We would be MUCH better without Bannan

[Ian]

Interesting reading the comments on Wing

 

Personally I rather have someone who fails with 9 out of 10 potential goal scoring passses than someone who succeeds with 10/10 safe square balls in our own half

[Paul..]

2 hours ago, StudentOwl said:

No Wednesday player completed more passes than Wing yesterday?

 

Interesting, nobody gave the ball away as much as him either, I'm guessing?

[Paul..]

1 hour ago, AndersonOWL said:

well said - Bannan demands the ball to then pass it backwards - I like the directness of last night - actually an exciting match for one

 

Well, and here I was thinking Bannan's alleged "problem" was always looking for the Hollywood pass, hard to keep up on here!

 

48 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

The directness had nothing to do with Bannan not playing it was a change of tactics from Moore , 

 

Exactly.

 

Utterly laughable that Bannan not being on the pitch somehow resulted in 9 other outfield players deciding they'd actually try working hard for once, closing down the opposition, blocking space, running into the channels, pulling their players around, pressing the opposition back, etc. etc. etc. etc.

[Guest Willow Owl]

24 minutes ago, Ian said:

Interesting reading the comments on Wing

 

Personally I rather have someone who fails with 9 out of 10 potential goal scoring passses than someone who succeeds with 10/10 safe square balls in our own half

How many goals and assists has wing got ?

[Guest Willow Owl]

17 minutes ago, Paul.. said:

 

Well, and here I was thinking Bannan's alleged "problem" was always looking for the Hollywood pass, hard to keep up on here!

 

 

Exactly.

 

Utterly laughable that Bannan not being on the pitch somehow resulted in 9 other outfield players deciding they'd actually try working hard for once, closing down the opposition, blocking space, running into the channels, pulling their players around, pressing the opposition back, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Totally agree, Some are that desperate to blame Bannan that they ignore the facts. Result aside, Last night we played fine for 20/25 mins second half just like all other games this season ( apart from Plymouth ). The rest of the game Wigan were well on top and we rode our luck.

1- Our ball possession stats were the worst of the season 36% !
2- Our number of passes were the worst this season 239 compared to 450 from Wigan !

3- Our pass completion rate was the worst of the season 130 Wigan 370 ! 
4- Our keeper was man of match 

5- Set pieces free kicks were no better !

6- Did anyone in midfield perform well enough to keep Bannan out, absolutely no way.

 

The reason we looked more dangerous was because we tweaked the system and played Patterson closer to Gregory.

 

 

But according to some it’s all okay to drop Bannan ( our best player by miles) because the team ran about a bit more. 
 
Why not try running and closing down more with your best player also in the side. Not rocket science mate is it. 

 

[soldierboyblue]

46 minutes ago, Ian said:

Interesting reading the comments on Wing

 

Personally I rather have someone who fails with 9 out of 10 potential goal scoring passses than someone who succeeds with 10/10 safe square balls in our own half

Reyt logic that a bit like in the first half when we couldn't string a pass together and it just gave the opposition the ball

[Philb125]

5 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

Totally agree, Some are that desperate to blame Bannan that they ignore the facts. Result aside, Last night we played fine for 20/25 mins second half just like all other games this season ( apart from Plymouth ). The rest of the game Wigan were well on top and we rode our luck.

1- Our ball possession stats were the worst of the season 36% !
2- Our number of passes were the worst this season 239 compared to 450 from Wigan !

3- Our pass completion rate was the worst of the season 130 Wigan 370 ! 
4- Our keeper was man of match 

5- Set pieces free kicks were no better !

6- Did anyone in midfield perform well enough to keep Bannan out, absolutely no way.

 

The reason we looked more dangerous was because we tweaked the system and played Patterson closer to Gregory.

 

 

But according to some it’s all okay to drop Bannan ( our best player by miles) because the team ran about a bit more. 
 
Why not try running and closing down more with your best player also in the side. Not rocket science mate is it. 

 

You think our keeper was MoM?? Glad you’re using stats/facts based arguments, that opinion must have slipped in with them.

[Paul..]

2 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

You think our keeper was MoM?? Glad you’re using stats/facts based arguments, that opinion must have slipped in with them.

 

[Philb125]

Just now, Paul.. said:

 

So a collective of opinions is now a fact? Also he’s not MOM unless the 31% Paterson has doesn’t count because he erm has never been a footballer? 

[WhiteOwl91]

One thing i dont get is bannan gets accused of being too 'Hollywood' and going for the special ball too much, but also being accused of just playing square passes and going backwards. 

[Guest Willow Owl]

4 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

You think our keeper was MoM?? Glad you’re using stats/facts based arguments, that opinion must have slipped in with them.

In my opinion he was, followed by Patterson. Honourable mention for Palmer who kept McLean quiet. 

[Guest Willow Owl]

8 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

You think our keeper was MoM?? Glad you’re using stats/facts based arguments, that opinion must have slipped in with them.

Also don’t think your in a position to comment on this as you voted Lewis Wing man of match.

[Philb125]

1 minute ago, Willow Owl said:

In my opinion he was, followed by Patterson. Honourable mention for Palmer who kept McLean quiet. 

I get that, your opinion seems echoed by many in MoM thread, but your post started with people ignoring facts, then you stated facts and the opinion was mixed in with it. 
 

Im genuinely shocked so many thought he was MoM. Maybe his howler last week/last few weeks plays a part with him not having one this week. 
 

Looking at the objective ratings on whoscored he’s not in the top 5 players. Well behind Paterson, Wing, Dunkley, Palmer, Gregory… 

[Philb125]

1 minute ago, Willow Owl said:

Also don’t think your in a position to comment on this as you voted Lewis Wing man of match.

I thought he was exactly what we needed in the middle of the park. Added physicality, bite, 7 tackles, 2 interceptions, 2 clearances, 1 key pass, most touches, most successful passes. Rated 7.7 out of 10 just behind Paterson by whoscored.

 

But hey, who needs facts and stats. You know what your eyes tell you I’m sure. 

[Guest Willow Owl]

4 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

I get that, your opinion seems echoed by many in MoM thread, but your post started with people ignoring facts, then you stated facts and the opinion was mixed in with it. 
 

Im genuinely shocked so many thought he was MoM. Maybe his howler last week/last few weeks plays a part with him not having one this week. 
 

Looking at the objective ratings on whoscored he’s not in the top 5 players. Well behind Paterson, Wing, Dunkley, Palmer, Gregory… 

I’ll give you MOM, was in my opinion and not factual. 
Glad you agree with the rest of the post though !!
 

[Guest Willow Owl]

6 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

I thought he was exactly what we needed in the middle of the park. Added physicality, bite, 7 tackles, 2 interceptions, 2 clearances, 1 key pass, most touches, most successful passes. Rated 7.7 out of 10 just behind Paterson by whoscored.

 

But hey, who needs facts and stats. You know what your eyes tell you I’m sure. 

Isn’t a 7.7 opinion only 

[Philb125]

Just now, Willow Owl said:

I’ll give you MOM, was in my opinion and not factual. 
Glad you agree with the rest of the post though !!
 

 

Last night certainly lacked quality and finesse. But personally I thought the determination, work ethic, tempo and aggression made up for that. We were away to table topping team after all. 

 

In a few other games this season we have played better passing football, but often at a walking pace. With far lessor players overrunning our midfield and limiting us, to far fewer chances than what we created last night.

 

I'm sure/hopeful we can do both.  Be aggressive, play with tempo and energy and still add better passing and confidence into the mix. But after last few weeks maybe the confidence was lacking?  

[Philb125]

4 minutes ago, Willow Owl said:

Isn’t a 7.7 opinion only 

 

I don't think they have a bunch of analysts giving opinions. Most likely an algorithm that takes all the data and generates the score. Not perfect and can give false scores due to tippy tappy passes etc. but useful when comparing players objectively, rather than with our own conformational bias. I know in the past I have often judged Reach and bannan by a higher standing and feel they had bad games when in fact they have been middle of the pack. 

[83owl]

3 hours ago, CircleSeven said:

We won without Bannan so it’s an easier case to make. But if you think about it we only won because of a fluke own goal. With Bannan on the pitch and the extra energy we had last night we could have score three or four….

How do you know we would have had the “extra energy” with BB in the side?

 

Lets face it pretty much every week we say the players look lethargic and lacking energy during games? 

[Guest Willow Owl]

6 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

 

I don't think they have a bunch of analysts giving opinions. Most likely an algorithm that takes all the data and generates the score. Not perfect and can give false scores due to tippy tappy passes etc. but useful when comparing players objectively, rather than with our own conformational bias. I know in the past I have often judged Reach and bannan by a higher standing and feel they had bad games when in fact they have been middle of the pack. 

Well according to whoscored Wing is 9th in our squad for pass completion this season no assists and no goals. They even state is weakness is passing. 
Can’t see how that justifies him starting before Bannan in my opinion.