Spin spin spin the ……

Wheel of fortune.

Out season looks like being reliant on luck to a greater degree than it has in recent times.

Look at Liverpool the first goal had a degree of good fortune and the pass from
Bamford which ended up being perfect even though he miscontroled and Jimmy pounced.

On a different day Cooper’s double pirouette (he would have got 9s on strictly come
Dancing) would have cost us too.

We have very little possession and therefore rely on taking all our chances (given how little we score atm) and not conceding at the other end.

All of that got me thinking whether our style of play brings good fortune into the reckoning more than it otherwise would?

More realistically, our season hinges on our ability to effin turn up against the shighte teams in the league, what nearly got us relegated last seasons was the losses to newcastle , everton etc, not the wins against City, its not just losing, but gifting easy points to the fellow strugglers around us, and we are doing exactly the same this time around.

We need around 40 points to stay up, the other strugglers think in 35, as they will for sure be gifted 6 points by Leeds!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hopelesslyoptimistic

Wheel of fortune.

Out season looks like being reliant on luck to a greater degree than it has in recent times.

Look at Liverpool the first goal had a degree of good fortune and the pass from
Bamford which ended up being perfect even though he miscontroled and Jimmy pounced.

On a different day Cooper’s double pirouette (he would have got 9s on strictly come
Dancing) would have cost us too.

We have very little possession and therefore rely on taking all our chances (given how little we score atm) and not conceding at the other end.

All of that got me thinking whether our style of play brings good fortune into the reckoning more than it otherwise would?

---

Don't most football games depend on an element of that though? We with some more luck could and probably should have another 3/4 points right now particularly in the Arsenal game and Southampton game.

Liverpool one they rode their luck as did we but our 'style' does rely heavily for me on making opposition make mistakes and the luck of the bounce in final third quite often

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hopelesslyoptimistic

Wheel of fortune.

Out season looks like being reliant on luck to a greater degree than it has in recent times.

Look at Liverpool the first goal had a degree of good fortune and the pass from
Bamford which ended up being perfect even though he miscontroled and Jimmy pounced.

On a different day Cooper’s double pirouette (he would have got 9s on strictly come
Dancing) would have cost us too.

We have very little possession and therefore rely on taking all our chances (given how little we score atm) and not conceding at the other end.

All of that got me thinking whether our style of play brings good fortune into the reckoning more than it otherwise would?

---

Where are you getting the idea we have little possession? We sit mid table in the table for that stat.

You seem to be looking at stats for some answer, when it's down to either the manager unable to explain his ideas, using bad tactics or not adapting in games, not inspiring players to get the max out of them... or/and coupled with some players being woeful in their execution of basic skills and concentration.

To be fair, we were more than totally scabby against Liverpool, a team that has surprisingly lost some of its individual and collective mojo of late.

I reckon that, to some extent, it was pretty much the same with Chelsea (their apparent loss of confidence) too, but we were certainly unlucky in a fair few games as mentioned above.

I’m hoping we won’t have to rely on Lady Luck as she can be a fickle mistress, but if that’s what it’s going to take….

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joellufcprice

Don't most football games depend on an element of that though? We with some more luck could and probably should have another 3/4 points right now particularly in the Arsenal game and Southampton game.

Liverpool one they rode their luck as did we but our 'style' does rely heavily for me on making opposition make mistakes and the luck of the bounce in final third quite often

---

Yup they do and football more than any other popular team sport with a ball has more examples of the underdog winning more often than the odds on favourite.

I think our possession was about 36% v pool and not sure we have achieved more than 50% possession in any game this year in the PL but I haven’t checked those stats.

The point I was making v badly was that our style is based around creating chaos and relying upon that to win games. Thus for a game where luck plays a fairly big role anyway compared to other sports our reliance on chaos increases the role luck has to play - only a thought so hey ho.

Postscript - Part of Bielsa’s theory on dominating possession is that you reduce the chances of fortune playing a part which all goes to pot when you don’t have good enough players or too many injuries.


Granted none of this explains away having inadequate left backs or playing Bambi when the stats and our eyes suggest otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whitestomper45

Where are you getting the idea we have little possession? We sit mid table in the table for that stat.

You seem to be looking at stats for some answer, when it's down to either the manager unable to explain his ideas, using bad tactics or not adapting in games, not inspiring players to get the max out of them... or/and coupled with some players being woeful in their execution of basic skills and concentration.

---

Checked the stats and overall you are right we are in the middle and average about 50% - if you look at the games against the ‘better’ footballing teams we are a fair bit lower though.

Was only a thought though that chaos football might increase the effect of luck as it is designed to introduce unpredictability into the game etc.

I think the general thing most of us agree on is the better the player and the better the squad the less likely you are to get into difficulties and we don’t score as well as we would like in some areas there.

To be fair to Ted.

we could easily be top 10 right now. we have missed so many quality chances. Many of these don't even require the defense or keeper to make a stop. In addition, while Meslier has been solid he's had some dodgy games/goals let in so it's not like we've been riding on our keeper to win games. Liverpool is an exception to that statement. we've played the entire season without a true left back (no slam on Strujik) and actually played some games with the worst left back in the prem.

My problem with Ted is that he's not adjusting to the above. If you have strikers that can't score then you need to change up the style of play to reflect a more accurate assessment or maybe even give some of the youngsters such as Joffy, Perkins or Gary a chance at real game time. I hope that maybe he'll change that up after last week.

I do feel that the Bournemouth game is the most important one we've played this season. Win that and you really put presssure on some of the bottom half of the table (especially Bournemouth). Dare I say it but it also gives us a lot of momentum going in White hart lane. Lose it and it's a long relegation battle for the rest of the season type of feeling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spaldy

To be fair to Ted.

we could easily be top 10 right now. we have missed so many quality chances.
My problem with Ted is that he's not adjusting to the above. If you have strikers that can't score then you need to change up the style of play to reflect a more accurate assessment or maybe even give some of the youngsters such as Joffy, Perkins or Gary a chance at real game time. I hope that maybe he'll change that up after last week.

---

Spaldy, not a fan of small centre forwards but if in essence JM is sticking to his RedBull teams type tactical philosophy. Just hope he may consider Joffy or Gnonto to spin around the box as evidence suggests that is their natural game - to run direct into the box when played through.


End product (goals) is what JM requires from narrow pressing game is it not ?

https://i.postimg.cc/9RrRSps4/image.png


Gnonto for Italy produces what above tactics requires.

https://i.postimg.cc/dhjyTD80/image.jpg


So Gnonto or Bamford to score if put through ?

https://i.postimg.cc/8FkrdDHm/image.jpg

Spaldy, Not a fan of small centre forwards but in essence JM is sticking to his RedBull teams type tactical philosophy. Just hope he may consider Joffy or Gnonto to spin around the box as evidence suggests that is their natural game - to run direct into the box when played through.

Graphics from https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-2OIcMeNOcg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monaco_Totty

Spaldy, not a fan of small centre forwards but if in essence JM is sticking to his RedBull teams type tactical philosophy. Just hope he may consider Joffy or Gnonto to spin around the box as evidence suggests that is their natural game - to run direct into the box when played through.


End product (goals) is what JM requires from narrow pressing game is it not ?

https://i.postimg.cc/9RrRSps4/image.png


Gnonto for Italy produces what above tactics requires.

https://i.postimg.cc/dhjyTD80/image.jpg


So Gnonto or Bamford to score if put through ?

https://i.postimg.cc/8FkrdDHm/image.jpg

Spaldy, Not a fan of small centre forwards but in essence JM is sticking to his RedBull teams type tactical philosophy. Just hope he may consider Joffy or Gnonto to spin around the box as evidence suggests that is their natural game - to run direct into the box when played through.

Graphics from https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-2OIcMeNOcg

---

They didn't do anything against crew especially JG didn't look interested at all.