Mick Dennis article.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Walsh.i.am

Walsh.i.am

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Jan 24, 2011
17,327
8,175
113
Gem of the Norfolk coast. Bar none!
Interesting viewpoint of the Everton match - and stats in general, but this hit the nail on the head for me <ok>

And never forget the most significant numbers. Number of consecutive seasons in the Premier League: three. Amount of money owed to banks and other institutional lenders: nil. Cash spent on players this summer: £25 million.

The turn-around since 2009 is one of the greatest football success stories of the modern era. And it hasn’t finished yet.

These are exhilarating times to be a Norwich supporter. Those who carp and quibble now must just enjoy being miserable.
Click to expand...

Full piece here:- http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter...-only-ones-that-counted-meant-a-point-apiece/
 
It's a good article that and hits home how far we have come.

Interesting focus on Bradders. With his face fungus he now reminds me of the great, sadly departed, Trevor Hockey who operated in a similar kind of role. Hockey was never known for his fancy footwork, 45 yard passes, exhillerating runs or expressive distribution. He was an aggressive SOB who harried the oposition, nullified their creativity, broke down play and was a general effing nuisance to their players in the middle of the park. I used to laugh when opposition fans used to chant "Hockey is a werewolf" and we'd all chant back "Hockey, Hockey bite their legs". Bearded Trev was a hero of mine.

Bradders is our modern day Hockey and does his job very, very well.
 
Mick Dennis is very much a City supporter. But equally he is an intelligent football supporter. His analysis of football is always incisive and informative. A lot of football journalists could well try to copy his style.
 
Somewhat ironic though, that in an article which draws attention to the distinction between stats on the one hand and the interpretation of them on the other, Mick fails to observe the distinction consistently himself:

Quote: "Yet, just as I cleared my throat to shout at Match of the Day 2, Hansen began to debunk the statistics. He explained that Chelsea’s possession and completed passes were largely in and around the Hull penalty area. For their part, Steve Bruce’s boys retained the ball well at times – but only in their own half in the hope that nobody wearing blue would get too close.

Chelsea (operating with only one striker, by the way) won the game in the first 24 minutes and then put on the cruise control – proving that football stats without elaboration can usher us away from the truth.

So Hansen didn't "debunk the statistics" (first sentence), he debunked the naive use of them (second sentence)? We get the gist Mick, but people in glass houses .......... <laugh> <ok>
 
Sorry Robbie, but you've lost me again (please don't try to explain however, I'm happy to stay in the dark on this one).

Great article from Mick though! He gets some stick in certain parts but I've always though that he's a great writer personally and speaks far more truth and common sense than the majority of football journalists I've come across <ok>
 
Tony_Munky_Canary said:
Sorry Robbie, but you've lost me again (please don't try to explain however, I'm happy to stay in the dark on this one).

Great article from Mick though! He gets some stick in certain parts but I've always though that he's a great writer personally and speaks far more truth and common sense than the majority of football journalists I've come across <ok>
Click to expand...

Always happy to oblige Munky. I agree about Mick Dennis. Actually seems to live in the real world, not the imaginary one created by his fellow journalists. <ok>
 
top, top article.

mick gets on my nerves a bit sometimes but there's little doubt he's a passionate city fan and he knows the club inside out.

when he writes about city, it's always a 'must read' <ok>



ps. i also have absolutely no idea what robbie is talking about <laugh>
 
Superman wears Grant Holt pyjamas in bed said:
<laugh> i really tried to understand robbie, i really did! i read it three times but i'm flummoxed <laugh>
Click to expand...

I can see I'm setting the standard far too high. Never mind, I'm shortly going to be starting a new thread entitled "Is CH Roberto Martinez with defensive nous?". You'll all be able to have a real go at me! It'll make a change from Wenger and Arsenal :grin: <ok>
 
kickitoff-throwitin said:
....................and a not so inteligent article IMO, I actually read this with my mouth wide open as I couldn't believe the drivel this prat was spouting <doh>

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...l-will-be-a-premier-league-flop-with-norwich?
Click to expand...

I like the bit where he says we have overspent in bolstering our attacking positions because we are only going to play a 4-5-1? What the hell is he on about?

So we should of only purchased Hooper and he and Becchio would be enough? What is he on?
 
Celtic have just been knocked put of the Champions League and I think this explains a lot as to why Gary Hooper saw his future away from Celtic Park. Yeah, great playing in front of 60K fans every other week thrashing pub teams.

edit:- just realised it was the first leg, doesn't look good for them though has to be said
 
Tony_Munky_Canary said:
Sorry Robbie, but you've lost me again (please don't try to explain however, I'm happy to stay in the dark on this one).

Great article from Mick though! He gets some stick in certain parts but I've always though that he's a great writer personally and speaks far more truth and common sense than the majority of football journalists I've come across <ok>
Click to expand...

My Dad agree's with a lot of what he says I think his alright, however the one sticking point I have with him is when he stuck up for the past regime of Roeder/Doncaster/Munby and co, that really struck a raw nerve with a lot of our fans, like the rest of though I suppose he has the clubs best interests at heart.
 
robbieBB said:
Somewhat ironic though, that in an article which draws attention to the distinction between stats on the one hand and the interpretation of them on the other, Mick fails to observe the distinction consistently himself:

Quote: "Yet, just as I cleared my throat to shout at Match of the Day 2, Hansen began to debunk the statistics. He explained that Chelsea&#8217;s possession and completed passes were largely in and around the Hull penalty area. For their part, Steve Bruce&#8217;s boys retained the ball well at times &#8211; but only in their own half in the hope that nobody wearing blue would get too close.

Chelsea (operating with only one striker, by the way) won the game in the first 24 minutes and then put on the cruise control &#8211; proving that football stats without elaboration can usher us away from the truth.

So Hansen didn't "debunk the statistics" (first sentence), he debunked the naive use of them (second sentence)? We get the gist Mick, but people in glass houses .......... <laugh> <ok>
Click to expand...

Robbie I understand your point however it is the sort of point Wonky/Carla used to make
 
Fatter than Fleck said:
Robbie I understand your point however it is the sort of point Wonky/Carla used to make
Click to expand...

<laugh> Well, Dave (and Detective Inspector Munky) will vouch that I am neither Wonky nor Carla. I may be just as tiresome, but my IP address is different! I do enjoy it when someone points out someone else's deadly sin while committing it themselves in doing so. Quite common on here too, and I've done it myself! :grin: <ok>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back