| Looking at it from a scientific point of view 22:08 - Jan 28 with 1027 views | bosh67 |
We are certainly playing better in most games, even the defeats, than we did last season. A lot of our play is a lot more pleasing on the eye. Our young players are definitely holding their own at this level. You can see that although there is room for improvement that we are generally on the right path. But, looking at it from a scientific point of view... we need to score more goals than we let in. That's just the science of success generally in football. We need to try and do it more often!
|  |
| |  |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 22:14 - Jan 28 with 976 views | stevec |
Well we’ve got six months pre season training to get it right, starting Feb 1st.
God it’s hard work supporting this club. |  | | |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 02:47 - Jan 29 with 825 views | timcocking |
If Joe Lumley could save shots hit directly at him, we'd be a dozen points higher up at least. That would have made a difference. Plus, of course, cheating/incompetent/blind refs half of the time, as per usual.
When things are going well, all these loanees are all very well i suppose. When things start to unravel, though, they worry me more. Not quite the same level of accountability. Making a defensive lapse can't possibly matter as much when it's for a small, cr@p team you don't belong to and won't be with next season. Tis unlikely the result last night is going to keep the likes of Kane and Amos awake at night in the same way it probably would have Josh Scowen.
So pleased we rested Bright for the cup now, hey. |  | | |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 04:25 - Jan 29 with 798 views | Match82 |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 02:47 - Jan 29 by timcocking |
If Joe Lumley could save shots hit directly at him, we'd be a dozen points higher up at least. That would have made a difference. Plus, of course, cheating/incompetent/blind refs half of the time, as per usual.
When things are going well, all these loanees are all very well i suppose. When things start to unravel, though, they worry me more. Not quite the same level of accountability. Making a defensive lapse can't possibly matter as much when it's for a small, cr@p team you don't belong to and won't be with next season. Tis unlikely the result last night is going to keep the likes of Kane and Amos awake at night in the same way it probably would have Josh Scowen.
So pleased we rested Bright for the cup now, hey. |
Kane is not on loan he's our player. We've been shocking at the back this season but the back 4/5 for every single game have been QPR players as far as I know |  | | |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 06:30 - Jan 29 with 744 views | ozexile |
Maybe your right. Every time I hear Mark Warburton speak he says we deserved more from such and such a match.
We've always been the unluckiest team in world football. |  | | |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 07:51 - Jan 29 with 647 views | nix |
| Looking at it from a scientific point of view on 04:25 - Jan 29 by Match82 |
Kane is not on loan he's our player. We've been shocking at the back this season but the back 4/5 for every single game have been QPR players as far as I know |
But quite often it's not just the back five that make mistakes, it's often the midfield. One of our biggest issues is not picking up players for set pieces. We let in most of our goals from this or not closing people down for long shots. That amounts to both of our goals yesterday. It's so much easier to score the first when you've got so much time to take the shot and no one closing you down. Surely this is a predictable scenario, it happens in every match, usually from free kicks or corners when a ball comes back out of the pen. Personally I'd tell them who was going to close that person down before the match. For whatever reason, they can't make good decisions in the heat of battle, so they have to know their jobs in advance.
For the second it was a combination of Hughill and Cameron. Both of them looked square on to the ball coming over so therefore had no idea what was behind them. So when the ball starts coming over Cameron tries to get back but just bumps into Hughill and the bloke he's marking. If he'd had some idea who was behind him and where, he could have got to the bloke behind him. It's body positioning (being three quarter on rather than square on) and just not ball watching but also being aware of the man. We're letting so many goals in from set pieces they have to work on this. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
