Long - Time to go.

[Big Foot]

snowball seems to be genuinely heading towards some sort of mental collapse at the moment.

Did you hear that on the radio, Ian?

I'm really a happy, contented bunny right now. Watched a flesh and blood game in the outdoors yesterday (with real people kicking an actual ball)
came home to a nice meal with some nice wine, fell asleep on the sofa, woke up to Shane lacing home that penalty.

Went to be and slept well, nice bacon butty for brekkie, do a couple of hours A-Level maths with my daughter,
wrote a few words for the writing school I run, doodle here for a bit, then get ready to watch Arsenal on the box.


My friend Leonardo is coming round later to show me his new pink time-machine.

I've got a very strong feeling that I know who you are

[Snowball]

My friend Leonardo is coming round later to show me his new pink time-machine.

I've got a very strong feeling that I know who you are [/quote]

Do tell BF.

[Big Foot]

My friend Leonardo is coming round later to show me his new pink time-machine.

I've got a very strong feeling that I know who you are

Do tell BF.[/quote]
Ask your Private Detective

There could be some fun in this

[Snowball]

LOL @ extrapolating Long's goals in the Premier League to compare them to Doyle by just multiplying them by 6!!

Especially where there's a fairly strong chance Long won't manage even half the Premier League time on the pitch in his entire career, that Doyle has already.

No, Ian, that was for thickos like you who don't understand that strikers
playing 6 times as many games should be getting six times as many goals.

I's called "equivalence". Now go and hug your tree.

[Snowball]

My friend Leonardo is coming round later to show me his new pink time-machine.

I've got a very strong feeling that I know who you are

Do tell BF.

Ask your Private Detective

There could be some fun in this[/quote]

£10 to a charity of your choice if you can say who I am correctly
either my Birth Certificate name or the name I am known by.

A clue: it is not Napoleon or Aristotle

[Big Foot]

I'll donate the £10 myself and keep this one under my hat old boy

[Snowball]

I'll donate the £10 myself and keep this one under my hat old boy

Nah, I think you have it wrong.

[Big Foot]

That's very much your prerogative - now back on topic, Long is shit.

[Snowball]

That's very much your prerogative - now back on topic, Long is shit.

Nah, I think you have it wrong.

[Snowball]

PS I know you have it wrong cos U haven't asked for my autograph

[Big Foot]

PS I know you have it wrong cos U haven't asked for my autograph

And why would I do that?

[cmonurz]

No, Ian, that was for thickos like you who don't understand that strikers
playing 6 times as many games should be getting six times as many goals.

I's called "equivalence". Now go and hug your tree.

Another insult. Why are you so rude?

As for the extrapolation - yes, it's a simple mathematical illustration, but it misleadingly suggests that Long would necessarily maintain that level of performance over six times as many games, because of the way you have presented it. By definition, it is harder to score at that rate over 9,000 minutes of football than it is over 1,600.

[Snowball]

Another insult. Why are you so rude?

Cos I izz being called an irritating stat-obsessed mong by the same "gentleman"?

As for the extrapolation - yes, it's a simple mathematical illustration, but it misleadingly suggests that Long would necessarily maintain that level of performance over six times as many games, because of the way you have presented it. By definition, it is harder to score at that rate over 9,000 minutes of football than it is over 1,600.

Absolute BOLLOCKS!

I posted the actual figures (where people need to do mental work)
and offered the x 6 merely as an illustration. You're paranoid.

As for "the future" and whether it's harder to score at Rate X over 9000 minutes than 1600 YOU ARE WRONG

Strikers, when they find their groove, repeat it year on year unless they get serious injuries, and Long is an example of a player slowly getting to the point where he plays more minutes and gets more goals. He has yet to play a full season. (And by that I don't mean 46 x 90 minute games but the ilk of 41 (5) something like that plus maybe 5 (1) in the cups

His heaviest season is only half a season 24 (12) 2,246 minutes out of a possible 4800 = 46.79%... but he got 9 goals

and his growth is obvious

03
04
03
09
09
11-12 (projected)

So, contrary to your unfounded assertion, Sg=hane Long is not only maintaining a gal-scoring record but he is improving on it year by year. Though nobody knows the future, I will be shocked if this is not his highest-ever season for goals and next season will be higher again. Will you take a real-money bet on that? As he is so utter shit, will you give me odds?

I bet a MINIMUM of ten goals this season and a MINIMUM of 11 goals next. I think it'll be more.

[cmonurz]

You are stating that I am wrong that it is harder to score at a certain rate over 9,000 minutes than it is to do the same over 1,600 minutes?

Then your last shred of credibility just evaporated.

After pages and pages of stats you now want to bring your qualitative judgements into the argument. For every striker who does improve year on year, there is a striker whose form takes a dive and who disappears from the first team/moves down a league/disappears altogether. Who'd have known when he was scoring at Leeds that Alan Smith would barely score another goal in his career once he left the club?

The fact is, for example, it is harder to score at a goal every x games for two years, than it is to do it for one. That's undeniable.

And to be clear, I made no assertion about Long's year on year performance, just commented on the incorrect stats you initially provided.

[Snowball]

You are stating that I am wrong that it is harder to score at a certain rate over 9,000 minutes than it is to do the same over 1,600 minutes?

Then your last shred of credibility just evaporated.

Thank-you dear.

After pages and pages of stats you now want to bring your qualitative judgements into the argument. For every striker who does improve year on year, there is a striker whose form takes a dive and who disappears from the first team/moves down a league/disappears altogether. Who'd have known when he was scoring at Leeds that Alan Smith would barely score another goal in his career once he left the club?

It isn't a qualitative argument, mee luv. It's experience following football for at least 50 years and seeing "our strikers", basically the same guys knocking them in steadily season after season after season. In Doyle's case we are talking 5.3 seasons (although he hasn't scored yet in the .3)

I consider Shane to have had 2 seasons and this is his .3

How often do RFC have a one-season striker (other than an emergency buy) Kitson was here for 04/05/06/07/08, Doyle for 05/06/07/08/09 with one quieter season (still 6 prem goals)... How about Forster?

What about all those guys who score 100 goals or 150 goals, that takes a fair few seasons

The fact is, for example, it is harder to score at a goal every x games for two years, than it is to do it for one. That's undeniable.

I deny it.

It's a mere assertion with zero evidence, let alone proof.

If you are right we should look at the top 10-20-30 strikers in the championship and see most of them failing to repeat their feat, correct?

[cmonurz]

There's so many holes in your argument I don't know where to start, but suffice to say, if you can't even concede it's harder to score 20 goals in 2 years than it is to score 10 goals in 1 year, then there's really no point me even starting.

[Snowball]

There's so many holes in your argument I don't know where to start, but suffice to say, if you can't even concede it's harder to score 20 goals in 2 years than it is to score 10 goals in 1 year, then there's really no point me even starting.

Yes, but there is no reason per se to suggest that a striker breaking thru and getting ten
cannot repeat it for many seasons. Many do.

It may be "harder" but they get better and more experienced.

Are you saying that "a few" or "many" strikers, after getting a good season, fail to replicate it?

I am saying that many strikers break thru, have a good season and continue to have good seasons, with the natural ups and downs.

I am also saying that Shane will score 10+ this year and 11+ this year. Do you think that's tosh?

[Wimb]

There's so many holes in your argument I don't know where to start, but suffice to say, if you can't even concede it's harder to score 20 goals in 2 years than it is to score 10 goals in 1 year, then there's really no point me even starting.

Yes, but there is no reason per se to suggest that a striker breaking thru and getting ten
cannot repeat it for many seasons. Many do.

It may be "harder" but they get better and more experienced.

Are you saying that "a few" or "many" strikers, after getting a good season, fail to replicate it?

I am saying that many strikers break thru, have a good season and continue to have good seasons, with the natural ups and downs.

I am also saying that Shane will score 10+ this year and 11+ this year. Do you think that's tosh?

URZ is right and the fact was if Long was going to score those goals in the Premier League days then he would have A) been picked when we couldn't score for toffee and B) would no longer be at this club as his ability to score goals in the top flight would have been spotted and he would have been bought up by at least a WBA, Blackpool etc.

You are correct Snowball in that Long is coming on as a player and has improved significantly since his debut in 2005, but the evidence isn't currently there to suggest he's going to do it over a full season.

I know you'll rant off about this but I'll say it anyway. Take off the penalties and AT THE MOMENT Long is on track for about 3 league goals from open play, if he moved to a club with an entrenched penalty taker then the stats would project him to only score 3 over a season. However as noted he is a Reading player and does take (and credit given, win) penalties so I'm not ignoring that fact.

The problem is right now that neither you nor URZ can be proved right or wrong, just make guesses, something I believe URZ has conceded/admitted far more then yourself.

You could take Long's purple patch last year and if he was confirmed as penalty taker, you'd be accurate in saying 'Long's on track for 30 goals a year' but if you look at March onwards you'd look on paper and say 'Long's probably a 10-12 goal a season striker if he's kept on penalty duty.

But Snowball is right in saying that until Long's had that full season, or arguably 2-3 of starting 35-40 games then it's impossible to know how he's going to pan out. Right now Since he's been a week in week out starter he's looking more like a 8-9 (open play) goal a season man but that could change in a hurry and it only takes a little flurry of goals to make him look like a 10-15 goal man.

As for the comparison with Kitson/Doyle then it's pointless as they are just different players, from different teams and of different ability levels. I'd guess off the top of my head that Long's ratio is about the same as Martin Williams was in 98/99 - 99/00 and Skittles never made it.

[Wimb]

Just to expand on the Williams comparison.

Martin Williams - (not broken down into starts/subs but in his RFC career around 1/4 were sub appearances)

Season 96/97 32 games 3 goals
Season 97/98 37 games 8 goals
Season 98/99 30 games 11 goals
Season 99/00 39 games 6 goals

Totally different quality of player obviously but Williams was in a similar position to Long from what I remember in that we had few other quality options and was being asked to do a lot on his own up front. Despite promise and gradual increase in goals, his form petered out by 99/00 and he scored 11 goals in the rest of his career after leaving us.

Hoping this won't happen to Long but a warning of what can happen.

[Snowball]

Just to expand on the Williams comparison.

Martin Williams - (not broken down into starts/subs but in his RFC career around 1/4 were sub appearances)

Season 96/97 32 games 3 goals
Season 97/98 37 games 8 goals
Season 98/99 30 games 11 goals
Season 99/00 39 games 6 goals

Totally different quality of player obviously but Williams was in a similar position to Long from what I remember in that we had few other quality options and was being asked to do a lot on his own up front. Despite promise and gradual increase in goals, his form petered out by 99/00 and he scored 11 goals in the rest of his career after leaving us.

Hoping this won't happen to Long but a warning of what can happen.

Before my time, and I know nowt about the bloke. Could be any number of explanations, form, booze, family grief, injuries, anything.

But Long is still noticeably IMPROVING. His touch is MILES better, his ability in the 1 of 451 is getting better every game, he is now getting shots away and just a tad unlucky. Great goal at QPR against a top keeper, the lob v Cardiff could easily have dropped in, the first-time volley against Norwich was as good as it could be, not really anyone's "fault" it was straight at the keeper.. he dithered slightly for his other shot but did make sure, did get his shot away and made the keeper pull off a good save. And that's 3 goals in 5 games, one an absolute belter, at least two more shots on target, a great assist, a free-kick won that led to a goal, an opponent sent off. What more can we expect from a striker?