Rival watch

[Roo]

They don't really play that similarly though, that's shown by the goal distribution, if nothing else. Infact you acknowledge this by saying Bale is a striker for us, meaning we play one more striker and one less midfielder compared to what the others do. Realistically Bale plays deeper and moves around all over the pitch, he's no more a striker than Walcott or Podolski are for them, or VDV was in the past for us.

Anyway, we score a similar amounts across the team and we've also outscored the same amount of opponents this season, which is the most important thing. I get that it's frustrating such small margins can be the difference in CL football and EL football for the second season in a row but I think you're grasping in the wrong place with this. We can't need better strikers, plus more goals in midfield and for our defence to improve(which has conceded more goals than Arsenal's) and still be in with a shout of finishing above them.

I can't reply to this on an iPhone, so I'll get back to you later

 

[Spur of the Moment]

Just one aspect to consider when 'Levy-bashing' for the start of season shambles, was that (as I understand it) Citeh delayed and delayed the sale of Ade, which meant that although he was expected to arrive in June, he missed the entire Pre-season training etc. I am guessing that as it all looked a done deal - and especially after the success of the previous season - DL was loathe to ditch the acquisition too quickly in search of another target, and it just dragged on and on.... By that time the options were gone!!

Not a complete excuse but provides some balance.

 

[Wandering Yid]

No, DL, they didn't.

All I was saying is that if you get more points than the previous season, you've done better. You have to have won or drawn more games than the previous season, in order to get more points.

United might only have needed 80 points to finish first, but that's down to the result of others. Even though 85 points was only enough for second, they've still been better in terms of results, despite finishing second.

Agreed. DL doesn't seem to be able to distinguish between GETTING BETTER and DOING BETTER.

 

[Roo]

Agreed. DL doesn't seem to be able to distinguish between GETTING BETTER and DOING BETTER.

That's the two I was trying to highlight. Thanks WY!

 

[Inda]

I don't understand the Levy bashing either. A season is not won or lost in the first three games.

 

[District Line]

Agreed. DL doesn't seem to be able to distinguish between GETTING BETTER and DOING BETTER.

Why is it doing better? The dynamics of the league change each season. Some teams do better and some teams do worse.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

If you win more games and pick up more points than in the previous campaign, then surely you've done better?
Another side might improve more than you have, but you haven't done worse if they finish above you.

Say a team were to win every game bar four, drawing the remaining fixtures.
One of the teams that you've beat wins all of their games apart from two losses to the first side.
The second team would win the league, but the first team's season would be an improvement on any Premier League side's form, including Utd.
Would they have done worse in that scenario, just because somebody else did better than them?

 

[Spurm]

If you win more games and pick up more points than in the previous campaign, then surely you've done better?
Another side might improve more than you have, but you haven't done worse if they finish above you.

Say a team were to win every game bar four, drawing the remaining fixtures.
One of the teams that you've beat wins all of their games apart from two losses to the first side.
The second team would win the league, but the first team's season would be an improvement on any Premier League side's form, including Utd.
Would they have done worse in that scenario, just because somebody else did better than them?

Holy crap man, my head just burst

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Holy crap man, my head just burst

I might be overthinking that one!

 

[Spurf]

I might be overthinking that one!

Just a bit PNP just a bit.

 

[The RDBD]

"I don't understand the Levy bashing either. A season is not won or lost in the first three games."

Because of the PERCEPTION that Levy doing his usual in the summer + poor(ish) starts cost us the
CL slot. Similarly with the drops in form come March-April.

 

[District Line]

If you win more games and pick up more points than in the previous campaign, then surely you've done better?
Another side might improve more than you have, but you haven't done worse if they finish above you.

Say a team were to win every game bar four, drawing the remaining fixtures.
One of the teams that you've beat wins all of their games apart from two losses to the first side.
The second team would win the league, but the first team's season would be an improvement on any Premier League side's form, including Utd.
Would they have done worse in that scenario, just because somebody else did better than them?

Surely you measure success on how well you do compared to the competition?

 

[Spurf]

But PNP is right.

Your response Spurm was so funny.

 

[Spurf]

Surely you measure success on how well you do compared to the competition?

Correct DL therefore if you have more points you have performed better. If that is not the case what the **** are you doing in 3rd place! Get out of there immediately.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Surely you measure success on how well you do compared to the competition?

Yes and no. I'll use another sport in comparison.
Say a two sprinters ran the 100m in around 8 seconds, but one hit it dead on and the other was a tenth of a second slower.
The faster one wins the gold, but the other one's still improved upon what he'd done before.
Is that success, though? No ****ing idea!

 

[District Line]

Yes and no. I'll use another sport in comparison.
Say a two sprinters ran the 100m in around 8 seconds, but one hit it dead on and the other was a tenth of a second slower.
The faster one wins the gold, but the other one's still improved upon what he'd done before.
Is that success, though? No ****ing idea!

Too tired for this brain scrambling. I'll leave you to your own devices

 

[Spurf]

Yes and no. I'll use another sport in comparison.
Say a two sprinters ran the 100m in around 8 seconds, but one hit it dead on and the other was a tenth of a second slower.
The faster one wins the gold, but the other one's still improved upon what he'd done before.
Is that success, though? No ****ing idea!

If you measure success as improving then it is. If you can only measure success by winning then only Man U. might as well bother, the rest of us can go home.

 

[Wandering Yid]

Too tired for this brain scrambling. I'll leave you to your own devices

HOORAY!

 

[NSIS]

Yes and no. I'll use another sport in comparison.
Say a two sprinters ran the 100m in around 8 seconds, but one hit it dead on and the other was a tenth of a second slower.
The faster one wins the gold, but the other one's still improved upon what he'd done before.
Is that success, though? No ****ing idea!

I'd say running 100m in 8 secs could be called a success. Bolt would most likely hate you though!..

 

[vimhawk]

We can't need better strikers, plus more goals in midfield and for our defence to improve(which has conceded more goals than Arsenal's) and still be in with a shout of finishing above them.

Exactly. If they finish 1pt above us and they have benefited by more than that from dodgy refs and penalties, then actually the table shows we are better than them! I think there is often a case of making the evidence fit the final standings - but if the final standings are false and created by bad officials etc, then the argument doesn't work. I know I keep going on about this, but why should we keep on blaming Levy etc (when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary) more than officials who have clearly made mistakes that have counted against us?