Management Ange Postecoglou

[dudu]

So basically City dropped 16 vs Woolwich, Liverpool, Villa and Chelsea, and we dropped 17 against the same four clubs...

Click to shrink...

Exactly.

The fact I was way off with Fulham makes my point even more true.
There's a long way to go this season. We have played 3 of the current top 10....and lost all 3.

Last season, our 4 points from Liverpool and Arse came in those first 10 games. Even our win against Fulham did.

After that, our results against top 10 sides

Chelsea - (0/6)
Villa (3/6)
City (1/6)
Newcasle (3/6)
Brighton (3/6)
Fulham (0/3)
Arse (0/3)
Liverpool (0/3)

39 points available. 13 games. 9 taken. 1.44ppg

I can't be arsed to do more calculations. But if we applied the same logic to all the bottom half teams, it would be way higher.
Which proves my point. Which, if you recall, was "we're good at beating bottom half and lower league teams"

If you're happy with that, then fine. But we'll likely only ever float just above those teams if we can't take points regularly from the teams in the top half.

Click to shrink...

We did regularly take points off teams in the first half.

Newcastle, Woolwich, City, Brighton, Villa, Liverpool, Man U - we didn't take enough points off them and we didn't take the points off them during the time period you have decided is important but we took points off all of them throughout the season.

We of course need to take more points off them, but the argument still remains that taking points off Fulham, West Ham, Everton and Wolves that we dropped last season will put us in range of the top teams - we are good at beating bottom half teams but we need to be better - that will be the biggest difference in where we finish this season.

 

[Incomplete_usernam]

Beat 9 man Liverpool, just. Lost the other (3/6)
1 draw from 3 with City (inc FAC) 2 losses (1/9)
1 point from 9 vs goons 2 losses (1/9)
W1 L1 Vs Villa (3/6)
3 points from 9 vs Brighton lost 2 (3/9)
0 from 6 vs Chelsea (0/6)
3 points from 9 from Newcastle (3/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Fulham I think. Excellent. (6/6)

That's the top half as at today. Numbers are points won vs points available. (using points for cup game vs City)

Bottom half
2 wins from 2 vs Bournemouth (6/6)
2 wins 1 draw from 3 with United (7/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Forest (6/6)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Brentford (7/9)
1 draw vs Leicester (1/3)
1 win, 1 draw, 1 loss vs Spam (4/9)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Everton (7/9)
Ipswich TBC (NA)
Southampton TBC (NA)
Wolves 0 for 2. (0/6)

Wolves aside. if you can't see that we get way more points from the bottom half than the top half then you're not one for seeing the facts in front of your face.

Look at cup games as well. Lost to fulham on penalties. Lost to City. Beat Coventry, Carrierbag and the other lot.
Pretty consistent against anyone who would struggle to get in the top half of the premier. Inconsistent at best against top half PL teams.

Click to shrink...

One could argue the reason we fail to beat the top half teams is because our squad simply isn't good enough, on the other hand, it could be down to the managers naivety when playing these teams, hard to judge really.

 

[Matt1882]

Exactly.


We did regularly take points off teams in the first half.

Newcastle, Woolwich, City, Brighton, Villa, Liverpool, Man U - we didn't take enough points off them and we didn't take the points off them during the time period you have decided is important but we took points off all of them throughout the season.

We of course need to take more points off them, but the argument still remains that taking points off Fulham, West Ham, Everton and Wolves that we dropped last season will put us in range of the top teams - we are good at beating bottom half teams but we need to be better - that will be the biggest difference in where we finish this season.

Click to shrink...

I suspect 7th-9th
I think we'll be worse this season against top half teams, not better.
It's then down to whether or not we can be utterly ruthless and win almost every game against the bottom half teams.
60 points available there alone. 12/15 so far.

 

[Matt1882]

One could argue the reason we fail to beat the top half teams is because our squad simply isn't good enough, on the other hand, it could be down to the managers naivety when playing these teams, hard to judge really.

Click to shrink...

Or both.
I think we have a good enough defence, or should I say set of defenders, to concede far few goals and chances than we do.
That's a tactical problem that needs addressing through the whole team.
But then we lack sufficient depth for when certain players can't play. Son came off and Werner was dismal for example.

 

[dudu]

I suspect 7th-9th
I think we'll be worse this season against top half teams, not better.
It's then down to whether or not we can be utterly ruthless and win almost every game against the bottom half teams.
60 points available there alone. 12/15 so far.

Click to shrink...

13 out of 15 but yes we need to be completely ruthless against those teams.

 

[prinmemo]

Beat 9 man Liverpool, just. Lost the other (3/6)
1 draw from 3 with City (inc FAC) 2 losses (1/9)
1 point from 9 vs goons 2 losses (1/9)
W1 L1 Vs Villa (3/6)
3 points from 9 vs Brighton lost 2 (3/9)
0 from 6 vs Chelsea (0/6)
3 points from 9 from Newcastle (3/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Fulham I think. Excellent. (6/6)

That's the top half as at today. Numbers are points won vs points available. (using points for cup game vs City)

Bottom half
2 wins from 2 vs Bournemouth (6/6)
2 wins 1 draw from 3 with United (7/9)
2 wins from 2 vs Forest (6/6)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Brentford (7/9)
1 draw vs Leicester (1/3)
1 win, 1 draw, 1 loss vs Spam (4/9)
2 wins, 1 draw vs Everton (7/9)
Ipswich TBC (NA)
Southampton TBC (NA)
Wolves 0 for 2. (0/6)

Wolves aside. if you can't see that we get way more points from the bottom half than the top half then you're not one for seeing the facts in front of your face.

Look at cup games as well. Lost to fulham on penalties. Lost to City. Beat Coventry, Carrierbag and the other lot.
Pretty consistent against anyone who would struggle to get in the top half of the premier. Inconsistent at best against top half PL teams.

Click to shrink...

You think it’s odd that we get many more points from the bottom half than the top half?

Think about this: the average top half club plays in Europe and the average bottom half club is closer to relegation than 10th place. The difference in quality is enormous.

We got 20 points out of an available 48 in PL action against what is an average 5th place club.

Seems about right for a team that finished 5th and barely made Europe.

 

[prinmemo]

You're right bar fulham who we lost to 3-0 in one of the games.

Posted this numerous times - but our form against TOP HALF teams last season was good enough that had we collected the points against the BOTTOM half teams - wolves (6) West Ham (4) and Everton (2) Fulham (3) last season - we would have finished level on points with Liverpool on 82 which i don't think anyone can deny would be a good total.

Of course beating the teams in the top half more consistently will help but, I personally think beating the teams we are better than is more important.

Even the Champions last season struggled against the better prem sides last season

City drew with

Chelsea x2
Liverpool x2
Woolwich x1
Us x1

Lost to
Woolwich x1
Villa x1

That's 18 points dropped against those teams from the top half.

Against the same opposition, we dropped 22 points with 5 of those coming against City who, let's be honest were much better than us.

Click to shrink...

Need to beat up the lower half clubs and hold our own against the top sides to be competitive in the league.

 

[marxoulis]

Everybody gets more points from the bottom half teams.

That's why they are in the bottom half

 

[Matt1882]

You think it’s odd that we get many more points from the bottom half than the top half?

Think about this: the average top half club plays in Europe and the average bottom half club is closer to relegation than 10th place. The difference in quality is enormous.

We got 20 points out of an available 48 in PL action against what is an average 5th place club.

Seems about right for a team that finished 5th and barely made Europe.

Click to shrink...

I think proportionately, it's odd. It seems that since about 2/3rd stage of last season, almost all of our points have come against bottom half teams. Early on it was spread a bit, but as time wears on, the better sides seem to beat us consistently. It's not even particularly inconsistent form against them. They all beat us after that Villa game. Don't think we have a single point from then on.

It worries me that we beat poor teams and everyone, fans, media, etc all start talking us up. And then as soon as we play a decent team, we get beat.
It almost feels like watching England sometimes. Results wise, anyway.

 

[Jose Dominguez 25]

Everybody gets more points from the bottom half teams.

That's why they are in the bottom half

Click to shrink...

It's this really isn't it.

How many games have we seen over the years, the likes of Wigan, Hull, Sheffield United, Burnley, Leicester, Southampton, Bournemouth etc where we've failed to put them away and get done by a late goal.

Beating the bread and butter is more key than beating the teams you're not expected to imo. You do that then move on to how to beat the bigger sides. That's more where positions are decided.

 

[Matt1882]

Everybody gets more points from the bottom half teams.

That's why they are in the bottom half

Click to shrink...

No shit sherlock,
But the teams in the top 4-6 take more points from the teams in the top half of the table than we do. And are even more consistent against the bottom half teams.

My comment, the one that prompted all this, was simply in response to some one who said Ange is good.
I said "at beating bottom half and lower league teams"

That is factually correct. We beat more bottom half teams that we lose to. We beat more bottom half teams than top half teams.
Ange is good at beating bottom half teams.
He's not good at beating top half teams.
1 out of 3 vs Newcastle. 1 out of 3 vs Brighton. 1 out of 2 vs (9 man with a totally legit goal ruled out) Liverpool. 1 out of 2 vs Villa. 0 wins against City, Woolwich, Chelsea,

It's not really about anything other than the fact Ange is good at beating lower teams. A fact.

 

[HampshireSpur]

Everybody gets more points from the bottom half teams.

That's why they are in the bottom half

Click to shrink...

Another stat I've always found confusing -

'X is a flat track bully, always scores against shite teams'

1. There are more mid-lower level teams, so ofc more opportunities to score goals against them
2. They are usually shite because they have a poor defence

 

[Matt1882]

It's this really isn't it.

How many games have we seen over the years, the likes of Wigan, Hull, Sheffield United, Burnley, Leicester, Southampton, Bournemouth etc where we've failed to put them away and get done by a late goal.

Beating the bread and butter is more key than beating the teams you're not expected to imo. You do that then move on to how to beat the bigger sides. That's more where positions are decided.

Click to shrink...

Prime Poch seasons saw us beating City, Woolwich, Chelsea, Liverpool etc. He also had a brilliant record vs promoted teams IIRC, hardly ever failing to win in a few seasons.
In 16/17 we only lost 4 games all season. 1 Vs each of Liverpool, Chelsea and United from the top half. And 1 Vs West Ham.
4 games in an entire season. We're at 3 losses after 8 games already. We're miles off that sort of team.

 

[Matt1882]

Another stat I've always found confusing -

'X is a flat track bully, always scores against shite teams'

1. There are more mid-lower level teams, so ofc more opportunities to score goals against them
2. They are usually shite because they have a poor defence

Click to shrink...

I always contest you need those sorts of players. Those lower teams can often be the harder ones to score against due to their lack of ambition to win games.
Think of all those goals Defoe scored where he dug out a 12-25 yard thunderbolt. Not many players in our team now can do that against a packed defence.

 

[SeeSpotRun]

Prime Poch seasons saw us beating City, Woolwich, Chelsea, Liverpool etc. He also had a brilliant record vs promoted teams IIRC, hardly ever failing to win in a few seasons.
In 16/17 we only lost 4 games all season. 1 Vs each of Liverpool, Chelsea and United from the top half. And 1 Vs West Ham.
4 games in an entire season. We're at 3 losses after 8 games already. We're miles off that sort of team.

Click to shrink...

How many points did we have after 8 rounds in Poch's second season?

 

[Shotgunofmichalebrow]

It's this really isn't it.

How many games have we seen over the years, the likes of Wigan, Hull, Sheffield United, Burnley, Leicester, Southampton, Bournemouth etc where we've failed to put them away and get done by a late goal.

Beating the bread and butter is more key than beating the teams you're not expected to imo. You do that then move on to how to beat the bigger sides. That's more where positions are decided.

Click to shrink...

For a while I've genuinely wondered if it was possible to win the league buy beating and I mean home and away every side bar the top 3. A few years ago pre Pep I think it was possible. But the standard and prize money spread has distributed quality more widely.

I think the Villa game is massive bellweather of our actual progress. Beat them and I'll more convinced by the direction of travel. Honestly I think the ceiling for Ange ball is almost entirely the five forwards he needs to make it work. I'll exclude Son because he has been that apex wide forward and Moore and Odobert they are the future; I think ALL our other options would need to be just better than they are to make it work. Jota, Silva, Salah , Palmer, Saka, Diaz. We need to give the coach this level of pace and lethality or he's hamstrung.

 

[Jose Dominguez 25]

Prime Poch seasons saw us beating City, Woolwich, Chelsea, Liverpool etc. He also had a brilliant record vs promoted teams IIRC, hardly ever failing to win in a few seasons.
In 16/17 we only lost 4 games all season. 1 Vs each of Liverpool, Chelsea and United from the top half. And 1 Vs West Ham.
4 games in an entire season. We're at 3 losses after 8 games already. We're miles off that sort of team.

Click to shrink...

Agreed, we also went unbeaten at home the last season at whl, winning 17, just blowing teams away, the main difference being that we had a defence that could be relied on. 9 goals conceded at home that year, it was ridiculous. We do need to be doing both. But as you say we're miles off that team, both tactically/mentality wise and personnel and will likely be for a while yet. I think there have been signs this season that we are making progress though.

It's slow progress though and we aren't winning the games that mean the most to fans, which is always going to make things worse.

 

[skywalker68]

For a while I've genuinely wondered if it was possible to win the league buy beating and I mean home and away every side bar the top 3. A few years ago pre Pep I think it was possible. But the standard and prize money spread has distributed quality more widely.

I think the Villa game is massive bellweather of our actual progress. Beat them and I'll more convinced by the direction of travel. Honestly I think the ceiling for Ange ball is almost entirely the five forwards he needs to make it work. I'll exclude Son because he has been that apex wide forward and Moore and Odobert they are the future; I think ALL our other options would need to be just better than they are to make it work. Jota, Silva, Salah , Palmer, Saka, Diaz. We need to give the coach this level of pace and lethality or he's hamstrung.

Click to shrink...

Do you think he will need a strong No 6 as well to give the team a better platform.
He certainly does need a certain quality profile to really push the top clubs.

 

[1882]

The fact I was way off with Fulham makes my point even more true.
There's a long way to go this season. We have played 3 of the current top 10....and lost all 3.

Last season, our 4 points from Liverpool and Arse came in those first 10 games. Even our win against Fulham did.

After that, our results against top 10 sides

Chelsea - (0/6)
Villa (3/6)
City (1/6)
Newcasle (3/6)
Brighton (3/6)
Fulham (0/3)
Arse (0/3)
Liverpool (0/3)

39 points available. 13 games. 9 taken. 1.44ppg

I can't be arsed to do more calculations. But if we applied the same logic to all the bottom half teams, it would be way higher.
Which proves my point. Which, if you recall, was "we're good at beating bottom half and lower league teams"

If you're happy with that, then fine. But we'll likely only ever float just above those teams if we can't take points regularly from the teams in the top half.

Click to shrink...

But surely EVERYONE to an extent drops more points against the top half teams than the bottom half teams...

THAT'S what helps them be the top half teams, and the bottom teams be at the bottom?!

 

[Matt1882]

How many points did we have after 8 rounds in Poch's second season?

Click to shrink...

13
It wasn't the most awe inspiring start to the season, but put it in perspective, we lost 1 of those 8, on the opening day of the season away at Old Trafford to a Kyle Walker own goal.
We've lost 3 of 8 this season, it took 21 games for us to lose 3 that season. It was boring at times and I wasn't bouncing off the walls. But we didn't lose much at all, nor even look like losing as we developed into a team that was very hard to beat. We lost our shit in the last 4 games. Not sure if Poch overworked them in training or it was psychological, but it was a massive drop off that cost us 1st or 2nd place.

Agreed, we also went unbeaten at home the last season at whl, winning 17, just blowing teams away, the main difference being that we had a defence that could be relied on. 9 goals conceded at home that year, it was ridiculous. We do need to be doing both. But as you say we're miles off that team, both tactically/mentality wise and personnel and will likely be for a while yet. I think there have been signs this season that we are making progress though.

It's slow progress though and we aren't winning the games that mean the most to fans, which is always going to make things worse.

Click to shrink...

I don't think we have a worse defensive unit today. I just don't think the team defends well. To me, it looks like something we don't work on in training based on the amount of sheer panic we see when teams attack us. Either that or we train something that isn't working (like not defending the far post) and that causes the players to fall apart.
The ethos of each coach isn't miles apart. Poch played a high line that could be exposed to counters, but it rarely ever happened.
Dembele?