| the false narrative of too many changes 17:35 - Dec 19 with 742 views | positivity |
when we've made 5-9 changes, we average 2 points per game
when we've made 0-4 changes, we average 1.36 ppg
weird! |  |
| |  |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:24 - Dec 19 with 616 views | EddyJ |
Should be remembered that if you play your first team in match 1, and make 5 changes in match 2, you need to make 5 more changes in match 3 to play your first team again.
Number of changes isn't the issue. Not playing our best team is the issue. | | | |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:38 - Dec 19 with 579 views | positivity |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:24 - Dec 19 by EddyJ |
Should be remembered that if you play your first team in match 1, and make 5 changes in match 2, you need to make 5 more changes in match 3 to play your first team again.
Number of changes isn't the issue. Not playing our best team is the issue. |
what's our best team though? combination of skill, form, fitness level, suitability for opposition?
in which case, it'll change game to game | |
| |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:50 - Dec 19 with 554 views | EddyJ |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:38 - Dec 19 by positivity |
what's our best team though? combination of skill, form, fitness level, suitability for opposition?
in which case, it'll change game to game |
I think we can all agree that any team featuring Akpom and/or McAteer is not our first team.
McKenna seems to be coalescing around a first XI of:
Walton
Furlong
O'Shea
Kipre
Davis
Matisuwa
Taylor
Walle-Egeli
Nunez
Philogene
Hirst
While not neccesarily our best 11 players, that team has looked the most cohesive we have fielded. [Post edited 19 Dec 19:52]
| | | |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:06 - Dec 19 with 511 views | bluefunk |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:50 - Dec 19 by EddyJ |
I think we can all agree that any team featuring Akpom and/or McAteer is not our first team.
McKenna seems to be coalescing around a first XI of:
Walton
Furlong
O'Shea
Kipre
Davis
Matisuwa
Taylor
Walle-Egeli
Nunez
Philogene
Hirst
While not neccesarily our best 11 players, that team has looked the most cohesive we have fielded. [Post edited 19 Dec 19:52]
|
And yet, 10 of that “best eleven” were dismal against Leicester. It’s almost like football is a game that doesn’t lend itself to simplistic theories about how to manage. |  | | |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:21 - Dec 19 with 479 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:06 - Dec 19 by bluefunk |
And yet, 10 of that “best eleven” were dismal against Leicester. It’s almost like football is a game that doesn’t lend itself to simplistic theories about how to manage. |
Yep, that 11 lost to Oxford and beat Cov |  |
| |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:32 - Dec 19 with 468 views | EddyJ |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:06 - Dec 19 by bluefunk |
And yet, 10 of that “best eleven” were dismal against Leicester. It’s almost like football is a game that doesn’t lend itself to simplistic theories about how to manage. |
We've looked like a team of strangers all season. Through October and November, we were fielding wildly different teams each game, often dropping/resting players that had done well in the previous match.
The Coventry/Stoke games were the first where we were starting to look cohesive. That coincided with us having a more settled team. Doesn't mean that settled team is going to win every week. Doesn't mean they are the finished article yet. Doesn't mean the team won't evolve, especially with the January transfer window coming up. But if we stick with roughly that team for a period of time, we are going to pick up more points than if we keep changing it.
We really missed Walle-Egeli against Leicester. He had contributed 2 important goals in our previous 3 games. He had often been our biggest attacking threat in those games. He also much more of a team player than any of our other attackers, bar Nunez. Clarke was powder-puff, slow and selfish.
Its almost like football is a simple game, but people want to make it seem complicated by taking one data point out of context. | | | |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:43 - Dec 19 with 453 views | Chris_ITFC |
That’s a tad too basic for me, and rather misses the point - sorry!
What would have happened if we’d picked a settled XI each week, building relationships, confidence and cohesion? That’s the comparison, for better or worse. |  |
| |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 22:48 - Dec 19 with 355 views | positivity |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 19:50 - Dec 19 by EddyJ |
I think we can all agree that any team featuring Akpom and/or McAteer is not our first team.
McKenna seems to be coalescing around a first XI of:
Walton
Furlong
O'Shea
Kipre
Davis
Matisuwa
Taylor
Walle-Egeli
Nunez
Philogene
Hirst
While not neccesarily our best 11 players, that team has looked the most cohesive we have fielded. [Post edited 19 Dec 19:52]
|
maybe, if fitness levels, form and the opposition allows. it won't be the case every week though! | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| the false narrative of too many changes on 22:49 - Dec 19 with 352 views | positivity |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:43 - Dec 19 by Chris_ITFC |
That’s a tad too basic for me, and rather misses the point - sorry!
What would have happened if we’d picked a settled XI each week, building relationships, confidence and cohesion? That’s the comparison, for better or worse. |
we'd probably have several of the "first 11" crocked by now! whenever we've kept the same 11 we've lost... | |
| |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 23:53 - Dec 19 with 299 views | bluefunk |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 20:32 - Dec 19 by EddyJ |
We've looked like a team of strangers all season. Through October and November, we were fielding wildly different teams each game, often dropping/resting players that had done well in the previous match.
The Coventry/Stoke games were the first where we were starting to look cohesive. That coincided with us having a more settled team. Doesn't mean that settled team is going to win every week. Doesn't mean they are the finished article yet. Doesn't mean the team won't evolve, especially with the January transfer window coming up. But if we stick with roughly that team for a period of time, we are going to pick up more points than if we keep changing it.
We really missed Walle-Egeli against Leicester. He had contributed 2 important goals in our previous 3 games. He had often been our biggest attacking threat in those games. He also much more of a team player than any of our other attackers, bar Nunez. Clarke was powder-puff, slow and selfish.
Its almost like football is a simple game, but people want to make it seem complicated by taking one data point out of context. |
We look like a team of strangers because essentially that’s what we were. If we’d had the same ‘first eleven’ for two months we’d eventually run into exactly the same issue we’ve had for three seasons, an injury crisis where we go a couple of months up against it.
And you want to blame Clarke for our loss against Leicester , because it doesn’t suit the narrative your promoting. FFS. it demonstrates exactly the opposite of the viewpoint you’d prefer.
If you think football is a simple game you really haven’t been paying attention | | | |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 02:55 - Dec 20 with 201 views | EddyJ |
| the false narrative of too many changes on 23:53 - Dec 19 by bluefunk |
We look like a team of strangers because essentially that’s what we were. If we’d had the same ‘first eleven’ for two months we’d eventually run into exactly the same issue we’ve had for three seasons, an injury crisis where we go a couple of months up against it.
And you want to blame Clarke for our loss against Leicester , because it doesn’t suit the narrative your promoting. FFS. it demonstrates exactly the opposite of the viewpoint you’d prefer.
If you think football is a simple game you really haven’t been paying attention |
"We look like a team of strangers because essentially that’s what we were."
Perhaps for the first 4 or 5 games. We didn't need to be strangers after that. We have chosen to be.
"we’d eventually run into exactly the same issue we’ve had for three seasons"
We got promoted in two of those seasons. It can't be that big an issue.
Playing your first team doesn't mean you will have 11 players with 46 starts at the end of the season. It does mean a relatively consistant team from game to game that slowly evolves according to form and injury. You can give one or two players a rest occasionally. But not five, every other game.
------------------
Here are some stats:
When we have started at least 10 of the current "first team", we have averaged 2 points per game across 6 games. That included a game against the runaway league leaders.
When we have started 9 or fewer of those players, we have averaged 1.5 points per game across 15 games.
------------------
If we are not playing the "first team", Clarke is the one of the players we usually bring in.
Here are some stats about Jack Clarke. I'm not blaming him to fit my narrative. The stats do the work for me.
When he has started, we have averaged 1.1 points per game across 9 games.
When he has not started, we have averaged 2 points per game across 12 games.
And here is a wonderful thread from during the Leicester game and some choice quotes.
"He’s lost the ball every time he’s received it"
"Absolute stinker so far!"
"He is their best player at the moment."
"He's been very poor thus far."
"We have a negative goal difference this season when Clarke has been on the pitch."
"Dire" | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
