not be enough to get us promoted.
Clearly we are the 3rd-best team in the league for the only stat that counts in the promotion race, & have played a game more than the two teams above us as well as the one below. |
I disagree, but realise that underlying stats v the league table itself is a difficult argument to win. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 16:33 - Feb 5 with 4909 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
The style of football is fine. The Style of football has us top of every positive metric in the league. Not taking chances and conceding bad goals is the issue so whilst this is a well written piece, I fear it is wide of the mark in relation to Ipswich. [Post edited 5 Feb 2023 16:34]
|  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 16:49 - Feb 5 with 4853 views | Kropotkin123 |
by the end of the season Rusk hadn’t improved the club’s league position from when he had taken over and County ended in the play-offs.
KM has improved our league position. Last year we were mid table. This season we have been predominantly in the top three. We've only lost one game against the teams in the top 6 this season and shoud go into the play-offs confident of winning them, if we fail to make the top 2 (which is still a realistic, but not probable ambition). |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:04 - Feb 5 with 4785 views | NorrisHatter |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 16:33 - Feb 5 by TRUE_BLUE123 |
The style of football is fine. The Style of football has us top of every positive metric in the league. Not taking chances and conceding bad goals is the issue so whilst this is a well written piece, I fear it is wide of the mark in relation to Ipswich. [Post edited 5 Feb 2023 16:34]
|
And therein (and In Herbivore's reply) lies the problem with stats like xG. Its based on the likelihood of scoring from a given position based on an analysis of thousands of matches. The problem is variance from the mean. xG doesn't take into account what the opposition may be doing in your particular matches. If it takes a team much longer to arrive at a given shooting position than average then its likely the opposition will have a better block and the shooting team will heavily underachieve versus xG. Or if their chances fall mainly to their least competent "shooters" who generally perform below the average. .
I don't know what Leicester's xG versus actual stats would have been when they won the league with their counter attacking style but I bet their actual was much closer or even better than xG.
Averages are the bane of my life in trying to get companies to use the right KPIs (that's my job). Average lead time to customers is 5 days and target is 5, so we are doing fine they say. Except that the average calculation consists of 2 threes and 4 sixes; so actually its a fail two times in every three.
xG is an average expectation; treat it with extreme caution. My head is in the freezer and my feet are in the oven, so my average body temperature is just fine and I've nothing to worry about. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:05 - Feb 5 with 4761 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 16:49 - Feb 5 by Kropotkin123 |
by the end of the season Rusk hadn’t improved the club’s league position from when he had taken over and County ended in the play-offs.
KM has improved our league position. Last year we were mid table. This season we have been predominantly in the top three. We've only lost one game against the teams in the top 6 this season and shoud go into the play-offs confident of winning them, if we fail to make the top 2 (which is still a realistic, but not probable ambition). |
4 league wins in 3 months.
Yet we should be confident of winning playoffs?
At this rate we won't be in them. | |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:13 - Feb 5 with 4708 views | Herbivore |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:04 - Feb 5 by NorrisHatter |
And therein (and In Herbivore's reply) lies the problem with stats like xG. Its based on the likelihood of scoring from a given position based on an analysis of thousands of matches. The problem is variance from the mean. xG doesn't take into account what the opposition may be doing in your particular matches. If it takes a team much longer to arrive at a given shooting position than average then its likely the opposition will have a better block and the shooting team will heavily underachieve versus xG. Or if their chances fall mainly to their least competent "shooters" who generally perform below the average. .
I don't know what Leicester's xG versus actual stats would have been when they won the league with their counter attacking style but I bet their actual was much closer or even better than xG.
Averages are the bane of my life in trying to get companies to use the right KPIs (that's my job). Average lead time to customers is 5 days and target is 5, so we are doing fine they say. Except that the average calculation consists of 2 threes and 4 sixes; so actually its a fail two times in every three.
xG is an average expectation; treat it with extreme caution. My head is in the freezer and my feet are in the oven, so my average body temperature is just fine and I've nothing to worry about. |
Nobody thinks xG is a perfect statistic but it's a reasonable indicator of the quality and number of opportunities a team creates or concedes. Our xG stats this season also mirror the eye test, we don't give up many good chances and we concede from an oddly high number of low percentage chances. We also create lots in most games but aren't clinical enough in taking our chances. These have been our dual problems all season, even when we were top. | |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:20 - Feb 5 with 4664 views | JakeITFC |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:04 - Feb 5 by NorrisHatter |
And therein (and In Herbivore's reply) lies the problem with stats like xG. Its based on the likelihood of scoring from a given position based on an analysis of thousands of matches. The problem is variance from the mean. xG doesn't take into account what the opposition may be doing in your particular matches. If it takes a team much longer to arrive at a given shooting position than average then its likely the opposition will have a better block and the shooting team will heavily underachieve versus xG. Or if their chances fall mainly to their least competent "shooters" who generally perform below the average. .
I don't know what Leicester's xG versus actual stats would have been when they won the league with their counter attacking style but I bet their actual was much closer or even better than xG.
Averages are the bane of my life in trying to get companies to use the right KPIs (that's my job). Average lead time to customers is 5 days and target is 5, so we are doing fine they say. Except that the average calculation consists of 2 threes and 4 sixes; so actually its a fail two times in every three.
xG is an average expectation; treat it with extreme caution. My head is in the freezer and my feet are in the oven, so my average body temperature is just fine and I've nothing to worry about. |
But the use of xG is an absolute measure of the averages - it’s fine to be used for comparison.
I think the better average gripe would be for you to sign up for the Plymouth forum to talk them through reversion to the mean, especially now their superstar keeper is seemingly injured. | | | |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:24 - Feb 5 with 4636 views | Guthrum |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 14:07 - Feb 5 by homer_123 |
Our current style under KM is possession based but anyone who thinks it's possession for possessions sake is mistaken.
There is real purpose with the way we move and use the ball...probing and stretching the opposition to create space or overloads.
In addition we use direct balls to our wide players very effectively with bothe defenders and deep lying midfielders encouraged to pick longer more direct passes.
The difference in effectiveness when compared to previous managers is night and day.
We are struggling, no question but I would not want to see any changes in personnel at all. |
Our possession is about patience and waiting for openings. Then we move the ball very fast. Hence why we create a lot of chances. |  |
| |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:33 - Feb 5 with 4578 views | NorrisHatter |
| Ipswich are playing Ruskball — and it won’t succeed on 17:13 - Feb 5 by Herbivore |
Nobody thinks xG is a perfect statistic but it's a reasonable indicator of the quality and number of opportunities a team creates or concedes. Our xG stats this season also mirror the eye test, we don't give up many good chances and we concede from an oddly high number of low percentage chances. We also create lots in most games but aren't clinical enough in taking our chances. These have been our dual problems all season, even when we were top. |
"it's a reasonable indicator of the quality and number of opportunities a team creates or concedes".
I completely agree. It indicates what has been created. It doesn't predict that it will be converted, or conceded if its xG against. It tells you what, but it doesn't tell you why. Why if our xG is say three a game every game do we only score one a game? And why is it that in some games a team's actual is much closer to xG than others?
According to the xG experts the answer is variance. The question is whether the variance is statistical inevitability that given a long enough run will correct itself . So I expect when I toss a coin it will be heads half the time. I might get 4 heads in a row when I start. It won't mean I'll get four tails next, but after 100 tosses of the coin the 4-0 I started with will look more like 50:50.
Alternatively the variance could be due to some self imposed factor. That's the question the Ipswich management team should be asking itself.
For the moment, given that Ipswich are top on statistics, but falling away badly in the real world, they don't seem to have the answer. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
