Those figures have a lot of intangables , which teams played , injuries involved , Europa .Monk has had a healthy team against teams we should have done better against this last bit and his first 3 games which we won at the start were more lucky than quality performances . Im worried Garry doesnt have the team on board in general
Maybe it's time we changed our signatures to "Garry Monk - from hero to zero in 5 games" ?......... ....or maybe 2 in 5 games ?
Tried remembering to account for our respective seasons in the guestimate results. 2011-2012 L-D-D-L (games 1-4, Brendan Rodgers) - Man City (a), Wigan (h), Sunderland (h), Arsenal (a) - 4 pts (2pts = 2 pts dropped - 0.5 per game) D-L-D-L (games 11-14, Brendan Rodgers) - - Liverpool (a), Man Utd (h), Villa (h), Blackburn (a) - 4 pts (2 pts = 2 pts dropped - 0.5 per game) D-L-D-D (games 16-19, Brendan Rodgers) - Newcaslte (a), Everton (a), QPR (h), Spurs (h) - 3 pts (3 pts = 0 pts dropped = good return) L-L-L-L (games 30-33, Brendan Rodgers) - Everton (h), Spurs (a), Newcastle (h), Qpr (a) - 2 pts (0pts = 2 pts dropped - 0.5 per game) So although a few 4 game winless runs, considering hte teams, it wasn't too bad. 2012-2013 D-L-L-L-D (games 3-7, Michael Laudrup) - Sunderland (h), Villa (a), Everton (h), Stoke (a), Reading (h) = 8 points (2 pts - 6 pts dropped - 1.2 per game) L-L-D-D (games 16-19, Michael Laudrup) - Norwich (h), Spurs (a), Man Utd (h), Reading (a) - 4 pts (2 pts - 2 pts dropped - 0.5 per game) L-L-L-D-D-L-D (games 29-35, Michael Laudrup) West Brom (a), Arsenal (h), Spurs (h), Norwich (a), Southampton (h), Chelsea (a), Man city (h) - 5 pts (3 pts - 2 pts dropped - 0.3 per game) 2013-2014 D-D-L-L-D-L-L-L (games 15-22, Michael Laudrup) - Hull (a), Norwich (a), Everton (h), Chelsea (a), Villa (a), Man City (h). Man u (a), Spurs (h) - 3 pts (3 pts - 0 pts dropped - good return) D-L-D-L-L-D (games 26-31, Garry Monk) - Stoke (a), Liverpool (a), Palace (h), West Brom (h), Everton (a), Arsenal (a) - 7 pts (3 pts, 4 pts dropped - 0.7 per game) So up til then although winless runs, the results themselves were not overly unexpected, well bar the first by Laudrup, in which we lost a fair few points we expected. But then we have our current. Chelsea (a), Southampton (h), Sunderland (a), Newcastle (h), Stoke (a) - 10 pts (2 pts, 8 pts dropped - 1.6 per game) The points for this were wins v Southampton, Newcastle and Sunderland (cant have them as an expected away draw, just feel we are that much better than them, sorry) and an away draw to stoke. Even if we were to say 8 pts with a draw at sunderland, we would drop 6 points in 5 games = 1.2 per game, on par with Lauduprs worst run of games as a points per game loss ratio.
Op Can't disagree much there but depending on 2 games from now, you may be a bit unrealistic expecting a win from Southampton, saying that though with 11 men we were so much a better team than them!
Leon is one. I was counting Amat as back up for Fernandez but who am I missing who'd be considered 1st team?
I suppose that's the thing, ifs and maybe on games don't give us points. Barnsley could say they were unlucky not to get at least a draw. As it stands we had a blistering run of points early on but that has dried up and for whatever reason we choose to focus on (some blame Monk, some blame Bony etc) the fact remains we are not picking up points the way we should.
Totally agree too pete..Montero was a combination of hungry , fast and smart today...was the biggest bright light for us today for such a short time...time for his minutes to change.
you guys 9 or 10 hours behind, must be 9 as I thought it was 10, turned the telly on and it was already 1-1
