We still keep getting the comparison between us and Blackpool, and that somehow this comparison means we'll plummet as they did. There's also been mention of Hull in their debut season. Now, most of us have made our feelings about the comparison to Blackpool fairly clear, and there's little need to go over the relative merits of the squads again (I think we're a better squad for what it's worth). However, I had a look at our respective positions at this point in the season, but rather than looking at points gained or league position, I looked at the gap to the bottom three. Blackpool were one point closer to the bottom three than we are, Hull were two points further away than us, though with goal difference that was essentially one. At the end of the season, Blackpool were relegated by one point, Hull stayed up by one point. I know the doom mongers will say 'well there it is, both those sides were in similar positions, one went down, the other nearly did'. But my point here is that, despite the idea that they both capitulated and struggled horribly (which they largely did), they both had seasons that came down to one point. Neither was somehow a foregone conclusion. So next time we get the Blackpool comparison (or Hull), it's worth remembering that, when push came to shove, there was only one point in it (and, of course, that we're better than they were!). OTBC
Statistically it is tempting,albeit lazy to interpret that one set of results will mimic another.In the case of football results this even more fraught with difficulties for a wide range of reasons.If you look at the effect of team form for example this illustrates my point perfectly. Blackburn caught Arsenal in the crest of a slump and won 4-3.We caught them on the upswing and lost 2-1.I think that if they had visited Blackburn when they did us the result would hav been more like 0-4 The argument that things balance out seems to be a pretty sound one.We had a run of bad penalties early on,then got one against Blackburn that was technically correct but which we all know we were lucky to win.Result for Blackburn 4 points from the two games,maybe one better than they might have expected. I don't see us doing a Blackpool.Looking at the next few fixtures I think Swansea have a particularly tough set with Spurs,Arsenal and Chelsea in the next 5 games.There are more poor looking teams around this season 36 points will be enough.
the biggest difference is surely the quality of the respective managers. phil brown is an absolutely terrible manager. how he managed to get them up in the first place i will never know but the likes of boothroyd and dowie also managed to gain promotion and they were ****e too. olly, although i'm a massive fan, is not in the same managerial league as lambert and his naivity cost his club in the end, bizarrely, when he tried to make them better at the back and less gung-ho. lambert makes sure his team plays to its strengths, one of which is its strength both in body and mind. we are far closer to stoke than blackpool, not in terms of the way we play the game but in terms of capability. comparisons between ourselves, hull and blackpool are generally made by people who don't do their research about us but need to write a story about us
Think you're spot on with the managers supers, ultimately it's the quality in the dugout that tends to dictate a season. My point in looking up the previous seasons was that, as easy as the comparison is, the reality isn't quite what many seem to want to suggest. It is, as CT said, just lazy. As poor as both those two were in the second half of those seasons, the great start they'd made was partly what kept one up, and allowed the other to come within a point of doing the same, despite the capitulation. It just illustrates how important points on the board are, and creating a gap as early as possible. The reality is we've made a great start, we've a top young manager, a sound squad on which to build, and no reason to fear the nonsense of the nay sayers.
I sort of agree Superman, but getting almost to the half-way point of the season (having played all except Fulham once) without being able to keep a single clean sheet does kinda worry me. Teams feel about us as they feel about Arsenal -- always liable to concede. PL is on record as saying that it doesn't particularly concern him, which I believe because, apart from e.g. the Man City game, I haven't really noticed any obvious adjustments designed to make the defence a bit more watertight.
robbie, totally understand peoples concerns about our lack of clean sheets. personally however, i'd be a million times more worried if we couldn't score goals. the fact is, teams will always be worried about playing a team who are dangerous going forward, a team that can hurt them. ok, we give teams a chance but we aren't being rolled over like bolton are regularly, and while we continue to have a threat and continue to pick up steady points, i very much doubt lambert will be too bothered either. indeed, has he even mentioned it as a concern? thats not to say we can't improve at the back but all i'm saying is that people make a big deal out of it but it only truly becomes a big deal if we stop scoring goals too. the opposition believe they probably have to score more than once to beat us and thats often a big ask
Am I the only one who doesn't give a toss about clean sheets? Would you rather be in the bottom three with a -15GD but a couple of bore draws in the pack.Give me a game like Blackburn any day. We might have sneaked nil-nils in either of the Merseyside games but,to be honest those two moments,the first with Holt forcing his way between Liverpool defenders and beating Reiner to the ball,the second with a finish,surrounded by six defenders and the goalie that would not have looked out of place if it had been scored by the player I took my handle from,well those moments were worth a whole laundry full of clean sheets.
Keeping a clean sheet does not mean playing out a boring 0-0! Nor does it stop e.g. Holt doing what he does. 1-0, 2-0, 3-0, any number to nil! I think it IS a concern that we concede every game precisely because, if the goals DO dry up and we always concede, we will be in the proverbial. Being able to nullify the opposition if necessary is a useful additional form of insurance; currently it appears to be beyond us.
Well said, good Sir! What's the point in being in the Premier League if you haven't got any good games to watch? We're not going to last forever, so let's enjoy it while we can and make sure our matches are as entertaining as possible!
i think what we have to remember is that we weren't great at the back last year either! going from memory, i think we kept 11 clean sheets - that is not very impressive for a promotion-winning team. however, we did score by far the most in the league. lambert's philosophy since coming to city has always been 'go for the win'. how many times have we seen a tight match, maybe poised at 1-1, lambert throw on three or four strikers to try and win the game? its brilliant that we have such a positive manager in charge and i think, as a whole, us supporters have embraced that philosophy. sometimes it will backfire but to be fair, it hasn't happened that often. because we choose as a team to open up a game early on, we are always liable to leave ourselves short at the back - its the way the team are ordered to play! its not because they aren't good defenders though they do make mistakes, but against the really top sides we will be punished - against the majority however it is likely to work to our benefit more often than not. how many other sides below the top 6 open a game right up early on? very few - its one of our strengths and we would suffer if we didn't continue to play that way. the lack of clean sheets is not because we can't defend - its because we play so open, and i wouldn't want us to change it.
I think another point, which has been touched on both in this and previous posts (I even "writ" and article on it!) is that we are very lucky insofar as the Premier League has some exceptionally weak teams in it this season, of which we are not one. The likes of Bolton, Blackburn, Wigan, Wolves are woeful this season, giving us a distinct advantage over Blackpool. The lack of quality in the Premier League has really given us a boost, something that every team is not so lucky to have in their first season. Providing that we stay up, which I think we will, then the experience and money we will have gained going into season number 2 should stand us in good stead to get ourselves properly established in the long run. Long way to get yet though! Good post btw exile.
i think you'll find, if you talk to fans of other clubs, that the premier league was desperately weak last season too CS... we are perhaps helped by the fact that blackburn seemingly wish to self-destruct and bolton have some injuries but other than that, the league is weak regardless. its only the top 6 that are any good and you could argue there were only 4 good teams last year!
Fair comment. Having looked at the final table from last year I would be inclined to agree; however, on 1st Jan 2010, there were only 7 points between bottom place Hammers and 9th placed Liverpool, whereas right now, the gap between bottom and 8th is 14 points. Which would suggest that the league was strong at this point last year. It's all lies, damned lies, and statistics though.
I think you will find out (I posted on this earlier in the season) that the top five or six teams are taking a proportionately higher tally of points than they did in 2010/11.The result of this is that the remaining 14 clubs have fewer points shared between them.The result will inevitably be that come season end the survival bar will be lower than last year,which is why i have argued that 36 points will bring safety. As regards the OP we are definitely more a Stoke than a Blackpool but with a streak of the Ollie flare thrown in.Although not I would concede on post match interviews which are more reminiscent of that great Scottish sage Rab C Nesbit.
It really irritates me when pundits continually compare us with Blackpool. We are poles apart in terms of support, history, etc so I just don't get it. Even in today's BBC match report there is a further comparison to Blackpool! Grrrrrrrr!
This time last season blackpool were 8th with 25 points on the board. were 10th with 22. If you do look though, they were very predictable and very gung ho, every game! We are the complete opposite, we play good football but were much more versatile. This could be what keeps us up. Everything went through adam, and once he was upset they fell to there knees and they were stuffed. Pundits havent got a clue. Another thing that got me rather annoyed was ian holloways comments about matty phillips saying that is his club any better than either us or swansea cos we scrambled out of the league! What an idiot, ive always liked olie but that was a bit of a stupid thing to say when they actually just managed to get up in the 1st place!
I know what you're saying about Ollie, but he's only saying that because he wants to hang on to Phillips! You can't blame him for that!
Then you need a history lesson, mate!! The 1953 FA Cup Final, Sir Stanley Matthews, Stan Mortenson... Alan Ball, Emlyn Hughs... 4th, 3rd, and runners-up in the old Division 1 in the 1950's... Blackpool have a great history, the "Matthews" FA Cup final v Bolton, I would suggest, is an iconic FA Cup final, more than can be said for your milk cup win v Sunderland, where you didn't even score the goal!
