The Swan and Cemetery
-
Posts
878 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Events
Posts posted by The Swan and Cemetery
-
-
1 minute ago, transfer reader said:
Yes, moving the goalposts by inserting extra information to the hypothetical at a later point.
It went from top 2 won all 10, 3rd won 9 and drew 1 and that was all to the top 2 only played the bottom 10 sides, but 3rd played tougher games.
You changed the hypothetical after it was originally made.
To be clear, I don't believe you've contributed anything to this thread. If you believe otherwise, fair enough.
As for the bolded part, that wouldn't go against what I've been saying, a team winning 20 in a row would be at the top of the form table.
I have never, at any point, suggested anything different, show me where I have, or don't bother responding with your drivel.
Changing a hypothetical or offering a different one, when the reasonably conclusive first one wasn’t quite enough for someone digging their heels in. A team winning 20 in a row wouldn’t have to be at the top of the form table, but suspect most would still describe them as being in promotion form.
I like how in your final sentence you’ve accused yourself so that you can accuse me of accusing you. Nifty.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, transfer reader said:
No, I'm not suggesting favouring any.
I've said from the start to do the same to all clubs.
This does of course mean you get issues in extreme examples, but these are extreme examples.
Alternatively, you could for this example give each team a win over each other or 2 draws, a neutral outcome for both sides.
You're also now making extra assertions on who each team has played which weren't there before.
You gonna put those goalposts back later, or keep on moving them when it suits?
Moving the goalposts? Haha. To be clear, I don’t believe anything you’ve contributed to this thread even vaguely supports the notion that a team that wins 20 games in a row isn’t in promotion form, whatever their league position. If you believe otherwise, fair enough.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, transfer reader said:
But it's a bullshit assumption to make, because you are favouring one team over the rest.
There is nothing to base the assumption of 3rd beating 1st and 2nd on.
It is flawed reasoning.
Eh? It’s extrapolating the form of team I’m considering, that’s allowed, I’m not favouring them. Your reasoning is in effect, teams 1 and 2 who’ve each beaten the 10 bottom teams are the form teams for promotion and should be ‘favoured’ over the rest vs team 3 who’ve beaten teams 4 to 13. If that’s how you want to perceive form, fair enough, but to call me out for bs is dripping in irony.
-
2
-
-
Just now, transfer reader said:
The point is why is that form only being extrapolated over a season for one side and not the others?
It's promotion form on the assumption that it is kept up for the whole season AND that the teams who were doing better also drop points.
Because, de facto, you can’t extrapolate for all, as @Davefevs points out above. Start of the season, 3 teams win their first 10 games. The team 3rd on goal difference will be automatically promoted if they retain their form, because the 1st and 2nd teams will have lost twice each to the team currently in 3rd. If 4 teams lose their first 10 games, the team just outside the relegation zone will be relegated if they continue their form, as they’ll have lost twice to each of the teams below them, so will be 0 points plays a minimum of 6. It’s a zero sum game.
-
2
-
1
-
-
The idea that 9 wins and a draw from 10 isn’t promotion form if two other teams win all ten is just pointless pedantry. That form over a season, is promotion form and everyone knows it. As they do with the equivalent for relegation.
-
6
-
-
Just now, Davefevs said:
Please explain the comparison? And why Luton were less fancied, less fancied by whom versus whom? Soundbites mates, soundbites, spoken for the gullible to ingest.
Think what they’re getting at is we should have hung on to NP because he’s been promoted to the PL… either that or we should hire a 12 year old because Sir AF was once 12 and look what he accomplished.
-
1
-
7
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, Jimbo76 said:
It's worth revisiting some of the 'Manning Out' posts to see how it lost perspective, at least from some.
Maybe a vocal minority.
As I say, just fun watching the u turns from those that were so anti Manning. Or at least I think it will be.
U turns would imply people now think LM is definitively is the right person for the job, having previously been desperate for him to go. Not sure there are many signs of that change in view, but people can recognise performances for what they are, good and bad. If @W-S-M Seagull comes on demanding a 10 year contract for LM, fair enough. Overall I remain very unconvinced, but last two games have been solid/strong performances, so if that progress continues, all good. Never quite reached wanting him out, equally a long way from expecting great things next season - with a fair wind I’ll be wrong.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Jimbo76 said:
The odd 'Manning Out' zealot turning up with a hint of humility.
Maybe, as I previously suggested, a little premature in the judgement and definitely inappropriately personal in nature.
I wasn't 'Manning In'. I said give him some time and limit the personal abuse.
I am however enjoying the subtle first efforts at U turns that are now cropping up.
Some of the big guns still holding out though.
Sort of get your point at the edges, but think most have called bad performances and good performances what they were. Always exceptions as there were with NP and all before him, a few more interested in being right ahead of anything else.
-
1 hour ago, And Its Smith said:
If we got the penalties we deserved we’d have had a huge xG. You can’t just look at one lot of ‘what ifs’ and ignore the other. We didn’t get lucky. We were unlucky not to have had two penalties
And their high xG chances generally came from individual errors, rather than being tactically swept aside. I’m unimpressed overall by LM to date, but can see that he and the players got a lot right yesterday.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, GrahamC said:
Pretty sure our one at Reading was that year, too.
83/84 I think, Div 4 promotion battle.
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, Northern Red said:
Don't feed it lads.
Get where you’re coming from, but find the level of narcissism required to start a thread about not starting threads, simply intoxicating…
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Glen hump said:
Don’t think I’ve heard anyone say he was amazing’ there’s just a lot of people who understand what a good job he done in a absolute shit storm he came into’ there’s still fans out the who don’t get what a mess we were in.
This. The nonsense spouted on here, by a few, about ‘cult of Nige’ is ridiculous (sometimes weak attempts at gaslighting). I haven’t seen a single poster imply he was perfect/didn’t make mistakes, just quite a few who can see he did a very decent job through some very difficult circumstances.
-
5
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Cole Not Gas said:
Dont know what kind of world you live in; poor win ratio, leaves the club after 30 months without the ability to score goals, during his best season with W-S-M up front (none of whom he recruited) he coached us to concede 77 goals - that is seventy seven.
Fans might sing; "you stole a wage, you stole a wage"
Except they wouldn’t. Unless there’s a halfwits half price offer.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Super said:
And what happens if a new man comes in and we lose every remaining game? No doubt you'll be calling for him to go as well.
Not sure unreasonable to call for a manager/coach to go if they’re losing every game. Ferguson was mentioned by someone as starting slowly at Man U, but he had won a European trophy beating Real Madrid, so wasn’t lacking a decent cv to give confidence that things might turn around.
-
1 minute ago, Red-Robbo said:
Yes but - as I remarked to a companion when they beat us at home early in Gary J's reign - however well they do, whatever they celebrate, it won't mask the unspeakable sadness of having to live in Luton....
Commute from leafy Harpenden!
-
2
-
-
For me Luton is the example that compares most interestingly with us. Top flight football, winning the league cup (and runners up), relegation, vast points reduction, non league, back up the leagues to the Prem and may well survive. If someone told me in advance that would be our journey, I’d take it, albeit when they exited the league system it was probably less fun. Despite the horror of relegation, suspect a lot of us found 75/76, 83/84, 89/90, 97/98, 06/07 and 14/15 amongst our most enjoyable seasons.
-
5 hours ago, The Fat Controller said:
If people want to criticise his performance as Technical Director, I have no problem with that at all.
Predictably for OTIB some of the things said about him recently have been insulting and childish.
That’s fair, but not helped by his lack of professionalism when representing the club in interviews and childish antics on X etc.
-
1
-
-
Ultimately this season will have been a roaring success for BT (getting rid of NP) and, apparently, SL/JL (a decent cup run for the under 18’s) - for anyone actually interested in first team football, not so much.
-
12 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:
9 from 23 are you sure??
It is 6 from 19 in the League and 7 from 23 which granted was tbh a nice little Cup run.
3 from 10, the final half of which was in the midst of a month long injury crisis and are you even accounting for the Fleming game. How you weighting this?
Fairly sure the Swansea game followed the Hull game so we won 4 of the last 10 anyway.
Think NP around a bit longer, so the played/won league games this season are:
NP 14/5 36%
CF 1/1 100%
LM 19/6 32%-
1
-
-
For me it’s not really a Pearson vs Manning debate, it’s the structure of the club, which was always ropey and has got worse:
From:
Owner - SL (well intentioned/generous over many years, but limited on the football side inc appointing football people?)
Chair - JL (not convinced)
Board - too small, limited challenge and oversight?
CEO - Gould (best for a long time?)/Alexander (Less visible but well regarded?)
DoF - BT (has strengths, but no track record in such a critical role?)
Manager - NP (imperfect, but has operated at headier heights than ours and appeared to have motivational skills needed)
Coaches - CF/JY (promising but no significant track record?)
To:
Owner: unchanged
Chair: unchanged
Board: unchanged (?)
CEO: role disappeared (broadly, maybe federated to a few people)
DoF: unchanged
Manager: role disappeared
Coaches: LM/CH (no particularly strong track record, but signs of having great potential)
Probably over simplified, but point is we’ve effectively lost two key layers of the structure, which had been filled with experienced people, but still have the remaining under qualified layers that lack strategy/oversight skills. Ie, in summary, the problem isn’t LM and nor was it NP. LM with a strong structure above would, in my view, be flying, as would NP (structure above and below).
Apologies, long post to say what lots of us have said over a long time.
-
12
-
-
28 minutes ago, Cole Not Gas said:
BUT for some people to criticize an individual for expressing an opinion when about a dozen people on OTIB post so regularly they must mistakenly think that others want to constantly hear their opinions, is quite weird.
28 minutes ago, Cole Not Gas said:but knocking fellow social media fans like you are better than them is really childish.
Zero irony.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, JAWS said:
Is he a player a club should look to sign if they want to push for the Premier league?
Given we need a squad and won’t be awash with £10m players, I’ve no problem with a £300k signing. Is he likely to be the player that gets us over the line to the PL, no, but don’t think that equates to it’s awful he’s here.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Bedminster said:
Has he shown anything in those 18 games to suggest he’s good enough? Not for me.
Think he’s shown some good stuff at times, helping take pressure off other front players with a style that causes typical Championship centre backs different problems. And not sure either NP or LM have quite worked out how to use him (don’t think his Luton record was a fluke). But overall sure he and management would say it hasn’t quite worked out, albeit for £300k hardly our worst signing over the years.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Bedminster said:
How did he do yesterday? It was his 4th goal contribution in 46 appearances.
46 appearances that are the equivalent of less than 18 full games.
-
2
-
I Say, We Are Top of the League
in Football Chat
Posted
For the season to date we’re =14th for scoring first (44%) and 9th for points won from scoring first positions. A few stats below, taken from Soccerstats, I haven’t done the hard yards of splitting NP/LM periods, albeit @Mr Popodopolous work above shows LM more successful at gaining points from winning positions. Think overall they show what we’d all think anyway, when we get a lead and opponents chase we’re decent at defending/extending, when we concede first, we’re below average at breaking teams down who are happy to defend their lead.
Score first %
Top: Southampton 71%
14th: BC 44%
bottom: Sunderland/Stoke/Rotherham: 33%
PPG from scoring first
Top: Leeds 2.82
9th: BC 2.42
Bottom: Rotherham 1.21
Concede first
Top: Rotherham 63%
=12th: BC 47%
Bottom: Southampton 27%
PPG from conceding first
Top: Ipswich 1.56
17th: BC 0.40
Bottom: Millwall 0.12