Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Statbank: Charlton 1-0 Leeds
lancashire lad
Posts: 15,629
many thanks to the 101 Lifers who gave marks
The lowest percentage possession that we have had and won since 2011:
17-18 41% Doncaster H 1-0
15-16 39% Middlesbro' H 2-0
14-15 36% Bradford H 3-0
13-14 34% Q.P.R. H 1-0
11-12 39% Bournemouth H 3-0
and all clean sheets!
The lowest percentage possession that we have had and won since 2011:
17-18 41% Doncaster H 1-0
15-16 39% Middlesbro' H 2-0
14-15 36% Bradford H 3-0
13-14 34% Q.P.R. H 1-0
11-12 39% Bournemouth H 3-0
and all clean sheets!
17
Comments
-
Great work again Lancs.
I notice you have Gallagher down for a shot on target. I believe that should be in the next box down against Lockyer’s name?0 -
As usual, great information LL0
-
thanks Callum - correction madeCallumcafc said:Great work again Lancs.
I notice you have Gallagher down for a shot on target. I believe that should be in the next box down against Lockyer’s name?1 -
Like the critical points.1
-
Great stats.
Interesting that we have let zero goals in first 30 mins, and only 1 in last 30 mins.
I love the Points above Millwall section.0 -
Woh ooh oh
Weve got Baby Beckham
Woh ooh oh
He just can’t wait for Peckham
Woh ooh oh
We’re gonna beat the scum awayyyyy3 -
The lowest percentage possession that we have had and won since 2011:
17-18 41% Doncaster H 1-0
15-16 39% Middlesbro' H 2-0
14-15 36% Bradford H 3-0
13-14 34% Q.P.R. H 1-0
11-12 39% Bournemouth H 3-0
and all clean sheets!Brenford at home earlier in season 32% ?
0 -
Love the fact that we’ve only conceded one goal in the last 30 minutes of games while scoring five. That’s huge.
edit: just realised you have us down for six goals conceded, while we have conceded eight.
There’s a goal missing against Wigan scored after 22 mins and a goal missing against Forest scored after 78 minutes.1 -
Thanks again for the stats LL.
Interesting to see, in view of how much he is missed due to his injury, that Lyle has not been MoM even once this season. although his average mark is second in the squad. Do we take him for granted?0 -
thanks Callum - I'll correct it for the Swansea stats1
-
Sponsored links:
-
You do an excellent job sir. :-)2
-
Great work. Thanks for all your efforts because that can't be easy. I love the "critical points" section.1
-
Red7Oak - whoops forgot this season and you are correct 32% and a clean sheet, I find that clean sheet bit quite intriguing!1
-
Brilliant work @""lancashire lad"
Reading the players marks thread I couldn't argue with much of it, and the players are marked in roughly the order I would have given. BUT how can a starting midfield 4, then a 3 when we changed formation all get over 7.5, 1 nearly 8 and 1 nearly 9 and still have less than 30% possession?
You can't argue the commitment etc but we played Leeds, not Liverpool (who are actually the champions of Europe). Is there, in hindsight to much respect for the opposition in the marks?
If you read the marks, just the marks, you would either think we walked it and it could have been 5 or 6 (the 1st hour against forest) or we just beat peps barca and the lads had to have the game of their lives.
I am torn between thinking the marks are well deserved for the effort, commitment and game managment or thinking they are insulting to the level of ability of our players and they could of actually played better. Be intresting to hear other people's take on it.
An example, Gallagher got nearly a 9, nearly perfect, but he didn't do much in the final third. Is that the near perfect performance?2 -
We were never gonna play them at their own game. We had a plan (another genius one from Lord Bowyer) and they all did their job excellently in getting us the win.Cafc43v3r said:Brilliant work @""lancashire lad"
Reading the players marks thread I couldn't argue with much of it, and the players are marked in roughly the order I would have given. BUT how can a starting midfield 4, then a 3 when we changed formation all get over 7.5, 1 nearly 8 and 1 nearly 9 and still have less than 30% possession?
You can't argue the commitment etc but we played Leeds, not Liverpool (who are actually the champions of Europe). Is there, in hindsight to much respect for the opposition in the marks?
If you read the marks, just the marks, you would either think we walked it and it could have been 5 or 6 (the 1st hour against forest) or we just beat peps barca and the lads had to have the game of their lives.
I am torn between thinking the marks are well deserved for the effort, commitment and game managment or thinking they are insulting to the level of ability of our players and they could of actually played better. Be intresting to hear other people's take on it.
An example, Gallagher got nearly a 9, nearly perfect, but he didn't do much in the final third. Is that the near perfect performance?0 -
I more or less agree. A great battling and defensive performance, but one which relied heavily on the run of the ball - 3 times the ball dribbled across the box - and poor finishing by Leeds. If one of those chances had gone in and it had finished 1-1, would the players have got the same scores? I doubt it, despite them playing just as well.Cafc43v3r said:Brilliant work @""lancashire lad"
Reading the players marks thread I couldn't argue with much of it, and the players are marked in roughly the order I would have given. BUT how can a starting midfield 4, then a 3 when we changed formation all get over 7.5, 1 nearly 8 and 1 nearly 9 and still have less than 30% possession?
You can't argue the commitment etc but we played Leeds, not Liverpool (who are actually the champions of Europe). Is there, in hindsight to much respect for the opposition in the marks?
If you read the marks, just the marks, you would either think we walked it and it could have been 5 or 6 (the 1st hour against forest) or we just beat peps barca and the lads had to have the game of their lives.
I am torn between thinking the marks are well deserved for the effort, commitment and game managment or thinking they are insulting to the level of ability of our players and they could of actually played better. Be intresting to hear other people's take on it.
An example, Gallagher got nearly a 9, nearly perfect, but he didn't do much in the final third. Is that the near perfect performance?
2 -
Thank you. Most enlightening. is there evidence that we always score players higher in games we win, regardless of the individual performance?1
-
What a difference 7 days make,
168 little hours...
At Wigan, after a very poor 1st half, we wake up 2nd half and easily could have had 3 goals with a bad miss by Lockyer, last ditch save by Marshall, and a blatant shirt pull but no pen on Sarr. So the outcome is everyone gets a low score with Lockyer MOM with 6.41. Trust me Aneke was our best player but only did a cameo of 20+ minutes
Against Leeds we hardly have the ball but same as Brentford, the commitment is 100% by everyone and Leeds picked that day to be profligate with their finishing.
Aneke is the lowest ranked player with 7.08
A win gets the Endorphins working overtime and the scores go up.
A defeat and the black cloud descends and the players lose points even if it's bad luck or the opposite keeper has a blinder.
What a difference 7 days make,
168 little hours.
Brought the sun and the flowers
Where there used to be rain.
MOM Lancashire lad
1 -
Thisgrumpyaddick said:Thank you. Most enlightening. is there evidence that we always score players higher in games we win, regardless of the individual performance?
I sometimes don't mark because I know that this affects my judgement.
I normally start on a par 6 and rarely go below 5. My extra marks are normally awarded for match changing moments especially if they are not part of their normal duties.
Two examples Saturday would be Leko's defensive clearance and Lockyer's assist for the goal.0 -
Yes Aneke was decent at Wigan, but bang average against Leeds, no way was his individual performance in that game worth more than a 7soapboxsam said:What a difference 7 days make,
168 little hours...
At Wigan, after a very poor 1st half, we wake up 2nd half and easily could have had 3 goals with a bad miss by Lockyer, last ditch save by Marshall, and a blatant shirt pull but no pen on Sarr. So the outcome is everyone gets a low score with Lockyer MOM with 6.41. Trust me Aneke was our best player but only did a cameo of 20+ minutes
Against Leeds we hardly have the ball but same as Brentford, the commitment is 100% by everyone and Leeds picked that day to be profligate with their finishing.
Aneke is the lowest ranked player with 7.08
A win gets the Endorphins working overtime and the scores go up.
A defeat and the black cloud descends and the players lose points even if it's bad luck or the opposite keeper has a blinder.
What a difference 7 days make,
168 little hours.
Brought the sun and the flowers
Where there used to be rain.
MOM Lancashire lad1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Glad that Phillips got the recognition he deserved this game. I haven't been his biggest advocate but thought he was great on Saturday.
0 -
Gallagher and Lockyer have been our stand out players so far this season, so no surprise to see them as 1 and 2.3
-
I thought we had conceded 8 goals this season not 6. Am I reading the League Goals Timings table correctly.
0 -
yes you are right and I shall correct it with the next set of statsSark99 said:I thought we had conceded 8 goals this season not 6. Am I reading the League Goals Timings table correctly.0
