by Hoop Blah » 18 Nov 2010 12:32
by Wycombe Royal » 18 Nov 2010 12:35
by cmonurz » 18 Nov 2010 12:39
Wycombe Royal I think saying the Long dives to win penalties is a bit harsh. He plays for them, draws the tackle, and goes down under "minimal" contact for a lot of them. Is that diving? I don't think so.
by andrew1957 » 18 Nov 2010 12:39
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 12:41
Hoop Blah Snowball, you seem blind to the fact that Long is getting praise for the way he's playing.
He's getting some stick for not scoring, which is pretty understandable and is par for the course as is proven by the likes of Doyle, Kitson, Forster and Rougier (despite your laughable claims that they didn't get stick for the exact same reasons).
Largely, the so called debate on here isn't about how Longs been playing because you seem so obsessed with proving the unprovable through the use of your inaccurate and irrelavant statistics. If you shut up trying to prove he's scoring goals when he's not the debate can focus on how well he's actually playing (or not) and the merits of him being in the team.
For the record his diving for penalties isn't a new discussion point, it's something that's been talked about before. No more so than earlier this season when he dived for the penalty against (I think it was) Barnsley.
by Hoop Blah » 18 Nov 2010 12:44
Wycombe Royal I think saying the Long dives to win penalties is a bit harsh. He plays for them, draws the tackle, and goes down under "minimal" contact for a lot of them. Is that diving? I don't think so.
by Terminal Boardom » 18 Nov 2010 12:49
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 12:50
andrew1957 Although I don't want to compete with Snowball on stats I would say that Long's goal scoring for RFC is actually quite good for a player of his age.
He has played 84+83 games for us. Many of the sub appearances were just a few minutes so it would be fair to divide these by 4. This then equates to 104.75 appearances and 33 goals - which is 1 in 3.17 games. This is not bad at all. The best strikers achieve 1 in 2 but they are very few and far between and 1 in 3 or so is good.
Additionally Longy is definitely improving as an all round player. Many strikers take time to become top players and reach their peak between the ages of 25-30 typically. Also I just had a look at Noel Hunt's stats and they are not as good as Long's at the same age and he was playing at a much lower level.
Long could still become a top striker if he can just improve his conversion rate from open play.
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 12:53
Wycombe Royal I think saying the Long dives to win penalties is a bit harsh. He plays for them, draws the tackle,
and goes down under "minimal" contact for a lot of them. Is that diving? I don't think so.
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 12:55
Hoop Blah That's true, although the one earlier this season I think he took a dive.
by cmonurz » 18 Nov 2010 12:56
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 12:56
Terminal Boardom FFS Snowball, can you just accpet one observation that whereas Long IS playing well, and that his work rate is of a high standard, his goal scoring could do with improving.
by cmonurz » 18 Nov 2010 12:57
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 13:02
cmonurz I've also noticed a trend Snowball in the direction of your posts - you bring up a subject, and then like a sniper taking his victim in his sights, you round on whichever individual happens to disagree with you. Me and Wycombe has both posted in support of Long, that he isn't diving, or cheating, and you glaze over those posts,
Wycombe Royal wrote:I think saying the Long dives to win penalties is a bit harsh. He plays for them, draws the tackle,
and goes down under "minimal" contact for a lot of them. Is that diving? I don't think so.
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 13:04
cmonurz
It's like you want, or need, everyone to agree with you.
by cmonurz » 18 Nov 2010 13:08
by andrew1957 » 18 Nov 2010 13:08
Snowballandrew1957 Although I don't want to compete with Snowball on stats I would say that Long's goal scoring for RFC is actually quite good for a player of his age.
He has played 84+83 games for us. Many of the sub appearances were just a few minutes so it would be fair to divide these by 4. This then equates to 104.75 appearances and 33 goals - which is 1 in 3.17 games. This is not bad at all. The best strikers achieve 1 in 2 but they are very few and far between and 1 in 3 or so is good.
Additionally Longy is definitely improving as an all round player. Many strikers take time to become top players and reach their peak between the ages of 25-30 typically. Also I just had a look at Noel Hunt's stats and they are not as good as Long's at the same age and he was playing at a much lower level.
Long could still become a top striker if he can just improve his conversion rate from open play.
I have his total minutes. His ireland minutes are down as 542 but are probably less. I used his RECENT average and thus presumed, for the games I can't find, that he was getting on for 32 minutes when on as a sub (at 18-19-20, incredibly unlikely)
8,823 Minutes played 38 Goals 232.18 minutes per goal 1 every 2.58 games.
What distorts the view of Long a LOT IMO is that back in the days he was often brought on for 2-3-4-5-6-7-8 minutes
and NOT brought on to get the crucial goal but to harass the opposition to protect a lead.
People with small brains go 160+ appearances and don't think beyond that.
His time on the pitch needs two more full games to equal 100 games. 38 from a hundred (and he's still under 24, is not shabby)
And before the knee-jerk bleating starts YET AGAIN, go check Doyle's starts. He mostly played the whole match or came off around 84-87 minutes to give a sub a brief run. When I get the time I'll do Doyle's career minutes. I'm sure he will come out somewhere between 180 and 220 minutes, but then that's 6.5 Million's worth. Long is OK
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 13:09
cmonurz And yet you continue to ignore my posts on this thread (and others, I think) mentioning that when Doyle went through his own goal drought, people were on his back and wanted him out of the side.
Why keep implying Doyle is seen as some kind of 'God'?
BECAUSE HE IS SEEN THAT WAY. AND BECAUSE "LONG WILL NEVER BE AS GOOD AS HIM BLAH BLAH BLAH
He got plenty of criticism whilst was here, when his performances were not up to scratch. That said, he remains a better player for Reading than Long has ever been.
by cmonurz » 18 Nov 2010 13:09
by Snowball » 18 Nov 2010 13:10
cmonurz
And you're still ignoring my comments re Doyle. If you're going to claim he is seen as some sort of 'God', that ignores the huge demand there was on this board for Coppell to drop him through the extended barren spell without a goal.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], ILoveMoonPig and 124 guests