Shane Long

[readingbedding]

Bryan Munich or Reading?

[ZacNaloen]

Personally I think it's no surprise that Shane started scoring when our midfield got the steel it needed.


Any striker would have struggled to score without decent service.

[Snowball]

TB is right. Shane's form was excellent but his goal-scoring turned when Noel Hunt started playing
and more so when we finally had a midfield with a bit of balls

[Svlad Cjelli]

There could be so many reasons for that, though - better supply from midfield or from Hunt, being marked less tightly as he wasn't the loan striker, having to win the ball less himself, having to cover for midfield or defence less ... and so on.

[Snowball]

There could be so many reasons for that, though - better supply from midfield or from Hunt, being marked less tightly as he wasn't the loan striker, having to win the ball less himself, having to cover for midfield or defence less ... and so on.

being much better suited to playing 442...

[Svlad Cjelli]

There could be so many reasons for that, though - better supply from midfield or from Hunt, being marked less tightly as he wasn't the loan striker, having to win the ball less himself, having to cover for midfield or defence less ... and so on.

being much better suited to playing 442...

Yes, but I seem to remember being inundated with statistics when I stated that I didn't think Shane was suited to playing as a loan striker.

[ZacNaloen]

Snowballs position has always been that Shane plays better in 4-4-2.

Any statistics provided by Snowball would have been in support of that position.

[Svlad Cjelli]

That's not my recollection. My recollection is that constructive criticism of Shane's attributes like this was seen as a criticism of his overall abilities and so a mass of repudiation by statistics was immediately unleashed.

[ZacNaloen]

Then your recollection is wrong.

[Snowball]

There could be so many reasons for that, though - better supply from midfield or from Hunt, being marked less tightly as he wasn't the loan striker, having to win the ball less himself, having to cover for midfield or defence less ... and so on.

being much better suited to playing 442...

Yes, but I seem to remember being inundated with statistics when I stated that I didn't think Shane was suited to playing as a loan striker.

RUBBISH.

From the outset I have said Shane is not best-suited to 451 and needed to play
in a 442 or maybe wide man in a 433 (three strikers)

There was a debate on here just before the Rodgers half-season where I said I'd pick Shane
first for 442 but would drop him behind Hunt, Church, and Henry because he's not a 451 man.

He's better at it now, but it's a waste of his particular talents.

[Ian Royal]

I think Long dramatically improving his finishing from the start of the season was a big factor. Early on he missed a lot of good chances and bar that fantastic strike for his first goal from open play couldn't buy a goal if it wasn't from the penalty spot.

I'd put that down to confidence.

I'd also add that I agree snowball always said Long was far better in a 4-4-2 two, wasn't suited to one up front and would score fewer goals there. However, Dirk isn't far from the case with his recollection either.

[Snowball]

SHANE, FOR THE WHOLE SEASON WAS



104 shots in about 50 appearances


57 On Target
25 Goals
46 Off target
01 Hit Woodwork

So 55% of all his shots are on target.

Of shots on target 44% become goals. That is LETHAL

Almost 25% of his shots result in goals



Doyle's Championship figures were

58% on target (marginally better) of which 39% were goals (worse)

22.8% of all shots became goals (worse)


So Shane, this season got his 25 goals by being better than Doyle in his two "brilliant" seasons 2005-6 and 2008-9.


If he was "crap" as you say, then to get these figures for the season he must have been better than Messi from game 16 onwards.

[Wycombe Royal]

Not as lethal as Danny Graham.


Oh and if you are using the official sites stats then you need to change Long's number of goals to 23, which makes him only marginally more lethal than Grant Holt.

And that Adel Taarabt is useless.

[Snowball]

The OS hasn't included the POs

Most of the stats sites HAVE

[Snowball]

The point is Shane has always had less shots per game than some strikers
but has always had a very high accuracy rate and a high lethality
(on target shots becoming goals)


It's easy to "shoot" when it's not much more than a pass-back to their keeper.


Doyle, BTW had 15 assists over those two seasons. Shane had 10 this season

[Row Z Royal]

Then your recollection is wrong.

No it isn't.



And I'm damned well not going to stop you proving otherwise

[Row Z Royal]

The point is Shane has always had less shots per game than some strikers

How not to win Svlad over: 1.01

[sandman]

The point is Shane has always had less shots per game than some strikers
but has always had a very high accuracy rate and a high lethality
(on target shots becoming goals)


It's easy to "shoot" when it's not much more than a pass-back to their keeper.


Doyle, BTW had 15 assists over those two seasons. Shane had 10 this season

How many assists is Shane going to get sitting on the Bayern bench?

[T.R.O.L.I.]

Not as lethal as Danny Graham.


Oh and if you are using the official sites stats then you need to change Long's number of goals to 23, which makes him only marginally more lethal than Grant Holt.

And that Adel Taarabt is useless.

The OS hasn't included the POs

Most of the stats sites HAVE

Not sure if Snowball' response was aimed at WR's (a fair assumption considering they were back to back posts) however I don't agree that the season's stats should include the playoffs as you don't have a level starting point (due to the 2 or 3 extra games in the PO's).

[Wycombe Royal]

The OS hasn't included the POs

Most of the stats sites HAVE

Yes but you are including the goals from the playoffs but not the shots. That is my point.

Again you are being innaccurate and funnily enough yet again your innaccuracies are in FAVOUR of Shane Long. You haven't done that before have you?