Harte is Rubbish, not good enough for the Championship

[Ryn]

He will if he's a virtual ever-present


Mac is getting a selection problem now.

And therin lies my confidence that Harte will not score more than 10 goals this year unfortunately.

Stretch is a better (more complete) full back, and Mills/Zurab better at centre half. On rotation of course Harte will still get game time but I doubt it will be enough to net him those 10 goals.

[Snowball]

Well, if a guy gets 18 goals in 60 appearances at a lower level
we have a reasonable bet that he can get, say, half that amount
one level higher = 9 in 60

But if he plays half the total number of games, then 9/10 is a very tall order indeed!

[Snowball]

No doubt that Harte is slow, but he knows that better than anyone.

But why have we had four clean sheets in five?

And the three goals we conceded at Boro?

Goal one was a fast return of our early attack and Pearce was turned/beaten for speed, no way was that down to Harte.

Other goal was poor marking at a corner. was that Mills? Can't remember.

Third goal? Can't remember, but so far we aren't getting hammered by right wingers. Williams was skinned a lot more.

[rabidbee]

I'm arguing that when used selectively, statistics can illustate just about any point of view, especially relevant when on another thread, you seem to attribute our improved defensive record to luck.

The real point here is that 8 or 9 games is too small a dataset to be of much meaning.

[Snowball]

Just took another look at the video of the BORO game

Harte was trying to cover Pearce for the first goal but had a Boro player to deal with. Goal not down to him.

Similar for the Lita goal, and yes, the header of the first goal was Harte's man.


So, as far as I can see, to date, Harte hasn't been responsible for a goal, but has scored two,
made a few great passes out of defence, gone close with a few free-kicks and a good shot at Boro...

[Woodcote Royal]

Stats may not tell the entire story but it adds to the discussion

Toally agree and whilst we all know that it's possible to use selective data in order to support our own view, some posters seem to rubbish any stat that Snowball produces when most of us, myself included, rarely produce any to back our opinions.

We've now reached the point where some are claiming form tables are "Meaningless"

What can be said is that no stats are required to know we have a hardcore within our fanbase who rubbish any new signing who costs less than 500k and/or is over 30.

They also know so little about what makes a good player that they could never, for instance, see how good Kebe would be with just a modest improvement in his decision making process.

The raw talent was always there and now a player who took some disgusting stick from so called fans is going to be too good for us unless promotion comes into view.

[Ryn]

Well, if a guy gets 18 goals in 60 appearances at a lower level
we have a reasonable bet that he can get, say, half that amount
one level higher = 9 in 60

But if he plays half the total number of games, then 9/10 is a very tall order indeed!

I reckon my pint of beer is safe mate

[Snowball]

Well, if a guy gets 18 goals in 60 appearances at a lower level
we have a reasonable bet that he can get, say, half that amount
one level higher = 9 in 60

But if he plays half the total number of games, then 9/10 is a very tall order indeed!

I reckon my pint of beer is safe mate

That's what I was saying!

[Victor Meldrew]

Well, if a guy gets 18 goals in 60 appearances at a lower level
we have a reasonable bet that he can get, say, half that amount
one level higher = 9 in 60

But if he plays half the total number of games, then 9/10 is a very tall order indeed!

Although I prefer an orthodox hard-tackling full-back with a bit of pace who might score one or two goaks per season the Harte position is a strange one.
I presume that nearly all of his goals at Carlisle were from set-pieces-I got as far as finding out that 6 of his goals were from penalties last season out of 16 in all but got a bit fed up researching so it is likely that he scored most of the 10 from free-kicks.

In my view there shouldn't be much difference in completion rates at this level and it would depend upon how many opportunities he gets with both free-kicks and penalties.
I have detected in the past few games that Shane Long et al are doing their best to get free-kicks around the penalty area.
In some ways I hope that we are not going back to the Trevor Morley days of diving for free-kicks and penalties as our main attacking strategy.

It is impossible to show whether Harte's defensive contribution led to Carlisle conceding more than the 16 goals he actually scored so we don't really know what his net contribution was.
We also don't know in these post-Gylfi days if anybody else could become a set-piece and penalty specialist.

As long as we don't step away from using wing-play as our main way of attacking I'll be happy but if it becomes all about free-kicks I don't think that is in any sense building a team and a strategy for the future.

[Snowball]

Looked at last season's games for Carlisle but only found 15 of the goals

of the 15 I found

5 Penalties
7 Headers/Shots
3 Free-Kicks









Penalty <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (1)
zero
zero
zero
zero
zero
zero
DNP (90th min sub)
zero
zero
zero
Penalty (v Pompey) <<<<<<<<<<< (2)
zero
zero
zero
zero
zero
Penalty <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (3)
zero
Shot (after keeper saved pen)
Header
zero
Scored (Site doesn't say how the goal was scored)
zero
zero
zero
zero
Shot
zero
zero
zero
zero
zero
Penalty <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (4)
zero
zero
Header
Header
zero (Played first Half)
zero scored pen in shoot-out <<<<<<NOT in figures for goals scored
run & shot
zero
zero
zero
Free Kick & Penalty <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (5)
zero
zero
zero
zero
zero
zero
Penalty <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (6)
DNP
Scored
zero
zero
Free-Kick
zero
zero
zero

[From Despair To Where?]

That's a really bad case of OCD Snowball. I think you should seriously consider getting help.

[Hoop Blah]

Just took another look at the video of the BORO game

Harte was trying to cover Pearce for the first goal but had a Boro player to deal with. Goal not down to him.

Similar for the Lita goal, and yes, the header of the first goal was Harte's man.


So, as far as I can see, to date, Harte hasn't been responsible for a goal, but has scored two,
made a few great passes out of defence, gone close with a few free-kicks and a good shot at Boro...

Perhaps if he were quicker or positioned better he'd have covered for Pearce?

[Snowball]

That first goal

He had a player cutting in from the right. He had to deal/half-deal with him.

MILLS was nowhere, ditto the midfield.






Separately, the Lita goal, Lita had Cummings and Pearce in VERY close attendance
but he got his shot away, and Feds might have done better. Harte wasn't at fault at all.

[Snowball]

That's a really bad case of OCD Snowball. I think you should seriously consider getting help.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

As usual, when the FACTS show that Harte gets a lot of goals that are NOT penalties
(disproving the unsubstantiated bollox of too-many posters, then attack the messenger.

I repeat.5 penalties from 15 goals, 3 goals dunno.

[Ryn]

Well, if a guy gets 18 goals in 60 appearances at a lower level
we have a reasonable bet that he can get, say, half that amount
one level higher = 9 in 60

But if he plays half the total number of games, then 9/10 is a very tall order indeed!

I reckon my pint of beer is safe mate

That's what I was saying!

I know

[Hoop Blah]

That first goal

He had a player cutting in from the right. He had to deal/half-deal with him.

MILLS was nowhere, ditto the midfield.
.

Just playing devils advocate, but perhaps he made the wrong decision. The first job of a fullback is to cover his centre half, even if he's gone walkabout, that's part of being a TEAM.

[Ryn]

Not if he's being attacked by a winger it isn't.

[Snowball]

That first goal

He had a player cutting in from the right. He had to deal/half-deal with him.

MILLS was nowhere, ditto the midfield.
.

Just playing devils advocate, but perhaps he made the wrong decision. The first job of a fullback is to cover his centre half, even if he's gone walkabout, that's part of being a TEAM.

Take a look at it! He's the only one, other than Fed in the six-yard box and he has an opposition player
running in to ACRES of space. He has to cover the squared ball.


The reality is that the problem is a too-rushed kick-off, our shape already gone, Karajan and Gunnar
"ambling" back, almost going through the motions, Mills completely out of position, the attacker
having the nous to flick the ball past Pearce who has little chance to stop him.

First priority to cover Pearce is MILLS. Fail!

As he's on the right of the box, second defender after Mills should be Cummings. Fail!

Then exceptionally, the left-back comes across, but to do so would have left the goal utterly exposed

[Snowball]

That first goal

He had a player cutting in from the right. He had to deal/half-deal with him.

MILLS was nowhere, ditto the midfield.
.

Just playing devils advocate, but perhaps he made the wrong decision. The first job of a fullback is to cover his centre half, even if he's gone walkabout, that's part of being a TEAM.

Let's not forget the goal was on 24 seconds, so the "decision" is around 20-22 seconds
and if Harte takes the Mills spot, the right winger is totally free in the box

[Hoop Blah]

As a defender sometimes you have to leave your man to cover your teammates error. It's a gamble that the opposition don't exploit the space you leave, but the man on the ball is more dangerous than the man in space.

Not saying Harte was at fault, I don't really think he was, but I'm just pointing out where the stats and even per goal analysis doesn't mean he's played well or not.