Its not good enough....why are we all making excuses?

[Silent Bob]

Games 1-5 = 2 points
Games 6-10 = 7 points


We are improving. Facts support that.

No offence, cause I find a lot of what you post quite interesting, but I find the idea of judging a side purely on statistics a bit odd. Why 5 games? Isn't that a bit arbitrary? The two games we've won were the first two of the second five, so actually does that mean we're getting worse since the last three are as bad as the first three?

 

[keaton]

I missed it sorry.. I agree with your sentiments though!

Here's my thoughts:

1) We're playing good football.
2) We've missed key players through injury/suspension etc.
3) We've bought well and not relied on loan players as much as last season.
4) We ARE improving.

TwoChoicesTom speaks sense.
Even though he's in the gay version of Busted

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The one thing you can be sure after Brighton lose is that there will be a thread on here by sunday evening blaming the ref for it.

 

[Perry Milkins]

The one thing you can be sure after Brighton lose is that there will be a thread on here by sunday evening blaming the ref for it.

and for Spurs...how would our regal premiership friends react?

 

[eastlondonseagull]

The difference between las t year and this year is that we have played some good stuff whereas under Adams it was aimless hoofs and headless chicken football.

I am becoming frustrated at our (relatively) poor start but I can see light at the end of the tunnel. Last season under Adams there was no light and frankly no hope. We were DIRE. I cant say that yet about this side.

.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

By calling for the managers head of course.

 

[bhaexpress]

Who exactly is making excuses ?

 

[Perry Milkins]

By calling for the managers head of course.

Good old 'shifty 'Arry'

 

[Twinkle Toes]

The thing is though, you're wanting / expecting instant results.
So we sack Slade and bring in A.N. Other. What happens then if results don't immediately improve overnight ? And if the performances start to deteriorate ? Do we give it a dozen games and then get someone else in ?

Unlike last season under Adams, I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with how Slade is building the team. The additions look decent, and we're not constantly stuffed to the rafters with loan players all over the shop. Virgo is being used in defence rather than on the wing / up front / central midfield (delete as applicable), and the team is playing ok.

If our performances go downhill and we've not improved our position by the turn of the year, then I might be joining you in calling for his head, and you can justifiably turn round and say "I TOLD you this three months ago Easy". But for the time being, there are just about enough green shoots showing for me to give Slade the benefit of the doubt.

You can bloody well STOP that rational, informed opinion stuff right now Mr Ten. You should be jumping aboard the 'We Want A BHA Train-Wreck' locomotive while you still can. Have you no understanding of the word SOLIDARITY?? Honestly, I thought better of you. Bleedin' poor show.

 

[Easy 10]

You can bloody well STOP that rational, informed opinion stuff right now Mr Ten. You should be jumping aboard the 'We Want A BHA Train-Wreck' locomotive while you still can. Have you no understanding of the word SOLIDARITY?? Honestly, I thought better of you. Bleedin' poor show.

I'm sorry, I....
....I've not been well lately.

 

[Forster's Armband]

I cannot see how anyone could defend RS if we lose tonight. However I do think he must have had some problem with getting and Assistant Manager and new coach in. He made a big deal bout sorting the coaching side out so why has it not happened? I think one of the Southern County reporters should bloody well ask him!

 

[Acker79]

No offence, cause I find a lot of what you post quite interesting, but I find the idea of judging a side purely on statistics a bit odd. Why 5 games? Isn't that a bit arbitrary? The two games we've won were the first two of the second five, so actually does that mean we're getting worse since the last three are as bad as the first three?

I don't mean to judge purely on statistcs, but I think it's wrong to judge the team just on our mood. Losses are depressing. So are draws when you're 2-0 up. And that depression leads to us forgetting facts, and so I post them to try to let people see the situation in a way that isn't affected by emotion.

As for 5, yes, it is a bit arbitrary. But we were on 11 games, and it isn't easy to divide 11, and there's only a couple of ways to divide 10. I also had recollection of debates around Slade's results in blocks of 5 (e.g. "Yes, our first five games aren't great results, but slade's first five weren't great last season, but look at his second five games" etc)

I am compiling more detailed stats as the season progresses, (with pretty graphs to show there is a general upward trend in the rate we win points) but don't want to post them every week (originally was planning on every 10 games). This is a simple way of illustrating that, impirically, we are improving. Even if results can depress us.

 

[Perry Milkins]

I'm sorry, I....
....I've not been well lately.

Raving HabDabs, Screaming Heebie Jeebies or an attack of Bogdanovitch's Goats Disease?

 

[pork pie]

I missed it sorry.. I agree with your sentiments though!

Here's my thoughts:

1) We're playing good football. IT IS ALL ABOUT RESULTS!
2) We've missed key players through injury/suspension etc. SHIT HAPPENS - SO DO OTHER TEAMS!
3) We've bought well and not relied on loan players as much as last season. SO WHY THE FLOOD OF LOAN SIGNINGS RECENTLY?
4) We ARE improving. IT WOULD BE VERY HARD NOT TO!

:US:

 

[Brovion]

The thing is though, you're wanting / expecting instant results.
So we sack Slade and bring in A.N. Other. What happens then if results don't immediately improve overnight ? And if the performances start to deteriorate ? Do we give it a dozen games and then get someone else in ?

Unlike last season under Adams, I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with how Slade is building the team. The additions look decent, and we're not constantly stuffed to the rafters with loan players all over the shop. Virgo is being used in defence rather than on the wing / up front / central midfield (delete as applicable), and the team is playing ok.

If our performances go downhill and we've not improved our position by the turn of the year, then I might be joining you in calling for his head, and you can justifiably turn round and say "I TOLD you this three months ago Easy". But for the time being, there are just about enough green shoots showing for me to give Slade the benefit of the doubt.

*Tch*, Easy let me explain. We sack Slade NOW, he's already had too long and we've got to save the season. We get a new manager and obviously we give him a bit of time; but if he only wins 1 or 2 games out of six or seven - then we sack him and get someone else in. We must keep on repeating this process until we finally DO get a manager who can get us at least into the top half of the Championship. It's like kissing frogs; if we keep sacking managers every two or three months we will eventually find a good one. I mean, it stand to reason doesn't it?

Whaddya mean I'm an imbecile? I just want the best for this club; I simply have high standards and no patience.

 

[Don Quixote]

Slade is crooked, he's being payed to hold back Glenn. You heard it here first.

 

[Acker79]

*Tch*, Easy let me explain. We sack Slade NOW, he's already had too long and we've got to save the season. We get a new manager and obviously we give him a bit of time; but if he only wins 1 or 2 games out of six or seven - then we sack him and get someone else in. We must keep on repeating this process until we finally DO get a manager who can get us at least into the top half of the Championship. It's like kissing frogs; if we keep sacking managers every two or three months we will eventually find a good one. I mean, it stand to reason doesn't it?

Whaddya mean I'm an imbecile? I just want the best for this club; I simply have high standards and no patience.

It's a shame our fans accept such low standards... For me, we should sack them if we only win 3 or 4 out of six or seven games.

 

[Mellotron]

Slade is crooked, he's being payed to hold back Glenn. You heard it here first.

A bizarre joke, or?...

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

The people who are saying stop all this sack Slade talk are not happy with thwe results, I suspect that - like me - they just don;t see this constant chirping for the manager to be sacked as the panacea that some see it as.

 

[Silent Bob]

I don't mean to judge purely on statistcs, but I think it's wrong to judge the team just on our mood. Losses are depressing. So are draws when you're 2-0 up. And that depression leads to us forgetting facts, and so I post them to try to let people see the situation in a way that isn't affected by emotion.

As for 5, yes, it is a bit arbitrary. But we were on 11 games, and it isn't easy to divide 11, and there's only a couple of ways to divide 10. I also had recollection of debates around Slade's results in blocks of 5 (e.g. "Yes, our first five games aren't great results, but slade's first five weren't great last season, but look at his second five games" etc)

I am compiling more detailed stats as the season progresses, (with pretty graphs to show there is a general upward trend in the rate we win points) but don't want to post them every week (originally was planning on every 10 games). This is a simple way of illustrating that, impirically, we are improving. Even if results can depress us.

Some fair points but I just think that dividing the games into two lots of five is too flawed a way of looking at it to really tell us anything much. Especially because as I said the best little run of results came right in the middle of it.