Play Offs

[RedRag]

Your analysis would be better off, looking into the effectiveness of goals scored in terms of points won.... by which I mean, you can get goalscorers whose figures often include good days when they rattle in a few in a game which is already effectively won., so they may get 20, with a number of peripheral goals, whereas someone who scores perhaps 8 may have got those all as winners in close games.

My impression has been, notwithstanding the penalties factor, that Doughty has scored a number of point winning or saving goals.

[Peter Venkman]

Remember no-one has more time to argue the toss than Reg, ever.

[Reg Smeeton]

My impression has been, notwithstanding the penalties factor, that Doughty has scored a number of point winning or saving goals.

MD scored in 9 different games, and indeed in 7 of those his goals contributed. 4 wins, v Macc, Newport, at CG and Tranny Franchise on the road and 3 draws at FGR,  Oldham and CG v Lincoln.   Only in Lincoln away and Crewe at CG were his goals superfluous in the end.  For te gamnes played a decent yield, will ned the same next but more games played.

[Paolo69]

Controversial but if Doughty would have played every game this year we might have had your elusive 20 goal a season man. :-)

[Peter Venkman]

Your analysis would be better off, looking into the effectiveness of goals scored in terms of points won.... by which I mean, you can get goalscorers whose figures often include good days when they rattle in a few in a game which is already effectively won., so they may get 20, with a number of peripheral goals, whereas someone who scores perhaps 8 may have got those all as winners in close games.

I just did a quick check on the points that James Norwood has won for Tranmere this season.

5 times he gained them a point with his goals in games finishing as a draw.

8 times he won the game which would have finished as a draw without his goal in that game.

Norwoods goals on his own accounted for 20 of Tranmeres points total which would have meant they finished on 53 points and in 19th place.

With Tyler Walker at  Mansfield -

1 game he scored but Mansfield would have lost and 7 goals he scored the winning goal meaning they would have drawn the game.

So Walkers goals accounted for 17 extra points for Mansfield which means they would have finished on 69 points and in 11th place.

Nicky Maynard at Bury 9 times his goals won matches that would have been a draw and one game they would have lsot without his goals, accounting for 21 points on his own.

So without Maynards goals Bury would have finished on 58 points and in 16th place in the table.

I think that categorically puts an end to your argument once and for all about importance of goals

[horlock07]

I think we have reached peak Reg here......

[Nemo]

I think we have reached peak Reg here......

Tbh, the 20 goal a season striker is the logical conclusion of Thatcherite individualism. Reg would probably favour the full team contributing according to their own ability, and ideally a few of them being Eastern European beauties.

[Red Frog]

I think we have reached peak Reg here......

 

[Exiled Bob]

For te gamnes played a decent yield, will ned the same next but more games played.

You're becoming increasingly incoherent....

[Reg Smeeton]

I think that categorically puts an end to your argument once and for all about importance of goals

Nobody is arguing about the importance of goals.  Unfortunately your analysis doesn't hold up.... how do you define goals winning games... scoring in a 1-0 is obvoius, scoring the second in a 2-1 similarly, scoring the 4th in a 4-0 less so.

Callum Lang at Oldham who finished below us, has a similar record to Walker.... 7 wins and a draw.  Hallam Hope at Carlisle had 8 wins and a draw, comparable to Michael Doughty, but not sufficient on its own.

[wheretherealredsare]

I think we have reached peak Reg here......

Is that like a Smeltdown or maybe Smeltup?

[Reg Smeeton]

You're becoming increasingly incoherent....

Like Wellens then...

[RobertT]

Nobody is arguing about the importance of goals.  Unfortunately your analysis doesn't hold up.... how do you define goals winning games... scoring in a 1-0 is obvoius, scoring the second in a 2-1 similarly, scoring the 4th in a 4-0 less so.

Callum Lang at Oldham who finished below us, has a similar record to Walker.... 7 wins and a draw.  Hallam Hope at Carlisle had 8 wins and a draw, comparable to Michael Doughty, but not sufficient on its own.

I thought he said that it was games where they scored the crucial goal, so without their goal it would have been a draw or a defeat.

The logic is basic - the team with most goals wins a game.  The teams at the top won some of their games because they had near 20 a season strikers, and you can pinpoint some games where their goals specifically got those points.    It's illogical to suggest having a goalscorer is not a good thing - that is always set against further context - how many goals can the rest of the team score between them and how do they do in defence.

So for us - you say we don't need one and won't get one.

I say we don't have the players to fill the gap without one and we don;t have a blank cheque to replace everyone.  So assuming we keep what we have, the best option Wellens has is to find a goalscorer., or he is going to have to find four or five players who can get to double figure to supplement what we have, and maintain the defensive qualities at least to where they have been since Jan.  It's probably thougher to do the latter than the former, but both are not easy.

[BambooToTheFuture]

We wonder why there is a lack of new contributors to the forum?!

[Reg Smeeton]

I thought he said that it was games where they scored the crucial goal, so without their goal it would have been a draw or a defeat.

The logic is basic - the team with most goals wins a game.  The team at the top won some of their games because they had near 20 a season strikers, and you can pinpoint some games where their goals specifically got those points.    It's illogical to suggest having a goalscorer is not a good thing - that is always set against further context - how many goals can the rest of the team score between them and how do they do in defence.

So for us - you say we don't need one and won't get one.

I say we don't have the players to fill the gap without one and we don;t have a blank check to replace everyone.  So assuming we keep what we have, the best option Wellens has is to find a goalscorer., or he is going to have to find four or five players who can get to double figure to supplement what we have, and maintain the defensive qualities at least to where they have been since Jan.  It's probably thougher to do the latter than the former, but both are not easy.

Have you checked?

You're corrrect that the team scoring the most goals wins the game... incorrect in Div 4, the team at the top lacked a 20 goal man....

Nobody has said it isn't a good thing to have players who score goals.... and therefore all round contribution needs to be taken into account as well as defending.

I'm saying Power won't buy one.... why didn't he do it last season having moved on Norris and Mullin? We'd just had a windfall from Flint. Therefore if he won't do the necessary there isn't too much point in thinking you need something you'll not get.

I just think you're wrong to say that it's easier to find a 20+ goal man than say 2 10 goal men.  As mentioned they're rare... 4 in Div 4 this year, consider a club like Oxford 2 in their history. We have 2 players contracted Kaiyne and Keshi, who could possible get up to 10 goals apiece, it's a long shot.... but it's what Wellens should be focusing on.