Let's have some perspective

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:30 pm

KRBFC wrote:Yeah, I just despise the football we play tbh. I hate that we play this way, our lack of quality isn't an excuse because Hull had a weaker side last year and invested less than us in the windows yet they play some good stuff. Coyles side played some exciting attacking stuff with nowhere near the same resources as Dyche. For me, there was zero enjoyment sat at todays game, I understand we are going to lose games but where's the enjoyment in sat at the game knowing deep down your team wouldn't score if they played another 4 hours. We have some quality players capable of passing the ball given a license too which makes it even more frustrating. 1 win in 12 and Dyche just doesn't change, the same team and system over and over again (unless he is forced to change).

Where I believe we differ, KRBFC, is that I don't "despise" or "hate the way we play." I'm disappointed we don't play better some games, today's included. I thrilled how much we have achieved this season and the progression from last time in Premier League - and the first time. I'm enjoying it a lot more than I enjoyed last season - and, winning the Championship was very enjoyable.

I read the profile on Michael Keane in today's S.Times. He mentions Dyche's style of discussing performances with players. It is part of our success this season.

UTC

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:56 pm

bfcmik wrote: Our record buy, Brady, cost around £13m which United wouldn't even consider worth looking at. If someone isn't valued at £25m and upwards they aren't good enough!

Only 4 of Uniteds starting 11 cost over 25m.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:56 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Perspective is that Hull and Swansea have been gaining ground for weeks. And today we are closer to the drop than we have been in weeks or even months!?

The problem with "perspective" is that when it's based on stuff that is not true, then it becomes completely false perspective.

At the end of October, we were ahead of Swansea by 6 points.
At the end of November, 5.
At the end of December, 8.
At the end of January, 8.
At the end of February, 7.
At the end of March, 5.
At 23rd April, 5.

I don't see a trend of "gaining ground for weeks!" there. I realsie that there are averaging three points per game from their last one game, but as that game was against Stoke and their next is away to Manchester United I think it's fair to hope that they might not be able to keep up that average. I've watched both Stoke and Man United recently, and I think the majority on this board would say that Man United are the better side.

But before that stunning run of a victory, Swansea had 1 point in 6 games. They weren't gaining ground.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:05 am

Well, the trend there for weeks is that they are gaining ground. And thats not even looking at Hull! So you rpost proves, not disproves my point.

And that trend shows the gap closing. That is not even looking at the fact the gap was even wider than 8 points too!

The gap is closing, not widening.

bfcmik · Post by **bfcmik** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:08 am

Is there 1 of United's 14 players used today that would not be almost guaranteed a place in our team?

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:12 am

Dyche reminds me of Pullis sometimes, WBA fans called for his head the last couple seasons for prioritizing safety over playing 'attractive' football.

This season they hit 40 points with time to spare, will finish in the top half and the silence from the fans is deafening.

CBT · Post by **CBT** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:18 am

This thread is turning out to be a classic
I think united looked the best and most organised side to come here this season by the way
Suck on that u knockers

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:40 am

All this will be forgotten as soon as we are mathematically safe which we will be soon. Thankfully the points are already in the bank. After the stoke game I was most relaxed about it. The cushion is healthy there's too much for the other teams below to do & we will pick odd points up here & there before the season closes.

ThinLizzy · Post by **ThinLizzy** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 6:27 am

There certainly does need to be some perspective. As soon as I saw Fellaini was starting I thought it was going to be a tough day. No he isn't the most technical player, but the way we play meant he was going to be challenging Barnes for those balls up to him. As Phil Neville said in commentary, Fellaini was winning those balls and we needed somehow to get the ball wide, he was actually quite complimenatary about us but it seems Mourinho got his tactics spot on and played us expertly on the counter. Mee had the measure of Herrera in the air and with a bit more direction and luck, may have nicked a goal.
We are lacking in quality, that isn't a negative comment; that's the reality of the financial power of the league. Something, if we stay up we can improve in some way next season. We brought on Tarkowski, Agyei and Gudmundsson. They brought on Rashford, Mkhitaryan and Carrick. We're poles apart.
On another day, Barton takes one for the team and fouls their player and Mee deflects Rooney's shot wide. Small margins.
They are on a 23 game unbeaten run and that, yesterday; was a masterstroke in how to pick us off on the break and totally nullify our main game plan. Frustrating yes, but we're dealing with seasoned Premier league players, top class internationals and a manager, no matter how much you may dislike him. Is tactically excellent.
The atmosphere again sounded a bit flat, the team seemed a bit flat, Gray was left with no support far too often and we weren't at our best. I think we only made our first meaningful and concerted effort around the 70 minute mark, not surprisingly not long after JBG came one. It seemed to lift us a tad.
I'm disappointed, but not overly surprised. For anyone to expect us to be in anything less than a struggle at this stage is massively overly optimistic. We'll have perfomed a minor miracle just to survive. I think we'll be ok, for what's it worth. WBA are out of form and having nothing to play for I'd think we'd be picking up at least a point from them and West Ham. I have a gut feeling we'll get a result at Palace too, despite their upturn in form.
It's not every day we'll come up against a team who have one player alone worth more than our entire club and all it's players put together.
We'll be ok and just remember. Considering the financial playing field we're competing with, staying up in itself will be a massive achievement.

jlup1980 · Post by **jlup1980** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:05 am

I think the perspective bit has it's place. I mean 36 points in a hell of an achievement so far, but we can't ignore our form over the past 12 games or the fact that Dyche just seems to go with the same team every week regardless of opposition. He's learnt a lot this year, I really believe that, but he's gone back to his comfort zone in the past month or so and I understand why. However, he needs to take the shackles off a bit and allow us to play some football and create some chances. We're starting to look a bit like Boro under Karanka. Relatively solid but with no creativity and that's not going to get us another 3 points!

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:09 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:What is absolute ******** is giving Barton a 7 out of 10 today!

.

I haven't checked the player ratings thread but has someone seriously given Barton a 7??

ablueclaret · Post by **ablueclaret** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:44 am

The thing is me and KR. are just repeating the same stuff we've been saying for months, in my case since shortly after SD's arrival when I described him as needing to be more flexible. It has of course been his pursuit of stability which has proved so successful in the Championship, but for me tends to get found out at this level.
I felt he was beginning to become more experimental and proactive but about two months ago he retreated into the framework and has started tinkering at the edges rather like Laws did.
Hopefully he and the team will just make it, certainly they deserve to on effort alone, and if he does I hope he learns from it and develops more open strategies.

boatshed bill · Post by **boatshed bill** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 9:15 am

It's all very well asking for perspective now, but where was this need for perspective 2 months ago when some posters were getting dogs' abuse for posting that things may not have been as rosy as they appeared?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 9:30 am

ablueclaret wrote:The thing is me and KR. are just repeating the same stuff we've been saying for months, in my case since shortly after SD's arrival when I described him as needing to be more flexible. It has of course been his pursuit of stability which has proved so successful in the Championship, but for me tends to get found out at this level.
I felt he was beginning to become more experimental and proactive but about two months ago he retreated into the framework and has started tinkering at the edges rather like Laws did.
Hopefully he and the team will just make it, certainly they deserve to on effort alone, and if he does I hope he learns from it and develops more open strategies.

Yes, we know. You've spent 4 years saying that Dyche is a failure and will never achieve anything. Do you wonder why we get fed up of it?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 9:38 am

ablueclaret wrote:The thing is me and KR. are just repeating the same stuff we've been saying for months, in my case since shortly after SD's arrival when I described him as needing to be more flexible. It has of course been his pursuit of stability which has proved so successful in the Championship, but for me tends to get found out at this level.
I felt he was beginning to become more experimental and proactive but about two months ago he retreated into the framework and has started tinkering at the edges rather like Laws did.
Hopefully he and the team will just make it, certainly they deserve to on effort alone, and if he does I hope he learns from it and develops more open strategies.

Your issue is you say the same thing but phrase it differently after each loss, usually 4-5 new threads.

You also bang the drum for Tarks to be in midfield, like you did with Edgar, but with no real sound reasoning for the move other then your say so.
As for comparing him to Laws, go and have a word with yourself.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 9:45 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Only 4 of Uniteds starting 11 cost over 25m.

Indeed. But when you consider Moaninho made eight changes, still had four 'over 25m' players (one at £89m) and we are gutted we didn't give them the runaround; that shows how high our expectations are, and rightly so.

They are on a different planet but every now and then we'll beat them.

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:12 am

ablueclaret wrote:The thing is me and KR. are just repeating the same stuff we've been saying for months.

Should have just left it at that.

If you watched any clarets games, other than those on internet streams / live TV games, your in-depth analysis might be more respected. As it is your arguments are dismissed by any who have an I.Q. bigger than their shoe size. This perfectly illustrated by your comparison of Laws' and Dyche's tenures. Then again, there was no internet streams in Laws PL days, nor his championship days so, as per usual, just a baseless point.

btw, how did the majestic Tarkowski perform yesterday? Caught in possession twice and wayward passing was what I saw. I suppose thats all down to him playing at CB though, eh?

vinrogue · Post by **vinrogue** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:13 am

Perspective is called for. United had 12 men, thank goodness they didn't have the whole of the CFS they sing and sing. Talking with friends before the game the discussion was about hoping it wasn't a cricket score. Our TEAM is made up of the odd journeyman, free signings and a smattering of expensive for us players. 36 points with 4 games to go, what a brilliant achievement. Perhaps we have to understand that to achieve this you have to grind out results, Allardyce and Pullis initially target defence over attack, concentrating on trying to score from set pieces, whilst knowing that a clean sheet is at least 1 more point towards survival. Survival is the key word, we are now one of the clubs in the best league in the world with an aim of surviving. Pretty, attacking football is not on our radar at the moment and I don't think we can have survival (yet) unless we stick to grinding out results 4 boring 0 0 draws gives us 40 points would you take that? Your answer to that question probably determines which league you prefer to see us playing in at the moment. UTC

BabylonClaret · Post by **BabylonClaret** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:21 am

Belgianclaret wrote:"The issue in tactics is much more about whether changing the shape would help instead of going 442. Play 5 in midfield and you can accommodate Defour."

Let's say I can agree with that Babylon (although still not completely convinced about it)

"I'd say Dyche obviously values his ability because when fit he has put him into a 442 out wide rather than Brady or Arfield."

Only partly agree with that: (1) that is not the position he has been playing for years (and I suspect he was bought for) and (2) guess he was played there because of the poor form of Arfield & Brady, and his ability to provide incisive passes (which he can do much better from the centre of MF). Now GG is fit again, this option will not be used again I would suspect.

My point/question is simple: he's a quality CM player, but when was the last time he was played in his preferred position and why?

I expect that Dyche thinks other central combinations have more of what's needed in a midfield 2 in the centre. He's not finished 90 minutes for us once this season which suggests that either he's struggling a bit with the physicality of the league or tactically he's the first to take the hit when we do change it.

I like Defour - he's got talent and has great distribution. But he's not Burnley's version of Eden Hazard as some people seem to be thinking (he'll open defences, he's the most creative player we have, he can open up teams with his passing). He's a good passer and prepared to get stuck in and has great vision too, but defensively he's sometimes caught for pace or strength. I'd argue we really need more than a single CM alongside him to get the best from him in the middle - although like I said I thought he and Barton looked good in the FA Cup 3rd round.

And you've already answered why he's probably played wide - to contribute his incisive passing, but unfortunately he again picked up a knock against Spurs. maybe against some of the lesser sides we might see him again (if he's fit enough)

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:25 am

Sidney1st wrote:I haven't checked the player ratings thread but has someone seriously given Barton a 7??

Not sure it's me you were referring to but I did I think. I thought he showed more tempo and purpose than the rest of the team, he won tackles, headers and even a couple of take-ons, against Pogba if I recall. I tend to excuse his misplaced passes in attempting to give us that purpose. I was tempted to knock one of his score for the lack of a foul against Martial but punishing Barton for not being a bad-boy seemed too weird. I noticed last night the statistical scores on whoscored.com had him as fifth out of our fourteen players.

Anyway, the reason why I logged onto this thread was nothing to do with the above post, just to observe that having 7 out of 11 away, with 3 of those 4 home games against sides likely to finish in Champions League places, really is a shocking fixtures list, considering our away / home form. I hope Dyche doesn't come to rue ensuring we didn't lose at Hull, Boro and Sunderland, but I can see why he did it.

We need to keep some perspective as the thread title says and go into our last 4 games with confidence, because there is nothing about our form that has worsened since earlier in the season - we've just lost at home to Spurs and Man Utd, and drawn to Chelsea, that's all.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:48 am

Guich wrote:Indeed. But when you consider Moaninho made eight changes, still had four 'over 25m' players (one at £89m) and we are gutted we didn't give them the runaround; that shows how high our expectations are, and rightly so.

They are on a different planet but every now and then we'll beat them.

We wouldn't have beat any other side in the football league with that performance. Goals win games, how do you expect to score with 0 shots on target? There was just nothing coming from anywhere, flat. We wouldn't have scored if the game was still going on niw

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:09 am

KRBFC wrote:We wouldn't have beat any other side in the football league with that performance. Goals win games, how do you expect to score with 0 shots on target? There was just nothing coming from anywhere, flat. We wouldn't have scored if the game was still going on niw

As I said before, if you'd been watching just before half time you would have seen Gray have a shot on target. There were probably others.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:16 am

If the ball doesn't reach the target, it's not a shot on target.

It goes down as a shot blocked, of which we had 4 and they had 3.

It's no different to a speculative punt from 40 yards which hits a defender.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:19 am

dsr wrote:As I said before, if you'd been watching just before half time you would have seen Gray have a shot on target. There were probably others.

Gray didn't have a shot on target, it went wide. De Gea made 0 saves, keep making excuses though

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:35 am

Yesterdays performance was exactly the same as Lincoln. The fact that United had Pogba and co makes no odds. It was the same performance.

I wasn't one for over dramatising the Lincoln game even though I was disappointed. But we havent played well at home since!

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:40 am

UpTheBeehole wrote:If the ball doesn't reach the target, it's not a shot on target.

It goes down as a shot blocked, of which we had 4 and they had 3.

It's no different to a speculative punt from 40 yards which hits a defender.

That would mean shots on target would equal goals. I know that in official stats "shots on target" means "shots saved by the goalkeeper", but official stats don't necessarily tell the full story of the game. Remember Mee's header off the floor at Reading? To Burnley fans, it looked like a brilliant block; the the official statistician, and to KRBFC, it was just another shot off target.

Against Everton, did Barkley clear two off the line, or were they shots blocked? In real life, they were shots on target.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:41 am

KRBFC wrote:Gray didn't have a shot on target, it went wide. De Gea made 0 saves, keep making excuses though

If a keeper makes a brilliant save, it's exciting; if a defender makes a brilliant save, it's just another miss? Each to his own.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:43 am

dsr wrote:If a keeper makes a brilliant save, it's exciting; if a defender makes a brilliant save, it's just another miss? Each to his own.

You're getting desperate arguing against the stats aren't you? Are you trying to claim Grays blocked shot was on target? I don't understand your argument.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:47 am

KRBFC wrote:You're getting desperate arguing against the stats aren't you? Are you trying to claim Grays blocked shot was on target? I don't understand your argument.

It looked in target to me, but I only saw it live. Are you saying it was missing, or are you saying it wasn't on target because someone stopped it?

Maybe a better example - Middlesbrough's free kick last week, when Lowton got back and headed it off the line. I would say that was a shot on target because it would have gone in if a Burnley player hadn't got in the way. Are you saying that it wasn't a shot on target because the goalkeeper didn't save it?

I'm a statistician. If the stats are deliberately misleading, I will argue against them. Stats prove that virtually everyone in the world has more than the average number of legs.

jurek · Post by **jurek** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:50 am

It's fine to put matters in perspective and we can all agree that we'd have taken 36 points
at this stage of the season but we also have to accept that our form since we
got beat by Lincoln in the FA Cup at the beginning of February has been pretty poor.
One win, three draws and 5 defeats is pretty well nailed on relegation form.

Can we get another win in our remaining 4 games doesn't look easy with our best hope coming
from our two remaining home games against WBA and WHU.

I do think we will need a win (or 3 points) rather than a couple of draws to
get beyond what either Hull or Swansea might be able to do.
I could be wrong and it may turn out that Swansea don't manage to get more than another 6 points
from their remaining games which means we just need one draw/point.
We'll know after the next two games.

But we all know football can be very cruel and that sometimes teams
that are desperate start getting results and pull themselves out of the firing line.
Palace, Leicester and Bournemouth have done so recently and Hull and Swansea are
putting up a fight.

It 'll be interesting to see how Dyche sees it and who he picks?
I'm more concerned now that Mee seems to be out for the rest of the season
although Tarkowski is a natural replacement albeit with very little game time.
More importantly is whether we can get the goals that might produce that win
as we haven't look likely to score for a while now.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:51 am

dsr wrote:I know that in official stats "shots on target" means "shots saved by the goalkeeper"

it doesn't.

a shot on target is one that goes in or would have gone in unless blocked by the last man, whether thats the keeper or an outfield player.

the ones lowton and barkley cleared were all shots on target; the gray one that was blocked yesterday and ben mee's floor header, were not.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:53 am

dsr wrote:It looked in target to me, but I only saw it live. Are you saying it was missing, or are you saying it wasn't on target because someone stopped it?

Maybe a better example - Middlesbrough's free kick last week, when Lowton got back and headed it off the line. I would say that was a shot on target because it would have gone in if a Burnley player hadn't got in the way. Are you saying that it wasn't a shot on target because the goalkeeper didn't save it?

I'm a statistician. If the stats are deliberately misleading, I will argue against them. Stats prove that virtually everyone in the world has more than the average number of legs.

Are you really defending that horsesh**e performance in this manner? Some people settle for any old garbage.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:55 am

KRBFC wrote:Are you really defending that [expletive deleted] performance in this manner? Some people settle for any old garbage.

You need to read it again. I'm saying that ranting on and on and on about not having a shot on target is a bit irrelevant when we did have a shot on target. If you want to rant about Sunday's game, rant about what actually happened, not what official statistics say happened.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:00 pm

we didn't have a shot on target though.

that did actually happen.

standishclarets · Post by **standishclarets** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:25 pm

Posting the day after gives you time to calm down and hopefully be a bit more rational!

It is difficult to get away from the fact that teams seem to have sussed us out good and proper. It just happens that yesterday's performance made it all too clear. Fellaini won nearly everything - so much so that Barnes was ineffective. Gray 'huffed and puffed' as usual but was also ineffective (big strong defenders on his back nearly all the time). You can make all the excuses you want, but our current system of play has been nullified. Have we the players to change this....?

And picking up injuries at this time of the season doesn't help either.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:34 pm

So DSR, if you were to shoot an arrow at a target but it hits something on the way there, meaning it doesn't reach the target, you'd class that as hitting the target?

jlup1980 · Post by **jlup1980** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:35 pm

standishclarets wrote:Have we the players to change this....?

I think the big question is "have we got the Manager to change this?".

We clearly have the options to put another man in the middle of the park in place of Barnes (Westwood, Defour or even Tarky) and we also have the option to play a more creative wide man than Boyd (JBG). Will SD choose to use these options in the remaining games? We'll see on Saturday. I'll be bitterly disappointed if he starts the same 11 at Palace, I really will.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:44 pm

Belgianclaret wrote:"So those two things are incompatible. In effect, you can't get Gray and Defour in the same team in their best positions. Now, I said earlier in the week I'd have played Defour today in a midfield 3. But since Gray was our best attacking outlet today, its hard to argue he should have been sacrificed to get Defour in the team."

Thxs Spice - interesting proposition. Just seems strange to me that an international CM can't seem to get a game in his best position either in a 4-4-2 or in a 4-5-1,the latter because we don't seem to have a player up front who's good enough to hold up the ball.

In my opinion, this comes down to not making use of a very good player just because another (playing in a different position) is not up to the task.

Secondly, it also appears to me that SD doesn't even trust Defour to make an impact as a half time sub (in a 4-4-2) when for the moment Barton is definitely out of form.

Once again, your skewing the analysis. It isn't that we aren't playing a very good player because another in a different position is not up to the task. Arguably the reverse is true - if we played 4-5-1, we'd be leaving a very good player (Gray) on the bench to get a different player into the team. Defour has his weaknesses. I agree that Barton is a touch out of form, but bringing on Defour yesterday at half time without a change of shape would have been a gamble - we might have improved in possession, but we'd have been even more vulnerable to the sort of counter attacks United managed several times through the game. We've identified that Defour's weaknesses is players bursting beyond him with an athleticism he can't match: yesterday, United had Pogba, Herrera, Martial, Young, Lingard and even Rooney doing precisely this.

Managers see their team 2-0 down at half time and have to weigh whether to twistand risk getting beaten badly, or whether to stick a bit more and accept that the chances of getting back into the game reduce. Chucking on Defour for Barton would have been to commit to the first approach - its an easy one for us to pontificate about, but we don't have to deal with the consequences for confidence of being tubbed at home.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:47 pm

when you're 2-0 down with virtually no signs of getting back in the game, you absolutely twist. it was a free hit before kick off and even more so when we went behind.

defour for barton was absolutely not the change we needed; it was defour for barnes with hendrick pushed forward from midfield.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:52 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:So DSR, if you were to shoot an arrow at a target but it hits something on the way there, meaning it doesn't reach the target, you'd class that as hitting the target?

No. you're confusing "shot on target" with "goal". Shots which don't go in can still be shots on target.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:00 pm

If they reach the target

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:01 pm

quoonbeatz wrote:when you're 2-0 down with virtually no signs of getting back in the game, you absolutely twist. it was a free hit before kick off and even more so when we went behind.

defour for barton was absolutely not the change we needed; it was defour for barnes with hendrick pushed forward from midfield.

I disagree with you on both points Quoon. A free hit it may have been, but confidence is a bit fragile at the minute and I think the manager will have rightly wanted to avoid the risk of a damaging, heavy defeat. Losing heavily at home can affect confidence however much a free hit it might have been. Dyche probably decided it wasn't worth the risk given United looked very solid.

I also don't think that what you suggest was the right change. If anything, I'd have shifted Barnes to a wide position so we could still look for him from diagonals, but without Fellaini being stood next to him, perhaps with Brady playing in the third central midfield position (he's played there for Ireland) or alternatively Defour coming on for Boyd. To completely deprive the team of the sort of out-ball that is the bedrock of our performance seems to me to be an unnecessary experiment half way through a game.

In summary, getting Defour on yesterday and shaking things up at half time was not easy, and it was complicated further by the fact we were forced to disrupt our back 4 at half time and use a substitution up.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:18 pm

dsr wrote:No. you're confusing "shot on target" with "goal". Shots which don't go in can still be shots on target.

A shot from 14 yards which gets blocked before it even goes a yard cannot possibly be deemed a shot on target.

Do you also class free kicks which hit the wall as a shot on target? I'm interested to see how far you go with this.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:18 pm

fair enough spice, i take your points.

i'd still have hooked barnes for defour. it was always going to be very tough to get back into the game and it was the perfect opportunity to get our best player on the pitch.

we needed something different and all our best moments came when we kept the ball on the deck. i don't think we'd have sacrificed and defensive solidity; if anything it would have improved with the extra man in midfield.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:03 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:A shot from 14 yards which gets blocked before it even goes a yard cannot possibly be deemed a shot on target.

Do you also class free kicks which hit the wall as a shot on target? I'm interested to see how far you go with this.

Why not? (to both questions). It might be harder to assess whether it was on target or not, but that doesn't change the fact - a shot on target is a shot which would have gone in if someone hadn't got in the way. If you shoot from 14 yards, whether it is a shot on target or not depends on where the ball was going when it left your foot. It doesn't somehow change from off target to on target when it's half way there.

What's your principle for deciding whether a 14 yard shot is on target? Would you accept that one cleared off the line by a defender is on target? If so, how close to the goal does a blocked shot have to be before it changes from off target to on target?

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:08 pm

Being a statistician, you'll know that there are set parameters by which you record statistics.

The leading stats provider, Opta, defines the stats in question thus:

Shot on target

Any goal attempt that:

a) Goes into the net

b) Would have gone into the net but for being stopped by a goalkeeper's save

c) Would have gone into the net but for being stopped by a defender who is the last man.

Shot off target

Any goal attempt where the ball is going wide of the target, misses the goal or hits the woodwork.

Blocked Shot

Any goal attempt heading roughly on target toward goal which is blocked by a defender, where there are other defenders or a goalkeeper behind the blocker.

http://optasports.com/news-area/blog-op ... tions.aspx

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:28 pm

standishclarets wrote:Posting the day after gives you time to calm down and hopefully be a bit more rational!

It is difficult to get away from the fact that teams seem to have sussed us out good and proper. It just happens that yesterday's performance made it all too clear. Fellaini won nearly everything - so much so that Barnes was ineffective. Gray 'huffed and puffed' as usual but was also ineffective (big strong defenders on his back nearly all the time). You can make all the excuses you want, but our current system of play has been nullified. Have we the players to change this....?

And picking up injuries at this time of the season doesn't help either.

That's because we play the same pretty much every game, teams don't even need to send a scout to watch us, they know it's going to be 4-4-2 and pump it up to Barnes - there's our biggest issue

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:34 pm

2-0 down at ht, home to United with nothing to lose. Changes should have been made at HT anyone but Dyche could see that. Second half should have been a higher tempo fearless approach yet it was the complete opposite.

iluva64 · Post by **iluva64** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:47 pm

Mr Sutherland sums it all up for me.

One point per game is the best mantra and we are still on course......full steam ahead Mr Dyche!!!

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:59 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:Being a statistician, you'll know that there are set parameters by which you record statistics.

The leading stats provider, Opta, defines the stats in question thus:

http://optasports.com/news-area/blog-op ... tions.aspx

Which is fair enough, but it's a poor basis from which to complain that we didn't get any shots on target. Quite apart from the limited value of the stat anyway. Most sites either ignore the "blocked shots" or else lump them in with the misses, anyway.