Captain... Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 it's better than yours! As a striker full who is apparently full of energy. He should be the kind of player coming off the bench and making a impact when everyone else is tired, but he's incapable of doing it. As a sub you have a massive advantage over the other players on the pitch as your fresh, this is why if you look at GPM ratio's and who is near the top you will see names like Hernandez and Ballotelli and probably OGS. This is why every footballing media company look at goals per apperance. Instead of arguing with me why don't you tell them that they're doing it "wrong, wrong, WRONG" see what response they give you (a very similar one to me I'm guessing) I'd understand if Waghorn was regularly bought on for the last few minutes but he normally gets at least 15 minutes. And I understand there are number of reasons to take a player off, in Waghorns case though, it's usually the reason I mentioned! So you are expecting Waghorn to be like Chicharito, (I know you don't but I am deliberately taking what you say out of context, annoying isn't it). Waghorn is not a poacher like Chicharito, he is not a "fox in thebox", I wish he was, but that is not his game, and I wouldn't use him as an impact sub to get us a goal when we are losing, which is why he didn't come on against Huddersfield, and didn't have much impact against Posh. Personally I would bring on Waghorn when we are holding on to a slim lead, he pressurises high up the pitch, and can hold the ball up, he will often filter out wide and protect the full backs and drop back. Or you start him, when he had a spell in the first team in November - December, he started 7 games, scored 2 got 3 assists, and we only lost once in that time, and he was widely praised for his performances. As for the stats being wrong, good websites will normally include subs appearances within the stats, such as Sky sports as 9(12) or the BBC which will show it as 21 appearances (9 as a sub) because it is relevant and it does give a more accurate picture (but it is not quantifiable). Whereas Wikipedia just gives a brief summary, as it is not a sports stats website, and the Leicester OS is just shite. So again you are WRONG!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 So you are expecting Waghorn to be like Chicharito, (I know you don't but I am deliberately taking what you say out of context, annoying isn't it). Waghorn is not a poacher like Chicharito, he is not a "fox in thebox", I wish he was, but that is not his game, and I wouldn't use him as an impact sub to get us a goal when we are losing, which is why he didn't come on against Huddersfield, and didn't have much impact against Posh. Personally I would bring on Waghorn when we are holding on to a slim lead, he pressurises high up the pitch, and can hold the ball up, he will often filter out wide and protect the full backs and drop back. Or you start him, when he had a spell in the first team in November - December, he started 7 games, scored 2 got 3 assists, and we only lost once in that time, and he was widely praised for his performances. As for the stats being wrong, good websites will normally include subs appearances within the stats, such as Sky sports as 9(12) or the BBC which will show it as 21 appearances (9 as a sub) because it is relevant and it does give a more accurate picture (but it is not quantifiable). Whereas Wikipedia just gives a brief summary, as it is not a sports stats website, and the Leicester OS is just shite. So again you are WRONG!!! Not at all I do expect Waghorn to score if he's going to come on so you're not really taking out of context at all. So your putting on a striker to defend now, priceless. I actually do wonder if you watch football sometimes your opinions are that bizare. He did, breifly, have a couple of decent games, but if you think he played well in all of those 7 you are gravely mistaken he cost us points missing good chances where as his goals didn't gain us anything and were against poor and already completley defeated and demorilised teams, this is what I mean about scekwed stats if he had played more games things like that would come out in the wash but as he made so few it makes him look better than he is. Apart from one goal against Derby . Exactly you numpty, 21 (9) Apperances, sub apperances, doesn't have a big * with the number of ****ing minutes played after it does it??? You can keep saying I'm wrong in capital letters all you want, it doesn't mean I am . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooseBreath Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 I'm pretty sure the last couple of games that waghorn has come on we've gone on to concede goals almost immediately. If we were protecting an important lead in a big game and we brought him on I think I would be sick. He would be a decent workhorse striker for a team batting in the rello's in league one. He's not a top half championship striker. Let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 I'm pretty sure the last couple of games that waghorn has come on we've gone on to concede goals almost immediately. If we were protecting an important lead in a big game and we brought him on I think I would be sick. He would be a decent workhorse striker for a team batting in the rello's in league one. He's not a top half championship striker. Let it go. Yeah but what about all those other games when he's come on and single handidly seen out the game by chasing down the back four............. Oh wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 Not at all I do expect Waghorn to score if he's going to come on so you're not really taking out of context at all. So your putting on a striker to defend now, priceless. I actually do wonder if you watch football sometimes your opinions are that bizare. He did, breifly, have a couple of decent games, but if you think he played well in all of those 7 you are gravely mistaken he cost us points missing good chances where as his goals didn't gain us anything and were against poor and already completley defeated and demorilised teams, this is what I mean about scekwed stats if he had played more games things like that would come out in the wash but as he made so few it makes him look better than he is. Apart from one goal against Derby . Exactly you numpty, 21 (9) Apperances, sub apperances, doesn't have a big * with the number of ****ing minutes played after it does it??? You can keep saying I'm wrong in capital letters all you want, it doesn't mean I am . You are wrong because you said other sites don't count stats like that, they do, I've just shown you, no not all go into the level of detail as per minutes, but the dedicated stats site I refer to does, because it is more accurate as an appearance, or a sub appearance is an inconsistent period of time, it does worry me that you said you work with statistics. You want to say he has scored in 3 in 9(12) this season, I have no problem with that, but you can see the difference between that and saying he scored 3 in 21 this season? As for always conceding as soon as Waghorn comes on, Peterborough was the first game this season that we have conceded in the last 10-15 minutes, yes that was more or less straight after Waghorn came on, but surely even you don't blame him for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 Yeah but what about all those other games when he's come on and single handidly seen out the game by chasing down the back four............. Oh wait. Yes that is what I think, Waghorn can singlehandedly defend from the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 You are wrong because you said other sites don't count stats like that, they do, I've just shown you, no not all go into the level of detail as per minutes, but the dedicated stats site I refer to does, because it is more accurate as an appearance, or a sub appearance is an inconsistent period of time, it does worry me that you said you work with statistics. You want to say he has scored in 3 in 9(12) this season, I have no problem with that, but you can see the difference between that and saying he scored 3 in 21 this season? As for always conceding as soon as Waghorn comes on, Peterborough was the first game this season that we have conceded in the last 10-15 minutes, yes that was more or less straight after Waghorn came on, but surely even you don't blame him for that. No I said they did it by apperances not minutes, which they do, so I'm right. I didn't say all the apperances were clumped together and not seperated into starts and sub apperances did I? Exactly how it would roll off the tongue of any football fan correct, 3 in 21, you'd probably mention a lot of them have been as sub as an after thought as you've got to make an impact as a sub it's not an excuse for being poor. Nugent and Wood have required about 3 or 4 sub apperances between them to produce 3 goals. Simple when you've got a bit of quality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 Is Kermo better than Wagho and Vardo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 Are you still at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigHeadLCFC Posted 18 February 2013 Share Posted 18 February 2013 Everyone has been sayin for a lot of the season that Vardy needs to get used to this level of football, but 1. He's had ages now and 2. He can't finish for shit, and that doesn't change when 1 on 1 with the keeper, conference or championship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonnieTodger Posted 19 February 2013 Share Posted 19 February 2013 Is Kermo better than Wagho and Vardo? He is now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 19 February 2013 Share Posted 19 February 2013 He is now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.