Harte Signs

[Snowball]

One game too many yesterday? Time for a long overdue rest.

No jokes, please, but for part of the game yesterday he looked to be running awkwardly as if maybe he had had a dead leg or a slight pull

[cmonurz]

Harte is also more deadly 2 goals in 7 shots (28.6%) compared with 15 in 136 shots for Gylfi (11.03%) (excluding pens)

Shame he is so slow, so laboured defensively and just as likely to cost us as many goals as he makes at the other end.

So how many of yesterday's were down to him?

The ball central that hit the bar was straight down the centre and HRK and Howard screwed up

First goal was opposite wing, Karacan and Griffin skinned after Howard let the pass go out to Taarabt, and then it's Howards bad tackle.

The other goal was again to the left, well away from Harte's wing, failure by Mills (nowhere) and presumably Griffin.

Other goal Harte is done with a pass, fair enough.

Well if 2 out of 7 is considered a relevant stat (Harte's "deadliness"), then Harte being at fault for 2 of the last 6 we have conceded is also relevant.

[Snowball]

Well if 2 out of 7 is considered a relevant stat (Harte's "deadliness"), then Harte being at fault for 2 of the last 6 we have conceded is also relevant.

The 2 out of 7 (3 out of 8 ) covers ALL Harte's appearances for Reading.

You are now selecting his worst patch. Isn't selecting all 11 games fairer?

Sure, the defence (as a whole) has had 2 bad games, and Harte has played less well
but is it fair to ignore those games when the defence was very good indeed?

The team's form over the last 11 games (since Harte became ever-present) is 18-12,
almost exactly a goal a game (previously just 6 in 9 games)


And we are still the sixth best defence in the league!!

1 15 06 Queens Park Rangers TOP of the LEAGUE
2 15 12 Swansea City 3rd in the table
3 15 13 Cardiff City 2nd in the table
4 15 15 Nottingham Forest
5 15 16 Ipswich Town SIXTH
6 15 17 Reading
6 15 17 Derby County FOURTH

[cmonurz]

No, if 2 out of 7 is suitable for one stat, then 2 out of 6 is suitable for another, you can't pick and choose.

[Snowball]

No, if 2 out of 7 is suitable for one stat, then 2 out of 6 is suitable for another, you can't pick and choose.

The 2 out of 7 (take your blinkers off) is NOT games, it's 2 GOALS from 7 SHOTS (excluding pens) across ALL Harte's games for Reading.

You are so anxious to take a poke you've stopped thinking.




You can say, "Oops, I missed that," if you want.

[cmonurz]

Yes, I did miss that, but my point absolutely stands. If 2 out of 7 (whatever, goals, games, grapes) is a relevant stat, then as its basically the same, so is 2 out of 6. You're just applying the 'Snowball standard' and claiming certain stats are and aren't relevant depending on your point.

[Snowball]

Yes, I did miss that, but my point absolutely stands. If 2 out of 7 (whatever, goals, games, grapes) is a relevant stat, then as its basically the same, so is 2 out of 6. You're just applying the 'Snowball standard' and claiming certain stats are and aren't relevant depending on your point.

Tell you what. Here's a totally fair deal.

When talking about Harte we talk about ALL his games for Reading.

How can you object to that? He's played just ELEVEN.

Why would you want to select a smaller portion of 11 unless you were deliberately trying to skew the figures?

I am talking about ALL Hartes' games, EVERY one, no omissions, no exceptions
and I am talking about ALL his shots and whether they went in or not. That's
not selective in any way shape or form, is it?

This time, you simply got it wrong. Admit it and move on.

[cmonurz]

No. You used a stat that said 2 in 7. I pointed out that you can't then discount a stat of 2 in 6 as not a big enough sample. Simple as that.

[Snowball]

No. You used a stat that said 2 in 7. I pointed out that you can't then discount a stat of 2 in 6 as not a big enough sample. Simple as that.

You are truly, unmeasurably STUPID, a total MORON.

You really, really don't get this? Are you drunk?


I am using all Harte's games. 11 games, all of his games, 100% of his games, and every single one of the shots as recorded on the OS.

There are goals scored in those games (all the games) from shots in those games (all the games). There is NO SELECTION at all, no sub-set, no games removed or dropped or omitted or covered up.


You are NOT using all Harte's games.
You are selecting the last six when you consider Harte has made mistakes and ignoring the five previous games when he did not.I might as well choose the six games where we let in 3 goals and none were Harte's fault.

But I'm not, I'm using them all, and if you don't see that you're extremely thick.

If you DO see that you're a charlattan. END.



Perhaps we should use your method (last six games) and show that while Harte has been underperforming (last six games) Long has scored two goals (50% from open play) plus got an opposing player sent off, plus won a free-kick from which we scored, plus got the assist for Antonio's goal.

That'll do me.

Or how about "The last 3 games", two goals from Long, a goal every 1.5 games, plus an assist.

[cmonurz]

No. You used a stat that said 2 in 7. I pointed out that you can't then discount a stat of 2 in 6 as not a big enough sample. Simple as that.

You are truly, unmeasurably STUPID, a total MORON.

Quoted for future reference when you bleat about supposed slights at you and your character.

Once again, you aren't addressing my point. Irrespective of what the stats themselves mean, if you deem 2 in 7 to mean something in one respect, you can't immediately dismiss 2 in 6 as being irrelevant in another. Either 6/7 is a relevant sample or it isn't. Simple.

[Snowball]

No. You used a stat that said 2 in 7. I pointed out that you can't then discount a stat of 2 in 6 as not a big enough sample. Simple as that.

You are truly, unmeasurably STUPID, a total MORON.

Quoted for future reference when you bleat about supposed slights at you and your character.

Once again, you aren't addressing my point. Irrespective of what the stats themselves mean, if you deem 2 in 7 to mean something in one respect, you can't immediately dismiss 2 in 6 as being irrelevant in another. Either 6/7 is a relevant sample or it isn't. Simple.

No it isn't simple. But I think you may be.

[cmonurz]

If I'm immeasurably stupid and a moron (as well as a twat for whom you have no respect, that was last week) then I think being 'simple' is the least of my worries.

You've done well tonight, I've made two points on separate threads, and in about 10 attempts in total, you haven't addressed either.

[Wycombe Royal]

Comparing the "deadliness" of a player who is a left back and basically only takes shots from free kicks (in other words a free shot) to a player who took the majority of his shots on the run and under pressure is quite frankly idiotic and totally irrelevant.

[Ian Royal]

If I'm immeasurably stupid and a moron (as well as a twat for whom you have no respect, that was last week) then I think being 'simple' is the least of my worries.

You've done well tonight, I've made two points on separate threads, and in about 10 attempts in total, you haven't addressed either.

I can't help but feel that snowball is running towards a fully justified banning. You constantly make reasonable point and IMO the tone of the majority of your posts addressed to him are perfectly polite in tone and content, at least you always seem to start out that way.

And yet all you get in response are insults and patronising nicknames whilst your questions go unanswered.

snowball, you really need to moderate your attitude and start acting like an adult, not a spoilt little teenager.

[BR2]

Comparing the "deadliness" of a player who is a left back and basically only takes shots from free kicks (in other words a free shot) to a player who took the majority of his shots on the run and under pressure is quite frankly idiotic and totally irrelevant.

Agreed WR.
Also so little has been said on this thread about him as a left-back and from what I have seen with my own eyes he is as bad a defender as I always thought he was and it seems as though a number of clubs have sussed him in that area once the clouding effect of scoring from set-pieces is eventually seen through.

The trouble is Brian signed him and although he quickly ditched Williams as a poor signing I have this feeling that he doesn't want to ditch another poor left-back signing within 3 months of the start of this season when the chairman has been concerned with cloth-cutting and might start to wonder why we have so many left-backs but no creative midfielder nor a target striker.

[Snowball]

Comparing the "deadliness" of a player who is a left back and basically only takes shots from free kicks (in other words a free shot) to a player who took the majority of his shots on the run and under pressure is quite frankly idiotic and totally irrelevant.

Is comparing the deadliness of two players when we ONLY CONSIDER their free-kicks and pens, also unfair?

[Snowball]

Comparing the "deadliness" of a player who is a left back and basically only takes shots from free kicks (in other words a free shot) to a player who took the majority of his shots on the run and under pressure is quite frankly idiotic and totally irrelevant.

Agreed WR.
Also so little has been said on this thread about him as a left-back and from what I have seen with my own eyes he is as bad a defender as I always thought he was and it seems as though a number of clubs have sussed him in that area once the clouding effect of scoring from set-pieces is eventually seen through.

The trouble is Brian signed him and although he quickly ditched Williams as a poor signing I have this feeling that he doesn't want to ditch another poor left-back signing within 3 months of the start of this season when the chairman has been concerned with cloth-cutting and might start to wonder why we have so many left-backs but no creative midfielder nor a target striker.

You REALLY believe a manager of McDermott's ability is keeping Armstrong out merely to make himself look better?

What are you people on?

How about McDermott looks at everything, watches training, assesses where we've leaked goals etc
and decides in his best professional wisdom, that Player A is a better bet than player B.

That's what we pay him for, after all.

[Wycombe Royal]

Comparing the "deadliness" of a player who is a left back and basically only takes shots from free kicks (in other words a free shot) to a player who took the majority of his shots on the run and under pressure is quite frankly idiotic and totally irrelevant.

Is comparing the deadliness of two players when we ONLY CONSIDER their free-kicks and pens, also unfair?

But it shows nothing except that one player has had more success from the occasional dead ball than the other. What about the other 89 minutes of the match?

For the umpteenth time - the stats cannot show you everyhing. Most of it comes from using your own eyes and forming your own opinions, but with you it appears that if you can't qunatify it then you can't form an opinion on it.

[Snowball]

But it shows nothing except that one player has had more success from the occasional dead ball than the other. What about the other 89 minutes of the match?

For the umpteenth time - the stats cannot show you everyhing. Most of it comes from using your own eyes and forming your own opinions, but with you it appears that if you can't qunatify it then you can't form an opinion on it.

Hold ON!

This debate and others started because people were saying we were DOOMED! DOOMED I TELL YER! because Gylfi left.

The point was made that Harte is AT LEAST as good at Gylfi at free-kicks and penalties. If that is so, and his deadliness
statistics are pretty damn amazing, so it is true, then, that as long as Harte plays WE HAVE REPLACED GYLFI'S FREE-KICKS AND PENS.

Nobody on this list or on the f-cking PLANET is arguing that Harte is (at 33) as good a player as Gylfi. Hell, he's not as good as Bertrand, either
but he IS keeping out more goals than Williams, and he IS scoring goals. 5 in 16 games so far this year. His rate of goals per free-kick is MUCH
better than Gylfi's was. Gylfi missed a LOT. Harte doesn't miss that many.

You ask, "what about the other 89 minutes on the pitch?" But that is a totally dumb question,
the two positions are not even slightly comparable, one is a deep striker or attacking midfielder, the other is a defender.

You might as well say Federici doesn't score enough goals.

[Wycombe Royal]

I caught a big one with that...