| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now 11:24 - Sep 24 with 7266 views | SomethingBlue |
Two home games, neither straightforward at all; if you asked me now I'd be OK with four points, because this is the Championship, but needless to say we should be aiming for six. A couple of good results and continued presence in the top six might go some way towards convincing people, both around Ipswich and beyond, that we haven't necessarily been a flash in the pan; the opposite and it might become a tricky autumn. I see it as a fantastic opportunity though: play as we did yesterday and there's every chance we could be in a really fine position this time next week. |  |
| |  |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:18 - Sep 24 with 1514 views | ClausThomsen |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:10 - Sep 24 by Herbivore |
Going to games is kind of helpful when forming a view about how we ought to play, mate. Give it a go, you might learn something. |
Feel better?
All of our defeats have come with a back 4 and over 90% of our goals conceded as well. Playing well and losing isn't going to take us anywhere, or playing crap and losing, like the QPR and Fulham games.
Be interesting to see the formation Tuesday, if we play a back 5 and beat Sunderland you can suck my balls. | | | |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:23 - Sep 24 with 1501 views | Mullet |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:18 - Sep 24 by ClausThomsen |
Feel better?
All of our defeats have come with a back 4 and over 90% of our goals conceded as well. Playing well and losing isn't going to take us anywhere, or playing crap and losing, like the QPR and Fulham games.
Be interesting to see the formation Tuesday, if we play a back 5 and beat Sunderland you can suck my balls. |
How do you explain Barnsley then? Or the fact we've played 442 against two of the best teams who have beaten us then? One of whom was Leeds who lost to Millwall. A team who peppered their goal and failed to score as many times as they did against us, while Leeds only managed one shot on goal to our 4 actual goals?
The stats and false comparative method are meaningless with a bit of context like that aren't they? |  |
| |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:26 - Sep 24 with 1497 views | Herbivore |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:18 - Sep 24 by ClausThomsen |
Feel better?
All of our defeats have come with a back 4 and over 90% of our goals conceded as well. Playing well and losing isn't going to take us anywhere, or playing crap and losing, like the QPR and Fulham games.
Be interesting to see the formation Tuesday, if we play a back 5 and beat Sunderland you can suck my balls. |
Thankfully I can't see us playing a back 5 so I don't think I'll be sucking your balls anytime soon. You can keep regurgitating stats but it remains the case that we play better with a back 4, if you watched us play you'd see that. There's a reason we abandoned the formation against Barnsley and Bolton and then went on to win, it's a more effective formation for the players we have. It's handy to have other systems in the locker but there's no way we should be using 352 as our primary formation. |  |
| |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:33 - Sep 24 with 1481 views | ClausThomsen |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:23 - Sep 24 by Mullet |
How do you explain Barnsley then? Or the fact we've played 442 against two of the best teams who have beaten us then? One of whom was Leeds who lost to Millwall. A team who peppered their goal and failed to score as many times as they did against us, while Leeds only managed one shot on goal to our 4 actual goals?
The stats and false comparative method are meaningless with a bit of context like that aren't they? |
Barnsley we started with a back 5, it wasn't working so we changed it at halftime - see also Bolton. I've nothing against changing it if it isn't working.
"the fact we've played 442 against two of the best teams who have beaten us then?" - er, we haven't lost a game when we've started with a back 5. Why are you blowing the trumpet over defeats in a 442? You're just proving my point.
Millwall haven't been freescoring since they beat Norwich 4-0, the same Norwich who drew with Fulham who so outclassed us (when we started with a back 4). That isn't context, that's just early season football. If we beat Millwall and Millwall beat Leeds, why didn't we beat Leeds? That's what should have happened in the context...
What is the false comparative method? | | | |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:35 - Sep 24 with 1473 views | Mullet |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:33 - Sep 24 by ClausThomsen |
Barnsley we started with a back 5, it wasn't working so we changed it at halftime - see also Bolton. I've nothing against changing it if it isn't working.
"the fact we've played 442 against two of the best teams who have beaten us then?" - er, we haven't lost a game when we've started with a back 5. Why are you blowing the trumpet over defeats in a 442? You're just proving my point.
Millwall haven't been freescoring since they beat Norwich 4-0, the same Norwich who drew with Fulham who so outclassed us (when we started with a back 4). That isn't context, that's just early season football. If we beat Millwall and Millwall beat Leeds, why didn't we beat Leeds? That's what should have happened in the context...
What is the false comparative method? |
The quality of the opposition who have beaten us far more significant than the formation. Barnsley absolutely murdered and scored, yet you discounted that and then contradicted yourself.
If you're not against changing it, and 442 is so porous then your stats then become meaningless if you're now saying that it's not actually the problem. Simply saying we should go with "what works" and ignoring who we're playing/how the game goes makes no sense at all. | |
| |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:39 - Sep 24 with 1467 views | ClausThomsen |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:35 - Sep 24 by Mullet |
The quality of the opposition who have beaten us far more significant than the formation. Barnsley absolutely murdered and scored, yet you discounted that and then contradicted yourself.
If you're not against changing it, and 442 is so porous then your stats then become meaningless if you're now saying that it's not actually the problem. Simply saying we should go with "what works" and ignoring who we're playing/how the game goes makes no sense at all. |
I haven't discounted Barnsley, that was the game where you wrote off Kenlock. We started that game with a back 5 and won it. It's not like we've played a blinder every time in a 442 (see Fulham and QPR).
On the contrary, your second paragraph makes no sense at all. I'm saying see how the game goes, but don't start it with the formation that we've pissed over 90% of our goals in.
PS What is the false comparative method? And how have I used it? Teach me, teacher. [Post edited 24 Sep 2017 19:41]
| | | |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:45 - Sep 24 with 1456 views | Mullet |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:39 - Sep 24 by ClausThomsen |
I haven't discounted Barnsley, that was the game where you wrote off Kenlock. We started that game with a back 5 and won it. It's not like we've played a blinder every time in a 442 (see Fulham and QPR).
On the contrary, your second paragraph makes no sense at all. I'm saying see how the game goes, but don't start it with the formation that we've pissed over 90% of our goals in.
PS What is the false comparative method? And how have I used it? Teach me, teacher. [Post edited 24 Sep 2017 19:41]
|
I didn't write him off at all, I said he was atrocious and that I hoped he shake it off. I was also very happy when he came back into the side and played well.
You're a liar, as well as a hypocrite it seems.
How often have you been falsely trying to criticise people who go to games and rubbish their views and it seems you don't go at all? Then you get all brave and dish a few insults out or feel threatened because you make yourself look a bit clueless?
I'd love to see you find a post of mine saying Kenlock should never play for us again. | |
| |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:57 - Sep 24 with 1430 views | ClausThomsen |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:45 - Sep 24 by Mullet |
I didn't write him off at all, I said he was atrocious and that I hoped he shake it off. I was also very happy when he came back into the side and played well.
You're a liar, as well as a hypocrite it seems.
How often have you been falsely trying to criticise people who go to games and rubbish their views and it seems you don't go at all? Then you get all brave and dish a few insults out or feel threatened because you make yourself look a bit clueless?
I'd love to see you find a post of mine saying Kenlock should never play for us again. |
You said he shouldn't be considered for the first team for a while based on that performance.
If I'm a liar and a hypocrite, why waste your time engaging with me?
I've just pointed out the cold stats that we've lost 3 of our last 4 and are leaking far too many goals playing a back 4. We conceded 6 to Charlton before going to a back 5 for Birmingham.
I'd love to see you explain what the false comparative method is. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 20:04 - Sep 24 with 1413 views | Mullet |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 19:57 - Sep 24 by ClausThomsen |
You said he shouldn't be considered for the first team for a while based on that performance.
If I'm a liar and a hypocrite, why waste your time engaging with me?
I've just pointed out the cold stats that we've lost 3 of our last 4 and are leaking far too many goals playing a back 4. We conceded 6 to Charlton before going to a back 5 for Birmingham.
I'd love to see you explain what the false comparative method is. |
So I didn't write him off at all then?
Similarly I had engaged with you before your lie and hypocritical stance. No wonder you get yourself in such a muddle.
The comparative method is used to take sets of data (usually stats) and comparing them for similarities and differences to draw conclusions. Only it doesn't work if (like you've done) people falsify their findings as they cherrypick, make exceptions and use cognitive bias to reinforce their own assumptions instead of making them based on what you find.
Cold stats are awful at the best of times, let alone in a game like football. Hence why those that only use them always get stuff spectacularly wrong. They're only good for helping add depth to a point of view, not basing whole standpoints about the game on. | |
| |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 20:16 - Sep 24 with 1393 views | ClausThomsen |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 20:04 - Sep 24 by Mullet |
So I didn't write him off at all then?
Similarly I had engaged with you before your lie and hypocritical stance. No wonder you get yourself in such a muddle.
The comparative method is used to take sets of data (usually stats) and comparing them for similarities and differences to draw conclusions. Only it doesn't work if (like you've done) people falsify their findings as they cherrypick, make exceptions and use cognitive bias to reinforce their own assumptions instead of making them based on what you find.
Cold stats are awful at the best of times, let alone in a game like football. Hence why those that only use them always get stuff spectacularly wrong. They're only good for helping add depth to a point of view, not basing whole standpoints about the game on. |
You wrote him off for the time being.
You're engaging with me after?
I haven't cherry-picked or made exceptions. 10 of our 11 league goals conceded have come when we've been playing 4 at the back. As have all of our defeats.
The league table is made from cold stats! They're quite important. | | | |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 20:21 - Sep 24 with 1380 views | Mullet |
| Very interesting to see how we are placed a week from now on 20:16 - Sep 24 by ClausThomsen |
You wrote him off for the time being.
You're engaging with me after?
I haven't cherry-picked or made exceptions. 10 of our 11 league goals conceded have come when we've been playing 4 at the back. As have all of our defeats.
The league table is made from cold stats! They're quite important. |
Which is not actually what I said and again you changing your mind after being made to look silly. I made a suggestion that it might benefit him given how badly he performed and actually seeing it, you could simply hold your hands up and admit you lied to try and discredit my view.
The table doesn't inform anyone about formations, playing style or the relative merits of performances in the way you were cackhandedly trying to do. It's an entirely different discussion. One you seem to struggle with.
It's also worth noting you fail to recognise when we concede in 442 it is across a span of four games, two of which we lost and one where we scored 4 and conceded 3. So again your sample size is even worse than your malleable conclusions. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
