KrolMong Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 We need 13 points from 8 games including games at home to West Brom and Norwich and away trips to Boro and Sunderland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 So win the other four and just 1 point from them. Piece of piss 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hirstys 12th Pint Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 1 hour ago, KrolMong said: We need 13 points from 8 games including games at home to West Brom and Norwich and away trips to Boro and Sunderland. We need to hope Boro are their mid table self and then West Brom on their pre Play Offs rest and Sunderland on the beach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reesh Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 35 minutes ago, Hirstys 12th Pint said: We need to hope Boro are their mid table self and then West Brom on their pre Play Offs rest and Sunderland on the beach. We just need to be at our best. There. Corrected. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBO Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 On 16/03/2024 at 17:06, JBO said: 40% of today's Championship goals were scored by Ipswich The highest percentage in one day in the same division with a minimum of 9 games since 1899. Stick it on the honours board Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 12 hours ago, JBO said: The highest percentage in one day in the same division with a minimum of 9 games since 1899. Stick it on the honours board Whilst I like an interesting fact (almost as much as a boring anecdote) the reality here was the dearth of goals elsewhere rather than our porous defence. The Championship is a great league that as a surprisingly large number of poor games where sides nullify each other. Long advocate of reducing the number of league games back to 42 and sacking off 4 midweek rounds. I don't think the impact on finances would be that great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 2 minutes ago, mkowl said: Whilst I like an interesting fact (almost as much as a boring anecdote) the reality here was the dearth of goals elsewhere rather than our porous defence. The Championship is a great league that as a surprisingly large number of poor games where sides nullify each other. Long advocate of reducing the number of league games back to 42 and sacking off 4 midweek rounds. I don't think the impact on finances would be that great Seems that whether the top few teams score is much more on how they play than what their opponents did. More about whether they're up for it or not, or just not hitting the target. The teams down here, it's more like League One, who makes the fewest mistakes wins. Goals come more from defensive mistakes than good attacking play. Watching some teams recently Birmingham, Boro, Stoke, 91% of Blackburn, they could be playing all weekend and not create a goal, there was a thing on the Welsh Derby that showed the percentage if set piece goals, it was about 40% for lower teams. Reducing the games played to 42 would mean the EPL having to play less overseas friendlies and mess up their P&S. Can't have that. Klopp would stay on another year at Liverpool just to whine about it every day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 8 minutes ago, Tewksbury said: Seems that whether the top few teams score is much more on how they play than what their opponents did. More about whether they're up for it or not, or just not hitting the target. The teams down here, it's more like League One, who makes the fewest mistakes wins. Goals come more from defensive mistakes than good attacking play. Watching some teams recently Birmingham, Boro, Stoke, 91% of Blackburn, they could be playing all weekend and not create a goal, there was a thing on the Welsh Derby that showed the percentage if set piece goals, it was about 40% for lower teams. Reducing the games played to 42 would mean the EPL having to play less overseas friendlies and mess up their P&S. Can't have that. Klopp would stay on another year at Liverpool just to whine about it every day. The EPL would never change, the only way that would go is down to 34 so they could have a refreshing mid season break to replenish the coffers. I mean my plan would mean 2 clubs less in the EFL (would keep 46 games in League 1 and 2 but banish any postponements for international call ups). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 2 minutes ago, mkowl said: The EPL would never change, the only way that would go is down to 34 so they could have a refreshing mid season break to replenish the coffers. I mean my plan would mean 2 clubs less in the EFL (would keep 46 games in League 1 and 2 but banish any postponements for international call ups). My issue with that is that the jump from National League to L2 is brutal. Every team in the 72 is there on merit. L1 and 2 already have the FA trophy with group stages to pkay in in top, so reducing the Championship load is a bit unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 35 minutes ago, mkowl said: Whilst I like an interesting fact (almost as much as a boring anecdote) the reality here was the dearth of goals elsewhere rather than our porous defence. The Championship is a great league that as a surprisingly large number of poor games where sides nullify each other. Long advocate of reducing the number of league games back to 42 and sacking off 4 midweek rounds. I don't think the impact on finances would be that great 8-9% drop in revenue would put most clubs in trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Just now, Tewksbury said: My issue with that is that the jump from National League to L2 is brutal. Every team in the 72 is there on merit. L1 and 2 already have the FA trophy with group stages to pkay in in top, so reducing the Championship load is a bit unfair. It's all hypothetical of course, would never happen. My point is more the quality in the Championship for me gets watered down by squeezing in 4 extra midweek rounds, already high because of 4 international weeks during the course of the season. It would reduce the calls to rest players for FA Cup games etc I don’t think fans would be that bothered overall to have 21 home games not 23. How many already miss a couple of midweek ones anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 3 minutes ago, mkowl said: It's all hypothetical of course, would never happen. My point is more the quality in the Championship for me gets watered down by squeezing in 4 extra midweek rounds, already high because of 4 international weeks during the course of the season. It would reduce the calls to rest players for FA Cup games etc I don’t think fans would be that bothered overall to have 21 home games not 23. How many already miss a couple of midweek ones anyway. The season when the bottom 5 get relegated would be a blinder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 3 minutes ago, Andyben said: 8-9% drop in revenue would put most clubs in trouble. I acknowledge the point as totally relevant but I don't think the TV companies would pay less I mean fans would moan about the apparent jump in price per game but I could argue that some fans don't get season tickets because of the number of midweek games. Clubs perhaps could reduce playing squads by 2 or 3 players to compensate as they need less insurance against fatigue and minor knocks. I mean given wages to revenue %'s it would save em money !! To note it would never happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 2 minutes ago, Tewksbury said: The season when the bottom 5 get relegated would be a blinder. Be even worse if we lost three localish teams which had big away followings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 3 minutes ago, Tewksbury said: The season when the bottom 5 get relegated would be a blinder. Only promote 2 from League 1 relegate 4 or do it over 2 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 minute ago, Andyben said: Be even worse if we lost three localish teams which had big away followings The opposite argument is that some away followings on a Tuesday night with a 250 mile round trip, with the game on Ifollow are piss poor. I mean when I actually used to go to games sometimes it was a chore to force yourself to get there. You only have to look at the crowd (not the official attendance) to see many take the same view. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) 47 minutes ago, mkowl said: Only promote 2 from League 1 relegate 4 or do it over 2 seasons. The one change that would improve the domestic game is change European qualification. Leave the top 4 CL spots, but award 3 points for a cup win and 1 for a draw when working out the others, so while you can qualify for the conference league by finishing 7th, a team in 10th could overtake you with good cup runs and would make the cups much more competitive and important for mid EPL teams. Edited March 19 by Tewksbury Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrolMong Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 As the season has wore on. I happen to think that the actual overall standard of the Championship has turned out to be absolutely piss poor. What you’ve got is four very good sides in the current top 4. You’ve got West Brom to Cardiff who are just average. Sunderland to us are poor. And Rotherham will struggle in L1 next season. That group from Sunderland down it’s a mix of the sublime and the ridiculous. Really poor league this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 15 minutes ago, KrolMong said: As the season has wore on. I happen to think that the actual overall standard of the Championship has turned out to be absolutely piss poor. What you’ve got is four very good sides in the current top 4. You’ve got West Brom to Cardiff who are just average. Sunderland to us are poor. And Rotherham will struggle in L1 next season. That group from Sunderland down it’s a mix of the sublime and the ridiculous. Really poor league this. Strongly believe if DR had joined in June and had his players in we'd be up there or thereabouts 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrolMong Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 23 minutes ago, Andyben said: Strongly believe if DR had joined in June and had his players in we'd be up there or thereabouts We’d not be in relegation trouble, but we wouldn’t challenge the top 6 without spending several million. That group of teams from 5th down to Sunderland all have several players each who would get in our team even now. 14th to perhaps 10th might be achievable. But, year two after Rohl being here for a full season, with the right recruitment, we’d have a shout. As it stands right now, and assuming we stop up, we want to achieve mid table mediocrity next season and have a pop in year 3. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, Andyben said: Strongly believe if DR had joined in June and had his players in we'd be up there or thereabouts He'd have been sacked after a few games due to DM leaving us with an unfit aging group of weak willed players who didn't understand basic modern tactics. If anyone thinks he would have survived the 'Giz Darren Back' campaign on his first full manager job they are sadly mistaken. He'd have been gone before 'his' players ever got to full match fitness, same as Xisco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reesh Posted March 19 Author Share Posted March 19 6 minutes ago, Tewksbury said: He'd have been sacked after a few games due to DM leaving us with an unfit aging group of weak willed players who didn't understand basic modern tactics. If anyone thinks he would have survived the 'Giz Darren Back' campaign on his first full manager job they are sadly mistaken. He'd have been gone before 'his' players ever got to full match fitness, same as Xisco. Do you talk shit constantly or just on here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 10 minutes ago, Reesh said: Do you talk shit constantly or just on here? Tell me he would have had a winning start with the players and fixtures available at the start of the season. Then tell me that the DM lovers and press wouldn't have crucified him as a way of getting at DC for sacking DM, especially with it being his first job. Then go on and tell me 'His' recruitment would have been much different, even though we only started 11 days before the season started and most player movement had already happened, leaving us with not a lot more than what we signed available. Then we'll see who's talking shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owling_Wolf Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 6 hours ago, Tewksbury said: The season when the bottom 5 get relegated would be a blinder. The one when 3 went up auto from Champ, (1st Div), plus one via playoffs, wasn't too shabby. 😎 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 58 minutes ago, Tewksbury said: He'd have been sacked after a few games due to DM leaving us with an unfit aging group of weak willed players who didn't understand basic modern tactics. If anyone thinks he would have survived the 'Giz Darren Back' campaign on his first full manager job they are sadly mistaken. He'd have been gone before 'his' players ever got to full match fitness, same as Xisco. 1st June. DR announces. Two months with squad and his transfers in. Would have started so much better 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 3 minutes ago, Andyben said: 1st June. DR announces. Two months with squad and his transfers in. Would have started so much better Same could be said for Xisco. Turned up, straight to Spain with half a squad and the u21s, back a week and straight in. Probably wouldn't have signed the English loans either with more time. That's the joy of hindsight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, Tewksbury said: Same could be said for Xisco. Nah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoylandOwl Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 3 hours ago, Tewksbury said: He'd have been sacked after a few games due to DM leaving us with an unfit aging group of weak willed players who didn't understand basic modern tactics. If anyone thinks he would have survived the 'Giz Darren Back' campaign on his first full manager job they are sadly mistaken. He'd have been gone before 'his' players ever got to full match fitness, same as Xisco. can’t see why DR would have been sacked after 3 games. Xisco got 10… And, already we’ve seen DR has got more than a tune out of them in comparison to what Xisco EVER did. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reesh Posted March 19 Author Share Posted March 19 2 hours ago, Tewksbury said: Tell me he would have had a winning start with the players and fixtures available at the start of the season. Then tell me that the DM lovers and press wouldn't have crucified him as a way of getting at DC for sacking DM, especially with it being his first job. Then go on and tell me 'His' recruitment would have been much different, even though we only started 11 days before the season started and most player movement had already happened, leaving us with not a lot more than what we signed available. Then we'll see who's talking shit. Pipe down you silly ****. You post this shit enough you believe it yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tylluan Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 @Tewksbury when Rohl came in I posted about the difference between Munoz training regime and Rohl's and the main difference is volume. Munoz's pre session was disrupted by the massive heatwave and Rohl's probably would have been as well. In Spain he had them training at 11pm to try and beat the heat. Other teams changed their plans and went to Scandinavia and the Alps instead. But when the squad got back he'd decided to copy the zonal system he'd used at Watford. The physical training for zonal is completely different to the constant press with overlaps and quick beaks. It's akin to the difference between training for the 400m and 1500m. Zonal should be 10-15m shuttles to cover your area. Problem was the players were being overrun and having to cover more ground. That's why we were blowing out of our arses after 70mins and why Rohl had to rotate a bit while he got everyone up to the right levels. In all his early press conferences all he talks about is levels of fitness. When he got his hands on the data he must have cried. I would have done. If Rohl had arrived in early July then basic fitness training would have been different. Recruitment would have been different. It might not have seen much of a change in results in August but September would probably have been a lot different. There's no doubt we would have been fitter and wouldn't have faded in games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tewksbury Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 20 minutes ago, Tylluan said: @Tewksbury when Rohl came in I posted about the difference between Munoz training regime and Rohl's and the main difference is volume. Munoz's pre session was disrupted by the massive heatwave and Rohl's probably would have been as well. In Spain he had them training at 11pm to try and beat the heat. Other teams changed their plans and went to Scandinavia and the Alps instead. But when the squad got back he'd decided to copy the zonal system he'd used at Watford. The physical training for zonal is completely different to the constant press with overlaps and quick beaks. It's akin to the difference between training for the 400m and 1500m. Zonal should be 10-15m shuttles to cover your area. Problem was the players were being overrun and having to cover more ground. That's why we were blowing out of our arses after 70mins and why Rohl had to rotate a bit while he got everyone up to the right levels. In all his early press conferences all he talks about is levels of fitness. When he got his hands on the data he must have cried. I would have done. If Rohl had arrived in early July then basic fitness training would have been different. Recruitment would have been different. It might not have seen much of a change in results in August but September would probably have been a lot different. There's no doubt we would have been fitter and wouldn't have faded in games. Xisco said he was hammering them on fitness, but he only had about 7-8 players for the full preseason and first few games. Once the season started he was fucked as we were playing too many games with an unfit squad, most of the players who are performing for Rohl weren't ready or available at the start, Pol, Gassama etc. He went zonal because we were too unfit to press as he wanted, and couldn't play 90 minutes anyway at a high tempo, so he defended the box, which, as much as people say it was shite, it was effective, until their heads dropped, same as now. Almost every game we competed for 60 minutes, then conceded a set piece and fell apart. Same as we do with Rohl. We just couldn't get the first goal, despite having the chances, Windass had enough chances to win 2-3 of those games himself. Xisco's biggest issue was he didn't get the players onside so they fucked him as they knew he was off after 10 games, same as Pulis. They openly admitted to not following instructions numerous times. He had to be doing fitness as Rohl would have took even longer to get them playing as they were miles off at the start of the season. Xisco had to go, he failed, but anyone coming in would have had the same reception, Rohl included and would have been hammered by the fans and press, who to this day thing DM would have us in a better position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fOWLmouth Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 14 minutes ago, Tewksbury said: Xisco had to go, he failed, but anyone coming in would have had the same reception, Rohl included and would have been hammered by the fans and press, who to this day thing DM would have us in a better position. Whoever came after Moore was on a hiding to nothing without an exceptional run of results.That was never going to happen in the circumstances.If we stay up,Munoz will have served his purpose. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellsview Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 If we stay up it will be in spite of Munoz. Absolute disaster of an appointment! Worst manager in all my time of watching SWFC. We’d be below Rotherham now if we’d still got him in charge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fOWLmouth Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 8 minutes ago, Bellsview said: If we stay up it will be in spite of Munoz. Absolute disaster of an appointment! Worst manager in all my time of watching SWFC. We’d be below Rotherham now if we’d still got him in charge. I think we mostly agree with that. The point I’m trying to make is if Röhl had been appointed at the start of the season it could be Munoz or someone similar who would be in charge now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamblor Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I don’t believe that at all. In Röhl’s first match you could see the style of play that he wanted to impose and if he’d had a pre-season, the squad would have been in a much better position to execute it. As for recruitment, admittedly there’s not much to go off, but he’s signed four players and three of them are key players already. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fOWLmouth Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 He would have had a limited pre season though. I’m not denying Munoz was bad ,but even he must have put some fitness into the players before Rohl took charge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tylluan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 I'll simplify my previous post. Munoz might have hammered them for fitness but it was the wrong type of fitness training. That's why we started blowing after 60-70 minutes. Nothing to do with a lack of pre season as we were still unfit in September and still only playing for 70 mins. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 20 minutes ago, Tylluan said: I'll simplify my previous post. Munoz might have hammered them for fitness but it was the wrong type of fitness training. That's why we started blowing after 60-70 minutes. Nothing to do with a lack of pre season as we were still unfit in September and still only playing for 70 mins. To my less knowledgeable eye, I will admit, we are still below the fitness levels of other clubs. I mean Ipswich looked ahead of us on every metric Been commented on previously that 2nd half performances between say 50 and 70 minutes are generally average at best. Nothing will convince me that our central midfield is not inadequate for this league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyben Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 12 minutes ago, mkowl said: Nothing will convince me that our central midfield is not inadequate for this league Took a while but I think I agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 18 minutes ago, Andyben said: Took a while but I think I agree A few negative negatives. I will stick with numbers Basically the midfield is a bit shit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reesh Posted March 24 Author Share Posted March 24 9 minutes ago, Bronco said: You should have mentioned Steve Burtenshaw. Check his stats but maybe before your time? Look you old **** just cos your grandkids want fuck all to do with you on a Sunday and your wife can't stomach who you are to the point she can barely disguise her disgust of you don't come on here shit stirring fuck off to the allotment and drink some brake fluid. ****. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owling_Wolf Posted March 25 Share Posted March 25 8 hours ago, Bronco said: You should have mentioned Steve Burtenshaw. Check his stats but maybe before your time? I've always said Burtenshaw was the worst we've had in my time, (which started during Alan Brown's tenure), but I can't argue with anyone saying Muñoz. We walked away from the Donny friendly literally shaking our heads in despair. I think I only missed one of his competitive (ha!) matches, (Cardiff), and other than at L**ds we were mainly dogshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owl71 Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 On 19/03/2024 at 19:58, Tylluan said: @Tewksbury when Rohl came in I posted about the difference between Munoz training regime and Rohl's and the main difference is volume. Munoz's pre session was disrupted by the massive heatwave and Rohl's probably would have been as well. In Spain he had them training at 11pm to try and beat the heat. Other teams changed their plans and went to Scandinavia and the Alps instead. But when the squad got back he'd decided to copy the zonal system he'd used at Watford. The physical training for zonal is completely different to the constant press with overlaps and quick beaks. It's akin to the difference between training for the 400m and 1500m. Zonal should be 10-15m shuttles to cover your area. Problem was the players were being overrun and having to cover more ground. That's why we were blowing out of our arses after 70mins and why Rohl had to rotate a bit while he got everyone up to the right levels. In all his early press conferences all he talks about is levels of fitness. When he got his hands on the data he must have cried. I would have done. If Rohl had arrived in early July then basic fitness training would have been different. Recruitment would have been different. It might not have seen much of a change in results in August but September would probably have been a lot different. There's no doubt we would have been fitter and wouldn't have faded in games. I’ve never quite managed to get my head round why XM, who had a 58% win ratio at Watford, was such a disaster at Wednesday. But this post does add a lot of clarity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmesfield_owl Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 I don't XM is anywhere near as bad as some make out. Came into an unfit shit show. That said I'm glad he's gone and DR is here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkowl Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 7 hours ago, holmesfield_owl said: I don't XM is anywhere near as bad as some make out. Came into an unfit shit show. That said I'm glad he's gone and DR is here. The point being made is that the fitness levels were never then improved. But I can concur that having made the play offs, thus curtailing the pre season anyway, your manager then leaving, a delay in a new appointment and overall chaos it was barely a surprise the start to the season we had Once you start badly and confidence hits the floor, the pressure builds, rinse repeat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owling_Wolf Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 2 hours ago, mkowl said: The point being made is that the fitness levels were never then improved. But I can concur that having made the play offs, thus curtailing the pre season anyway, your manager then leaving, a delay in a new appointment and overall chaos it was barely a surprise the start to the season we had Once you start badly and confidence hits the floor, the pressure builds, rinse repeat You've missed out the bit where he moves the established players into new / opposite rôles. *When much of the squad is already screwed up, don't screw up the rest. *See Trevor Francis, c1993/4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.