Burnley v Newcastle - Player Ratings

[quoonbeatz]

Not missed your point at all - you said that you did not think Newcastles 2 good chances were better than Burnley`s chances when very very clearly they were easier chances.

nope, i've been back and had a look at the earlier posts and you picked up on my ratings saying they looked more likely to score last night but I said we had as many good chances (if not more) than they did.

i said that both sides' finishing was poor but at least we worked the keeper.

seeing as the two perceived 'easiest' chances of the night for them didn't even hit the target, it would suggest I'm right.

[TVC15]

Sorry ?
What about the post when you said :
"in terms of chances, the two newcastle missed were good chances but don't think they were better than any we had"
That seems pretty clear cut....or is it one of those sentences where I need to read between the lines ?

Although I am now loving your own made up definition of what equates to an easier chance...which now "suggests you are right"....!!!

So Ronnie Rosentail, Sterling and Ritchies chances were all more difficult because they did not hit the target than say Barnes 20 yard pee roller shot that hardly reached the goal in the second half....but at least hit the target ?

[quoonbeatz]

Although I am now loving your own made up definition of what equates to an easier chance...which now "suggests you are right"....!!!

?

i said both sides finishing was poor and the fact that the two 'easiest' chances of the night were off target suggests i'm right.

So Ronnie Rosentail, Sterling and Ritchies chances were all more difficult because they did not hit the target than say Barnes 20 yard pee roller shot that hardly reached the goal in the second half....but at least hit the target ?

no idea what you're on about here. thats a pretty bizarre assertion.

again, my entire point was that we had some very good chances - as many as, if not more than, newcastle did, and we (in particular wood) should have done better with them. we looked as likely to score as they did on the balance of play and chances as a whole.

not really anything to get yourself in such a tizz about.

[TVC15]

Pretty confusing to understand what you are trying to say when you are actually saying things like :

"seeing as the two perceived 'easiest' chances of the night for them didn't even hit the target, it would suggest I'm right" (sorry - does not that mean that you think the chances that I perceive to be easier were not easier because they did not hit the target ?)

and "in terms of chances, the two newcastle missed were good chances but don't think they were better than any we had"

So....you don't actually mean that the 2 chances they had were better than any of our chances.....but it was more generally a view that "overall" we had the better chances because we had more chances than they did.

Super that its all cleared up now and I can stop tizzing.

[quoonbeatz]

literally no one else struggling with what i'm saying. and nor should they be given its pretty straightforward stuff.

if you're going to keep ignoring the sentence written before the one you're quoting, you going to keep struggling.

[TVC15]

I was not ignoring any sentence before the one I'm quoting when you said "in terms of chances, the two newcastle missed were good chances but don't think they were better than any we had"......infact there was no sentence to ignore. Feel free to check your own posts.

But lets pretend I missed something....are you still saying that the open net they missed from one yard out was no better a chance than any of our chances ?

[quoonbeatz]

"seeing as the two perceived 'easiest' chances of the night for them didn't even hit the target, it would suggest I'm right" (sorry - does not that mean that you think the chances that I perceive to be easier were not easier because they did not hit the target ?)

here you go:

i said that both sides' finishing was poor but at least we worked the keeper.

seeing as the two perceived 'easiest' chances of the night for them didn't even hit the target, it would suggest I'm right.

i even explained it again for you later on:

i said both sides finishing was poor and the fact that the two 'easiest' chances of the night were off target suggests i'm right.

are you still saying that the open net they missed from one yard out was no better a chance than any of our chances ?

nope, i'm saying that in terms of what both sides created, they didn't create better chances than us and at least we worked the keeper. i've been consistent with that all along.

to make it even simpler for you:

ritchie - should have scored, off target
joselu - should have scored, off target

wood 1st half - should have scored, decent save from the keeper
wood 2nd half - should have scored, straight at keeper
wood 2nd half - should have scored, skyed it

[TVC15]

Great thanks for all that - absolutely none of what you have said or quoted equates to Newcastle’s 2 chances not being better / easier than “any” of our chances.

Whether we had the better or more chances overall is a completely different debate - and as I have said I think we played better than a lot of fans are giving us credit for.

But whilst we are using that patronising “let’s make things simple for you” tone.

We could have 20 great chances last night and Newcastle could have just had the one open net chance.

So that’s 21 chances in total (20 +1 = 21) - the chance that Newcastle had could still be a better chance than all the 20 we had....as every chance is an individual chance.

Using that same principle for last nights game then to say that the open net miss was not an easier chance than any of the ones we made is just wrong....IMHO

[quoonbeatz]

Whether we had the better or more chances overall is a completely different debate - and as I have said I think we played better than a lot of fans are giving us credit for.

its exactly the debate we were having from the start!

you picked up on my ratings saying that newcastle looked more likely to score. i countered saying we looked just as likely to score.

to clarify, yet again, both sides had very good chances and should have scored more goals than they did but newcastle didn't look more like scoring than we did on the balance of play and chances.

really don't see why you're confusing yourself so much but i'll leave you to it now. perhaps don't query other people's posts if you don't understand what they're saying.

[TVC15]

Thanks for the advice “forum elder”

I know what the original debate was....and happy to admit that who had the best chances overall between the 2 sides is very much open to opinion.

What I don’t understand is why you continued to try and justify your statement that their 2 best chances were no easier than any of ours.

That’s me done - you will be no doubt happy to hear !

[bfcmik]

Hart 5 good keeper but no organisational skills for the defence in front of him.
Lowton 6 difficult night playing with a statue in front of him.
Long 7* the stand-out. No comprise defending.
Mee 6 unlucky with the deflection but OK otherwise.
Taylor 5 very ordinary defensively and even more ordinary when going forward.
Lennon 3 - 65 year olds at walking football move more than he did last night.
Defour 6 difficult to move the ball when everyone is so static.
Cork 5 difficult to move the ball when everyone is so static.
Brady 5 offered not a lot at all.
Wood 3 played for about 3 minutes out of the 95 he was on the pitch.
Vokes 5 with an extra point for the goal.

Dyche - 3 failed to motivate, failed to recognise the problems, waited to long to make changes and then totally b*llsed up the substitutions!

Awful watching! When we had the ball we often looked like a team of Subbuteo players as everyone just stood still waiting for that misplaced pass so that they could trot back into their defensive positions. Possibly the least fluent performance I have seen since 1987!

[quoonbeatz]

What I don’t understand is why you continued to try and justify your statement that their 2 best chances were no easier than any of ours.

That’s me done - you will be no doubt happy to hear !

very much so but just to point out, i haven't stated anywhere that their two best chances were no easier than any of ours so i'm not sure why you think i'd be trying to justify that.

that's probably where you've gone wrong.

cheers anyway.

[TVC15]

in terms of chances, the two newcastle missed were good chances but don't think they were better than any we had.

I give up !!

[quoonbeatz]

could be me but i genuinely can't see the word easier anywhere in that quote?

[Silkyskills1]

Hart 6
Lowton 4
Long 6
Mee 5
Taylor 4
Lennon 5
Cork 4
Defour 5
Brady 3
Wood 5
Vokes 6

Relegation written all over that display. They came for a point, they would have been happy with a point and overall played like a team who would have been happy with a point. At least though they had a game plan,the least you would expect from such a top class manager. Our 'plan' amounted to 'hit and hope' for the most part where the hope had pretty much dissipated after 20 mins. or so.
I've said for a while now that I believe it is probably the beginning of the end of Sean Dyche's wonderful 6 years in charge; It can't go on forever but neither can what was served up last night. Newcastle are definitely not one of the league's big-hitters by any stretch of the imagination despite the impression their fans give. A victory over Burnley is not totally unexpected currently and that is perhaps the most worrying part of it for me. We have become a definite 'soft touch'.

[TVC15]

could be me but i genuinely can't see the word easier anywhere in that quote?

Haha !
Does a “better” chance not mean an “easier” chance now ?!!

Ok let’s replace every time I said easier and replace it with better and we will start again...

Actually if that’s the best you can do to justify what you said let’s not bother !

[quoonbeatz]

[KippaxFifaHD]

Hart - 6
Lowton - 5
Long - 9 - MOTM
Mee - 6
Taylor - 6
Lennon - 3
Cork - 5
Defour - 5
Brady - 4
Wood - 6 - Thought he tried to play positively, despite what some on here might think
Vokes - 7

[Grumps]

The stats provided by the Premier league show Taylor as one of the best full backs defending, in the league, but yet this forum thinks he's shite

[Hibsclaret]

Hart 6
Lowton 6
Mee 6
Long 6
Taylor 4
Defour 6
Brady 4
Cork 5
Lennon 7
Vokes 7*
Wood 7

Get behind the team ffs. They weren’t that bad yesterday. As for giving the likes of Defour a 4 or below when he barely misplaced a pass and found what little space there was. We had a few chances and deserved at least a point. Shame Woodys shooting boots weren’t there and an early scabby goal does not help

[Nonayforever]

Hart. 4 the last 5 mins was like watching N Wisdom
Lowton 6
Long 7
Mee 5
Taylor 6
Lennon 7
Cork 4
Defour 4
Brady 4
Wood 4
Vokes 8

The second half was a training session

[Marty Dobson]

Hart 6
Lowton 5
Long 8
Mee 7
Taylor 6
Brady 5
Cork 5
Defour 5
Lenton 5
Vokes 7
Wood 5
Barnes Hendrick not on long enough.

[Parkvilla]

Hart 5 Not a lot to do but they could have scored 4 and he made no saves
Lowton 5 tries to get forward and only player who puts a cross in
Taylor 3 dreadful,can't beat a man and couldn't cross the road.Hits the first man every time.Another awful Dyche signing
Mee 5 hoof,hoof,hoof
Long 6 better than his partner
Lennon 5 Play him wide so he has chance to attack the fullback instead of telling him to come inside all game
Detour 7 only player capable of creating something.Unfortunately no one makes themselves available
Cork 3 the crab.passes everything back or sideways
Brady 3 clearly not fit but gets picked cos the manager is quickly running out of ideas
Vokes 5 one added for goal,slow,slow,slow
Wood 1 absolutely appalling.At fault for there 1st goal.Cant run,can't pass,can't control a ball and about as lethal in front of goal as Les Lawrence.
Subs ha ha
Dyche 0 clueless.plan A square passes then launch it.plan B launch it.Plan C launch it longer and harder.Tactically hopeless never changes style and brings like for like subs on when it quite clearly isn't working.As for taking Defour off and leaving Cork on.This is his team and it is a shambles.Relegation fodder and no doubt he will toss the fa cup off as well.TIME TO GO.

[Cirrus_Minor]

Hart 6
Lowton 5
Long 9
Mee 6
Taylor 5
Lennon 8
Detour 7
Cork 6
Brady 4
Vokes 9
Wood 6

[Marple Claret]

Hart 6
Lowton 6
Taylor 6
Mee 6
Long 6
Cork 5
Defour 6
Lennon 6
Brady 5
Vokes 7 MOM
Wood 4

[Wile E Coyote]

time to do away with this feature, insulting to the players.

[Hibsclaret]

The stats provided by the Premier league show Taylor as one of the best full backs defending, in the league, but yet this forum thinks he's shite

24 prem appearances 3 wins
Goals nil
Assists nil
Clean sheets 4

Clearly you mentioned defending stats but I’m sorry he has had 2 reasonable games at West Ham and Leicester. Beyond that he has been absolutely woeful

[quoonbeatz]

Get behind the team ffs.

he has had 2 reasonable games at West Ham and Leicester. Beyond that he has been absolutely woeful

[claretonthecoast1882]

Good to see the forum balloon back hammering Taylor, even funnier when you realise with his warped twisted agenda he has marked him the same as Cork & Brady.

It is all a bit Barry George / Jill Dando