Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Arriba Los Zorros

Traditionally poor at home?

Recommended Posts

Posted

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9927450/do-not-publish-historys-top-home-team-is

According to this article, we have the 54th best home record out of all of the 92 Football League teams. 
 
The trend is that the better the team, the higher up they tend to be on the list so we are remarkably low down. Similar clubs in Derby and Southampton are 18th and 19th.
 
I'm surprised as people always have said Leicester's a hard place to come and get a result.
 
Why are we so low down? Are we just traditionally a strong away side?

Posted

That is pretty odd.

 

One thing I've noticed that's weird about us is that all of our season defining games seem to be away from home.

Posted

Lets not forget the 10 years of absolute rubbish, ever since we moved into the KP only up until Pearson have we been hard to beat.

Yeah between 2003/4 and 2007/8 we can't have won more than 7/8 home games on average. Even averaging 12/13 home wins in that period would have us knocking on 51% which would be a bit more respectable.

Posted

Lets not forget the 10 years of absolute rubbish, ever since we moved into the KP only up until Pearson have we been hard to beat.

 

 

we've not played a 1000+ home games at the KP tho

Posted

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9927450/do-not-publish-historys-top-home-team-is

According to this article, we have the 54th best home record out of all of the 92 Football League teams. 

 

The trend is that the better the team, the higher up they tend to be on the list so we are remarkably low down. Similar clubs in Derby and Southampton are 18th and 19th.

 

I'm surprised as people always have said Leicester's a hard place to come and get a result.

 

Why are we so low down? Are we just traditionally a strong away side?

 

Because we aren't very good

Posted

Not surprised in the slightest. Over our entire history we've only had a handful of spells of relative success with lots and lots of shite times. Filbert Street was never really a fortress during the 30 years I went. More surprising for me is Forest only 50th.

Posted

Yeah between 2003/4 and 2007/8 we can't have won more than 7/8 home games on average. Even averaging 12/13 home wins in that period would have us knocking on 51% which would be a bit more respectable.

 

We won 32 home matches in five seasons (average of 6.4 a season). Since then we've won 87 in seven full seasons (average of 12.4).

 

Defeats wise, we lost 37 in that period (average of 7.4) compared to 30 in seven since (average of 4.3).

Posted

I am a bit surprised considering we've won a record 2nd division titles plus plenty of other promotions.

 

I guess we've spent a lot of time in the top flight without doing much.

 

Also it can't have helped that some genius decided to use half of our Kop for segregation and away fans for over 10 years!

Posted

Without the same figures for away games, it's meaningless.  If we were, say, 20th on the all time away list then yes, we'd be comparatively poor at home.  But if we're 54th, then we've just been mediocre all round over the last 122 years.

 

All this probably reflects really is that we've had some pretty crap periods in our club's history since the 1892/93 season.

 

The overall trend over time is much more interesting, with home advantage declining over the period under review.

Posted

Without the same figures for away games, it's meaningless.  If we were, say, 20th on the all time away list then yes, we'd be comparatively poor at home.  But if we're 54th, then we've just been mediocre all round over the last 122 years.

 

All this probably reflects really is that we've had some pretty crap periods in our club's history since the 1892/93 season.

 

The overall trend over time is much more interesting, with home advantage declining over the period under review.

That's a fair point. However, I find it interesting that clubs that have had similar success and history as us have a significantly higher win % at home and perhaps the inference is we have always picked up a higher % of points away?

Posted

considering how ****ing awful we were mid 2000s I imagine that had a big effect

Not really. It's about 5 years off the 110-ish seasons we've played in the league.

It isn't going to have much of an effect. The fact we

were regularly finishing near the bottom of the second division and often the league's whipping boys pre-World War I will have had much more of an effect.

Posted

There's only about 10.percent difference towards the number 4 spot.a lot of teams were around are above us by 0.1 or 0.2 etc, so hardly a big difference.

Posted

Out of the 14 years at the Walkers/KP, we've only been solid 5 or 6 seasons. Between 2003/04 and 2007/08 we were incredibly poor and couldn't have won more than 10 games at home. I can remember going to games knowing we'd be beaten; it was such a lost period. 

 

2002/03, the first season here, was excellent. And it wasn't until Pearson joined we became solid again. How many home games did he lose in his first two seasons? 6 or 7? Last season we lost a lot, a few 0-1, but this season (so far) it's been a better return. 

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...