Shane Long

[Woodcote Royal]

Stats are very useful, but you need more than just stats to show anything
And I'm sorry, but yours are dredging the bottom of the barrell.

Have to disagree....................Snowball's "stats" are a breath of fresh air compared to the "opinions" of Lita's fan club, that have littered this board since he recently burst off the bench to score his 2nd league goal for us in nearly 2 years

[juanpablo]

give Shane a start vs Wolves imo

[rg6royal]

give Shane a start vs Wolves imo

[Snowball]

Another Stat for You.

Our Relegation Season




07 Starts (20 Sub) Average 20 minutes a game - Total Minutes Played 0764 3 Goals 1 goal every 255 minutes (1 every 2.8 games) LONG
35 Starts (01 Sub) Average 79 minutes a game - Total Minutes Played 3017 6 Goals 1 goal every 503 minutes (1 every 5.6 games) DOYLE
09 Starts (04 Sub) Average 24 minutes a game - Total Minutes Played 0893 1 Goals 1 goal every 893 minutes (1 every 9.9 games) LITA

So in a full Premiership Season (the most recent full season) despite only starting 7 times

Long was TWICE as prolific as Doyle

Long was 3.5 times as prolific as Lita

[Schards#2]

So if you're going to base the team purely on goals per minutes playing outfield for the first team, wouldn't the forward line be Federici and Henry?

Hunt>>Lita>>Cox>>Henry>>Long

Cox and Henry has both proved their worth elsewhere in professional football, surprisingly, no one seems to have wanted to have Long on loan, or permanantly as far as we know.

[Platypuss]

But seriously how does anyone break into a forward line like Doyle-Hunt?

By being better on the pitch? He had the opportunity.

Long started in preference to Hunt against Palace and Ipswich. From the following Shef weds game onwards NHunt was first choice of the two. Why was that?

Anyway, if Coppell thought Long was as good as you do, why did he buy Noel Hunt in the first place?

Choosing to ignore this one, too?

How about fewer stats, more answers?

[Yellowcoat]

What clinches it for me is not the stats from Snowball but that Schards & RL are saying Lita is better. Now I know for certain that Long is the superior player.

[Schards#2]

What clinches it for me is not the stats from Snowball but that Schards & RL are saying Lita is better. Now I know for certain that Long is the superior player.

It's not like you to have nothing worthwhile to contribute is it?

[juanpablo]

What clinches it for me is not the stats from Snowball but that Schards & RL are saying Lita is better. Now I know for certain that Long is the superior player.

Lita is far superior

and this is from schards betting nemesis

[hughsies no.1]

this thread is a joke. how is it even possible to try and defend LOLong. he has been given various chances. he hasnt taken them. we move on. stats mean nothing. if your team has 98% possesion in a game and 50 shots and the opposition has one and scores then they get the points. i bet a few LOLong lovers are harper haters too! shock!!!

[Snowball]

So if you're going to base the team purely on goals per minutes playing outfield for the first team, wouldn't the forward line be Federici and Henry?

Henry hasn't scored in the league. I'm only interested in the league and have only been talking about the league

Hunt>>Lita>>Cox>>Henry>>Long

That is plain dumb. Lita has scored just twice for Reading in TWO SEASONS, both meaningless goals in the 90th minute when we were already winning 3-0

Henry hasn't scored in the league!

Hunt, not there for his scoring, has got 10 goals but that's in 65 starts ( 1 goal every 6.5 starts)
Long, by comparison has got 6 goals in 10 starts, 1 goal every 1.67

2007-8 Premiership

Hunt scored 4 last year from 37 starts (00 sub) He started 5.3 times more than Long, for 1.33 times his goals
Long scored 3 last year from 07 starts (00 sub)
Lita scored 1 last year from 10 starts (04 sub) He started 1.4 times more than Long for one third of his goals.
Lita scored 4 last year from 18 starts (04 sub) He started 2.6 times more than Long for 1.33 times his goals (INCLUDING CHARLTON LOAN)

Lita, despite playing 20% more minutes than Long, scored 1 goal in the 90th minute of the last game. Wow!

Even including Charlton he was only half as prolific as Long. FACT

2008-9 Championship

Hunt has scored 6 this year Starting 28 Games (00 Sub) Ratio starts/goals 4.67 Hunt starting 9.33 times more than Long for twice the goals)
Long has scored 3 this year Starting 03 Games (20 sub) Ratio starts/goals 1.00
Lita has scored 1 this year Starting 03 Games (02 sub) Ratio starts/goals 3.00 Lita starting equal to Long for a third of Long's goals
Lita has scored 8 this year Starting 19 Games (02 sub) Ratio starts/goals 2.38 Lita starting 6.33 times more than Long for x 2.67 more goals (incl Norwich)

Henry has scored 0 this year Starting 03 Games (04 sub)

Cox and Henry has both proved their worth elsewhere in professional football, surprisingly, no one seems to have wanted to have Long on loan, or permanently as far as we know.

First YOU DON'T KNOW.
Second While Lita was away Long was vital to us

This season Long is getting more time, coming on between 60 and 70, usually for Noel Hunt.

So I see him as important to SC. He won us the game against Norwich (0-0 at 82 minutes, he wins a penalty and scores a goal) PRICELESS.

He got a priceless point at Saints, too, and we almost won it after he got his brave goal.

With the current strike force, Lita surely going, Long is very important, with Mooney the fourth striker in the short term.

SC will be looking for a ready-made Premiership striker is my guess, (not sure we can afford it) then Long-Mooney might drop to 4th-5th


My whole point in all of this is that for minutes played Long is a top, prolific striker.

He is the best impact sub we have and has won games coming on late, has snatched last-ditch equalisers

He is under-rated because he has so many "appearances" but about 75% of those are at the rag-end of matches
often matches where the result is already set.

Lita has loads of class but a bad attitude and no loyalty. He has been in steady decline 11-7-1-1 for Reading over the last 4 seasons

[hughsies no.1]

ive worked it out.

snowball is shane long

[heathrow royal]

give Shane a start vs Wolves imo

You are having a laugh arn't you??????

[John Madejski's Wallet]

By being better on the pitch? He had the opportunity.

Long started in preference to Hunt against Palace and Ipswich. From the following Shef weds game onwards NHunt was first choice of the two. Why was that?

Anyway, if Coppell thought Long was as good as you do, why did he buy Noel Hunt in the first place?

Choosing to ignore this one, too?

How about fewer stats, more answers?

Snowball is happily showing-up people's ingrained opinions in here, so repeating this question is a bit desperate.

I wouldnt start Long at all, but these stats are not 'dredging the bottom' as IR said, but instead are proving people wrong. I think the 'he only scores from headers from set pieces' is a perfect example

[Stranded]

I agree the stats are interesting but even the goals per minute do not show the full picture.

A lot of Long's goals have been in minutes where he is coming on fresh to play against tiring defences this would have an impact on those figures.

[Huntley & Palmer]

Hang on a minute, are people arguing that a striker is worth keeping just to be used as a substitute

[Rex]

I agree the stats are interesting but even the goals per minute do not show the full picture.

A lot of Long's goals have been in minutes where he is coming on fresh to play against tiring defences this would have an impact on those figures.

Agreed.

[FORSTERS_RIGHT_FOOT]

give Shane a start vs Wolves imo

No. Just, No.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

I agree the stats are interesting but even the goals per minute do not show the full picture.

A lot of Long's goals have been in minutes where he is coming on fresh to play against tiring defences this would have an impact on those figures.

Agreed.

'greed again.

Even with snowball's great stats, I don't rate Long as a starter. But coming off the bench I think he can do more damage and change the game far more than Lita could hope of doing

[Snowball]

Long started in preference to Hunt against Palace and Ipswich.


That's one way to put it. Not necessarily true though.
It's common practice to "blood" new players as 20-30 minute subs
So SC might have bought Noel as second-striker



From the following Shef weds game onwards NHunt was first choice of the two. Why was that?

Because Noel Hunt is a very, very good striker and works perfectly with Doyle.



Anyway, if Coppell thought Long was as good as you do, why did he buy Noel Hunt in the first place?

Because, the manager has always said he wants four strikers competing for the two places,
because Lita was (rightly) out of favour and Mooney was a work-in-progress.