Looking up or Looking down?

[Hoop Blah]

The issue with that Wimb, is that although Long has shown the ability to score in short bursts he doesn't appear to be able to do so consistently.

A short burst in January or over Easter may well get us 2 or 3 good results but if we want to challenge for the play-offs then we need someone, anyone, to be finding the net on a more regular basis. If we had a watertight defense then, like Swansea have done over the last few seasons, we might get away with needing a few less goals to win enough games.

We're 'making do' yet again and that's what is going to hold us back. That's fine to some extent, but there's only so long you can make do before it catches up with you.

[Wimb]

The issue with that Wimb, is that although Long has shown the ability to score in short bursts he doesn't appear to be able to do so consistently.

A short burst in January or over Easter may well get us 2 or 3 good results but if we want to challenge for the play-offs then we need someone, anyone, to be finding the net on a more regular basis. If we had a watertight defense then, like Swansea have done over the last few seasons, we might get away with needing a few less goals to win enough games.

We're 'making do' yet again and that's what is going to hold us back. That's fine to some extent, but there's only so long you can make do before it catches up with you.

I'd agree with that Hoop and it's certainly possible that Long turns into another Lovell, Nogan, Butler or Lita who never really scored consistently after early promise with the club.

I think Brian (and 99% of the fanbase) know that we need another striker to help take us up another level but I'm just suggesting that the players we have now do have the potential to go on bursts and almost become a 'new' striker. In other words we should be looking at every opportunity to go and get someone who improves the squad but if the worst came to it and we missed out on someone then the POTENTIAL is still there with the strikers at the club/out on loan.

[Snowball]

Watford, City and 'Boro were both playing top sides this weekend...I think they all did ok.

So easy to talk like that... but how do we compare with these sides over the last 8?

RFC's last 8 is WWLDDDDD ELEVEN POINTS, with a GD of +3, better than both these "examples"

Watford lost to Scunthorpe 0-2, then Derby 1-4, drew 1-1 with Forest, then lost two more 2-3 to Palace, and Burnley, then drew 1-1 with Reading, 0-0 with Barnsley before FINALLY turning the corner and beating Leicester 3-2 then their great win versus QPR. That's L-L-D-L-L-D-D-W-W 13-17 9 POINTS FROM THEIR LAST 8 GAMES. GD -4

Boro are: 1-2 Bristol City, 2-1 Crystal Palace, 2-0 Scunthorpe, 0-1 Swansea City, 0-1 Millwall, 2-2 Hull City, 0-1 Coventry City, 1-0 Cardiff City and immediately prior to that they lost 5 of 6 and drew the other: 1-3 Watford, 2-2 Portsmouth, 1-2 Leeds United, 0-1 Nottm Forest, 0-1 Norwich City (4-9)



P8 W3 D1 L4 08-08 10 Points Middlesbro (and in the six games immediately before that? W0 D1 L5 4-9)
P8 W2 D3 L3 13-15 09 Points Watford

[Svlad Cjelli]

Blah, blah, blah, blah

[Snowball]

The issue with that Wimb, is that although Long has shown the ability to score in short bursts he doesn't appear to be able to do so consistently.

I don't want to get into a Long-debate, but the only time Long has been on an extended run of games and failed is this season, 4 goals in 19. I showed that he has played hardly at all before December every season. The reason he has come good has been because he's been PLAYED. Of course, NOW we can say "dry spell" etc, but Hunt is dry, Church is dry, McAnuff is dry. There is nobody in the team who is prolific. NOBODY. It's a team malaise, down to either lack of quality, or poor decisions by Mac. I didn't go Saturday, but the one thing that was clear when Long made the two misses I saw, was there was no RFC player near him. I thought 4-4-2 was about the PAIRING, two strikers working in combo, rarely more than ten yards apart. I've been saying for ages that we don't have the players to play a 4-5-1 but that when we ostensibly play 442 the "2" isn't a two

If we had a watertight defense then, like Swansea have done over the last few seasons, we might get away with needing a few less goals to win enough games.

We aren't that far from Swansea. But we had that horrible blip of 10 goals in 4 games Donny, QPR, Cardiff, Norwich.

2 21 18 0.86 conceded per game Swansea
6 20 22 1.10 conceded per game Reading
? 16 12 0.75 conceded per game Reading


It looks like a settled back five will have Elwood in front of them, and maybe we are going to pick up a lot more clean sheets

[Snowball]

Blah, blah, blah, blah

Go empty your potty

[Svlad Cjelli]

Blah, blah, blah, blah

Go empty your potty

Eh?

I was just trying to make the point, which appears to have escaped you completely, that we've heard it all before from you. reams and reams of meaningless numbers to try and justify your arguments, which frequently fly directly in the face of what most people see with their own eyes.

I personally don't bother to look at all the stats you post any more, and I'd be prepared to bet that I'm not in the minority on that point.

[Snowball]

I'm heartbroken

[Hoop Blah]

Watford, City and 'Boro were both playing top sides this weekend...I think they all did ok.

So easy to talk like that... but how do we compare with these sides over the last 8?

RFC's last 8 is WWLDDDDD ELEVEN POINTS, with a GD of +3, better than both these "examples"

Watford lost to Scunthorpe 0-2, then Derby 1-4, drew 1-1 with Forest, then lost two more 2-3 to Palace, and Burnley, then drew 1-1 with Reading, 0-0 with Barnsley before FINALLY turning the corner and beating Leicester 3-2 then their great win versus QPR. That's L-L-D-L-L-D-D-W-W 13-17 9 POINTS FROM THEIR LAST 8 GAMES. GD -4

Boro are: 1-2 Bristol City, 2-1 Crystal Palace, 2-0 Scunthorpe, 0-1 Swansea City, 0-1 Millwall, 2-2 Hull City, 0-1 Coventry City, 1-0 Cardiff City and immediately prior to that they lost 5 of 6 and drew the other: 1-3 Watford, 2-2 Portsmouth, 1-2 Leeds United, 0-1 Nottm Forest, 0-1 Norwich City (4-9)



P8 W3 D1 L4 08-08 10 Points Middlesbro (and in the six games immediately before that? W0 D1 L5 4-9)
P8 W2 D3 L3 13-15 09 Points Watford

Doesn't that back up the point that it doesn't matter how good or bad a run you're on you can still beat a top team, which means your excuse for the teams run of bad form (or not as you claim it to be) is that they were playing a couple of good teams within that run.

The point is, if we want to push for a play off place (let alone challenge the top teams) we have to beat a few good sides along the way. This is a bad run of form, there's no getting away from it.

[floyd__streete]

Anyone worth selling has been sold over the last 2 seasons. We're on course for a lower-than-last-season finish for the fourth season in a row. Crowds are dipping. Our main striker has managed one goal from open play in 19 appearances.

Those who are 'looking up' presumably still believe in things like the Tooth Fairy.

[Oi Oi Saveloy]

Simple question with 2 outcomes.

We buy a decent striker in Jan = UP

We are happy with what we've got = Down

[Wycombe Royal]

Watford, City and 'Boro were both playing top sides this weekend...I think they all did ok.

So easy to talk like that... but how do we compare with these sides over the last 8?

RFC's last 8 is WWLDDDDD ELEVEN POINTS, with a GD of +3, better than both these "examples"

Watford lost to Scunthorpe 0-2, then Derby 1-4, drew 1-1 with Forest, then lost two more 2-3 to Palace, and Burnley, then drew 1-1 with Reading, 0-0 with Barnsley before FINALLY turning the corner and beating Leicester 3-2 then their great win versus QPR. That's L-L-D-L-L-D-D-W-W 13-17 9 POINTS FROM THEIR LAST 8 GAMES. GD -4

Boro are: 1-2 Bristol City, 2-1 Crystal Palace, 2-0 Scunthorpe, 0-1 Swansea City, 0-1 Millwall, 2-2 Hull City, 0-1 Coventry City, 1-0 Cardiff City and immediately prior to that they lost 5 of 6 and drew the other: 1-3 Watford, 2-2 Portsmouth, 1-2 Leeds United, 0-1 Nottm Forest, 0-1 Norwich City (4-9)



P8 W3 D1 L4 08-08 10 Points Middlesbro (and in the six games immediately before that? W0 D1 L5 4-9)
P8 W2 D3 L3 13-15 09 Points Watford

I thought you didn't recognise 8 matches as "standard" for form?

[Snowball]

Doesn't that back up the point that it doesn't matter how good or bad a run you're on you can still beat a top team, which means your excuse for the teams run of bad form (or not as you claim it to be) is that they were playing a couple of good teams within that run.

No, it shows that you have to judge teams over a reasonable period of time. Losing at QPR is hardly surprising. Most clubs do, and five draws against top eight sides is not bad play or a poor run.

Watford showed they had ability being third after ten games, then they fell away, then they turned back and started getting results. So their 20/21 game form is the one that counts.

Our form is solid mid-table or a little better. Of more interest is we are a VERY hard team to beat and it looks like we are getting harder to beat



This "bad run" bollocks surprises me. We played well against Cardiff and most thought we deserved to win it only to be robbed by a non-goal. We had a terrible first half versus Norwich and a totally brilliant second half scoring three goals and drawing, another game we could easily have won. We scored a really good goal at Watford, let in a poor one, had a stone-wall penalty shout turned down. Nobody said we played badly. Leeds was a bit drab first half but Kebe was on fire when he came on and again we dominated, nobody said we played badly did they? I didn't see the Coventry game so can't comment.

My point is these five draws, taken singly, every game we've competed well. In only one game did we play poorly and only in the first half (Norwich)

[Snowball]

I thought you didn't recognise 8 matches as "standard" for form?

I thought it had been pointed out to me that 8 is a standard?

[Hoop Blah]

We didn't play well against any of those sides apart from Cardiff though.

I agree that our performances possibly deserved better results, but ultimately it's results that determine where we'll finish at the end of the season and this has been a poor run of results. We've not won in 6, and haven't won a couple of games we perhaps should've.

That sounds like the form of a relegation side.

[Snowball]

We didn't play well against any of those sides apart from Cardiff though.

I agree that our performances possibly deserved better results, but ultimately it's results that determine where we'll finish at the end of the season and this has been a poor run of results. We've not won in 6, and haven't won a couple of games we perhaps should've.

That sounds like the form of a relegation side.

Would you like some money on RFC to be relegated?

Happy to give you 10/1 £1,000 against your £100 or multiples thereof.

[Ferris]

You're obviously less confident than the bookies that we'll stay up then

[Snowball]

You're obviously less confident than the bookies that we'll stay up then

Didn't look at the odds. Me risking losing a grand is SUPER confident

[RoyalJames101]

RFC's last 8 is WWLDDDDD ELEVEN POINTS, with a GD of +3, better than both these "examples"

How can you include the Burnley and Doncaster games?! They were both well over a month ago, how can that be part of our recent form?!

[Hoop Blah]

We didn't play well against any of those sides apart from Cardiff though.

I agree that our performances possibly deserved better results, but ultimately it's results that determine where we'll finish at the end of the season and this has been a poor run of results. We've not won in 6, and haven't won a couple of games we perhaps should've.

That sounds like the form of a relegation side.

Would you like some money on RFC to be relegated?

Happy to give you 10/1 £1,000 against your £100 or multiples thereof.

I don't think we'll get relegated, and didn't say I did either, so why would I want to put money on it?

The run of form we've been on, that you say isn't bad form, is that of a side looking at relegation though. When you start thinking you've been unlukcy, could've won here or there, if only this or that, then you're on a slippery slope.

We're a mid-table side who'll be inconsistent and won't win every game we 'should' but that doesn't mean our bad runs aren't bad, however positive or controversial you want to try and be.