Brian: The right decision?

[winchester_royal]

nope.

if you allow the opposition possession in the first two thirds, and reduce them to shots from outside the area, which are saved by your incredible keeper, or blocked by your gr8 defence, & you set up to soak up pressure, take possession, break quickly, and score clinically.

then its hardly luck when this is what happens.

I didn't say shots from outside the area though, I'm talking about clear cut chances that they miss because of poor finishing.

poor finishing as the result of excellent pressure from the defence, great positioning from the keeper etc?

Fair enough Brendy, I disagree, but it's hard to argue against that with any rationality

[melonhead]

irrational people do find it hard to do so. i feel for you

[maffff]

FCUK ME.

If football is such a lottery why bother paying exorbitant wages to get the best players?

It appears form some posters just having 11 people on the pitch is enough to win games.

http://www.goal.com/en-my/news/3891/fea ... -to-beat-a

[RoyalinBracknell]

Ultimately you don't win 15 out of 17 games simply through luck, though obviously there are bound to be individual instances within that run where maybe on another day something different would have happened; cause and effect is clearly a significant part of football. Yet I don't think instances of great goalkeeping, or poor finishing from the other side, or the other team losing their discipline can be put down to 'luck'. Those kinds of things are exactly what a football match is supposed to test. I'd also equally argue that it is generally more likely the better teams will take advantage of any 'bounce of the ball' that does come their way.

I disagree, if you allow the opposition a chance that they really should score and they don't because of poor finishing then you've got lucky. There's no grand design behind giving the opposition chances.

.

Firstly I'm not sure how many chances that 'they really should score' we gave to the opposition, and often factors such as an onrushing goalkeeper or pressure from defenders can contribute to a miss. Really I just think that it's a part of football; in pretty much any game both sides have their chances and you never get a game where every promising attack results in a goal. If we missed a chance that we really should have scored I wouldn't say we were unlucky so I'm reluctant to place too much emphasis on 'luck' if the opposition does the same. Equally if team A missed a good chance at one end and then team B scores an equally good chance at the other I wouldn't say that team B were lucky.

As I say a football match often has fine margins but I'm not sure that's quite the same thing. If we played 20 times against Barnsley at home then how many would we have lost 2-1? Or how many times would we miss 2 penalties in the same match? But equally our players took poor penalties that day and the Barnsley keeper did his job in saving them. I don't think I could particularly attribute that to 'luck'. As I say in a 15 out of 17 winning game run some things might go your way but equally a team's ability to capitalise on them and overcome anything that goes against them is part of a successful team. Perhaps on another day we'd have only drawn with Brighton away but on another day we'd maybe have beaten Doncaster instead. There are clearly lots of variables but I think 'luck' would be some way down the list.

[Royal With Cheese]

1000th lock!

[winchester_royal]

Ultimately you don't win 15 out of 17 games simply through luck, though obviously there are bound to be individual instances within that run where maybe on another day something different would have happened; cause and effect is clearly a significant part of football. Yet I don't think instances of great goalkeeping, or poor finishing from the other side, or the other team losing their discipline can be put down to 'luck'. Those kinds of things are exactly what a football match is supposed to test. I'd also equally argue that it is generally more likely the better teams will take advantage of any 'bounce of the ball' that does come their way.

I disagree, if you allow the opposition a chance that they really should score and they don't because of poor finishing then you've got lucky. There's no grand design behind giving the opposition chances.

.

Firstly I'm not sure how many chances that 'they really should score' we gave to the opposition, and often factors such as an onrushing goalkeeper or pressure from defenders can contribute to a miss. Really I just think that it's a part of football; in pretty much any game both sides have their chances and you never get a game where every promising attack results in a goal. If we missed a chance that we really should have scored I wouldn't say we were unlucky so I'm reluctant to place too much emphasis on 'luck' if the opposition does the same. Equally if team A missed a good chance at one end and then team B scores an equally good chance at the other I wouldn't say that team B were lucky.

I'm not talking about RFC per se, just in general. Missed chances are a part of football, of course they are, but that doesn't mean that luck doesn't play a part in them.

[Royal91]

Majority of the games I walked away from the stadium thinking how the oxf*rd did we win that. I would say we were lucky to win the league. How many top teams win based on clinging on??

Were Chelsea LUCKY to win the CL?? Too bloody right they were.

[Maguire]

Majority of the games I walked away from the stadium thinking how the oxf*rd did we win that. I would say we were lucky to win the league. How many top teams win based on clinging on??

Were Chelsea LUCKY to win the CL?? Too bloody right they were.

Yeah, they beat Barcelona over two legs and then downed Bayern in their own stadium. It's not like they won it by tossing a coin.

Reading fans don't seem to be happy with winning games or titles, it appears you have to do it by dominating every game you play and chalking up a hatful of goals in the porcess. Newsflash - no team does that.

Think back over the last ten or so years and how many times we've lost at home to a team that goes on to get promoted despite us "deserving" a point or even three. It happens all the time - getting put under pressure away from home, defending hard, and still walking away with all three points is what champions do.

[Elm Park Kid]

Majority of the games I walked away from the stadium thinking how the oxf*rd did we win that. I would say we were lucky to win the league. How many top teams win based on clinging on??

Were Chelsea LUCKY to win the CL?? Too bloody right they were.

Yeah, they beat Barcelona over two legs and then downed Bayern in their own stadium. It's not like they won it by tossing a coin.

Reading fans don't seem to be happy with winning games or titles, it appears you have to do it by dominating every game you play and chalking up a hatful of goals in the porcess. Newsflash - no team does that.

Think back over the last ten or so years and how many times we've lost at home to a team that goes on to get promoted despite us "deserving" a point or even three. It happens all the time - getting put under pressure away from home, defending hard, and still walking away with all three points is what champions do.

I agree.

I personally disagreed with a lot of what McDermott did, from transfers to formation to team selection. However you can't argue about winning 17 out of 23 games and then getting promoted with 2 games to spare. If football is a results game then McDermott's record in the Championship was as good as was realistically possible. Yes, our wage bill went up a bit once the Russians took over but Leicester are proof that it far from guarantees success.

[Haag Royal]

Going back to the original question.

Yes.

[Hoop Blah]

I don't really subscribe to the general idea of luck in sport as I think it usually comes down to your ability to take luck out of the equation or to make the best of situations which in some instances people will see as luck.

It's not good luck when Federici makes a string of good saves, it's what he's there to do afterall, but it is getting away with it a bit when you conceed too many chances and the opposition fail to convert as many as you'd expect a decent team at that level to do.

McDermott's winning run was exceptional. The momentum that he and the squad built up and then kept going wasn't down to luck but there was an element of good fortune (I don't see that being the same as luck) along the way, as there always is in any stretch of results like that.

It still remains the correct decision to give McDermott the boot though. He'd come to the end of the line and changing the manager gives us the best long term chance of success. It may or may not pay off this season, or next, but making the change needed to happen IMO.

[Extended-Phenotype]

People are confusing ‘luck’ with the ‘merit’.

People saw us win games we “didn’t deserve to win” according to some unfamiliar alternative winning criteria which differs to the one the competition is based on (goals) and try and define the other team having a bad day as luck, failing to appreciate that the ability a player or team shows on competition day is what a competition is trying to f/cking measure.

Sorry to disappoint, but football like most sports rewards those who play a particular way to maximise the possible return from the quality available. Playing other ways which result in less goals scored and more conceded may be all very deserving, but according to the rules will win you at best a runner-up position.

The team you put together, how you play on the day, what tactics you choose – I doubt anyone is rolling a dice to decide any of that. So slate McD’s style all you like, and even claim other teams were more deserving of the title than us because you felt they played the sport more to your liking, but f/ck off with this luck crap. We won the league through ability, not fate.

[creative_username_1]

Majority of the games I walked away from the stadium thinking how the oxf*rd did we win that. I would say we were lucky to win the league. How many top teams win based on clinging on??

Were Chelsea LUCKY to win the CL?? Too bloody right they were.

Yeah, they beat Barcelona over two legs and then downed Bayern in their own stadium. It's not like they won it by tossing a coin.

Reading fans don't seem to be happy with winning games or titles, it appears you have to do it by dominating every game you play and chalking up a hatful of goals in the porcess. Newsflash - no team does that.

Think back over the last ten or so years and how many times we've lost at home to a team that goes on to get promoted despite us "deserving" a point or even three. It happens all the time - getting put under pressure away from home, defending hard, and still walking away with all three points is what champions do.

I agree.

I personally disagreed...........zzzzz...zzzzz...

[creative_username_1]

There is definitely luck/randomness in football as there is in life. But i'm fcuked if i'm going to argue over a definition of a word

[Extended-Phenotype]

Yeah, that's what we are doing. Passionately defending the meaning of a word plucked out of the ether at f/cking random.

[creative_username_1]

Yeah, that's what we are doing. Passionately defending the meaning of a word plucked out of the ether at f/cking random.

CHillax EP....

[RoyalBlue]

People are confusing ‘luck’ with the ‘merit’.

People saw us win games we “didn’t deserve to win” according to some unfamiliar alternative winning criteria which differs to the one the competition is based on (goals) and try and define the other team having a bad day as luck, failing to appreciate that the ability a player or team shows on competition day is what a competition is trying to f/cking measure.

Sorry to disappoint, but football like most sports rewards those who play a particular way to maximise the possible return from the quality available. Playing other ways which result in less goals scored and more conceded may be all very deserving, but according to the rules will win you at best a runner-up position.

The team you put together, how you play on the day, what tactics you choose – I doubt anyone is rolling a dice to decide any of that. So slate McD’s style all you like, and even claim other teams were more deserving of the title than us because you felt they played the sport more to your liking, but f/ck off with this luck crap. We won the league through ability, not fate.

We won the league through determination, passion and fight. Ability was not a (significant) positive discriminator in our favour. Events of last season would appear to support that.

[Extended-Phenotype]

Yeah, that's what we are doing. Passionately defending the meaning of a word plucked out of the ether at f/cking random.

CHillax EP....

chil·lax
/cheeˈlaks/
Verb

1. To rest or engage in an enjoyable activity so as to become unaware of who your wife is fucking behind your back.

[Extended-Phenotype]

People are confusing ‘luck’ with the ‘merit’.

People saw us win games we “didn’t deserve to win” according to some unfamiliar alternative winning criteria which differs to the one the competition is based on (goals) and try and define the other team having a bad day as luck, failing to appreciate that the ability a player or team shows on competition day is what a competition is trying to f/cking measure.

Sorry to disappoint, but football like most sports rewards those who play a particular way to maximise the possible return from the quality available. Playing other ways which result in less goals scored and more conceded may be all very deserving, but according to the rules will win you at best a runner-up position.

The team you put together, how you play on the day, what tactics you choose – I doubt anyone is rolling a dice to decide any of that. So slate McD’s style all you like, and even claim other teams were more deserving of the title than us because you felt they played the sport more to your liking, but f/ck off with this luck crap. We won the league through ability, not fate.

We won the league through determination, passion and fight. Ability was not a (significant) positive discriminator in our favour. Events of last season would appear to support that.

O 4 FS.

The manager's ability to form a League Title winning side.
The manager's ability to craft a style which maximised return for the quality on offer.
The players ability to carry out the managers tactics.
The players ability to score more goals and concede less goals than the opposition, more times than anyone else in the competition.

Is this really what we are going to do all summer? Piss on someone's face because a word can mean something slightly different if you say it through a mouth shaped like a f/cking arse?

[creative_username_1]

Yeah, that's what we are doing. Passionately defending the meaning of a word plucked out of the ether at f/cking random.

CHillax EP....

chil·lax
/cheeˈlaks/
Verb

1. To rest or engage in an enjoyable activity so as to become unaware of who your wife is fucking behind your back.

trying too hard again brother

EDIT: just seen you've posted and picked up the typo. Congratz EP