Why Lita Doesn't Work

[Ian Royal]

I thought NHunt was looking jaded before being replaced by Lita; that change needs to be reversed now as NHunt has had a rest and as Lita isn't delivering.

It's the wingers who aren't delivering. Michael Owen in his pomp would struggle in our team in recent weeks. Same old same old, a) we've been sussed, b) the wingers have lost form & c) there's no alternative plan to wing play. Bickering about which centre forward is least well equipped to feed off scraps is entertaining but pointless.

I reckon that if we start creating, then either NH or LL are good enough to convert them in this league. It's the system, the moribund centre-mids and the wingers' form wot matter.

Agreed TYE, and in other threads I have expressed why I think that is, but IMHO, I thought NHunt was looking a bit jaded, whereas Lita had come back looking very lively, so I can quite understand why Coppell made he change.

I also agree 100% that we need to employ an alternative to the style of play that we have employed for the whole of the season and which, though succesful for the first half of the season has been so unsuccesful thus far in the second half. Ironically, by changing the tactics, Lita MAY be more effective; however, I would be surprised if NHunt isn't in the starting 11 on Saturday regardless of the tactics employed on the day.

Three excellent posts there. Sums up my thoughts fairly well.

[Snowball]

Lita had a standing ovation when he came on in the Watford game where he scored. Does that mean he's playing fantastically?

There y'go again. He got applause because he was an old favourite returning, not because he had played well for eighty minutes
and covered every blade of grass, run his heart out for the team. And he scored because he was put through for a 1 on 1, the fourth
goal of 4 against a totally demoralised side. Oh, look just like his fourth goal of four against another totally demoralised side last season,
that time in the last minute of the season.

Had he missed that goal, last minute of the last game, meaningless goal his stats would have been

Played 10 (4) 13 Fouls, 1 Yellow card, 1 assist, 19 shots, 8 on target, 11 off target, 1 hit woodwork, ZERO GOALS

So he had at least 20 chances (20 shots including his goal) for a single goal.

This season, apparently, beginning of the season, and the last games, it was all the midfield's fault, last season too, I presume?

Two different season's different teams, common denominator, Lita

[Ian Royal]

Do you want me to stop posting so you can carry on making up what I'm saying, so it's easier to argue with?

[Fezza]

Statistically speaking how many times do you need to post the same irrelevant bullsh*t before you realise no one cares?

[Millsy]

Two World Wars, here's the post I posted on why I thought, Lita wasn't right etc, twenty-odd posts ago!

So you did thank you.

And very well laid out reasons too.

I was going by the original post which sets the tone for a thread. Not everyone has the patience (evidently with me) to read every thread in a post to finally get to a post which addresses what the thread title suggests should've been answered in the first post, that's all. I dont even know why I'm saying this really as I really rate your posts - I guess it's just I like the way you think so I want to make a great job greater.

Now to tackle your points, I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions/reasons anyway. Apart from the stats all your reasons for why "LIta doesn't work" are speculative, based on personal opinion or bias. One's personal opinion could easily lead to the conclusion that the team has payed awfully recently anyway such that even Ronaldo wouldn't score. It's a little far fetched for example to say not only is Lita not scoring (because of HIS fault) but that also he is somehow stopping ANYONE scoring. That just doesn't follow. I see what you say about assists etc but as a pure finisher it's never been his place to assist. It just doesn't follow. Just my opinion though.

Havign said that as a scientist I do respect properly laid out stats and what I see, whilst I like LIta, makes me think Doyle and Nunt work best.

Who knows. Even as a Lita fan I think I'd like to see Nunt and Doyle start again.

[Royal Rother]

Lita doen't STOP anyone else from scoring but I think it's fair to say he doesn't help others to score in the way that NHunt does. And that's not only by direct assists, but also by the runs he makes.

Apart from running to collect the downfield punts, Lita's runs tend to be to take him into goalscoring positions (no particular criticism for that - except the fact that he isn't converting the chances that come his way of course) whereas NHunt, being a more intelligent and less selfish player I feel (again, not intended as a criticism of Lita) will make decoy runs that open up space for Doyle and Co.

If you can produce stats on the quality of the runs they make that would really be a killer snowball!

[Snowball]

If you can produce stats on the quality of the runs they make that would really be a killer snowball!

'T'w'd be nice, but it would be subjective.

First post that said NHunt made three quality runs, Ian Royal would
respond, "Quality? The guy didn't have a clue, he was going for a drink!"

[Snowball]

It's a little far fetched for example to say not only is Lita not scoring (because of HIS fault) but that also he is somehow stopping ANYONE scoring. That just doesn't follow. I see what you say about assists etc but as a pure finisher it's never been his place to assist. It just doesn't follow. Just my opinion though.

Not QUITE what I said. I merely pointed out that this season, when he's played (beginning of the season, Watford, Swansea, and latest three games) none of the other strikers scored while he was on the pitch and he didn't score while Doyle was on the pitch. We can't blame the dodgy midfield for the games at the start of the season (especially as we did win games)

I think how he plays just doesn't fit with the team any more. Let's face it, Doyle has been playing as part of a working PAIR all season, and at least in the last three games, Lita seems to plough a lone furrow. I really cannot remember them being within ten yards of each other except when Doyle played Lita thru' twice when he shot at the keeper twice (once offside)

Whereas before there was a DUO, now there's two individual strikers. WHY that is, is debatable, but I really wonder how much they get on.

[Snowball]

Having said that as a scientist...

My first two degrees were in psychology and I know just how fallible "gut instinct" is, but worse, people believe in it over hard facts.

One of my major projects was "Attribution of Blame". People can't accept randomness, chance, they need to pin it on someone.

[cmonurz]

One of my major projects was "Attribution of Blame". People can't accept randomness, chance, they need to pin it on someone.

*spits out his tea.

[Royal1983]

Stats say one thing but watching Doyle how can people say that he has been good recently? In the last 4 games what has he actually done other than not score? Snowball what would the stats say to Lita and N.Hunt starting as that may be a good partnership that has not yet been tried as a first off?! Cops is too faithful to some players and needs to try changing things if we are to go up. Please do not get this wrong as I am not saying it his Cops fault as the players just don't seem to want to win at the moment.

[CMRoyal]

Having said that as a scientist...

My first two degrees

As suspected, over-academicisation leads to analysis to paralysis syndrome. "Gut instinct" in football comes from the manifold unmeasured facets that have been witnessed by the naked eye - first touches, off the ball runs, pass decision making, energy, attitude, speed of reaction, accuracy and direction of passes, tracking back, fouling, diving, bravery in challenges, rallying of team-mates, etc etc etc...

Just because someone hasn't been assiduously noting all those things down in cold dry statistics, it doesn't mean it can all be dismissed by supposedly countervailing stats. That's why there's something of a consensus that Leroy has played OK, but the partnership isn't gelling. We can see why - and the factors are legion and include much of my list above - and the stastics are only one part of the evidence for that. Gut instinct (ie first hand experience) has as significant a part to play in forming that opinion.

[Snowball]

Try reading "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell

Gut instinct is total bollocks. It's complex statistical analysis just without the understanding of statistical analysis.

If I throw you a ball and you catch it, how do you think you manage that? It ain't chance.

You make really complex ballistic analysis looking at the way it was thrown, angles, gravity, air-resistance etc
and it's based on vast analyses over possibly decades.


There have been thousands of studies of analysis and amateurs v experts. When amateurs are given simple choices
like "which jam is better" and they are given 3 from 30 jams, the amateurs match the experts if the jams are
the best, a middle, the worst... but give them the top 5 and experts can still spot the difference, amateurs don't

But, contrary to lay-opinion, it is not simply "loads-of-experience" that distinguishes the experts from the amateurs

Experts use complex NUMBERED grading systems to teach themselves the extra level of analysis. So using "jam"
as an example, the punter goes, "Cor, that's Sweeeet" (or red or whatever) but the expert has learned to break down
the attributes of good jam, fruitiness, right level of sweetness, colour, consistency (and God knows what else)

They learn a system, and once they have learned it, they can "forget it"

We all have approximately the same ability to analyse, and in everyday life most of the analysis is unconscious.

That is fine and works a lot of the time (imperfectly or crudely) but we have to be taught to make that analysis better.

Also it's incredibly easy to trick the layman. One example. Most people can tell coke v pepsi if you give them one of each
(in plain glasses, obviously) but give them THREE glasses, two with coke and one pepsi (or vice versa) and their ability
to spot the difference collapses. (but not the expert)


They call it "going behind the locked door". You discover HOW you analyse and then you can (a) improve the level of analysis
and (b) avoid the many traps that trick the layman.

[Snowball]

Never having played CM I would watch Arsenal and think "What the hell is Gilberto THERE for?"

he was "invisible, for years, apart from one season where he suddenly started getting goals.

But I was sat down once with someone who stopped and started the match on TV to show me what he was doing and how brilliant it was.

THEN I could see it, and it was "obvious"


This is like the Harper argument on this list. Some people who've PLAYED CM can see what he does and rate him
(as does Coppell, the Fulham manager, the Boro manager)


but

because he isn't banging in shots, going on runs, and doesn't seem to get many tackles in, to many he is "crap"


Coppell and his coaching team are experts. Actim and Pro-Zone are examples of formalised systems that help analysis.

95% of the pundits on here are dumb amateurs (and I don't exclude me)


Arsenal's boy-wonder Jack Willshere looks promising, but he appeared on TV and the former pros were going on and on
about how incredibly well he shield the ball making fair-tackles almost impossible. No way could I see that until it was explained
and a few slow-mos of the way he used his body

[CMRoyal]

Try reading "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell

Try not being so patronising.

I put "gut instinct" in inverted commas for a reason, and said "Just because someone hasn't been assiduously noting all those things down in cold dry statistics" for a reason too, ie I agree that these things are worked out by the brain in a complex manner, I'm just saying that this is why your cold hard stats are only part of the equation.

Using the ball analogy, you can say I caught it three times out of four and you caught it twice out of four, therefore I'm a better catcher than you with my 75% success rate. But A N Other Hobnobber might pipe up and say "hold on a minute, I was there and snowball was having the ball thrown to him by that tramp in the park - the ball was all over the shop; whereas CMRoyal joined in with that young yank who'd been tossing a baseball about like Babe Ruth and he STILL managed to drop one."

[Stranded]

Different sport but I think it’s relevant to at least one of these stat filled threads.

I’m currently reading a book called The Blind Side about the rise in importance of the left tackle position in the NFL. Now up until quite recently the player playing this role was often among the lowest payed players in the game – why because they had no “production”. There were no numbers for them, nothing in black and white that said that this role is key or that that guy is better than that guy there.

It became clear that this was a major oversight as this one player was key in delaying players getting to the QB from his blind side, giving him the extra fractions of a second or peace of mind to make certain plays – in many cases this one player is often the highest paid player (or one of) and yet a lot of what he does will not show up in stats and is often completely ignored.

That’s the joy of sport, stats show only a small inkling of the story of what is really going on, or what a player really gives to a side regardless of who they are.

[Maguire]

I thought NHunt was looking jaded before being replaced by Lita; that change needs to be reversed now as NHunt has had a rest and as Lita isn't delivering.

It's the wingers who aren't delivering. Michael Owen in his pomp would struggle in our team in recent weeks. Same old same old, a) we've been sussed, b) the wingers have lost form & c) there's no alternative plan to wing play. Bickering about which centre forward is least well equipped to feed off scraps is entertaining but pointless.

I reckon that if we start creating, then either NH or LL are good enough to convert them in this league. It's the system, the moribund centre-mids and the wingers' form wot matter.

This is good.

[CMRoyal]

Different sport but I think it’s relevant to at least one of these stat filled threads.

I’m currently reading a book called The Blind Side about the rise in importance of the left tackle position in the NFL. Now up until quite recently the player playing this role was often among the lowest payed players in the game – why because they had no “production”. There were no numbers for them, nothing in black and white that said that this role is key or that that guy is better than that guy there.

It became clear that this was a major oversight as this one player was key in delaying players getting to the QB from his blind side, giving him the extra fractions of a second or peace of mind to make certain plays – in many cases this one player is often the highest paid player (or one of) and yet a lot of what he does will not show up in stats and is often completely ignored.

That’s the joy of sport, stats show only a small inkling of the story of what is really going on, or what a player really gives to a side regardless of who they are.

On a similar tip, but about baseball, there's 'Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game' by Michael Lewis about the Oakland Athletics' general manager, Billy Beane who revolutionised the team's statitical basis for picking players, but allied it with an empirical, 'instinctive', almost counter-intuitive approach. I wonder how Brian Clough built his great Nottingham Forest team in the '70s - surely at least partly on the kind of "gut instinct" Beane and the above example displayed?

I'm not completely dismissing the stats snowball produces, just saying they are only part of the armoury.

[Stranded]

Different sport but I think it’s relevant to at least one of these stat filled threads.

I’m currently reading a book called The Blind Side about the rise in importance of the left tackle position in the NFL. Now up until quite recently the player playing this role was often among the lowest payed players in the game – why because they had no “production”. There were no numbers for them, nothing in black and white that said that this role is key or that that guy is better than that guy there.

It became clear that this was a major oversight as this one player was key in delaying players getting to the QB from his blind side, giving him the extra fractions of a second or peace of mind to make certain plays – in many cases this one player is often the highest paid player (or one of) and yet a lot of what he does will not show up in stats and is often completely ignored.

That’s the joy of sport, stats show only a small inkling of the story of what is really going on, or what a player really gives to a side regardless of who they are.

On a similar tip, but about baseball, there's 'Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game' by Michael Lewis about the Oakland Athletics' general manager, Billy Beane who revolutionised the team's statitical basis for picking players, but allied it with an empirical, 'instinctive', almost counter-intuitive approach. I wonder how Brian Clough built his great Nottingham Forest team in the '70s - surely at least partly on the kind of "gut instinct" Beane and the above example displayed?

I'm not completely dismissing the stats snowball produces, just saying they are only part of the armoury.

The Blind Side is written by the same guy, so if you enjoyed Moneyball I'd highly recommend it.

[CMRoyal]

Different sport but I think it’s relevant to at least one of these stat filled threads.

I’m currently reading a book called The Blind Side about the rise in importance of the left tackle position in the NFL. Now up until quite recently the player playing this role was often among the lowest payed players in the game – why because they had no “production”. There were no numbers for them, nothing in black and white that said that this role is key or that that guy is better than that guy there.

It became clear that this was a major oversight as this one player was key in delaying players getting to the QB from his blind side, giving him the extra fractions of a second or peace of mind to make certain plays – in many cases this one player is often the highest paid player (or one of) and yet a lot of what he does will not show up in stats and is often completely ignored.

That’s the joy of sport, stats show only a small inkling of the story of what is really going on, or what a player really gives to a side regardless of who they are.

On a similar tip, but about baseball, there's 'Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game' by Michael Lewis about the Oakland Athletics' general manager, Billy Beane who revolutionised the team's statitical basis for picking players, but allied it with an empirical, 'instinctive', almost counter-intuitive approach. I wonder how Brian Clough built his great Nottingham Forest team in the '70s - surely at least partly on the kind of "gut instinct" Beane and the above example displayed?

I'm not completely dismissing the stats snowball produces, just saying they are only part of the armoury.

The Blind Side is written by the same guy, so if you enjoyed Moneyball I'd highly recommend it.

Ah! Excellent, added to my Amazon wish list.