• Current Donation Goals

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

The alternative way of looking at it is that when we went to 3/5 at the back last year we had our 4th worst defensive record under RA, and won the title because of the second highest goals scored total.

It is 3/5 at the back that is the problem (and specifically it is not carrying a big enough threat up front, so teams are happy to have a go at you).  Not Cahill or JT.

We conceded 9 goals in the first 6 games where we played a back 4, once shifting to a back 3/5 we conceded 24 goals in 32 games

The season before we played a back 4 and conceded 53 goals our worst Abramovich era total.

Can't be arsed to check the goals scored but quite possible that ratio also went up when we switched formation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xCELERYx   
5 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

I read the entire post. Anyone here can, not a great deal of point in me quoting the entire thing. But then I don't understand at all why you're being so precious about apparently being misrepresented when literally the next paragraph starts with you explaining why it is actually the flogged players not being good enough that is the problem, and not the fact that they are being flogged. What did I take out of context or misrepresent?

You've made clear you think the attacking players aren't good enough in themselves. It's very clear to me you are wrong, and that there is something else making the difference between this season and last. It's the logical conclusion; far more out there to suggest a load of good players suddenly turned to sh*t for no real reason.

This isn't about being right or wrong. It's about acknowledging the fact we've got a lot of players who are inconsistent in nature. Have you seen the career tallies that the likes of Willian, Pedro, Morata, etc have served up over the years? It's not hard to work out that all of our attacking players aren't reliable when it comes to providing an impact in the final third. Which low and behold, has been a huge problem for us over the years. 

Willian has 23 goals/19 assists in over 150 appearances for us. Pedro has 20 goals/13 assists from 83 appearances. While our CF in Morata has scored 10 goals or more in his entire career twice. 

Last season was an exception - Willian found his shooting boots for the first time in his career. Pedro was both a consistent scorer and creator having his best season since 2013/14. Hazard had his best career goal return of any season, while Costa equaled his best goal return during his time here - and the second best of his career. Then you look around the other positions and the story reads fairly similar. A lot of players has career best seasons or close to. 

Naturally, that form hasn't been maintained and most have largely settled back into the familiar mediocre territory they've generally produced across their careers. Which is fine, if they weren't deemed first team starters. But alas, they are. And in such a position, where there is a lot of responsibility on the likes of Willian, Pedro, Moses, etc to produce in the attacking third regularly, they aren't. And that has let us down across the course of the season. 

Willian - 4 goals (Liverpool, Huddersfield, Stoke and Brighton) / 6 assists (Burnley, Brighton, Huddersfield x2, Stoke x2) from 1995 minutes.
Pedro4 goals (Stoke, Watford, Huddersfield, Stoke) / 2 assists (Tottenham and Watford) from 1071 minutes.
Hazard - 8 goals (Bournemouth, WBA x2, Newcastle x2, Brighton x2 and Arsenal) / 2 assists (Watford and Liverpool) from 1437 minutes. 
Morata - 10 goals (Burnley, Everton, Leicester, Man Utd, WBA, Newcastle, Brighton, Stoke x3) / 4 assists (Bournemouth, Burnley, Everton, WBA) from 1522 minutes. 
Moses - 1 goal (Brighton) / 1 assist (Newcastle) from 1249 minutes.
Fabregas - 1 goal (Everton) / 4 assists (Crystal Palace, Brighton, WBA x2) from 1445 minutes.
Alonso - 6 goals (Tottenham x2, WBA, Southampton, Brighton, Arsenal) / 1 assist (Huddersfield) from 2147 minutes.

That's the reality of our season right there. What really stands out though is that a lot of those goals have come against some of the worst sides in the league, which highlights just how little some of these players have stood up during when the going has gotten tougher or when facing better sides. 

While more games plays a part in comparison to last seasons performance, the reality is we lack quality, and a lot of it. That's plain as day to see. And the worst part is that Pedro, Willian and Fabregas aren't going to get any better or younger. That there's a real chance Hazard could finally leave and go elsewhere. While Morata never manages to break the inconsistency shackles that have plagued him his entire career to date. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, xCELERYx said:

Have you seen the career tallies that the likes of Willian, Pedro, Morata, etc have served up over the years?

If you keep counting 90 min games the same as 60 min games when a player gets subbed off you'll get low numbers for any player, especially those that have played behind 2 other forwards for all their careers.

If you count 10 min sub appearances the same as full games you'll get silly numbers of the kind that ought to be ignored as soon as mentioned.  Still the numbers for Willian and Pedro remain impressive despite all that.  

Still you do make a case for upgrading or simply deepening our AMs.
What I don't see here is any argument for just not playing them at all and picking a CB and Bakayoko instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kev61   
5 hours ago, Lump Of Celery said:

We conceded 9 goals in the first 6 games where we played a back 4, once shifting to a back 3/5 we conceded 24 goals in 32 games

The season before we played a back 4 and conceded 53 goals our worst Abramovich era total.

Can't be arsed to check the goals scored but quite possible that ratio also went up when we switched formation.

So e=mc2!?in footballing terms.Try watching a game in nuetrality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, xCELERYx said:

This isn't about being right or wrong. It's about acknowledging the fact we've got a lot of players who are inconsistent in nature. Have you seen the career tallies that the likes of Willian, Pedro, Morata, etc have served up over the years? It's not hard to work out that all of our attacking players aren't reliable when it comes to providing an impact in the final third. Which low and behold, has been a huge problem for us over the years

I'm not going to quote the entire post ...

Over the, recent at least, years we've won some pretty damn important trophies while playing really good football and scoring plenty of goals; I think you're catastrophising to prove a weird point.

Literally no one, myself very much included, is denying there is an 'inconsistency' in what players are doing and achieiving this season compared to last (or the one before that ... or the one before that etc.).

Generally our players, like most footballers, have performed better when they aren't being flogged to football death. Even if I accept that Pedro and Willian were particularly good last year compared to their general careers (and FYI I don't, and cherry-picked stats with no broader context mean absolutely nothing), what I fail to see is how you fail to see what it is about last year that really made the difference, and why it is we are struggling with that difference gone.

A flogged horse is a flogged horse, no matter how good it apparently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kev61 said:

So e=mc2!?in footballing terms.Try watching a game in nuetrality

Droy's statement was that switching to a back 5 had caused us to concede more goals last season. I was just pointing out that we conceded twice as many goals in the games where we played a back 4 rather than back 5 last season. We also scored considerably more goals when switching to the back 5. So in direct response to that statement yes in this case e=mc2.

Of course there is a discussion as to whether it's the best choice going forward this season but the above is facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
1 minute ago, Lump Of Celery said:

Droy's statement was that switching to a back 5 had caused us to concede more goals last season. I was just pointing out that we conceded twice as many goals in the games where we played a back 4 rather than back 5 last season. We also scored considerably more goals when switching to the back 5. So in direct response to that statement yes in this case e=mc2.

Of course there is a discussion as to whether it's the best choice going forward this season but the above is facts.

We have different players at the back this season so who knows until we try? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now