What do we do?

[Bruce Rioja]

I got as far as that line in SF's post, shook my head, re-read it and then just ignored the rest if that's the standard of it.

You still read them! Don't you know them by heart yet?

Well, yeah, but was the only thing lit red.

[Wandering Willy]

wasn't expecting beckford to cross it and head in the cross.

Why not? KD was expected to win the headers, cross the ball then bang it in the net.

Ah - to bite or not to bite?

[Enoch]

I got as far as that line in SF's post, shook my head, re-read it and then just ignored the rest if that's the standard of it.

You still read them! Don't you know them by heart yet?

Well, yeah, but was the only thing lit red.

Ah! Can be a bugger that.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Can't think which thread to put this in, but here's a slightly surprising statistical fact: last season, we had the division's lowest points yield when scoring first. We did it 26 times - more than anyone bar Cardiff and Watford - but only won 14 (and drew 6) of them, averaging 1.84ppg. In other words, even when scoring first, we were almost as likely NOT to win as we were to win.

(Hull were top. Scored first 23 times, won 21, drew 1, lost 1.)

Doesn't mean the world (and can't be totally blamed on either manager) but it surprised me enough to bring it to your attention.

http://stats.football365.com/2013/ENG/D1/scfst.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BWFC_Insane]

Can't think which thread to put this in, but here's a slightly surprising statistical fact: last season, we had the division's lowest points yield when scoring first. We did it 26 times - more than anyone bar Cardiff and Watford - but only won 14 (and drew 6) of them, averaging 1.84ppg. In other words, even when scoring first, we were almost as likely NOT to win as we were to win.

(Hull were top. Scored first 23 times, won 21, drew 1, lost 1.)

Doesn't mean the world (and can't be totally blamed on either manager) but it surprised me enough to bring it to your attention.

http://stats.football365.com/2013/ENG/D1/scfst.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We threw away the most points last season from winning positions of anyone in the football league (I think).

Was well over 30 IIRC.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Can't think which thread to put this in, but here's a slightly surprising statistical fact: last season, we had the division's lowest points yield when scoring first. We did it 26 times - more than anyone bar Cardiff and Watford - but only won 14 (and drew 6) of them, averaging 1.84ppg. In other words, even when scoring first, we were almost as likely NOT to win as we were to win.

(Hull were top. Scored first 23 times, won 21, drew 1, lost 1.)

Doesn't mean the world (and can't be totally blamed on either manager) but it surprised me enough to bring it to your attention.

http://stats.football365.com/2013/ENG/D1/scfst.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We threw away the most points last season from winning positions of anyone in the football league (I think).

Was well over 30 IIRC.

Usually due to appalling individual errors or several players watching the world go by...

[LeverEnd]

And, it has to be said, tactical negativity. If they were encouraged to score 2nd as well it may have been different.

[Enoch]

Like at Charlton you mean?

[LeverEnd]

Like at Charlton you mean?

No, I meant generally. I'd like to see us have more of a go in an attacking sense. Especially now our defence has turned to absolute shit.

[SmokinFrazier]

Hull outplayed us for 80 minutes?

Was that the 80 minutes after they went three goals behind?

See, you may well have a point in there somewhere, but you don't help your own case when you act daft.

I understand the basic flaw in arguing against a 4-1 victory but I do think that game ties in to what I'm saying about us being the lesser team in quite a few of the matches we won. Us getting off to such a good start would have affected our mentality, and it's entirely possible that the reason they were a better side for the rest of the game was because there was no need for us to continue to try and outplay them, we just had to sit back, not be reckless and we'd coast to an easy win. As it happened, that's how the game unfolded and if they were the tactics, which I don't dispute, then that's fine. I have no objections with that strategy. However, that result was an anomaly for us and them and they should never have gone down 3-0 after 8 minutes. It's something you very, very rarely see in football, so could that be considered fortuitous? I think so. It's impossible to say how the game would have panned out had it been 0-0 after 10 minutes but the eventual scoreline flattered us. It wasn't a typical dominant 4-1 win where the victorious side is clearly superior, we just got off to a great start and then over the rest of the game, they played better than us. Maybe it's harsh to criticise such a scoreline, I don't know, but the result didn't reflect the pattern of the game over 90 minutes.

Watching England's attempts at creating a goal was frustratingly similar to watching Bolton under Freedman. How anyone can defend a performance like last nights is beyond me. Alright defensively but we never looked creating a single chance from open play, which is unacceptable.

[StaffsTrotter]

You do have a point SF. We generally weren't convincing last season even on our winning run
I don't know whether we just got giddy because we'd just dropped down, or our pre-season tag as favourites but I certainly expected us to dominate and look comfortable in more matches than we did - (can anyone name any in which we were ?).

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

While we're on the subject, I'm bored of folk moaning about England, too. We needed a draw, we got a draw. Beforehand, folk were saying we'd only kept clean sheets against Moldova and San Marino, now we've got one at the home of the best team we'll face in the group. Qualification is in our own hands after a diligent drilled defensive performance. Questions over the attacking panache might be answered by noting that our first choice three strikers were out.

I'm aware there'll be a thread on this elsewhere but I can't be arsed because it strikes me that folk who complain Bolton can't keep a clean sheet will complain that England can.

As for complaining about a 4-1 Bolton win, or that unbeaten run in general, you may think as you will but I'd be rather happy to encounter those disasters again.

[BWFC_Insane]

While we're on the subject, I'm bored of folk moaning about England, too. We needed a draw, we got a draw. Beforehand, folk were saying we'd only kept clean sheets against Moldova and San Marino, now we've got one at the home of the best team we'll face in the group. Qualification is in our own hands after a diligent drilled defensive performance. Questions over the attacking panache might be answered by noting that our first choice three strikers were out.

I'm aware there'll be a thread on this elsewhere but I can't be arsed because it strikes me that folk who complain Bolton can't keep a clean sheet will complain that England can.

As for complaining about a 4-1 Bolton win, or that unbeaten run in general, you may think as you will but I'd be rather happy to encounter those disasters again.

I was critical of England but not of Hodgson or the selection or owt. I just don't think England have very good players. And it shows in performances like the other night. The result was good. I'm not a "dyed in the wool" England fan though, not anymore so I watched the game with a different perspective than I'd watch a Bolton game. Englands problem is a lack of genuine international quality players. Or rather a balance of those players. We don't have anyone who can change the pace of a game.

Anyhow enough about that.

You only have to look at QPR with their vast resources, huge wage bill and talented group grinding out 1-0 wins this season to see what this division is about.

Its about coming out on the right side of tight results, in tight games, consistently enough to go up.

[StaffsTrotter]

While we're on the subject, I'm bored of folk moaning about England, too. We needed a draw, we got a draw. Beforehand, folk were saying we'd only kept clean sheets against Moldova and San Marino, now we've got one at the home of the best team we'll face in the group. Qualification is in our own hands after a diligent drilled defensive performance. Questions over the attacking panache might be answered by noting that our first choice three strikers were out.

I'm aware there'll be a thread on this elsewhere but I can't be arsed because it strikes me that folk who complain Bolton can't keep a clean sheet will complain that England can.

As for complaining about a 4-1 Bolton win, or that unbeaten run in general, you may think as you will but I'd be rather happy to encounter those disasters again.

wasn't complaining DSB, thought the debate was about how we evolving under DF in playing and trying to win football matches. I'll take as many tight or underserved wins as the next guy, but you'dve expected those wins to have translated into a greater confidence, control & dominance in games and allowed what we thought were our better than average Chpship players to have strutted their stuff, that's all.

[truewhite15]

Who was it that said they'd rather be a lucky manager than a good one?

So that record at the back end of last season was exclusively down to luck, was it? I'll take that. I don't think it's true, because the odds of getting THAT lucky are extraordinary, but I'll take it.

Let's face it. We're in this league because we were too shite for the Premier League two years ago. We shouldn't expect, therefore, to be pissing it. We've had an exceptionally poor start to the season, but that doesn't mean the season is over, nor does it mean we should sack the bloke who kept the ship from sinking last year. We're a Championship club, without a divine right to be anywhere else. We'll only get out of it through stability and pulling together.

Let's stop knee-jerking and get a grip on reality for a sec, shall we?

[bwfcdan94]

While we're on the subject, I'm bored of folk moaning about England, too. We needed a draw, we got a draw. Beforehand, folk were saying we'd only kept clean sheets against Moldova and San Marino, now we've got one at the home of the best team we'll face in the group. Qualification is in our own hands after a diligent drilled defensive performance. Questions over the attacking panache might be answered by noting that our first choice three strikers were out.

I'm aware there'll be a thread on this elsewhere but I can't be arsed because it strikes me that folk who complain Bolton can't keep a clean sheet will complain that England can.

As for complaining about a 4-1 Bolton win, or that unbeaten run in general, you may think as you will but I'd be rather happy to encounter those disasters again.

Agree with you completely DSB. A draw was a very good result especially considering the circumstances and it is no wonder that we have to won a trophy for the best part of 50 years with such a redicoulas amount of expectation on our players every time they play a game.

[SmokinFrazier]

You do have a point SF. We generally weren't convincing last season even on our winning run
I don't know whether we just got giddy because we'd just dropped down, or our pre-season tag as favourites but I certainly expected us to dominate and look comfortable in more matches than we did - (can anyone name any in which we were ?).

I'd be interested to see if anyone could answer this question and provide a reasonable amount of games. Under Freedman's whole reign as manager, how many times have we been comfortably the better side? The Championship is a tough league and you expect plenty of hard fought games but for a team hoping to do anything, you also expect plenty of games where you look very strong. I don't think we did last year, even during our best run of form - and, again, did we 'deserve' 15 points from those 5 wins in a row? I don't think anyone would say that, even the pro-Freedman crowd build their optimism around that streak of results.

It's easy to get carried away with results but performances give you a greater indication because lightning doesn't strike twice. You can have good periods, just like you can have bad periods which we may be in right now, but good performances are what will decide a teams fate. I don't think our performances have been good enough under Freedman, and that's not being reactionary because of this poor run either. I made my opinion clear before the season had started. We needed to improve and we haven't.

While we're on the subject, I'm bored of folk moaning about England, too. We needed a draw, we got a draw. Beforehand, folk were saying we'd only kept clean sheets against Moldova and San Marino, now we've got one at the home of the best team we'll face in the group. Qualification is in our own hands after a diligent drilled defensive performance. Questions over the attacking panache might be answered by noting that our first choice three strikers were out.

We had a couple of scares but defensively, I thought we were pretty solid throughout and there's no shame in going to Ukraine and keeping a clean sheet. What was awful, however, was our attacking play. I'm not having that a team with Gerrard, Lampard, Wilshere and Walcott should be so woefully inept when going forward. Even Milner and Lambert would easily get into their starting 11. Praise the defence all you like but why can't we have a solid defence and a side who knows how to attack? We didn't create a single chance against Ukraine and whilst they're a solid side and a draw isn't terrible, you'd expect us to at least have several shots at goal. Our best opportunities came from corners and in open play, we did nothing with the possession we had.

I said before the game that a draw would suit me and the result itself was fine, I didn't expect a win. The performance just left me with no optimism that the team is going anywhere or has progressed since Capello. We'll get to the World Cup, we'll underperform and Hodgson will keep his job because his face fits at the FA, despite it being clearly obvious that we'll continue to underperform as long as he's the national manager.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Who was it that said they'd rather be a lucky manager than a good one?

Napoleon said he'd rather have lucky generals.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Who was it that said they'd rather be a lucky manager than a good one?

Napoleon said he'd rather have lucky generals.

I'd be more interested in what Wellington said!

[Enoch]

Who was it that said they'd rather be a lucky manager than a good one?

Napoleon said he'd rather have lucky generals.

I'd be more interested in what Wellington said!

Something along the lines of, 'Those French generals aren't very lucky.'?