cc_star Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 Nothing we don't already know, but here's the facts and figures to prove it Championship Table results Vs top half Championship table Vs bottom half Unbelievable really, proves it's an attitude issue rather than ability or anything. Probably easier to fix than it being the other way around, maybe?... like Brighton's for example who have fared poorly against their rivals but have dispatched the bottom half teams with ease.
Happy Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 Nothing we don't already know, but here's the facts and figures to prove it Championship Table results Vs top half Championship table Vs bottom half Unbelievable really, proves it's an attitude issue rather than ability or anything. Probably easier to fix than it being the other way around, maybe?... like Brighton's for example who have fared poorly against their rivals but have dispatched the bottom half teams with ease. Mixture of both we have the ability to beat the top sides but we don't have the ability and attitude to beat the bottom sides ( these sides are hard to break down) we really need a maverick midfielder someone that has the ability to move freely of the ball and on the ball a Peter Whittingam type figure and defensive midfielder ( Danny Murphy or Karl Henry) type, also the mentality which you alluded to as well but under two manager tenure so far this hasn't changed.
Grey Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I think it's a mixture of our players attitude, but also the way the opposition approaches a game against us. We don't seem to be able to cope with the different tactics that the bottom sides use. Where as teams like Southampton and West Ham, who must be treated in the same way as us, have no problem.
Babylon Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I think it's a mixture of our players attitude, but also the way the opposition approaches a game against us. We don't seem to be able to cope with the different tactics that the bottom sides use. Where as teams like Southampton and West Ham, who must be treated in the same way as us, have no problem. Probably because they pass and move, rather than pass, stand still, lose the ball, throw a stop and let the oppo have a free run on goal.
Webbo Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I can't see the top table vs top teams. whereabouts do we come?
cc_star Posted 17 April 2012 Author Posted 17 April 2012 I can't see the top table vs top teams. whereabouts do we come? Odd... 4th behind Reading, S'ton and WHU
Bugg Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I can't see the top table vs top teams. whereabouts do we come? 4th against Top Half
Grey Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I just noticed something interesting. We still have more points against the bottom sides (34), and (28) against the top sides. Granted we still have 3 top half games to play (or maybe 2 depending where Burnley finish). But the points per game are both very close. 1.42 against the bottom half, and 1.47 against the top. This just shows what we all already know, we have been consistently inconsistent against both!
cc_star Posted 17 April 2012 Author Posted 17 April 2012 I just noticed something interesting. We still have more points against the bottom sides (34), and (28) against the top sides. Granted we still have 3 top half games to play (or maybe 2 depending where Burnley finish). But the points per game are both very close. 1.42 against the bottom half, and 1.47 against the top. This just shows what we all already know, we have been consistently inconsistent against both! In the Vs bottom half table... the 4th place team has 1.91ppg as teams (except us) obviously pick up more points against the worst teams
Corky Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I just noticed something interesting. We still have more points against the bottom sides (34), and (28) against the top sides. Granted we still have 3 top half games to play (or maybe 2 depending where Burnley finish). You've answered your own question
Grey Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 In the Vs bottom half table... the 4th place team has 1.91ppg as teams (except us) obviously pick up more points against the worst teams Exactly, we are remarkably consistent at being inconsistent, no matter who we play.
Grey Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 You've answered your own question I admire your confidence in us getting at least 7 points from our last 3 games.
Corky Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I admire your confidence in us getting at least 7 points from our last 3 games. I don't really, but we've played all the bottom half so it's likely we'd get more points with nine extra to play for. To pick up 28 points against the rest of the top half is a very decent effort.
Raw Dykes Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I just noticed something interesting. We still have more points against the bottom sides (34), and (28) against the top sides. Granted we still have 3 top half games to play (or maybe 2 depending where Burnley finish). But the points per game are both very close. 1.42 against the bottom half, and 1.47 against the top. This just shows what we all already know, we have been consistently inconsistent against both! As cc_star wrote, in general, teams pick up more points against sides nearer the bottom, and fewer points against teams near the top of the table. That's why they're where they are in the league. It's not unusual that we've picked up more points against teams in the bottom half than the top half, because nearly every single team has. That's what's expected. It's the fact that we've not done well compared to the rest of the league when playing the teams in the bottom half. I can't find it, but someone found some similar stats to these, but talked about the thirds of the table, instead of halves. Turns out we've done very well against teams in the eight places in the middle third, quite well against teams in the top third, and not very well against teams in the bottom third.
cardifflee Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 I don't really, but we've played all the bottom half so it's likely we'd get more points with nine extra to play for. To pick up 28 points against the rest of the top half is a very decent effort. Really???
Grey Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 As cc_star wrote, in general, teams pick up more points against sides nearer the bottom, and fewer points against teams near the top of the table. That's why they're where they are in the league. It's not unusual that we've picked up more points against teams in the bottom half than the top half, because nearly every single team has. That's what's expected. It's the fact that we've not done well compared to the rest of the league when playing the teams in the bottom half. I can't find it, but someone found some similar stats to these, but talked about the thirds of the table, instead of halves. Turns out we've done very well against teams in the eight places in the middle third, quite well against teams in the top third, and not very well against teams in the bottom third. I'm not belittling our effort against the top half sides. 4th in the table is a very good effort. I just thought it was interesting that despite that, we still have more points against the bottom sides. I understand that we should have because they are supposed to be easier to beat, so we should have done even better against them. I agree it is better to look at it in thirds. I posted those stats on Sunday, we were very poor against the bottom third, but specifically positions 17-21 for some reason?
Iwan Roberts Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 This is not the reason we have not reached the play offs. The main problem LCFC have had this year is our away form. Away pld W D L 22 6 6 10
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 Nothing new as wel all know how crap we are against the shite teams.
Corky Posted 17 April 2012 Posted 17 April 2012 Really??? Yes. To pick up that amount of points against sides who more often than not win their games is a very commendable effort.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.