So,now we know ...

LIBERTARIAN

LIBERTARIAN

Well-Known Member
Apr 8, 2013
14,898
20,307
113
Swansea
... it's all down to "bad luck".

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27024439

And there was me laying most of the blame on climate change,etc.

But,no need for panic,Routledge and Bony "nearly" scored in the recent loss to Chelsea.

If we add the points we "nearly" had to the points actually accrued,hey,we should be in Europe again next season. <laugh>
 
Ive always thought a team near the bottom , with an unusually good goal differencial , has had its share of bad luck.Only the top 8 teams have a better goal differencial than us .
 
roofjack_22 said:
Ive always thought a team near the bottom , with an unusually good goal differencial , has had its share of bad luck.Only the top 8 teams have a better goal differencial than us .
Click to expand...

Presumably,they also benefit from the occasional piece of good luck,but no-one ever mentions that.
 
Whether you lose a game 0-1 or 0-6, it doesn't much matter in the standings as far as points go. We have a good goal difference because other than United at the start of the season we have played all of the top teams very tight; the other teams around us have taken their share of hammerings.

Our fundamental problem this season has been at the back. Too often, we concede goals through weak defending often against "weaker" teams and this has cost us a ton of points. It's sickeningly ironic that the one person that is now bemoaning bad luck is the one person who seems to make the slip-ups that matter most - he and Davies. The Chelsea game was a good example, where weak defending against a defendable situation resulted in Ba scoring - when a forward gets off a shot on goal from 25 yards out in that sort of situation he is being closed down and contained ineffectively. Williams, rightly or wrongly, expected better from Vorm from that distance, but should Ba have been able to shoot in that situation to start with?

The ignominy of having to battle for survival with the goal difference that we have indicates that points are being thrown away against teams that we should have handled. This has been the story since Monk took over. When the players are not operating on a "high" against the top teams that overcome our tactical deficiencies, we are getting out-thought, out-executed and out-managed by the lesser teams.

This is why I don't have any confidence for the remaining series of matches. You never know which Swansea "team" is going on to the field, why our bench is the way it is, what nonsense has happened behind the scenes beforehand, and WTF we might do in the second half. We have prem level players not making the bench in preference to champ level players that look every bit like fish out of water the moment they get on the field. I don't get it.

We're a broken club. And now the captain is embracing escapism by citing bad luck as the root of all evil. At least, indirectly, he is admitting that it wasn't Laudrups "fault".

And to make it even more laughable, Leighton James is now being criticized by Monk for suggesting that he get somebody with more experience to stand beside him. This suggests to me that Curtis has been moved to the sidelines as opposed to being more involved under Laudrup (at least that's the impression I get - maybe wrong). Let's cast our minds back to Toshack. When he took over having had an illustrious career with Liverpool and Wales, he decided to surround himself with smart, experienced people ... Harry Griffiths stayed on, Terry Medwin came in, and Shankly (FFS) was standing in the shadows ready to drop a pearl of wisdom here and there and provide some foundation. Our journeyman, lower league, no-name center-back thinks the youth team coach is what he needs beside him. Toshack started in the old third division. Monk starts in the Prem and suddenly thinks he knows it all. Stupid is as stupid does.
 
If 'Schadenfreude' is a word for pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others, what's the word for pleasure derived from the misfortunes of your own football club? :emoticon-0112-wonde
 
11 of 17 losses have been by 1 goal , chances of unluckiness are more probable by being beat by 1 goal than by 6 goals. All 6 games that we were beat by multi goals were with Laudrup on the bench , Monk has yet to be beat by more than a goal.
 
There is no pleasure in this. It is tragic. It's not about Monk, he is albeit a pivotal player in a tragedy much bigger than him.

Monk has performed as I, and many others for that matter, expected ... under-credentialed, inexperienced, ineffective and not table to live up to the myth of magic he or somebody planted in the minds of HJ and the Board. It's not his fault - he is what he is. Others should have been more sensible, more rational, and performed better at an executive level. I am sure Monk is trying very hard and probably operating beyond his ability ... but it's not in any way sufficient or good enough. He may be better tomorrow, but we need him better today and it's just not there.

If the Club fails to stay up, there will be an implosion that will wreck this Club for many seasons to come as players leave and quality in terms of players and managers will be tough to attract. It will be our first real failure since the resurrection, a major failure given where we were 12 months ago, and we have no idea how the executives / board at the club will respond. The likes of Ben Davies and Neil Taylor, for example, don't belong in the Championship, they belong and will be thirsty for another crack at the Prem, but I don't think they will linger to enjoy it with us. Shelvey will want to play in the Prem as will the likes of Bony, Pablo, Amat, Canas, JDG et al - they are all top level players in this or another country. Monk will move on - or worse stay with us. And we, the supporters, will have to deal and suffer with the fall-out.
 
roofjack_22 said:
11 of 17 losses have been by 1 goal , chances of unluckiness are more probable by being beat by 1 goal than by 6 goals. All 6 games that we were beat by multi goals were with Laudrup on the bench , Monk has yet to be beat by more than a goal.
Click to expand...

But many of these games we were expecting to win. A loss by any margin is not acceptable against many of these teams.
 
Newcastle have 46 points with a gd of - 14 , we have 33 points with a gd of - 5 . I think Newcastle have been lucky and we haven't .... sorry yankee , you cant change my mind.
 
roofjack_22 said:
11 of 17 losses have been by 1 goal , chances of unluckiness are more probable by being beat by 1 goal than by 6 goals. All 6 games that we were beat by multi goals were with Laudrup on the bench , Monk has yet to be beat by more than a goal.
Click to expand...

The "bad luck" was that many of the defeats were against the so called "easy" teams.

Remember those? <laugh>
 
roofjack_22 said:
Newcastle have 46 points with a gd of - 14 , we have 33 points with a gd of - 5 . I think Newcastle have been lucky and we haven't .... sorry yankee , you cant change my mind.
Click to expand...

Head in sand comment.

The reality is that Newcastle have performed far better than Swansea as their points tally and League position would indicate.
 
There ya go again , making things up vetch , there are no easy teams , just easier fixtures .Im afraid your neck is dug in deeper than me if you have to make thinks up
 
roofjack_22 said:
There ya go again , making things up vetch , there are no easy teams , just easier fixtures .Im afraid your neck is dug in deeper than me if you have to make thinks up
Click to expand...

Not making anything up,there were some posters on here,who couldn't wait until we played the "easy" teams like Palace,WBA,Hull,and a few others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back