| Shots on target 00:12 - Dec 17 with 4779 views | britbiker |
Something I've noticed lately is that we don't make the oppositions goalkeepers save many.
We either miss the target totally or score
Can't think of many recent games where a keeper has made multiple good saves.
Today I think Gunn had one good save and one standard save. Don't remember the Watford keeper doing much except goal kicks or picking the ball out of the net.
[Post edited 17 Dec 2023 21:39]
|  | | |  |
| Shots on target on 16:58 - Dec 17 with 803 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Shots on target on 16:48 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Think that's been my point. It's not about what burns needs to do. He has a ceiling. We have it and it's been working for us which is fab.
But as we continue to grow so do our needs and that's where I then feel we need to grow further by getting better on that side. It's not a slight on Burns he is what he is. But everyone gets to a point where the club outgrows them and I think we are at that point with him.
That's not saying get rid. Nothing like that. But imo we need that next level. And yes that will be an amazing player who ever that is.. but that's where we are heading.. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 16:49]
|
Burns will improve while he is playing under McKenna's coaching - all our players are. If finishing is something he can improve, that will be an area that will improve I am sure.
The idea his finishing is significantly worse than the best players in his position is wrong though. Even when you picked out the player with the best finishing in his position in this division, it proved to be worse than Burns'! |  |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:03 - Dec 17 with 780 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 16:58 - Dec 17 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Burns will improve while he is playing under McKenna's coaching - all our players are. If finishing is something he can improve, that will be an area that will improve I am sure.
The idea his finishing is significantly worse than the best players in his position is wrong though. Even when you picked out the player with the best finishing in his position in this division, it proved to be worse than Burns'! |
Tbh if burns had 80 shots I'd be fuming with that level of accuracy too lol. That's a heck of a lot of shots. Do teams literally sit and invite whit to shoot lol
And yeah burns may improve. He may not. Difficult to know. Stat wise hes worse this season. But different league etc anyway. He's 30 next season. Doesn't mean much but we might start looking for that higher ceiling younger option anyway. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 17:08]
|  |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:06 - Dec 17 with 769 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Shots on target on 17:03 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Tbh if burns had 80 shots I'd be fuming with that level of accuracy too lol. That's a heck of a lot of shots. Do teams literally sit and invite whit to shoot lol
And yeah burns may improve. He may not. Difficult to know. Stat wise hes worse this season. But different league etc anyway. He's 30 next season. Doesn't mean much but we might start looking for that higher ceiling younger option anyway. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 17:08]
|
Or does Whittaker wastefully shoot from distance? And then score a few more goals as a result too. He has played a lot more minutes than Burns too. He also plays through the middle so would be expected to be shooting more.
EDIT: but the point is, that you are expecting unrealistic things of Burns' shooting. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 17:07]
| |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:11 - Dec 17 with 744 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 17:06 - Dec 17 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Or does Whittaker wastefully shoot from distance? And then score a few more goals as a result too. He has played a lot more minutes than Burns too. He also plays through the middle so would be expected to be shooting more.
EDIT: but the point is, that you are expecting unrealistic things of Burns' shooting. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 17:07]
|
Why is it unrealistic to want more of this shots to hit the target?
Those two yesterday before his goal.. what was unrealistic about them to be able to be on target? | |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:19 - Dec 17 with 736 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Shots on target on 17:11 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Why is it unrealistic to want more of this shots to hit the target?
Those two yesterday before his goal.. what was unrealistic about them to be able to be on target? |
Because even the very top players don't get every shot on target! Players are human. Neither of those chances were as good as those that Broadhead put wide and yet you are happy with Broadhead's less than perfect stats. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:30 - Dec 17 with 721 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 17:19 - Dec 17 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Because even the very top players don't get every shot on target! Players are human. Neither of those chances were as good as those that Broadhead put wide and yet you are happy with Broadhead's less than perfect stats. |
No. I mentioned broady and snapping at one of his efforts in my first reply to the OP.
He should have had a hattrick yesterday quite simply it was very poor finishing.
But what was nice to see which we haven't seen it much lately was broady heavily involved. Which hasn't been the case in the last handful of games.
KM spoke about our lack of clinical finishing.
Considering broady and burns shared a few of the efforts you'd imagine KM was also expecting better from both. Or is that unrealistic? | |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:39 - Dec 17 with 715 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Shots on target on 17:30 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
No. I mentioned broady and snapping at one of his efforts in my first reply to the OP.
He should have had a hattrick yesterday quite simply it was very poor finishing.
But what was nice to see which we haven't seen it much lately was broady heavily involved. Which hasn't been the case in the last handful of games.
KM spoke about our lack of clinical finishing.
Considering broady and burns shared a few of the efforts you'd imagine KM was also expecting better from both. Or is that unrealistic? |
You are not happy with Broadhead's 26% shot conversion? I am sure McKenna's comments were general but especially referencing Broadhead's chances but not with a "his shooting isn't good enough" emphasis, but rather a general, "our shots went the wrong side of the post/bar too often today" sense. Of course, Broadhead should have scored 3 yesterday. Of course every shot should be on target. Every shot should be placed with power just inside the post along the ground or in the top corner. There isn't a player in the world that will ever reach that standard.
The point is, Burns' shooting stats are really in keeping with the best at the level he is playing. He will need to improve to keep up with the best at the next level, I am sure. I am also sure he will be working hard to do that. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 17:48 - Dec 17 with 702 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 16:03 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
He scores 1 in 8 shots
Less than 50% of his shots on a target. Its ok to admit you're wrong rather than ignoring something so blatant just to be able to say he's the best thing since slice bread with 0 negatives in his play. It's OK to say he's good but he has things he could improve on. It's OK to agree with me despite not wishing to look like you do on an Internet site.
It's OK.
Oh also. Can we please stop this pretence that he's a wingback. He's not. Far far from it. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 16:05]
|
"Its ok to admit you're wrong"
Ahahahahaha. Good one, tell me another. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Shots on target on 17:52 - Dec 17 with 695 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Shots on target on 17:48 - Dec 17 by The_Flashing_Smile |
"Its ok to admit you're wrong"
Ahahahahaha. Good one, tell me another. |
To be fair Frimmers was throwing that one back at me because I had said it to him.
The problem is that he goes on an opinion regardless of whether evidence supports it and then won't back down. That is human nature and we all do it at times. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 18:14 - Dec 17 with 680 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 16:55 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Once again - if Burns got more on target or scored more he wouldn't be playing for us - you continually overlook this fact"
No I don't overlook it. I've always said it and agreed he is what he is. But we need better. What you overlook is that we are a side about to go into the Premier league and overlook the need to improve the team. |
You were saying this when we were challenging to get out of League 1. You constantly move the goalposts to justify your ridiculous position rather than just admit you got it wrong. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Shots on target on 18:27 - Dec 17 with 667 views | StokieBlue |
| Shots on target on 16:55 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Once again - if Burns got more on target or scored more he wouldn't be playing for us - you continually overlook this fact"
No I don't overlook it. I've always said it and agreed he is what he is. But we need better. What you overlook is that we are a side about to go into the Premier league and overlook the need to improve the team. |
Disingenuous and a lie as Dolly has pointed out.
All your hallmarks really.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Shots on target on 18:29 - Dec 17 with 665 views | SheffordBlue |
| Shots on target on 17:11 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Why is it unrealistic to want more of this shots to hit the target?
Those two yesterday before his goal.. what was unrealistic about them to be able to be on target? |
His first shot was on target - it was saved. He then had a miss just over the cross bar before his third shot was a goal. |  |
| |
| Shots on target on 18:47 - Dec 17 with 647 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 17:11 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Why is it unrealistic to want more of this shots to hit the target?
Those two yesterday before his goal.. what was unrealistic about them to be able to be on target? |
We got Wes from Fleetwood Town, where he'd scored 16 goals in 144 games.
What you're asking for is unrealistic. And silly.
I wish the quality of your posts was as high as Wes's shooting accuracy. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Shots on target on 18:52 - Dec 17 with 632 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 18:29 - Dec 17 by SheffordBlue |
His first shot was on target - it was saved. He then had a miss just over the cross bar before his third shot was a goal. |
Not it wasn't on target it was going wide.
The miss over the bar wasn't just over either. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 18:55 - Dec 17 with 631 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 18:14 - Dec 17 by The_Flashing_Smile |
You were saying this when we were challenging to get out of League 1. You constantly move the goalposts to justify your ridiculous position rather than just admit you got it wrong. |
Well yes that tends to happen when you're looking at the next level. No different to yourself and SB that Burgess wasn't good enough. But don't see you moaning at sb about it or saying you were wrong. Or do you agree that its part of football for football fans to discuss who they don't feel is good enough?
Ah forgot. If you don't agree with something. It's not allowed. But if it's your view. Then it's fine.
It's just weird you get worked up over someone not rating a player you like. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 19:16]
| |
| |
| Shots on target on 19:16 - Dec 17 with 614 views | StokieBlue |
| Shots on target on 18:55 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Well yes that tends to happen when you're looking at the next level. No different to yourself and SB that Burgess wasn't good enough. But don't see you moaning at sb about it or saying you were wrong. Or do you agree that its part of football for football fans to discuss who they don't feel is good enough?
Ah forgot. If you don't agree with something. It's not allowed. But if it's your view. Then it's fine.
It's just weird you get worked up over someone not rating a player you like. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 19:16]
|
Unbelievably disingenuous again. Sigh.
It's entirely different. I didn't think Burgess was good enough but he's improved massively and proven me wrong and I've never mentioned it again. It's been over 40 matches since I said that and I only stated it a few times after his first games.
My opinion changed with the evidence, that is the critical difference here. Your opinion hasn't changed and has in fact become worse when presented with evidence.
Please don't ever compare yourself to me again, it's insulting.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Shots on target on 19:20 - Dec 17 with 605 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 18:55 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Well yes that tends to happen when you're looking at the next level. No different to yourself and SB that Burgess wasn't good enough. But don't see you moaning at sb about it or saying you were wrong. Or do you agree that its part of football for football fans to discuss who they don't feel is good enough?
Ah forgot. If you don't agree with something. It's not allowed. But if it's your view. Then it's fine.
It's just weird you get worked up over someone not rating a player you like. [Post edited 17 Dec 2023 19:16]
|
I didn't know SB didn't rate Burgess, probably because he hasn't posted about it a million times. Where have I said I didn't rate Burgess? Kindly provide a link.
Your logic is all over the place with your last bit, because all that applies to yourself.
I've not said your opinion isn't allowed. I've said it's bobbins and supplied evidence, which you've ignored: We got Wes from Fleetwood Town, where he'd scored 16 goals in 144 games. He already has 23 in 97 for us, so has already stepped up. Expecting more in League 1 was unrealistic. Now you're expecting more in the Champ.
I don't think you're clueless. I think you know your logic has been flawed on this issue for a long time but you simply refuse to back down. You even tried to belittle his wonder goal the other week just to save face on the internet. All very odd. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Shots on target on 19:24 - Dec 17 with 582 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 19:16 - Dec 17 by StokieBlue |
Unbelievably disingenuous again. Sigh.
It's entirely different. I didn't think Burgess was good enough but he's improved massively and proven me wrong and I've never mentioned it again. It's been over 40 matches since I said that and I only stated it a few times after his first games.
My opinion changed with the evidence, that is the critical difference here. Your opinion hasn't changed and has in fact become worse when presented with evidence.
Please don't ever compare yourself to me again, it's insulting.
SB |
Hang on. You slated him after a few games.
Don't you hound me for giving early views on players.. good for you to finally admit you're a hypocrite. Its taken a while.
I do change my views. You're the first to tell me that SB.
So just to clarify something
I didn't rate burns last season and see him being strong enough this season..
The evidence you ask for shows he's not been as strong this season ( again. Higher league etc so fair enough,) but he clearly hasn't. If you're basing it on stats only... depends what evidence it is you're seeking. So if we say stats then state wise he's worse. No?
If its based on what you see... no evidence to share really it's a personal view isn't it? That personal view you don't seem to accept people are allowed to have.
what you're saying is and admitting is it's OK for me not to rate a player or believe he's good enough for us.
Finally we got there SB.
Oh and I'd never compare myself to you. I'm man enough to share my thoughts. You hide behind others. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 19:34 - Dec 17 with 564 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 19:20 - Dec 17 by The_Flashing_Smile |
I didn't know SB didn't rate Burgess, probably because he hasn't posted about it a million times. Where have I said I didn't rate Burgess? Kindly provide a link.
Your logic is all over the place with your last bit, because all that applies to yourself.
I've not said your opinion isn't allowed. I've said it's bobbins and supplied evidence, which you've ignored: We got Wes from Fleetwood Town, where he'd scored 16 goals in 144 games. He already has 23 in 97 for us, so has already stepped up. Expecting more in League 1 was unrealistic. Now you're expecting more in the Champ.
I don't think you're clueless. I think you know your logic has been flawed on this issue for a long time but you simply refuse to back down. You even tried to belittle his wonder goal the other week just to save face on the internet. All very odd. |
Oh he did indeed. Pretty much whenever edmundson came up he was all over it. Which is strange when you consider you're supposed to love anyone that plays.
Yes I do expect more than 3 goals so far from such an attacking player with so many attacking opportunities.
Especially when even Jackson has 2.
The funny thing you say opinions are allowed.. so why so eager to shut views down? | |
| |
| Shots on target on 19:44 - Dec 17 with 554 views | StokieBlue |
| Shots on target on 19:34 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Oh he did indeed. Pretty much whenever edmundson came up he was all over it. Which is strange when you consider you're supposed to love anyone that plays.
Yes I do expect more than 3 goals so far from such an attacking player with so many attacking opportunities.
Especially when even Jackson has 2.
The funny thing you say opinions are allowed.. so why so eager to shut views down? |
Sigh.
Are you deliberately disingenuous or do you not realise you're doing it?
Burgess wasn't great in his opening matches, I think there is pretty much a consensus on that but he improved and has continued to improved and thus my opinion changed and I haven't mentioned it for about a seasons worth of matches.
It's nothing like your Burns nonsense and I would kindly ask you stop trying to force and equivalence where one clearly doesn't exist. It's disingenuous and bad faith debating.
I won't be replying to your other post because it's a rambling mess of lies and nonsense.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Shots on target on 19:45 - Dec 17 with 542 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 19:44 - Dec 17 by StokieBlue |
Sigh.
Are you deliberately disingenuous or do you not realise you're doing it?
Burgess wasn't great in his opening matches, I think there is pretty much a consensus on that but he improved and has continued to improved and thus my opinion changed and I haven't mentioned it for about a seasons worth of matches.
It's nothing like your Burns nonsense and I would kindly ask you stop trying to force and equivalence where one clearly doesn't exist. It's disingenuous and bad faith debating.
I won't be replying to your other post because it's a rambling mess of lies and nonsense.
SB |
I'm just happy you admitted to making rash decisions on players after a few games.
I look forward to your post in 2024 when you admit that it's OK not to rate a player.
Enjoy your evening SB. I have. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 20:20 - Dec 17 with 509 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 19:34 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
Oh he did indeed. Pretty much whenever edmundson came up he was all over it. Which is strange when you consider you're supposed to love anyone that plays.
Yes I do expect more than 3 goals so far from such an attacking player with so many attacking opportunities.
Especially when even Jackson has 2.
The funny thing you say opinions are allowed.. so why so eager to shut views down? |
So no evidence that I knew SB didn't rate Burgess initially?
No evidence that I myself didn't rate Burgess?
Where have I shut views down? Opinions are allowed and people are also allowed to disagree with them, particularly if they cite evidence to show they're bobbins. Evidence which you again have conveniently ignored.
SB has explained himself - he didn't initially think Burgess was good enough, but then revised his opinion. This is where you continue to go wrong, and why he's different to you. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Shots on target on 20:29 - Dec 17 with 492 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 19:45 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
I'm just happy you admitted to making rash decisions on players after a few games.
I look forward to your post in 2024 when you admit that it's OK not to rate a player.
Enjoy your evening SB. I have. |
It is ok not to rate a player.
It is ok to change your opinion on a player.
It's not ok to have unrealistic opinions on a player and/or never revise your opinion, even in the weight over overwhelming evidence and opinions from others that you're talking out of your wotsit, and keep banging on about it over hundreds of posts.
When so many people constantly disagree with you, do you ever consider it's maybe you who's wrong, or just everyone else? | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Shots on target on 20:46 - Dec 17 with 465 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Shots on target on 20:29 - Dec 17 by The_Flashing_Smile |
It is ok not to rate a player.
It is ok to change your opinion on a player.
It's not ok to have unrealistic opinions on a player and/or never revise your opinion, even in the weight over overwhelming evidence and opinions from others that you're talking out of your wotsit, and keep banging on about it over hundreds of posts.
When so many people constantly disagree with you, do you ever consider it's maybe you who's wrong, or just everyone else? |
But you've showed me no evidence to suggest he's better than I feel he is.
Again. What is unrealistic about thinking 3 goals isn't that great from an attacking winger who gets plenty of chances.
Also. You're saying I'm banging on about it. I did say I didn't want to spend another day defending my view. But SB said I should as I replied to the OP. So again what's the wrong thing to do. Not defend or defend a view and be moaned to about defending myself. | |
| |
| Shots on target on 20:56 - Dec 17 with 453 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Shots on target on 20:46 - Dec 17 by FrimleyBlue |
But you've showed me no evidence to suggest he's better than I feel he is.
Again. What is unrealistic about thinking 3 goals isn't that great from an attacking winger who gets plenty of chances.
Also. You're saying I'm banging on about it. I did say I didn't want to spend another day defending my view. But SB said I should as I replied to the OP. So again what's the wrong thing to do. Not defend or defend a view and be moaned to about defending myself. |
1. I've shown you evidence of where he came from, what his goal stats were from there, how he's massively improved from that, and how it's unrealistic to expect much more. You want a League 1 player from Fleetwood with 16 goals in 144 games to become a world beater in the Championship. Do you realise how daft that sounds?
2. I obviously mean banging on about it over months and months, not just today.
You are so disingenuous it's unreal. The problem with that (for you) is that everyone can see it. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
