Take away the pens and free kicks....

[Snowball]

We're missing Gylfi's link up play and threat in and around the box in open play, but Harte has admirably replaced his set piece delivery.

Oh, I SEEeeeee....


Why are we scoring more goals then?

With Gylfi, I think we'd be doing just as well right now, probably better. Although without Khiz and to a much lesser extent Harte (thanks to Cummings and Armstrong) we would be weaker at the back.

We would be doing better with Gylfi, that's a given and already said so in this thread.

But isn't it interesting how the "He will never be a footballer" Cummings, RB, (7 whole games, 1 at LB, 6 at RB!) is an answer,
or Armstrong, 5 games in midfield, then injured, but yet LB is "covered"


Gylfi slotting in would obviously help the team, but as already stated, we had to lose Gylfi to sort the balance of the side

[SLAMMED]

Hi snowball

[Wimb]

Harte has scored 2 very good free kicks for us and the 1 penalty he was asked to take was taken very well, so he's (definitely) been a good asset. I'd still question some of the corners though, they don't have the potency that some previous corner kick takers have had but we've still scored a goal or 2 from them so it's not that bad.

I think to have scored three and been a major part of at least three more (6 out of 17) is very good, really,
and the defence is a lot more sound over the last 10 games, even when you include the twice we let in 3)
With those we are better by about 12 goals less-conceded per season. A big improvement.

His corners and free-kicks into the danger area are getting better as he settles. There was a purler on Saturday they should have done better with.

If you're asking me if the Sig would improve this team then it's not really a debate as only Tabb away at Burnley has come close to making the impact in 'the hole' that Gylfi has. That being said his sale let us add Kizi and Harte and allow room in the budget for a striker come January so overall I think it'll closer to being even depending on who we bring in.

Of COURSE Gylfi would improve this team. If we had this back four/five and Gylfi in the hole we'd for sure be top-three, probably the automatic places

---------Federici
Griffin-Mills-Zurab-Harte
Kebe-Tabb-Karacan-McAnuff
-------------Gylfi
--------Long


would be AWESOME, of course it would be, and maybe there'd be room for Armstrong for Harte if he really is long-term fit.

That to me is a helluva side with more to it than QPR who rely a bit too much on Taarabt. Might not top Cardiff, though.


But we'd never have got that side, because of the money situation

Nice to see we agree for once Snowball

[floyd__streete]

Is there any data to hand on how many goals LOLong has scored this season if we take away penalties?

[Snowball]

Is there any data to hand on how many goals LOLong has scored this season if we take away penalties?

YES

[Snowball]

Wimb, I have not argued, even for a second, anywhere, that Gylfi isn't a fantastic talent.

But I'd lose Gylfi, McAnuff and Kebe to get a back five that could keep 46 clean sheets a season.

We had a luxury player, fantastic, yes, but we needed a defence and a better shape more than we needed HIM

[Snowball]

Ian Harte won't get in the team ahead of Zurab and Mills though, and he isn't a left back any more!

Is Harte "even better" at free kicks than Gylfi? Hard to say- we don't know how many of his goals were headers (he estimates 9 or 10), and if he simply had more penalties then the amount he scored is pretty irrelevant. Besides, Gylfi's penalty contribution was a very small part of his game, he split duties at least four ways last season with Long, Howard and Church.

Oh dear. Available for Reading for ten games, started ten games at left-back.

Does that mean you were wrong, SCIAG?

[Wycombe Royal]

Ian Harte won't get in the team ahead of Zurab and Mills though, and he isn't a left back any more!

Is Harte "even better" at free kicks than Gylfi? Hard to say- we don't know how many of his goals were headers (he estimates 9 or 10), and if he simply had more penalties then the amount he scored is pretty irrelevant. Besides, Gylfi's penalty contribution was a very small part of his game, he split duties at least four ways last season with Long, Howard and Church.

Oh dear. Available for Reading for ten games, started ten games at left-back.

Does that mean you were wrong, SCIAG?

And you wonder why so many dislike you.....

[Snowball]

Ian Harte won't get in the team ahead of Zurab and Mills though, and he isn't a left back any more!

Is Harte "even better" at free kicks than Gylfi? Hard to say- we don't know how many of his goals were headers (he estimates 9 or 10), and if he simply had more penalties then the amount he scored is pretty irrelevant. Besides, Gylfi's penalty contribution was a very small part of his game, he split duties at least four ways last season with Long, Howard and Church.

Oh dear. Available for Reading for ten games, started ten games at left-back.

Does that mean you were wrong, SCIAG?

And you wonder why so many dislike you.....

Thank God you still love me, eh?

And exactly why should it not be pointed out when someone is 100% wrong after such a clear statement.

And what about the INCORRECT statement that he split the penalty duties "at least" four ways with all the others? Gylfi took EIGHT penalties in the season. How many does he think we GOT, 32?

and the penalties were a mere 35% of his goals...

[Ian Royal]

It's probably best if people in glass houses don't throw stones. So those who refuse to ever admit being wrong, don't then haul up old posts and laugh at those who were.

[Snowball]

It's probably best if people in glass houses don't throw stones. So those who refuse to ever admit being wrong, don't then haul up old posts and laugh at those who were.

Thanks, Dad.

Win some lose some.


As for wrong-right, I mainly bring up people downing on the club or a player.

I happen to think optimism, supporting my club, and backing the players is a GOOD thing.

Silly ol' me.