In the league ,he had higher points per game ratio, better goal difference, more goals scored per game and fewer goals conceded per game and never lost a game by more than one goal. Yet the average performance was worse than the West Ham away game. It must have been - the "metrics" have shown it to be so.
You either don't read well or have difficulty comprehending two things: a) the concept of team performance quality; b) the concept of opposition quality. Both have a bearing on measuring the performance of the coach in terms of preparation and team execution. Monk gained more points but against weaker opposition with a fully fit squad - that fact is undeniable. Laudrup faced much tougher opposition with a depleted squad - that fact is undeniable. These are not my numbers they are from FourFourTwo Stats Zone - in the metrics of pass completion, possession, territory - which should be a fair measure of the Swansalona style of football that we cherish or have become admired for - Laudrup beat Monk in every category - higher maximum value, higher average, higher minimum value, and small standard deviation (which is a fair measure of consistency). Which, when you consider the two facts just mentioned (opposition quality and squad availability), makes his performance even more significant. Whether you recognize it or not, it doesn't change what is and I don't care. The data is out for you to do your own analysis. Now, put your head back in the sand or wherever else you keep it that the sun doesn't reach and start praying that the trend of last season, demonstrated so clearly last Saturday, doesn't continue into this season.
Well if the trend at the end of last season continues, won't that mean we average 3 wins out of every 4 games? I'll settle for that I suppose
Monk had a depleted squad as well. You've just cherry picked the "metrics" that made Monk look worse. Probably "factored" them as well. I'm not sure how Monk will do this year and they may well be a time where is team performances need criticising but to try and say that the West Ham performance was better than the average under Monk is complete and utter böllocks.
Close except the nearest you can get to balance game difficulty for a particular team is comparing performance against the same games the previous year (not perfect but much better than counting games against top and bottom teams as if they were equal). Monk could not come close to his predecessors like for like PL points total despite having a virtually fully fit team. if I recall Laudrup was operating at 96% of last years points total, despite major injuries (including both Michu and Bony together) and a massively crowded fixture list. So was well on track to keep us up even if you just took straight points per game projection. To achieve at that level with so many first pick injuries and also keep us in Europe and the FA cup was nothing short of miraculous, let alone taking into account a disruptive club captain and a team captain who was visably sulking, blaming others for his mistakes and showing no leadership on the pitch (which I repeatedly witnessed first hand). Laudrup did not have enough time to be disinterested (nor to protect his back) when we consider at the height of injuries he had to manage 9 games from the 1st of Dec to 1st Jan (including Europe away, Man C twice, Chelsea, Everton, Newcaslte....). Then straight after play away to Man U twice in 6 days. Can you imagine what the atmosphere was like by the time of West Ham with what was going on with those with much to gain. Williams even publically stated he was going to try harder for Monk. However with a virtually fully fit team Monk took us straight our of Europe and the FA, gave us our longest run of matches without a win all season and could not come close to the like for like PL points total that Laudrup achieved even with the skilled team that Laudrup had built. Consider West Brom (15/3) a team we normally do well against who were in absolutely terrible form (1 win in 19 games and not won away from home since sept).
I agree i'm also slowly buy steadily getting more & more sick of Swansea, and this gay parade Monk and Huw jenkis have going. All the backstabbing lying and stupid **** like that. Actually i'm really sick of English football in particular, bunch of stupid pricks. really grown fond of some of the middle eastern teams actually. Al ahly play some great football, also this new club Lewinkyha have a really well drilled team, who play beautiful football. I'm actually considering ditching Swansea for them.
Yeah, I see you completely ignored everything I and some others here said. Nice meeting you but on reflection of your statement I'm going to put you in the 'bullshit' corner until you prove everything you just wrote.
No factoring - raw data. There was no scaling, factoring or other massaging of the raw data. The metrics were not cherry picked. They were the three available from the data source under the category Passing, which is/was our core strength. I kept a separate ranking of opposition quality assigning a score based on a club's end of season league position. I assigned -1 to club's in the bottom 7, +1 to club's in the top 7, 0 to the others. Monk's aggregate opposition rank was -3, Laudrup's was +2. Laudrup had the more difficult run of 14 games in terms of opposition quality. I take offense that you think that I am seeking to make Monk look worse. I did this to try to objectively measure what was happening, since what you see or think you see from the stands or in front of a tv is subjective at best. Monk's own actions speaks volumes - nobody can make Monk look worse than he makes himself. I don't have to doctor up anything to make Monk look inferior to Laudrup or any other manager we could have hired in his place. Monk's teams produce the performance that score the metrics. Monk now has to walk the talk. Now he has to deliver. Saturday against Villareal the trend of Monk's 14 games continued. Let's see what happens in the Prem season. I am going to get the data for Laudrup's first season and also for Roger's Prem season. It's going to make for an interesting comparison.
Ah ... the West Ham game .Some are like "A team of Huw Jenkins 's " on here at times .....Laudrup's legacy is " A single game " finger point as he awaited the 2nd round of Europa and the 5th round of the FA Cup ...and certainly ready for an 11 team relegation race as players were coming back from injury and big teams already played . . Then the " Huw Handshake " before the derby .
So you chose one category and ignore others and then pretend it's not subjective. Not sure you know the meaning of the word.
So in judging a team's performance actually watching a game is a poor substitute to cherry picking statistics off a website !! That's what Fergie used to do - never watched a game, just looked at the "metrics" afterwards.
Yes am sure Fergi also used to get rid of players after seeing one bad performance too. Why wasn't Monk sacked after the West Brom game, that was a bloody shocker, don't you agree? I mean West Brom were the out of form team, they were bloody awful. West Brom 0-3 Man Utd West Brom 1-1 Fulham West Brom 1-1 Chelsea Crystal Palace 3-1 West Brom West Brom 1-1 Liverpool Aston Villa 4-3 West Brom West Brom 1-1 Everton Southampton 1-0 West Brom West Brom 0-2 Crystal Palace West Brom 1-0 Newcastle West Ham 3-3 West Brom Tottenham 1-1 West Brom West Brom 1-1 Hull Cardiff 1-0 West Brom West Brom 0-2 Norwich West Brom 2-3 Man City Newcastle 2-1 West Brom West Brom 2-2 Aston Villa Chelsea 2-2 West Brom 1 win in the last 19 games in all comps, yet they beat us. So was it really the West Ham game, or was it the 7 game run without a win that we had with ML? You know over Christmas and injurygate all played between the 9th Dec and the 1st of Jan, 23 days for 7 games. Swansea 2-3 Man City Aston Villa 1-1 Swansea Chelsea 1-0 Swansea Swansea 1-2 Everton Norwich 1-1 Swansea FC St Gallen 1-0 Swansea Swansea 1-1 Hull Or what about the 9 games without a win from Monk, none of you calling for his head after that run, Why? Arsenal 2-2 Swansea Everton 3-2 Swansea Swansea 1-2 West Brom Swansea 1-1 Crystal Palace Napoli 3-1 Swansea Liverpool 4-3 Swansea Swansea 0-0 Napoli Everton 3-1 Swansea Stoke 1-1 Swansea Played between the 12th Feb til 25th March, so over 41 days. An extra 18 days, but only 2 extra games, less injuries as they were coming back. Interesting. People go on about Monk saving us, and having a better points per game ratio. Of his 14 Premier League games, Sunderland, Villa, Hull, Norwich, West Brom, Palace, Cardiff. 7 Were against bottom half finishing clubs. So 50%, yeh but there were only 9 bottom half clubs to choose from, he played 7 of them lol. He also played Newcastle Stoke and Southampton. So of the bottom 13 clubs (bare in mind we were 1 of them) so of the other 12, he played 10 matches against middle/bottom clubs. So how can anyone sit there and judge ML, yet try and defend Monk in the same breath. How the hell can you sit there and justify a 9 match run without a win, yet condemn ML over 1 match? Which sorry, but 20 shots on goal, 0 on target is hardly the managers fault, granted the buck stops with him, but that for me was the players not doing enough on the pitch. And considering the frequency of games, the lack of full squad depth, players were bound to be feeling it. It was a bad game, no-one is denying that, but to justify ML's sacking, to put it blunty, your having a ****ing laugh.
Don't think Laudrup was condemned over 1 game, the wheels started to come off, for whatever reason after the cup win and it continued into the new season and it never looked like it would get better, at least not to me. Whichever way it is looked at, the run of 35 points from 36 games was terrible.
I am one who don't include the previous season, as to me the season was effectively over, the cup was won, the players were winding down. This season was all that mattered to me, and it could be said that he only got 24 points from 24 games, but that is not taking into account the cluster of fixtures with the Europa, the early start to the season for us, the other cups, the injuries over the December period. I mean even at that rate, with our cluster of fixtures, we would have survived, as 18th only got 33 points. Those who fail to accept how much pressure the Europa League put on us as a club, and on the players are doing the club and the players a massive disservice. We all knew the fixture list was getting less congested, with some easier (not easy in simple terms, but quality of opposition, after all Cardiff are easier than Man City or Fulham for that matter lol) games to come, we knew we had injuries coming back, for me our Premier League survival was never in doubt. Not once. Did we have some bad games last season, of course we did, we were playing 2 games a week, whilst opposition teams were fresher. It took its toll, yet we were still above the relegation zone whilst other teams with far easier fixture lists were doing much worse. We were 12th when he was sacked, that left 8 teams who were worse than us, and they didn't have the cluster of fixtures as a reason. So why the panic? It was only going to get easier for us as a club and group of players. The hard part was out of the way. The group faze was over, the over-packed December schedule was over. We had just come back from 2 wins against United and Fulham. Granted a loss in-between and after. Some were moaning about the training, but I made comments about that in the past, you cannot train when your on a plane, or on a bus travelling. And we were doing that more than most clubs. We are not your Man City, Man Utd, who have pretty much 2 first teams to choose from. Better clubs than us have struggled with the Europa, Newcastle, Fulham are 2 clubs who have recently been in it and struggled. Fulham 2 seasons ago had 27 points from 24 games. Newcastle the season before us, whilst in the Europa, after 24 games had 24 points too. So why do we think we should have been any better? They didn't panic and sack the manager, and they survived. Although if memory serves me right, the Newcastle fans wanted Pardew sacked. Am sorry, but the ML sacking for me was a panic reaction, the fans who were calling for his head have a lot to answer for IMO. They failed to accept that we are a small club, that had a tough time last season, through fixtures, injuries, lack of training time through travelling, players going behind the managers back.
The last 10 games of our " Greatest season ever " are the most important to some , rather than winning the League Cup , getting to Europe and already having 40 points with those last 10 games not played yet . It really is amazing the focus put on those last 10 games , really ..lol
Never condemned ML over one match. Never condemned him at all. It was Yankee_jack that first mentioned the West Ham game.
Never called for his sacking myself and said I was disappointed at his sacking and the manner of it. Only one or two on here were calling for his sacking. Compare that with the many more anti-Monk posters on here.
I am not anti-Monk, I am anti castrate Laudrup. And will defend his time at this club. Because the ones who tend to slate ML, are the ones defending Monk. And it beggars belief too me. Monk will get my full support, but I honestly don't see him in the way I do the lieks of Martinez, Rodgers and Laudrup, they all had the urmmm flair? to get us the passing football, Monk for me is more of a Sam Alardyce, Tony Pulis type of coach. And I don't mean that badly, they are good managers, just not for us IMO.
I guess it realy doesnt matter what the fans think about the way Laudrup was sacked and Monk brought in , its more what the players say Players like , Vorm , Chico , , Davies , Michu , Pablo , Poz , Canas and Bony (he will go and and there may be more) . And players we were interesred in over the summer and said no thanks to our inquires What they say is more important than us .
