Long - Time to go.

[Snowball]

THe difference with Kitson and Doyle is that they were scoring open play goals as well as penalties. This season Long has scored 75% of his goals from the spot in nearly half a season. That is his current form and Doyle and Kitson did not rely that heavily on penalties. Now I know you will come back and say that his ratio of penalties over his career is no worse than Doyle's or Kitson's and that is very true. But it is NOW that matters, not what he has done in the past and the simple fact is that he is out of form in front of goal.

Form is temporary, class is permanent. And please, no jokes about what "class" is. Long is never likely to be the CCC's top-scorer, but he is still a very good player.

Wycombe, I welcome real, genuine "interested in what the problem is" criticism or discussion. What gets my goat is the repeated vitriol from too-many people (the thread's title, for example) the foul comments about players who are normal, decent, usually hard-working, human beings.

Oh for a thread that discusses how McDermott's team set-ups make the strikers look WORSE than they are, how we play so much 4-5-1 when we have almost exclusively, players brought up and brought in as 4-4-2 players. I'm on record as saying I don't believe Long will ever make a good "1" in a 4-5-1. He should be about speed and power and hard-running, not playing half a game with his back to goal

What was clear Saturday, and I think at Watford, is we don't have a "TWO" we don't have a playing partnership, we don't have a clear shape that allows two strikers to help each other and thereby make BOTH more efficient. We are also (as an aside) getting very little luck.

Long could easily have won a pen at Watford when he was completely mashed by Loach.

We should have had a penalty this Saturday when an arm kept Long's shot out.

Both penalties genuinely deserved. Long might be on six goals now and we could easily have an extra 4 points

But I think our problem is we aren't yet playing a straightforward 4-4-2 with (presumably) Hunt-Long WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP up front. They certainly didn't look like a partnership this weekend

If Noel was to score 20 more goals this season and 15 of them are penalties I am pretty sure he would get criticism. No player is immune from it and most of them get it at some point or another when parts of there game are not what they should be.

He wouldn't.

[Wycombe Royal]

[quote="Snowball"]but he is still a very good player.[quote]
And I have never disagreed with that. I have said many times how valuable he is to RFC. My issue is with his goalscoring form which is not as good as it should be (and yes I am excluding penalties in that).

[Snowball]

And I have never disagreed with that. I have said many times how valuable he is to RFC. My issue is with his goalscoring form which is not as good as it should be (and yes I am excluding penalties in that).

I don't and never will, exclude penalties.

Say Kebe starts dribbling into the box a lot more and gets us a penalty every other game for the rest of the season (14 pens) and Long scores them all, or Harte scores them all, or they share them out, and Long wins a couple of pens and scores them, and "only" scores 4-5 open play goals.

Between him and Harte we'd have 4+4+2+14+4/5 = 28-29 goals excluding any others Harte might get in open play or from free-kicks. We would easily make the top six, and I doubt anyone would be complaining. Long is getting penalties because he's hard to stop fairly. He is getting very few real clear chances made for him by others. If he was getting the sitters that Church has missed I'd say OK, but he's not.

Take his "miss" the first one-on-one at Watford. He has no right to win the ball at all but does. He then sprints, full-tilt about 50 yards. His control is excellent except for his last touch. I thought he would shoot from further out or lob towards the corner and I thought it was brave to continue. He makes one less good touch and the defender does BRILLIANTLY to get a toe in, win the ball and not foul Shane. All this as a fringe-England keeper is rushing at you.

This is not remotely as bad as, say, Hunt, punting a shot from 8 yards straight into the keeper's hands.

I still believe we have to play 4-4-2, stick to 4-4-2, develop a main partnership (probably Hunt-Long)... only then will we start to cut out regular GOOD chances

[Stranded]

He was complaining (as many did at the time) at the poor decision to attempt such a volley when he didn't need to.

Something that had absolutely nothing to do with the fact he was a raw kid
with very very limited experience...

So does that preclude people being able to make criticism then?

[Blue Hooped Moose]

only then will we start to cut out regular GOOD chances

... which Long will promptly miss

[Svlad Cjelli]

Can I add to Handbag's analysis the incident away at Brum in the last PL season when in the very last minute the ball fell to SL about 6 yards out and with a nearly open goal he tried to do a scissors-kick and missed.

I'm convinced if he'd tried to head it, or even just try to play it normally, he'd almost certainly have scored - but the fact that in such a crucial moment of such a critical game he decided to try something so ambitious says something about his judgement under pressure.

Just so I have you right, you are complaining about "an ambitious attempt at a volley" by a 20-Year old player who had only just come on the pitch (he played a total of six minutes that game) and in the whole of his career to that point had started just ONE CCC game and 7 Premiership games IN HIS LIFE!

Nope, I'm complaining at his decision to try a ludicrously ambitious scissor-kick at such an inappropriate time in a crucial match, rather than the much easier header or volley option.

And if the fact that he had only recently come on is to be taken into consideration, surely that makes it even more outrageous that he went for such an ambitious option at such a point in what was potentially a relegation-decider.

PS - I won't debase my contribution with the use of upper case or emboldening. I'm secure enough in my arguments to not need to resort to such embellishments.

[Snowball]

PS - I won't debase my contribution with the use of upper case or emboldening. I'm secure enough in my arguments to not need to resort to such embellishments.

I'm very pleased for you

[Snowball]

He was complaining (as many did at the time) at the poor decision to attempt such a volley when he didn't need to.

Something that had absolutely nothing to do with the fact he was a raw kid
with very very limited experience...

So does that preclude people being able to make criticism then?

No, but criticism should be tempered by a full review of the context.

If a 27-28 year old grizzled pro with 400 games does something that we think is truly dumb
that, to me, is a far more serious "offence" than a naive youth committing the same error

[Snowball]

only then will we start to cut out regular GOOD chances

... which Long will promptly miss

If he does, if his stats over the season show he's worse in front of goal than Church and Hunt, I'll say so.

[Wycombe Royal]

And I have never disagreed with that. I have said many times how valuable he is to RFC. My issue is with his goalscoring form which is not as good as it should be (and yes I am excluding penalties in that).

I don't and never will, exclude penalties.

That's up to you. My point about not relying on penalties to push up your goal tally has been demonstrated twice recently at Watford and then against Leeds. With a penalty your are requiring outside assistance to be awarded the penalty - as a player Long cannot control that.

However him taking his chances he has far more control over if he is clinical enough with his finishing - however he isn't.

That is why I exclude penalties. THey are a bonus but should not be relied upon. A striker needs to take his chances and Long doesn't do that enough. With quite a few of the openings he gets he doesn't even get a shot away. He delays too Long and gets tackled or pushed wide. I'm sure it is just a confidence as we have seen him do it in the past but at the moment he is out of form in front of goal and only an idiot would say otherwise.

[Snowball]

I don't "rely on penalties"

I just count them as goals (silly me)

[Wycombe Royal]

I don't "rely on penalties"

I just count them as goals (silly me)

Ignore the point because you don't have a sensible argument to counter my comments.

[Snowball]

I don't "rely on penalties"

I just count them as goals (silly me)

Ignore the point because you don't have a sensible argument to counter my comments.

I'm not "ignoring" anything. We (as a team) and/or Long seem to have developed
a style of play which SEEMS to be looking for fouls on the edge of the box or in it.
OR a slight change of emphasis, possibly not conscious has RESULTED in the above.

And until we are genuinely suffering on the goals-for account (we are NOT)
I'll take any kind of goal. Penalties are fine by me, own-goals, sneaky hand-balls
by one of our strikers, "phantom goals" I don't care.

I would prefer every goal to be a scintillating ten-pass move with step-overs
but all I actually WANT is for RFC to score more goals than the opposition.

It's this "new" obsession with downgrading goals because they are penalties that makes me laugh.

[brendywendy]

I don't "rely on penalties"

I just count them as goals (silly me)

Ignore the point because you don't have a sensible argument to counter my comments.

im sorry- but penaltys count as goals.
when shearer counts his career goals up he counts the pens. not least because he(and long) won most of them.
it is a sensible argumemnt and doesnt require all of the h8 from you lot.

[Snowball]

Brett Pitman scored 3 goals in two League One games before being transferred to Bristol City

59 Goals in 173 Apps in total




He then had ten appearances for Bristol and failed to score any goals (one level higher) (Holt Lovers note)



But in two games he has suddenly got 3 goals and is up there with Hunt and Church


















2 Penalties

[Wycombe Royal]

I don't "rely on penalties"

I just count them as goals (silly me)

Ignore the point because you don't have a sensible argument to counter my comments.

im sorry- but penaltys count as goals.
when shearer counts his career goals up he counts the pens. not least because he(and long) won most of them.
it is a sensible argumemnt and doesnt require all of the h8 from you lot.

No hate from me. I think myself and snowball have a sort of understanding and our arguing on this forum is relatively "mature".

Snowball am I wrong with that comment?

Anyway I have stated why I don't include penalties in my opinion of the form a striker is in, and nobody will get me to alter that opinion. Also I am not alone in that opinion.

I have never said the goals don't count, I have just said they are not an indication of the form that striker is in. You could have a striker who does very little all game to the extent it is like playing with 10 men and he misses every chance presented to him. However he is the penalty taker and scores 15 of them in one season. Is his place justified in the team? No it isn't because someone else could quite easily take those penalties and the team would be better off with a striker who scores more open play goals.

[handbags_harris]

If a 27-28 year old grizzled pro with 400 games does something that we think is truly dumb that, to me, is a far more serious "offence" than a naive youth committing the same error

This doesn't wash with me and I'm sure many others. If he is good enough to be on a Premier League pitch playing with and against Premier League players then he is obviously considered able to make correct and ruthless decisions in given situations regardless of age, experience, number of goals from open play, number of penalties, number of free kicks won, number of eggs eaten for breakfast etc etc.

[Snowball]

No hate from me. I think myself and snowball have a sort of understanding and our arguing on this forum is relatively "mature".

Snowball am I wrong with that comment?

Yes, Wyc. if you look carefully, I "bristle" when poked, but would prefer intelligent debate. I don't consider differing in opinion a problem, but what tends to happen is a certain few have lost the ability to "discuss" with me (and I with them). They have one aim and one aim only and that is to burst my balloon. (That's what pricks are for BOOM!-BOOM!

Some things just get ridiculous, though, like "removing" Long's brilliant FA Cup goals last season (against Liverpool and Aston Villa) in order to engineer a seriously distorted view of his season. I'm willing to be that both Long and McDermott were more than satisfied with the 20-10 part of 2009-10

[Wycombe Royal]

Yes, Wyc. if you look carefully, I "bristle" when poked, but would prefer intelligent debate. I don't consider differing in opinion a problem, but what tends to happen is a certain few have lost the ability to "discuss" with me (and I with them). They have one aim and one aim only and that is to burst my balloon. (That's what pricks are for BOOM!-BOOM!

I was only talking about my "arguing" with you, no one elses. If you think I am trying to "burst your balloon" then you are wrong.

However some have tried to have intelligent debate with you but at times it is nigh on impossible because of your inability to accept anyone elses opinion. You have managed to wind up even the most reasoned posters on this forum over the past few weeks purely for that reason. Intelligent debate doesn't consist of you saying "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" but that is what it has boiled down to a lot of times.

[Snowball]

Anyway I have stated why I don't include penalties in my opinion of the form a striker is in, and nobody will get me to alter that opinion. Also I am not alone in that opinion.

Trust me, alone-in-your-opinion or in a tiny majority is a big POSITIVE on this list. The majority wrote of Kebe, wrote of Bikey..

I have never said the goals don't count, I have just said they are not an indication of the form that striker is in. You could have a striker who does very little all game to the extent it is like playing with 10 men and he misses every chance presented to him. However he is the penalty taker and scores 15 of them in one season. Is his place justified in the team? No it isn't because someone else could quite easily take those penalties and the team would be better off with a striker who scores more open play goals.

It is simply NOT TRUE that anyone can take a penalty. RFC v Northampton, anyone? Most penalty shoot-outs? England v Germany? Tottenham Hotspur 2010?

Scoring 90% plus penalties is a very difficult art. That's one reason we signed Harte, and if you remember Long's first penalty this season wasn't "great" and he got lucky. Since then he has been superb, though. It takes balls to score penalties.

It's a no-brainer that we want someone to score open-play goals, but it's not fair to presume that Long wouldn't have scored 3-4 of the times he instead got the penalty which WAS then a goal. Pure logic says it's better to get the penalty (if you have a near-perfect conversion-rate) than it is to shoot and MAYBE score.

Until proven otherwise I see Long as having scored 4 goals and these are totally equivalent of scoring FIVE goals (the Harte penalty.) Of course it MAY have been that he would have scored NONE of them (or all of them) but he is directly responsible for those five goals that we did get.