Jump to content

16 goals 9 games


Recommended Posts

Wasn't it Charlton who said that he'd pick the players for the system, not that they were his best players?

 

There's some merit in that approach, I just think that we don't have the squad for any one system right now.   A combination of contacts coming to an end and others on the downhill slope of form and ability.

 

The squad feels thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, billyblack said:

How many did we score, just asking, no idea.

 

3 at the back - 11 in 9 = 1.22 per game

 

4 at the back - 46 in 36 = 1.27 per game

 

In conclusion, with 3 at the back we've conceded quite a few more, and scored a few less. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Dooogs said:

 

I'm taking right now as equivalent to the end of the 2003-04 season. Time for a squad clear-out, and bring some new future legends in.

 

(And yes, I do remember that Turner got fired a few weeks into the 2004-05 season. I'd still like to see Monk given a chance with his own signings and backroom team, though).

 

I don't want that clown anywhere near my team next season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not ‘really’ working now and with the big player turnaround in the summer who’s to say whether we will have the playing staff to make it work then either. I don’t think you can nail your colours to the mast now to say what we will be playing next season. Suffice to say it’s not really working at this present time. The quick turnaround in games isn’t ideal at this point as the players need to play regularly together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alanharper said:

 

3 at the back - 11 in 9 = 1.22 per game

 

4 at the back - 46 in 36 = 1.27 per game

 

In conclusion, with 3 at the back we've conceded quite a few more, and scored a few less. 

True, bit its early days. I dont think 9 games is fair to compare against.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, the third man said:

 

No, buts its they way to go, so even though we don't have the players for it, we will carry on to the bitter end

Monk is stubborn and will carry on to the bitter end, OK we don't have the players for it so adapt until we do, obviously not in monks skill base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, alanharper said:

Whether you do the maths or do the math, it doesn't make the figures any different. 

 

Correct mate. Monk still has a worse record at Hillsbro than Jos had 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sefton owl said:

Things might be different had we signed Hector... Oh and didn’t have to play Odubajo

We didn’t have to play Odunajo today. Murphy has been our best player since the break but somehow Monk engineered him out of the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Emilianenko said:

We didn’t have to play Odunajo today. Murphy has been our best player since the break but somehow Monk engineered him out of the team.


Same as the other night mate when Murphy got played in the centre, even though clear as day he’s been most effective out wide and creating chances - joke

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

Which is correct math or maths?

The only difference between math and maths is where they're used. Like we said earlier, speakers of American and Canadian English use math, while speakers of British, Irish, and Australian English favor maths. There's no real logical explanation as to why math became preferred in some places while maths was elsewhere

Just say mathematics, then there is no issue

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...