|
|
Post by old_fogey on Sept 10, 2014 21:46:19 GMT
3 wins and a draw from the last 5. 10 points from the last 5 games. Thats win the league form after a difficult set of fixtures. Can we wait more than 1-3 games before talking of sacking the manager? Centenary - Our form is patchy - good at home poor away. Not going to argue that Clarke should necessarily go but if you want to defend him and be taken seriously it is best not to overplay current results and extrapolate ludicrously. You are very prone to do this. On another thread you said "1 win 1 loss x23 = 69 points, Thats got to be near the playoffs hasn't it?" The answer is no it isn't - Even when the League only had 22 teams and hence 42 games, 69 points wouldn't have made the playoffs. Your 10pts from 5 argument carefully avoids mentioning 3 were at home - unfortunately over the season we don't play 3 out of every 5 games at home. It is also true that 10pts from 5 games or 2 pts a game would get 92pts. This would NOT have been enough to win the league in any of the last 5 seasons and 2 pts a game would have only definitely won the league once this century. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2014 21:49:20 GMT
Remind me not to get in a stats disagreement with the fogester please.
|
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 10, 2014 21:56:19 GMT
3 wins and a draw from the last 5. 10 points from the last 5 games. Thats win the league form after a difficult set of fixtures. Can we wait more than 1-3 games before talking of sacking the manager? Centenary - Our form is patchy - good at home poor away. Not going to argue that Clarke should necessarily go but if you want to defend him and be taken seriously it is best not to overplay current results and extrapolate ludicrously. You are very prone to do this. On another thread you said "1 win 1 loss x23 = 69 points, Thats got to be near the playoffs hasn't it?" The answer is no it isn't - Even when the League only had 22 teams and hence 42 games, 69 points wouldn't have made the playoffs. Your 10pts from 5 argument carefully avoids mentioning 3 were at home - unfortunately over the season we don't play 3 out of every 5 games at home. It is also true that 10pts from 5 games or 2 pts a game would get 92pts. This would NOT have been enough to win the league in any of the last 5 seasons and 2 pts a game would have only definitely won the league once this century. I agree with you he's wrong on the first part of his post but I massively agree with him on his second part of his post. We've got into a pattern at this club of panicking, sacking , appointing , panicking, sacking , appointing, and it's got us no where because the person doing the sacking and appointing is clearly clueless when it comes to football matters. Sack the board mean no more Bristol Rovers and can't be done anyway. And sack Clarke means more changes more turmoil more new players more money spent more unrest. Are there any Gasheads on here who had the realistic target of mid table - play offs in mind who want Clarke out or is it just the " promotion is a must anything else is unacceptable " brigade who are firing on all " Clarke out " cylinders ? |
|
|
|
Post by old_fogey on Sept 10, 2014 23:12:17 GMT
Centenary - Our form is patchy - good at home poor away. Not going to argue that Clarke should necessarily go but if you want to defend him and be taken seriously it is best not to overplay current results and extrapolate ludicrously. You are very prone to do this. On another thread you said "1 win 1 loss x23 = 69 points, Thats got to be near the playoffs hasn't it?" The answer is no it isn't - Even when the League only had 22 teams and hence 42 games, 69 points wouldn't have made the playoffs. Your 10pts from 5 argument carefully avoids mentioning 3 were at home - unfortunately over the season we don't play 3 out of every 5 games at home. It is also true that 10pts from 5 games or 2 pts a game would get 92pts. This would NOT have been enough to win the league in any of the last 5 seasons and 2 pts a game would have only definitely won the league once this century. I agree with you he's wrong on the first part of his post but I massively agree with him on his second part of his post. We've got into a pattern at this club of panicking, sacking , appointing , panicking, sacking , appointing, and it's got us no where because the person doing the sacking and appointing is clearly clueless when it comes to football matters.Sack the board mean no more Bristol Rovers and can't be done anyway. And sack Clarke means more changes more turmoil more new players more money spent more unrest. Are there any Gasheads on here who had the realistic target of mid table - play offs in mind who want Clarke out or is it just the " promotion is a must anything else is unacceptable " brigade who are firing on all " Clarke out " cylinders ? Socrates - I am not arguing that Clarke should go, only that info, purporting to be factual, supporting the go/stay argument is correct and doesn't mislead. I'm sick to death, for example, with people arguing that Luton struggled in the Conference so why should we be any different. I have addressed this before (most recently on the other forum) - in case you were unaware, they made the playoffs in each of their first three seasons and the playoff final in two of those years, failing on a penalty shoot-out in one of those finals. I don't know about you, but I'd take that sort of struggle! I think the playoffs should be achievable and believe anything less would be failure. Clarke also seems to believe this (very naive however to say that we will definitely do it). We are not too far off (in terms of pts but not league position) at the moment but it's very early in the season. We'll have a much better idea in late Oct when around a third of our League games will have been played. I think the highlighted argument you make is a good one - but only up to a point. Given that the person with most input into sacking and appointing managers is likely to be here for some time yet, it means sticking with the manager irrespective of what happens in the forseeable future even it suddenly becomes a disaster. There must be some scenario down the line which calls for a roll of the dice. The only question is how bad does it have to get? |
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 10, 2014 23:30:20 GMT
I agree with you he's wrong on the first part of his post but I massively agree with him on his second part of his post. We've got into a pattern at this club of panicking, sacking , appointing , panicking, sacking , appointing, and it's got us no where because the person doing the sacking and appointing is clearly clueless when it comes to football matters.Sack the board mean no more Bristol Rovers and can't be done anyway. And sack Clarke means more changes more turmoil more new players more money spent more unrest. Are there any Gasheads on here who had the realistic target of mid table - play offs in mind who want Clarke out or is it just the " promotion is a must anything else is unacceptable " brigade who are firing on all " Clarke out " cylinders ? Socrates - I am not arguing that Clarke should go, only that info, purporting to be factual, supporting the go/stay argument is correct and doesn't mislead. I'm sick to death, for example, with people arguing that Luton struggled in the Conference so why should we be any different. I have addressed this before (most recently on the other forum) - in case you were unaware, they made the playoffs in each of their first three seasons and the playoff final in two of those years, failing on a penalty shoot-out in one of those finals. I don't know about you, but I'd take that sort of struggle! I think the playoffs should be achievable and believe anything less would be failure. Clarke also seems to believe this (very naive however to say that we will definitely do it). We are not too far off (in terms of pts but not league position) at the moment but it's very early in the season. We'll have a much better idea in late Oct when around a third of our League games will have been played. I think the highlighted argument you make is a good one - but only up to a point. Given that the person with most input into sacking and appointing managers is likely to be here for some time yet, it means sticking with the manager irrespective of what happens in the forseeable future even it suddenly becomes a disaster. There must be some scenario down the line which calls for a roll of the dice. The only question is how bad does it have to get? I think it'd have to get much worse than mid table after 8 games to be honest , or 16 th after 7 games which is what we were before Wrexham. A roll of the dice would be exceptable in January if we're in the relegation zone or only a couple of points above it in my opinion. I just feel that we've got so used to being in a relegation scrap that some of our fan base are so used to it that they're behaving like we're in one even when we're not. |
|
