-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
Looks like he is staying - what can we do?
- Thread starter Tony Flags
- Start date
Mark Pedlar":2xm5pqoz said:
Didn t mean Esmer was stupid if it came across that way apologies, i meant it was a silly statement to say results don t mater as long as we play well, all that really matters especially in the short term is results, of course ideally results with stunning football in the long term.
And of course he is entitled to his opinion, i m just frustrated and people telling me every thing is fine is winding me up sorry!
I can't understand how any knowlegable and experienced football watcher can produce a bunch of stats covering everything except the actual score - the only stat that matters!
All the corners and possession are meaningless if you can't even score, never mind win the game and the idea that achieving 1 point from 21, and only scoring 4 goals in the process, is largely a result of bad luck is ridiculous.
How many games have we all seen where a team has taken a battering but got the breakaway goal and won the game, it happens all the time.
I have seen Argyle do this on many occasions and come away from the game saying how resolute, organised and professional we were to grind out a result. In a way, it's more satisfying that winning 3 or 4 nil because it's the sign of a good team.
On the other hand, there's the teams who play quite well, huff and puff, get a few corners and appear to be dominating the game but without really testing the keeper much and cannot score. The longer the game goes on, you almost expect the other team to score and often they do and you feel robbed and complain about bad luck.
When this happens on a regular basis, it's not bad luck.
But it doesn't neccessarily mean you are a poor team either, just maybe that you are badly coached and poorly organised.
One of football biggest cliches is that "good teams get a result even when they play badly." We can't even get a result when we play well!
Perhaps Brent is wrong to bring in a DOF to prop up the floundering Fletcher and he should just wait until the luck comes back our way.
But it's no coincidence that every relegated team always cite bad luck.
All the corners and possession are meaningless if you can't even score, never mind win the game and the idea that achieving 1 point from 21, and only scoring 4 goals in the process, is largely a result of bad luck is ridiculous.
How many games have we all seen where a team has taken a battering but got the breakaway goal and won the game, it happens all the time.
I have seen Argyle do this on many occasions and come away from the game saying how resolute, organised and professional we were to grind out a result. In a way, it's more satisfying that winning 3 or 4 nil because it's the sign of a good team.
On the other hand, there's the teams who play quite well, huff and puff, get a few corners and appear to be dominating the game but without really testing the keeper much and cannot score. The longer the game goes on, you almost expect the other team to score and often they do and you feel robbed and complain about bad luck.
When this happens on a regular basis, it's not bad luck.
But it doesn't neccessarily mean you are a poor team either, just maybe that you are badly coached and poorly organised.
One of football biggest cliches is that "good teams get a result even when they play badly." We can't even get a result when we play well!
Perhaps Brent is wrong to bring in a DOF to prop up the floundering Fletcher and he should just wait until the luck comes back our way.
But it's no coincidence that every relegated team always cite bad luck.
E
