1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

To Those Who Incessantly Berate Hughton For Being Incompetent

Discussion in 'Norwich City' started by royalbarclayfan, Jan 2, 2014.

  1. GozoCanary

    GozoCanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    2,239

    Find them then. Find a post where I've said he is incompetent or **** or something similar. You may find me saying that in the course of a match or immediately afterwards, but that really is not my point. My point is that CH is mediocre, not awful, but that we should aim for someone who is more than mediocre. The risk is worth taking. That is my point.
     
    #101
  2. Tony_Munky_Canary

    Tony_Munky_Canary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2011
    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    964
    Took me all of thirty seconds to find <ok>
     
    #102
  3. Canary Rob

    Canary Rob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,385
    Likes Received:
    3,724

    I think that's fair and aside from the odd overstatement (as shown by Munky above) you generally are fair. In defence of vietnam, Munky, he at least backs up his opinion with either new or compelling information and has consistently shown that he is flexible in his opinions. I agree with him that I don't think Hughton can take us to the next level, but we've got him until the end of the season now at least so I say the best thing is to just get behind him when we have no choice and assume (know) the board knows something I don't.

    But the extraordinary vitriol that he recieves (not generally from you vitenam) both during and after matches with tedious regularity and at every opportunity is frustrating for even someone who doesn't think he's the right man for the job, and also really quite unhelpful. Especially when I find myself abused for merely pointing out the flaws in these opinions, despite having repeatedly stated my position as leaning towards Hughton-out.

    My real issue is that there is plenty of ammunition to explain why Hughton hasn't been good enough, so I don't see why the extremists feel the need to twist every situation into this box and slap me, or any other poster down, for pointing out the flaws.

    It's more boring than our matches
     
    #103
  4. GozoCanary

    GozoCanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    Munky, I agree that we have him until the end of the season. Why can't you be satisfied with that? You have won. I accept that, OK? You have won. We are going to keep him. Rejoice that you are right and us doubters are wrong and that at some point we are going to turn the corner and this ugly caterpillar is going to become a butterfly.
     
    #104
  5. Canary Rob

    Canary Rob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,385
    Likes Received:
    3,724
    I don't think that's a win. And I don't think Munky's claiming it's a win.

    I honestly believe that Hughton has come very, very close to being sacked this season, and justifiably so. I think the only reason he hasn't is because the board know which replacements they could have got in and nobody matched up at the time. It's now too late as the transfer window is upon us. If we are not on 35 points or close to (depending on the other relegation candidates) after we play Sunderland at home in March, I suspect he will lose his job.

    In that situation there are no winners.
     
    #105
  6. GozoCanary

    GozoCanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    Yes, it's too late. What would be the point in sacking him in March? Or now? The moment has gone and we're stuck with him.
     
    #106
  7. Canary Rob

    Canary Rob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,385
    Likes Received:
    3,724
    February to March is the only real time it's worthwhile sacking a manager in the second half of the season in my opinion, just like November or December in the first half - that gives the manager 6-12 games in the hope of the sudden change giving the team a boost and the results to get to safety. We saw West Brom do it with Hodgson a couple of years back and Reading tried (unsuccessfully) to do the same thing, but I accept it's a last chance saloon, desperation measure (and if you do it the Wolves way it could be an absolute catastrophe)...
     
    #107
  8. General Melchett

    General Melchett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    3,065
    Indeed I don't think our number 2 would bring about any sudden improvement or radical rethink, in fact Terry Connor may well have been a better option for Wolves!

    Bah!
     
    #108
  9. robbieBB

    robbieBB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    5,006
    Likes Received:
    769
    Just what I said. Unless the match is Man City 1st team v a team of ten year olds, the probability of each side winning is pretty much 50:50, just like the toss of a coin. People simply don't appreciate this fact, but the stats are there to back it up. If you want to test it for yourself, copy Lawro and try predicting the results each week. <ok>
     
    #109
  10. DHCanary

    DHCanary Very Well-Known Member
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    16,836
    Likes Received:
    5,767
    So if the probability is pretty much 50:50, why doesn't this balance out over a season so that nearly all teams finish within a few points of each other?
     
    #110

  11. Canary Rob

    Canary Rob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,385
    Likes Received:
    3,724
    And also what about draws?

    Judging by the managerial records and the end of season statistics, I'd say the probability of the top four clubs winning any given match is 50-70%, the probability of the Europa league challengers is between 35 and 50%, the probability of the relegation battlers winning is 20-40% and the probability of the stragglers winning is 15-25%

    Obviously this changes with the quality of the opposition, so, for example, I'd have thought our chances of a win against top four teams is probably around 20% at home and 5% away (Tottenham!)
     
    #111
  12. royalbarclayfan

    royalbarclayfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,996
    Likes Received:
    1,039
    Vietnam - I remember you saying things like this before, and I couldn´t understand it then and I can´t now, it´s got nothing to do with the In´ers or Out´ers winning, the only thing that´s important is that the Club wins out of it.
     
    #112
  13. GozoCanary

    GozoCanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    Agreed. And the final decision on whether the club has won or not will come in May. (Although if we just survive with 39 points or so, I think the arguments will rumble on during the summer.)
     
    #113
  14. SUPERNORWICH 23

    SUPERNORWICH 23 SUPERNORWICH

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,320
    This made me push the ignore button on Rob Carrubah.... Betting on football is clearly not a 50/50 shot and some games like Luton at home i would expect a victory.
     
    #114
  15. Canary Rob

    Canary Rob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,385
    Likes Received:
    3,724
    Who me?
     
    #115
  16. SUPERNORWICH 23

    SUPERNORWICH 23 SUPERNORWICH

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,320
    No
     
    #116
  17. GozoCanary

    GozoCanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    The 50:50 stuff is nonsense, Robbie, and you must know this. If all you are saying is that football is much more prone to chance than most other sports, I don't think anyone would argue with that. Shocks in tennis or badminton, for example, are much less frequent than in football. But to say that Man City at home to Palace or Fulham or us is 50:50 is just plain wrong. Are you arguing that, if we even it out over 100 matches, it's 50:50, even if Man City vs Fulham is 80:20? I really don't see what you are arguing here.
     
    #117
  18. robbieBB

    robbieBB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    5,006
    Likes Received:
    769
    Not you Rob, me <laugh>. I don't propose to embark on a seminar on probability theory. However, maybe we could ask ourselves why bookies make so much money from punters who really do expect their team to win a particular match, or why we don't all win the pools every week. SN23 says he works in the gaming industry; he should know better (or maybe he is on a mission to boost his company turnover). But seriously: I urge you all to put on Lawro's hat and try predicting the results every week. Keep a record and see how you've done at the end of the season. (Last season, if I remember correctly, Lawro's score for the season was 50%, i.e. he might just as well have done his predictions by tossing a coin.) <ok>
     
    #118
  19. GozoCanary

    GozoCanary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    2,239
    But there are three possibilities: A wins, draw, or B wins. So if Lawro gets 50% of calls correct, isn't he doing better than he should (i.e. 33%)?

    And bookies don't base their business on 50:50. They create a book and they build a bias in their favour into the book, so that, although on any individual race they may lose overall, in the long term they make a profit as long as they don't get a very bad hit against them that forces them out of business (and they will hedge against this anyway). It's the same principle as the zero in roulette.

    At least I think. I'm just a dumb arts and humanities person so I make no claim to understanding probability theory.
     
    #119
  20. robbieBB

    robbieBB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    5,006
    Likes Received:
    769
    When Lawro predicts a result he either predicts correctly or incorrectly; e.g. he predicts a draw -- either it is a draw or it isn't; he predicts team A will win -- either team A wins or it doesn't win. The fact that a match may have any of three results is neither here nor there in this instance. He gets it right half the time. And I wasn't suggesting that bookies operate their business on the basis of a particular probability. What I meant was that bookies have a far better understanding of the uncertainty of outcome of a football match than any punter, and especially any punter who thinks that far more games are decided by skill than by luck. <ok>
     
    #120

Share This Page