What would you take?

[crazyfists]

I would take 12th or above. I don't think we have to settle for 22nd just yet although as Elite says there's no material difference between 22nd and 8th.

I'm going to say we can make a late run to the playoffs if we can get into mid table by Christmas. I'm not betting my last dollar though on us being anywhere near mid table come Christmas ha ha.

[SmiffyPie]

Is that true? Yates played in 25 of the first 26 games and we let in 26 goals (can't be bothered to find which game he missed)

In the following 20 games we let in 22.

So very slightly worse, but nowhere near as bad as you infer.

Oh - and a finish outside the play-offs will be disappointing after last season and the signings etc but I still think we will finish mid-table, just below Crawley

I wasn't connecting Yates to goals conceded more the slump in results.

[TheProphet]

How bad were we last season after January? So why can't we have have a bad start this year and finish strong and still make the top 7?

[upthemaggies]

22nd, although not catastrophic, would be seriously depressing. it would guarantee terrible form throughout the remainder of the campiagn with nothing to build on or give hope that next season would be any better. It would also be our lowest ever finish. I'd really like to think we can end up above 22nd next May, I'd take 15th, that's what I'm hoping for at present as it would still be better than any other final position since we came back down.

[magpie_mania]

I wasn't connecting Yates to goals conceded more the slump in results.

'(4th best defence my arse!!). 4th best with Yates in front of it. Absolute crap once he left'

You referred to our defence after he had gone. How do you measure that apart from goals conceded? Actually, you've used it for before he left, then ignore it for games after!

4th best with Yates in front of it - 1.00 goals per game
Absolute crap once he left - 1.10 goals per game. Over a season we'd still have the fifth best defence.

[magpie_mania]

22nd, although not catastrophic, would be seriously depressing. it would guarantee terrible form throughout the remainder of the campiagn with nothing to build on or give hope that next season would be any better. It would also be our lowest ever finish. I'd really like to think we can end up above 22nd next May, I'd take 15th, that's what I'm hoping for at present as it would still be better than any other final position since we came back down.

Apart from last season!

[slack_pie]

I would take 12th or above. I don't think we have to settle for 22nd just yet although as Elite says there's no material difference between 22nd and 8th.

I'm going to say we can make a late run to the playoffs if we can get into mid table by Christmas. I'm not betting my last dollar though on us being anywhere near mid table come Christmas ha ha.

I'd say there is a material difference. The loss of interest would hit Notts and Hardy hard.

[SmiffyPie]

'(4th best defence my arse!!). 4th best with Yates in front of it. Absolute crap once he left'

You referred to our defence after he had gone. How do you measure that apart from goals conceded? Actually, you've used it for before he left, then ignore it for games after!

4th best with Yates in front of it - 1.00 goals per game
Absolute crap once he left - 1.10 goals per game. Over a season we'd still have the fifth best defence.

Before Yates left we had W14 D8 L4 after he left we W7 D7 L8 (including PO's) I am not suggesting it was him alone but Yates in the team had an impact that was obvious after he had gone. It is irrelevant how many we concede if the lost games increase by 100% (and in less games).

[magpie_mania]

Before Yates left we had W14 D8 L4 after he left we W7 D7 L8 (including PO's) I am not suggesting it was him alone but Yates in the team had an impact that was obvious after he had gone. It is irrelevant how many we concede if the lost games increase by 100% (and in less games).

You've changed this argument to suit what you want to infer (which is incorrect).

Your post was about how bad our defence were after Yates left.

'(4th best defence my arse!!). 4th best with Yates in front of it. Absolute crap once he left'

The facts are these
Goals against while Yates here - 1.00 per game
Goals against after Yates gone - 1.10 per game

Goals for while Yates here - 1.69 per game
Goals for when Yates gone - 1.35 per game.

They don't show that the defence were considerably worse (as you say) but rather suggest that it was lack of goals after he left.

This is not including play-offs (can't be bothered to recalculate!).

[SmiffyPie]

You've changed this argument to suit what you want to infer (which is incorrect).

Your post was about how bad our defence were after Yates left.

'(4th best defence my arse!!). 4th best with Yates in front of it. Absolute crap once he left'

The facts are these
Goals against while Yates here - 1.00 per game
Goals against after Yates gone - 1.10 per game

Goals for while Yates here - 1.69 per game
Goals for when Yates gone - 1.35 per game.

They don't show that the defence were considerably worse (as you say) but rather suggest that it was lack of goals after he left.

This is not including play-offs (can't be bothered to recalculate!).

I haven't changed the argument at all. You keep trotting out your little stats and all I am doing is expanding the fact that after Yates there was a noticeable slump in results and performance. Are you unable to see that the defence was noticeably worse and can you not see that there was a marked difference at both ends of the pitch once his influence and stability had been removed. At face value Yates was allowing players, back and front, to perform better. You can argue as much as you like when he left the defensive weaknesses became obvious.