Long - Time to go.

[Terminal Boardom]

Brendy I tend to confine myself to a few hot topics. Currently defending Long (a very good player)
and Ian Harte a great player who is IMO very important to RFC.

You aren't defending them to me, as I have never said they should be dropped or sold. I am criticising your use of statistics and your inability to accept anyones elses viewpoint. And I will continue to criticise until either you moderate your style of posting or your opinions actually hold up.

I agree with you that Shane Long is a valuable player to this club. // I don't agree he has a good scoring record. // I don't like him in a 451 (I think you have reservations on that as well)

I think he needs a regular strike partner.// I have already complimented him by comparing his role to that of Emile Heskey.

And others have called him (pejoratively) (a poor man's Emile Heskey)

I'm defending Shane Long's abilities, NOT overestimating them. I object, and will always object to a player being unfairly criticised. Example, when did it suddenly become an issue that players were scoring lots of penalties? Did we say SHunt was crap because he scored loads of penalties? Long's penalty percentage is about the same as Doyle's (4/33 compared with Doyle's 5/55 or Kitson's 6/56)... No, it was brought up because IT WAS A WEAPON TO BASH LONG WITH. It ignores the fact that his last 22 goals were 19 from open play and 3 penalties or that Gylfi (the God) had 8 penalties (one missed) and 3 direct free kicks scored, that's 10 of 22 goals not open play, a much higher percentage than Long's 3/22.

But hell, no. Gylfi's figures were inflated because he took the pens and frees, but he's not being attacked.

I will type this slowly as you obviously have difficulty in understanding what people are saying.

Comparing Gylfi to Long is, quite simply, laughable.

Gylfi is a natural footballer with a natural talent. Long is NOT! What Long does is make up for his lack of natural ability with a very good work ethic. Playing up front on his own does not suit him. That is not his fault. It is an observation. He needs a CF of the calibre and quality of Jimmy Quinn or Kerry Dixon to bring the best out of him.

[Wycombe Royal]

The simple fact is that Walcott does not play a central striking role regularly.

From the Arsenal website:
http://www.arsenal.com/first-team/players/theo-walcott

He remains a winger for now but Arsène Wenger still sees a striker in him.

You're not an Arsenal fan, clearly, and clearly haven't watched Theo this year.

I know what the Arsenal site says (under STRIKER, not MIDFIELDER) but I know
where his future lies, where and how his goals are coming from now, and what most
Arsenal fans see him as.

So now his own club is wrong. It just gets better. he does not play as a central striker on a REGULAR basis and therefore cannot be compared to strikers who regalarly play through the centre. Chamakh is a central striker currently, Bendtner is a central striker currently, Walcott plays there sometimes. THat is the difference, but again you just cannot accept it, despite his clubs own official website saying it.

[Wycombe Royal]

So this is in the same way that Kebe and McAnuff are strikers? (which they aren't by the way). Or Malouda or countless other attacking wide midfielders.

Kebe is listed by the site as a MIDFIELDER.

McAnuff is listed by the site as a MIDFIELDER

Malouda is listed by the Chelsea site as a MIDFIELDER

Walcott is listed by the Arsenal site as a STRIKER


There's a clue here. Can U see it?

The Arsenal website says "He remains a winger for now ".

There's a clue here. Can U see it?

[Snowball]

And in my opinion you are over-estimating his abilities, especially his goal scoring and you won't find many on here who will disagree with me. As for the penalties, lots of players goalscoring records get criticised for including a lot of penalties at all clubs. But the reason why it is being targetted at Shane is becuase this season 75% of his goals are penalties in 16 matches for us. Here an now is what matters to many, not what has been done in the past or what will be done in the future, but now. And at the moment those are his stats. No manipulation. No selectiveness. No distorting. Just a simple, bare, fact.

But it IS selectiveness. It's ignoring the fact that he's only scored 4 pens in his career and 33 other goals in open play.

10.71 %
12.12 %
09.50 %



Three pen-percentages, I only know for sure about Long's. Kitson and Doyle may be higher because all I've done is browsed looking for their pens whereas for Long I've made sure I have them all. One more pen or a couple of non-pens and those percentages could easily change. Doyle is 6 in 63 now

[Gordons Cumming]

I think he needs a regular strike partner who's big, strong and holds up the ball.

.

Grant Holt?

[Snowball]

The Arsenal website says "He remains a winger for now ".

There's a clue here. Can U see it?

A bit of blurb, maybe written in the summer by a hack.

Measure that against what the manager has SINCE said, both in print and on TV
and measure it against ACTUAL games where he started in the middle with Nasri and Arshavin wide


Simple question. Other than highlights, have you seen Walcott play this season.

Did you see him at Newcastle, goals in the centre-forward position, straight down the middle, for example or versus Blackpool

By Richard Clarke

Theo Walcott plundered the first hat-trick of his Arsenal career as Blackpool were put to the sword at Emirates Stadium on Saturday.

The 21-year-old gave Arsène Wenger's side the lead with a cool finish after 12 minutes, scored on the turn just before the break and completed his treble with a precise cross-shot on the hour.

Before this game, Walcott had mustered 18 goals in 75 Arsenal starts and 62 appearances as a sub. He remained mainly a winger though, like his hero Thierry Henry, Wenger had always harboured hopes of making him a free-scoring central striker.

This afternoon certainly suggests the manager is on to something.


PS Note 18 goals in 75 (62) and this season 7 goals in 5 (4) Guess what changed? Where he plays.

[Snowball]

So now his own club is wrong. It just gets better. he does not play as a central striker on a REGULAR basis and therefore cannot be compared to strikers who regalarly play through the centre. Chamakh is a central striker currently, Bendtner is a central striker currently, Walcott plays there sometimes. THat is the difference, but again you just cannot accept it, despite his clubs own official website saying it.

No, the club isn't wrong. He arrived AS a central striker.

He has repeatedly said he is better as a central striker.

Up until this season he was played as a winger.

The manager has said for years that he's developing him to be a central striker.

THIS SEASON he's played as a striker, hence he is suddenly scoring goals.

When Arsenal play 451 then it's Chamakh or maybe Bendtner or van Persie in the 1 position. (That doesn't mean Theo is a winger) but they play him much more centrally now, and he is most definitely, formally, a striker, not a midfielder, whereas other wingers like Nasri are called midfielders.

[BR2]

So this is in the same way that Kebe and McAnuff are strikers? (which they aren't by the way). Or Malouda or countless other attacking wide midfielders.

Kebe is listed by the site as a MIDFIELDER.

McAnuff is listed by the site as a MIDFIELDER

Malouda is listed by the Chelsea site as a MIDFIELDER

Walcott is listed by the Arsenal site as a STRIKER


There's a clue here. Can U see it?

Different sites,different defenitions?
If Walcott is a striker then so is Kebe.
In my office there is just the one Southampton fan (surprisingly as we are only 15 miles away) and one Arsenal fan and there has been much discussion over the years about Walcott.
The feeling here now is that he is too small and too easily knocked of the ball to play as an orthodox through-the-middle striker and the goals that he scores are generally where he outpaces defenders (as in their last game and v Croatia? for England).
Despite what Wenger said originally he now only ever plays him as a right-winger which is where he will play for England tonight.

Interestingly when Long first came here he had the odd rare success by going out wide right and beating a man and for a while I thought he could make a winger but his passing is so poor I don't think he could ever play successfully in that role.

BTW Snowball do you go on the Arsenal website and defend Bendtner to the nth degree having earlier done the same for Cygan and Senderos?

[Snowball]

I will type this slowly as you obviously have difficulty in understanding what people are saying.

Comparing Gylfi to Long is, quite simply, laughable.

Gylfi is a natural footballer with a natural talent. Long is NOT! What Long does is make up for his lack of natural ability with a very good work ethic. Playing up front on his own does not suit him. That is not his fault. It is an observation. He needs a CF of the calibre and quality of Jimmy Quinn or Kerry Dixon to bring the best out of him.

I am TOTALLY aware of Gylfi's gifts and am not, in any way, shape or form, saying
Long is in the same class as Gylfi. HAVE YOU GOT THAT?

Nor have I EVER suggested he was. Not have I ever suggested he will be.


That is NOT the point. The point being made is what you "excuse" for one player and USE AGAINST another. If Long had taken those penalties instead of Gylfi (presuming he was on the pitch, of course) he would have had 16 goals (he rarely misses and Gylfi missed one) and Gylfi would have been on 13

Look


16 Goals Long
13 Goals Gylfi

20 Goals Gylfi
09 Goals Long

The difference in effect is GIGANTIC. But nobody moans and says Gylfi's worth was inflated because he took eight penalites and all our free-kicks, do they?

Gylfi is a hero because he scores 7 penalties and 3 free kicks. (Playing, BTW, 621 minutes more than Long) Long is attacked.

[Wycombe Royal]

The Arsenal website says "He remains a winger for now ".

There's a clue here. Can U see it?

A bit of blurb, maybe written in the summer by a hack..

And there is the usual discrediting comment, with no basis or foundation.

[Wycombe Royal]

And in my opinion you are over-estimating his abilities, especially his goal scoring and you won't find many on here who will disagree with me. As for the penalties, lots of players goalscoring records get criticised for including a lot of penalties at all clubs. But the reason why it is being targetted at Shane is becuase this season 75% of his goals are penalties in 16 matches for us. Here an now is what matters to many, not what has been done in the past or what will be done in the future, but now. And at the moment those are his stats. No manipulation. No selectiveness. No distorting. Just a simple, bare, fact.

But it IS selectiveness. It's ignoring the fact that he's only scored 4 pens in his career and 33 other goals in open play.

10.71 %
12.12 %
09.50 %



Three pen-percentages, I only know for sure about Long's. Kitson and Doyle may be higher because all I've done is browsed looking for their pens whereas for Long I've made sure I have them all. One more pen or a couple of non-pens and those percentages could easily change. Doyle is 6 in 63 now

As I said, fans don't care about the past or the future, it is now that matters and this season he has scored once from open play (25% of his goals).

In a 451 we NEED goals from him, hence why I have said he needs a regular striker partner. I have not said he should be dropped.

[brendywendy]

Ian- i honestly see way more insults directed at him than the other way.
when he does its usually in response to one from someone else.

its not spam. its relevant to the board, and each thread, and its solicited by your replies.

It really isn't.

how isnt it?

you reply, and you know hes going to post back. in exactly the same way that you are obliged to reply for some reason when he posts.

therefore it isnt spam.cos you are asking for it, and getting what you deserve.

id just leave you to it except its ruining the board

[Wycombe Royal]

id just leave you to it except its ruining the board

I don't think it is anymore as long as it doesn't spread to too many topics and at the moment it is really only 2. I am trying to argue sensibly now, without sarcasm or insults (Snowball is still struggling with that) as well as keeping it to these two topics.

As I said before you know what is on these topics so don't click on them. Snowball has shown that he is man enough to not need you defending him by trying to get his criticisers off his back. I think he actually enjoys it.....

[Royal Rother]

I have to say I've lost a little chunk of respect for a number of posters participating on this thread. Snowball isn't one of them.

[Snowball]

I have to say I've lost a little chunk of respect for a number of posters participating on this thread. Snowball isn't one of them.

Thank You, RR

[Hoop Blah]

I agree brendy, it's stiffling all half decent debate and turning the whole forum into a bickering stat fest.

That's why I put snowball on ignore and have stopped replying to most of his posts (I read the odd one once I see him quoted elsewhere).

The problem is that a lot of people take his stats and their application on face value but they've been proved time and time again to be shakey at best. It's sometimes difficult to not pass comment on his posts when they're obviously wrong and when he won't conceed any ground on the many occassions he's been proved wrong.

Look at the number of generally sensible posters who've been drawn into correcting him (Stranded, Dirk, Vision, BR, comonurz, Wycombe, IR to name just a few) and yet he's apparently never been wrong on anything.

There is only one common denominator here, and only one real problem!

[brendywendy]

id just leave you to it except its ruining the board

I don't think it is anymore as long as it doesn't spread to too many topics and at the moment it is really only 2. I am trying to argue sensibly now, without sarcasm or insults (Snowball is still struggling with that) as well as keeping it to these two topics.

As I said before you know what is on these topics so don't click on them. Snowball has shown that he is man enough to not need you defending him by trying to get his criticisers off his back. I think he actually enjoys it.....

of course he enjoys it.
bloody loves it he does.
and im not defending him tbf- ill happily say his stats are sometimes innacurate, or biased, and that hes just as much to blame as everyone else.

[brendywendy]

I agree brendy, it's stiffling all half decent debate and turning the whole forum into a bickering stat fest.

That's why I put snowball on ignore and have stopped replying to most of his posts (I read the odd one once I see him quoted elsewhere).

The problem is that a lot of people take his stats and their application on face value but they've been proved time and time again to be shakey at best. It's sometimes difficult to not pass comment on his posts when they're obviously wrong and when he won't conceed any ground on the many occassions he's been proved wrong.

Look at the number of generally sensible posters who've been drawn into correcting him (Stranded, Dirk, Vision, BR, comonurz, Wycombe, IR to name just a few) and yet he's apparently never been wrong on anything.

There is only one common denominator here, and only one real problem!

this may be true
but i have often found his stats to be informative and challenging.
they help me moderate the evidence i see through my tinted specs.

mostly they arent/dont at all.and i just dont bother with those ones.

some people just love an internet row.

[Hoop Blah]

I have to say I've lost a little chunk of respect for a number of posters participating on this thread. Snowball isn't one of them.

I know you like your own style of WUM'ery RR but, taking the above as genuine, just out of interest, I'd love to know who and why.

[Snowball]

If a few neutrals took a CAREFUL look at these threads.

First, I'm usually backed into a corner with anything from 2-10 people taken turns to have a slap at me.

Another ten or so, drop in with a LOL-bomb, or a sneaky insult, or suggest I'm mentally ill,
or deluded, or not a true fan (Have I been called a paedophile yet?)

On another thread Ian Royal thought it was funny to suggest I sucked off my dead father.

In this thread, yet another attacking our Number 9 (he's the one with the black eye from QPR/Cardiff,
the one who has 3 goals and an assist in the last 5 games) the thread opens, and while I am not in it,
not in it for twenty posts, I'm openly insulted, basically being prodded with a sharp stick until I respond.

Must be some mistake as Snowball factually proved that Long would score 30 goals in this league if he played every game.

I fully expect him to carry on being average until January, then score 6 in 6 and get a new 3 year deal.

Remember, at this point and for about twenty posts I'm not even in the thread.

A couple of posts later (I'm still not in the thread)

Snowball will probably dredge up some useless stats proving that we're better off without Rasiak and Sigurdson.

I evntually posts showing that ALL the players are missing chances. There is no grief, no insult either from me or in response

Next up is cmonurz

To get all Snowball on your asses for a sec...

Long: 79 (83) apps, 30 goals. 1 goal every 5.4 appearances, and 1 goal every 2.6 starts.
Church: 33 (23) apps, 13 goals, 1 goal every 4.3 appearances, and 1 goal every 2.5 starts.
Hunt: 36 (23) apps, 15 goals, 1 goal every 3.9 appearances, and 1 goal every 2.4 starts.


And finally, I can't believe that Shane fcuking Long has played 162 times for Reading; 35 (and counting) more than Cureton.

Elsewhere cmonurz deliberately misquotes me so I reply:

Or, using Snowball's logic, if Long is a 30 goal a season striker, and our other two are apparently more prolific, then we've got some forwards even Barca should covet.

|

Just to set the record straight, I said the following:


I believe Long can, PLAYING IN A 4-4-2 FOR A WHOLE SEASON

Score TWENTY (2-0) two-zero, a score, less than two-dozen Championship goals in a season

30 in League 1, 10 Prem

As far down as the sixth page, where are any insults from me but on P6, there goes cmonurz again

MORE selective statistics. Bristol City were bottom when they beat us. Scunthorpe, who beat us at home, are 19th, Middlesbrough are 20th. That screams of inconsistency.

I did respond "Braniac" to that...



At the bottom of P6 I actually get a compliment... but the digs continue... we're on P7 and where am I insulting anyone... doesn't stop sandman

Long is a poor man's Doyle There can't be much argument about that (come up with all the stats you want Snowball you're on ignore).

and slowly but surely, the insults begin to fly in both directions. The difference is I'm fielding incoming from Alan Partridge, Scarface, Ian Royal (surprise), Hoop Blah, a little poke from West Stand man, a few side-swipes from Floyd, Sandman, and it gets worse later of course...

My contribution? In 8 pages I called someone Brainiac

It normally takes two to tango, here it, 1 and 22