Jump to content
IGNORED

Objective view on LJ


Robbored

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

It’s a simple enough article Cowshed - showing how well  LJ has done given the loss of three first team regulars last season along the financial restrictions he’s had to work under. No need for background data - just simple easily proven stats/facts compiled into the article.

Its a pat on the back for LJ in other words.

In regards to points and expenditure with no emojis, no I cant be bothered, no you still you are not getting it, and no aspersions about intelligence can you explain why?

54 minutes ago, Robbored said:

You’re doing what LJ has been accused of - over complicated things.

Its a simple enough article Cowshed and I’m not sure why you’re labouring some kind of point. I can only assume that you’ve dismissed it because of its lack of an index?     :dunno:

 

That is an emoji. A fact. 

I dismissed the article because it is not using facts. Nowhere in that article does it use evidence to highlight expenditure and points won. The journalist is using opinion.

Much of football analytics is of real value, but in regards to points and finance even experts and writers of the fine books like the ones mentioned can find themselves far apart in their conclusions. 

Without detail any crap can be written. A crap timescale? We could do Bristol City Jan - April 2018. Different period of months, different points yield versus expenditure.  In your post you are indicating a period  - Three first regulars not being present. Your timescale and the journalists(?) is being judged by months. Or is it? The article does not provide that detail. Its piss poor journalism which you take to leap to conclusions ... Or take for another strange wind up. 

 

48 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

So..........is there any evidence......or no evidence.....

and if there is evidence.......what is it evidence of..............

Without evidence to underline the fact its an opinion. Now that is fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

In regards to points and expenditure with no emojis, no I cant be bothered, no you still you are not getting it, and no aspersions about intelligence can you explain why?

That is an emoji. A fact. 

I dismissed the article because it is not using facts. Nowhere in that article does it use evidence to highlight expenditure and points won. The journalist is using opinion.

Much of football analytics is of real value, but in regards to points and finance even experts and writers of the fine books like the ones mentioned can find themselves far apart in their conclusions. 

Without detail any crap can be written. A crap timescale? We could do Bristol City Jan - April 2018. Different period of months, different points yield versus expenditure.  In your post you are indicating a period  - Three first regulars not being present. Your timescale and the journalists(?) is being judged by months. Or is it? The article does not provide that detail. Its piss poor journalism which you take to leap to conclusions ... Or take for another strange wind up. 

 

Without evidence to underline the fact its an opinion. Now that is fact. 

I really don’t know how to respond Cowshed........other than the words molehill and mountain............ :cool2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • First win at Sunderland for 25 years last season
  • First win at QPR this season for 41 years
  • First win at Ipswich last season for 39 years last season
  • First win at Stoke for 24 years this season (give or take 17 days)
  • First away win on New Year's Day for 116 years

 

Sunderland were ****** ****

QPR were losing to everyone at the time (and usually by a shed load of goals)

Ipswich, look at the table

Stoke, about to fire Mr. "Your football is jolly rotten" Rowett

First away win on New Years Day for an eternity !!! Can't see what this has to do with anything much

Not denying that LJ is on a good run,  but "Overturning Bristol City history"? ffs Give over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Without evidence to underline the fact its an opinion. Now that is fact. 

Err, well, no.  You are struggling with the basic concept of facts.

Bristol Rovers are below Bristol City in the football league tables.  I will provide you with no evidence but it is a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amuses me that people keep bring up these facts about "we haven't won there for 50 years" but fail to mention how many games that entails. Could be 5 or it could be 50 but on its own it is a meaningless stat. It may well be factual but it is totally meaningless in itself and can't be held up as any sort of evidence that LJ is some sort of record breaker. 

Pretty pointless article really and entirely subjective rather than objective imo.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to be someone’s opinion on how LJ is doing. 

The only interesting bit for me is that it’s someone not connected with the club. 

I think it’s pretty well known that LJ is held in pretty high regard outside our club. It’s only amongst our own fans that opinions are so divided. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said:
  • First win at Sunderland for 25 years last season
  • First win at QPR this season for 41 years
  • First win at Ipswich last season for 39 years last season
  • First win at Stoke for 24 years this season (give or take 17 days)
  • First away win on New Year's Day for 116 years

 

Sunderland were ****** ****

QPR were losing to everyone at the time (and usually by a shed load of goals)

Ipswich, look at the table

Stoke, about to fire Mr. "Your football is jolly rotten" Rowett

First away win on New Years Day for an eternity !!! Can't see what this has to do with anything much

Not denying that LJ is on a good run,  but "Overturning Bristol City history"? ffs Give over.

All valid facts tho  - an issue that Cowshed seems to have a problem with.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AppyDAZE said:
  • First win at Sunderland for 25 years last season
  • First win at QPR this season for 41 years
  • First win at Ipswich last season for 39 years last season
  • First win at Stoke for 24 years this season (give or take 17 days)
  • First away win on New Year's Day for 116 years

 

Sunderland were ****** ****

QPR were losing to everyone at the time (and usually by a shed load of goals)

Ipswich, look at the table

Stoke, about to fire Mr. "Your football is jolly rotten" Rowett

First away win on New Years Day for an eternity !!! Can't see what this has to do with anything much

Not denying that LJ is on a good run,  but "Overturning Bristol City history"? ffs Give over.

But facts none the less! COYR 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:
  • First win at Sunderland for 25 years last season
  • First win at QPR this season for 41 years
  • First win at Ipswich last season for 39 years last season
  • First win at Stoke for 24 years this season (give or take 17 days)
  • First away win on New Year's Day for 116 years

 

Sunderland were ****** ****

QPR were losing to everyone at the time (and usually by a shed load of goals)

Ipswich, look at the table

Stoke, about to fire Mr. "Your football is jolly rotten" Rowett

First away win on New Years Day for an eternity !!! Can't see what this has to do with anything much

Not denying that LJ is on a good run,  but "Overturning Bristol City history"? ffs Give over.

Don't forget the draw at Wolves? Not to be sniffed at that. For us. And a win at Brum. Plus, he followed up Cotts' win at Brammall Lane - our first since 1957 there - with another in our next visit!

And, four consecutive wins at Fulham, making a nice away day ever nicer - four times.

Then he's give us draws at Derby, Newcastle and Leeds (try and forget the advantages lost there) and a win at Forest. Blimey, I'm gonna start going away again....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Moments of Pleasure said:

Don't forget the draw at Wolves? Not to be sniffed at that. For us. And a win at Brum. Plus, he followed up Cotts' win at Brammall Lane - our first since 1957 there - with another in our next visit!

And, four consecutive wins at Fulham, making a nice away day ever nicer - four times.

Then he's give us draws at Derby, Newcastle and Leeds (try and forget the advantages lost there) and a win at Forest. Blimey, I'm gonna start going away again....

And the roads.......don’t forget the roads......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, NickJ said:

You have no way of knowing if it's objective.

However...

Judging by the one sided arguments in favour of LJ - eg "first win at Sunderland for 25 years" - when we've only payed at Sunderland 4 times in that period, I'd say it's anything but objective.

Similarly "first win at QPR in 41 years" when we've only played at QPR 9 times in that period.

Similarly "first win at Stoke in 24 years" when we've only played at Stoke 6 times in that period.

The "first away win on New Years Day in 116 years" is a belter.

Somebody has taken a lot of time to research these meaningless facts.

In the article Gregor McGregor talks about many meaningless records such as this but fails to mention the record breaking losing streak, and has IMO by writing such a one sided article made himself look a bit of a crap journalist.

Nevertheless I very much doubt that McGregor would have carried out this research, so this begs the question, who supplied it to him?  :whistle2:

 

I just tweeted a very similar reply to him....I get on well with Gregor (we DM a fair bit), but he hasn’t responded to that one!!!

For me, the piece is a bit random....there would be much better subjects to write positively about LJ on than “breaking records”.  I don’t think it’s objective imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I just tweeted a very similar reply to him....I get on well with Gregor (we DM a fair bit), but he hasn’t responded to that one!!!

For me, the piece is a bit random....there would be much better subjects to write positively about LJ on than “breaking records”.  I don’t think it’s objective imho.

Not a general criticism of the guy - because it’s probably a tough job at the Post. 

But this one seems a bit thrown together and too selective in it’s telling of history.

My guess is he genuinely had a conversation with someone who uses the data and LJ came up - but it was probably in the pub or something and so he’s fleshed out the details himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Not a general criticism of the guy - because it’s probably a tough job at the Post. 

But this one seems a bit thrown together and too selective in it’s telling of history.

My guess is he genuinely had a conversation with someone who uses the data and LJ came up - but it was probably in the pub or something and so he’s fleshed out the details himself.

Yeah, I think he’s doing a really good job at the Post.  Had a shaky start, but he’s built a good, solid relationship with the club.  He does like his stats, xG and all that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bcfcredandwhite said:

It seems to be someone’s opinion on how LJ is doing. 

The only interesting bit for me is that it’s someone not connected with the club. 

I think it’s pretty well known that LJ is held in pretty high regard outside our club. It’s only amongst our own fans that opinions are so divided. 

He had a few offers from premier league clubs in academy roles especially Arsenal I believe before he decided this was the correct decision. With what he's been given and had taken away the mans done a decent job and all being realistic with our wage structure is there anyone really better at this moment in time??? NOPE!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The “records” as evidence was a silly aside.

The main point was that some respected figures - eg the Brighton owner - think LJ is doing well, based on a complicated algorithm. Unless that is a lie (which Cowshed has implied it could be;why?) then it is an interesting fact. We don’t need to see the algorithm to take interest in that. We don’t know the identities of the contacts, but reporters don’t need to name their sources. We either trust them to tell the truth as they see it or not. I see no reason why GMcG should make this stuff up. Yes it’s a puff piece, but the positive information is likely to be correct. How accurate the actual algorithm is, is another issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Robbored said:

I really don’t know how to respond Cowshed........other than the words molehill and mountain............ :cool2:

Well you did not answer the points and used a emoji. You responded as predicted. You do the same virtually everytime. You repeat this theme everyday. According to posters you repeat this year upon year. That is a mountainous amount of posting out of a molehill. 

14 hours ago, Robin1988 said:

It's an opinion piece CS, not the latest Shakespeare sonnet.

It was a response to Robboreds post and his points about facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Jesus - some serious over analysing going on here. 

The Bristol Post is the type of thing you read on the shitter. It was a lazy article but not worthy of such dissection. Typical post

That was my thought exactly...:laugh:

All a bit pedantic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Drew Peacock said:

It has all been on OTIB and the BBC.

OK, but I still find myself wondering, who, other than somebody who is very keen on Lee Johnson, would trawl through the history books to establish facts which prove nothing but nevertheless attempt to demonstrate what a wonderful job Lee Johnson is doing?!

21 hours ago, Robbored said:

It has but NickJ must have missed it...............:cool2:

Correct.

 

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I just tweeted a very similar reply to him....I get on well with Gregor (we DM a fair bit), but he hasn’t responded to that one!!!

For me, the piece is a bit random....there would be much better subjects to write positively about LJ on than “breaking records”.  I don’t think it’s objective imho.

Yes, up till that I had thought he was quite a decent journalist but that piece makes him just look like Lee Johnson's spin doctor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NickJ said:

Yes, up till that I had thought he was quite a decent journalist but that piece makes him just look like Lee Johnson's spin doctor.

Because you don’t agree with him? 

Try looking at it from Gregors pov - no local sports journalist would risk pissing off LJ by posting a negative article about City as Richard Latham did with Joe Jordan who then banned him from press conferences.....................:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, NickJ said:

OK, but I still find myself wondering, who, other than somebody who is very keen on Lee Johnson, would trawl through the history books to establish facts which prove nothing but nevertheless attempt to demonstrate what a wonderful job Lee Johnson is doing?!

But it's not someone "trawling" through "the history books", is it? It's nothing more than a database search or a spreadsheet filter. Done in seconds, not some astounding research which exemplifies the best of human effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...