Goal difference

[Harrisblade]

Why isn’t there? Only in S2. Anywhere else quality is the sole measure.

Nobody said we shouldn't put in quality crosses.
In fact quite a few of the clueless S2 fans have moaned about the lack of quality associated with many of our crosses in the season so far.
The quality of the cross is a given but you seem to feel a need to pretend that the demand for an early cross somehow means that quality of the cross is irrelevant.
I wonder what particular agenda you're working to?

 

[Pinchy]

Have a guess.

It's not hard to work out.

Have you asked the counsellors at the Football Referral Unit?

You’ve made it clear beyond doubt, over many years, that you have yet to work out anything about football.

 

[1066blade]

You finish with a point fewer than another club and see where that argument gets you.

Are you Fukin mental? The statement quite clearly refers to two teams finishing on the same points, a better goal difference is as good as an additional point.
Why is that so difficult for someone,(even with room temperature IQ) to understand?

 

[Pinchy]

Nobody said we shouldn't put in quality crosses.
In fact quite a few of the clueless S2 fans have moaned about the lack of quality associated with many of our crosses in the season so far.
The quality of the cross is a given but you seem to feel a need to pretend that the demand for an early cross somehow means that quality of the cross is irrelevant.
I wonder what particular agenda you're working to?

The demand for an early cross has been roundly rejected by both of our management duo. The S2 cognoscenti are wishing on a star that they hadn’t and pretending they haven’t heard it.

In S2 they like their football as basic and rudimentary as it can possibly be. They’ve no time for passing football. Why take two minutes ter gerrinitintotbox when it can be done in a handful of seconds? Why kick it to each other 17 times when one ugly punt will do the same job?

The fact is that any number of circumstances dictate the optimum moment to deliver a cross, save in S2 where gerritinearly wins every time.

Luckily Tufty and One Knill have a very different and infinitely wiser view. S2 doesn’t like that so they completely ignore it.

 

[Pinchy]

I’m not sure why you’re asking me about crosses, I’m not talking about that. Possibly because you know you’re wrong and you’re trying to change the subject?

Anyway, rare as it may be (something which nobody has denied) it seems that you fully agree with the assessment that a better goal difference is worth something. You could have saved yourself a lot of time and just admitted you got it wrong from the start.

I didn’t get anything wrong on this occasion. I said it wasn’t worth a point, it isn’t.

 

[finlaytheblade]

Actually it was goal average in the days when Wednesday pipped us to promotion in the fifties. I think I am right in thinking that if goal difference had been in place then, we would have gone up instead of them.

Yep true Jock !, the point I'm making is what ever system in place it is worth a point to the team with the superior one

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Have you asked the counsellors at the Football Referral Unit?

You’ve made it clear beyond doubt, over many years, that you have yet to work out anything about football.

I obviously know a lot more than you if you don't even know why an early cross is more beneficial than a late one.

Jesus fucking Christ.

 

[wizadry]

How early should we cross it Wiz? Half-way line? What did you think of Flecks cross (after a multi-player passing move) for our third against Blackburn?

I’ve always understood and it was borne out by my (limited) playing days, that by far the most dangerous crosses are those pulled back from the goal-line. By what definition that is an early cross is a mystery to me.

Sometimes it might be right to get it in early; often another touch or pass will create a better angle or more space. There is no immutable rule, just the Neanderthal S2 desire to Gerritintbox as soon as humanly possible.

It does not invalidate your opinion of course, but both our manager and his assistant emphatically disagree with you. Noise and Nonsense, said Wilder.

There is no set time on when to cross it in but it goes without question that if you do something quicker, when the defenders are unprepared then you have more chance of creating something better than you do if you take your time with something, no matter what it is. If Wilder and Knilly think that’s noise and nonsense then I’m ok to say that they are wrong. We’ve been scoring goals by doing things quicker a lately so the evidence is there for all to see, even Wilder can see it.

 

[jockdodds]

Yep true Jock !, the point I'm making is what ever system in place it is worth a point to the team with the superior one

The bizarre thing about goal average was that when teams had a positive goal difference it benefited teams who had scored fewer, but teams which had a negative goal difference those which scored fewer were better off.

So if you scored 80 and conceded 40 the goal average is 2.0
Bit if you scored 81 and conceded 41 the goal average is 1.97561

Whereas if you scored 40 and conceded 80 the goal average is 0.5
But if you scored 41 and conceded 81 the goal average is 0.506173

Goal difference made things so much easier!

 

[Jon Slinn]

John Egan

Egan - Jack & Bash. work so well together.

 

[Punk Blade]

I don’t know about anyone else, but I remember us struggling to break teams down at home for a few games as we played neat little triangles around the box usually ending in one overhit pass going behind for a goal kick, or a low cross blocked by the first man, or finally the perfect crossing angle to be wasted by hitting it out for a throw in on the opposite side.

Then I remember McGoldrick v Derby, Billy v Blackburn (twice), Duffy and Billy v Wigan. The quicker we get the ball forward and the quicker we get it in the box, the more space we have to ruthlessly carve open the opposition. Moving the ball up the pitch quickly does not have to be at the expense of our footballing principles and tends to yield more goals than camping on the opposition 18-yard line for ten minutes.

 

[wizadry]

I don’t know about anyone else, but I remember us struggling to break teams down at home for a few games as we played neat little triangles around the box usually ending in one overhit pass going behind for a goal kick, or a low cross blocked by the first man, or finally the perfect crossing angle to be wasted by hitting it out for a throw in on the opposite side.

Then I remember McGoldrick v Derby, Billy v Blackburn (twice), Duffy and Billy v Wigan. The quicker we get the ball forward and the quicker we get it in the box, the more space we have to ruthlessly carve open the opposition. Moving the ball up the pitch quickly does not have to be at the expense of our footballing principles and tends to yield more goals than camping on the opposition 18-yard line for ten minutes.

Bang on. It might struggle to get through to the odd person though.

 

[Tom Bott]

Nobody says goal difference IS worth a point, they say it CAN be worth a point and that’s the difference.

Point noted...

But not taken..

 

[Harrisblade]

The demand for an early cross has been roundly rejected by both of our management duo. The S2 cognoscenti are wishing on a star that they hadn’t and pretending they haven’t heard it.

In S2 they like their football as basic and rudimentary as it can possibly be. They’ve no time for passing football. Why take two minutes ter gerrinitintotbox when it can be done in a handful of seconds? Why kick it to each other 17 times when one ugly punt will do the same job?

The fact is that any number of circumstances dictate the optimum moment to deliver a cross, save in S2 where gerritinearly wins every time.

Luckily Tufty and One Knill have a very different and infinitely wiser view. S2 doesn’t like that so they completely ignore it.

Ignore it like you ignored 'the quality of the cross is a given' ?

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

The quicker we get the ball forward and the quicker we get it in the box, the more space we have to ruthlessly carve open the opposition. Moving the ball up the pitch quickly does not have to be at the expense of our footballing principles and tends to yield more goals than camping on the opposition 18-yard line for ten minutes.

What utter rubbish. You’re clearly a dinosaur-loving hoofer with no understanding of the game. “Only in [the fevered and increasingly obsessive imagination of one aging supporter in] S2” etc.

 

[wizadry]

Point noted...

But not taken..

After reading some posts on here I often think what’s the point.

 

[Silent Blade]

Actually it was goal average in the days when Wednesday pipped us to promotion in the fifties. I think I am right in thinking that if goal difference had been in place then, we would have gone up instead of them.

1949-50. We scored 68, conceded 49. They scored 67, conceded 48. We got pipped by 0.008 goal average

 

[wizadry]

The goal average way of life seemed like a right load of bollocks.

How times have changed, you even get an extra point with this new goal difference malarkey.

 

[Pinchy]

Just so we don’t forget: Wilder says the “early cross” bollocks is noise and nonsense. Alan Knill has the same view.

S2, think on.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Bill Shankly said there's no such thing as 'long ball' or 'short ball', only the 'right ball' - this should also apply to a quick or slow cross.

The 3rd goal for Billy v Wigan was typical of quick decisive (and excellent) football played through the thirds, but each ball in turn was the correct ball - it involved 5 players who all know how to pass it culminating in a quick pass from McG to Billy.

Can't really see what CW or AK would find wrong with it. My opinion of CW & AK is that they don't want silly balls played just for the sake of it.

UTB