Jump to content

4 games in, how's he doing


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

At the risk of bringing actual facts into it again, we've gone from averaging 1.1 goals conceded per game under Monk to 0.75 goals conceded per game under Pulis, which is a tightening up, no matter how minor it may seem.

 

The average expected goals against us in Pulis' first four matches has been 1.05, compared with 1.18 in Monk's 11 games in charge. Again, not a huge shift, but given that we've played 143 minutes of those first four games with ten men, I'd say that Pulis has taken an already stingy defence and made it even more watertight.

 

Statistics will only tell you so much of course, and we also need to look at the games and judge what we're seeing with our own eyes. On that count, I'd also say we've look more defensively solid under Pulis so far - the solid banks of players behind the ball are making it difficult for teams to play through us and create too much in the way of clear chances.

 

As I say, however, we need to address our glaring issues at the other end of the pitch if we're going to avoid the drop next spring. 


Wouldn’t it be worth revisiting this after 10 games? 
 

I just don’t know how you can compare stats when one was here over a year, and the other for 4 games.

 

Yes, we are way short on goals. But who knows what will happen over the next 6 games 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rickygoo said:

Pulis has got three points from 4 games. An average of 0.75 points per game. Monk got 12 points from 11 games - an average of 1.1 points per game. If Pulis is doing "amazing" how well did Monk do? 

 

The only issue then would be how much Monk is to blame for the make up of the team as it is and how much was forced upon him.

 

Basically it's too early to say either way. I'd take the point about Pulis if we were winning games but - so far - we aren't. And given that's what his style of play is all about - performance and style are irrelevant  - I don't think amazing is the description that fits the bill.  And don't give me guff about playing better sides  - Reading have been on a poor run recently, Luton hammered Norwich and we beat Bournemouth who are second. I'm not saying he's a flop but amazing isn't the way I'd describe the way the team has played. 

 

We probably have to let him have a couple of windows now unless results are disastrous - I fear because I wouldn't have touched him with your bargepole never mind mine for the obvious oft stated reasons.  So be it. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FreshOwl said:

Wouldn’t it be worth revisiting this after 10 games? 
 

I just don’t know how you can compare stats when one was here over a year, and the other for 4 games.

 

Yes, we are way short on goals. But who knows what will happen over the next 6 games 

 

It would, yes.

 

It's early days, but we can compare Monk's 11 games to Pulis' 4 so far. As I said, stats will only tell you so much and need to be combined with what you're seeing with your own two eyes, but there's certainly been a change of approach which is evident from watching the games and is borne out by the stats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Kendo Nagasaki said:

You could look at it as 3 games undefeated against sides that will all be in the running for at least a playoff place but I suppose that would far too optimistic thinking 

 

25 minutes ago, Hookowl said:

Or you could look at it 4 games, won none. 

 

Both are true.

 

We should be looking at both elements of our recent form.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

I see a few comments along these lines at the moment, and as much as Pulis appears to have us even more organised and committed to defending than we were under Monk, we were actually pretty good defensively under the previous manager, with only six teams having a better defensive record than us at the point he was sacked.

 

It's obviously good that Pulis is tightening this up even further, but ultimately it's what happens at the other end of the pitch which is going to decide our fate from here on in.


I suppose the only difference is I don’t have the fear of 90+ minutes anymore like I did under Monk! lol

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SwellOwl said:

I suppose the only difference is I don’t have the fear of 90+ minutes anymore like I did under Monk! lol

 

I know what you mean.

 

If you read my next post in this thread following my reply to you, you'll see that I agree Pulis has tightened things up even more than they were under Monk, but I can't help but feel some fans (not you, by the way) are remembering Monk's entire tenure through the lens of that Rotherham game, when in reality we were already generally pretty solid defensively under him this season.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, FoxOwl12 said:

Just what are you on about. Bargepoles? Grow up man.

What's childish about a bargepole?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

At the risk of bringing actual facts into it again, we've gone from averaging 1.1 goals conceded per game under Monk to 0.75 goals conceded per game under Pulis, which is a tightening up, no matter how minor it may seem.

 

The average expected goals against us in Pulis' first four matches has been 1.05, compared with 1.18 in Monk's 11 games in charge. Again, not a huge shift, but given that we've played 143 minutes of those first four games with ten men, I'd say that Pulis has taken an already stingy defence and made it even more watertight.

 

Statistics will only tell you so much of course, and we also need to look at the games and judge what we're seeing with our own eyes. On that count, I'd also say we've look more defensively solid under Pulis so far - the solid banks of players behind the ball are making it difficult for teams to play through us and create too much in the way of clear chances.

 

As I say, however, we need to address our glaring issues at the other end of the pitch if we're going to avoid the drop next spring. 

fair shout.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

I know what you mean.

 

If you read my next post in this thread following my reply to you, you'll see that I agree Pulis has tightened things up even more than they were under Monk, but I can't help but feel some fans (not you, by the way) are remembering Monk's entire tenure through the lens of that Rotherham game, when in reality we were already generally pretty solid defensively under him this season.


Absolutely spot on and agree with your other post too. I think so much was made of the week where we could recover the damage done from points deduction, having 3 teams you would expect to struggle this season (Luton, Rotherham and Wycombe). Fans discussing about earning 7 or 9 points out of 9 and we came out the other side returning with 0 points and 0 goals. That week alone, finished Monk. Defence had improved but we missed a huge chance to collect some momentum. 
 

Pulis has made the team a unit but he has 2 issues he needs to resolve before January: score more goals and keep 11 men on the pitch. 

  • Like 1
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
×
×
  • Create New...