Long - Time to go.

[Ian Royal]

Yet another failed attempt at a one on one for Long in the Leeds game... spoiled with the first touch of someone with a club foot. Similar, though worse, to Hunt getting in behind the defence earlier in the game.

I make that about 5 he's now cocked up, with a further 4 that were going nowhere until he won some fairly soft contact and went down.

[Snowball]

I couldn't give a rats arse what Sig's accuracy or goals to shot ratio was. He scored a lorry load full of goals for us. Something Long has never done in his time for us, despite being a striker, not a midfielder and having multiple Premier League & Championship seasons experience.

As usual, Midge, you talk out of your arse. Prior to this season Long's goals per minutes played was very very close to Doyle's.

FFS Sig scored 2/3rds the goals in half the starts Long has made, completely discounting the fact Long had SEVENTY TWO more sub appearances as well, in his first season at any decent level.

Last season Gylfi played 2,609 minutes and scored 13 goals that were not penalties.
In Shane's first three season combined he played 2,686 minutes and scored 11 goals, no penalties

Gylfi's penalties completely distort his profile. He also took the free-kicks (scoring three)

If you look only at open-play goals Gylfi got 10 in 2609 minutes, 1 every 261 minutes.

Long got his first 11 goals in 2686 minutes, 1 every 244 minutes

Long reached 20 goals (1 pen) in 4,549 minutes, Removing the pen that's 1 goal every 239 minutes

Up to the end of last season Long was 29 goals (2 pens) so 27 in 6,885 minutes, 1 goal every 255 minutes.

His one open play goal this season is something he'll repeat maybe another dozen times in his career, it just came off. It's not something to suggest he'll score many more in open play.

You really, truly spout utter crap. He scored EIGHT goals last season, all from open play. He has scored 27 open-play goals for RFC and another 4 for his country

[cmonurz]

Up to the end of last season Long was 29 goals (2 pens) so 27 in 6,885 minutes, 1 goal every 255 minutes.

What about up to now? Why stop last May?

[Snowball]

WITHOUT PENALTIES


2,609 minutes = 13 goals Gylfi 2009-10 1 goal every 201 minutes (includes free-kicks)
2,609 minutes = 10 goals Gylfi 2009-10 1 goal every 261 minutes (open play)
2,686 minutes = 11 goals Long 2005-08 1 goal every 244 minutes (open play)
4,549 minutes = 19 goals Long 2005-09 1 goal every 239 minutes (open play)
6,885 minutes = 27 goals Long 2005-10 1 goal every 255 minutes (open play)



Gylfi's open-play goals per minute played ratios are fairly unremarkable.

Once you remove the penalties he's good but not great. Remove the free-kicks (fair comparison) and suddenly his goals/minute is just like Long's and worse than Doyle or Kitson.

Even if you add in Long's difficult run this season and discount all his penalties, he's on a goal every 299 minutes (open play goals only) compared with Gylfi's 261 minutes (open play goals only)

Now before you combine knees and jerks yet again, I am NOT repeat NOT saying Long is remotely in Gylfi's class as a player.

What I AM saying, though is Gylfi's profile is massively enhanced because he took 8 pens scoring 7 or 9 scoring 8, and his free-kicks also add to his profile. His goals in open-play are in the same bracket as Long

[Snowball]

Up to the end of last season Long was 29 goals (2 pens) so 27 in 6,885 minutes, 1 goal every 255 minutes.

What about up to now? Why stop last May?

BECAUSE, Dearest, this run this season is extreme and distorts the truth.

I HAVE however, already posted the figures INCLUDING the current run and EXCLUDING all penalties.

The comparison between the two then becomes 261 minutes versus 299 minutes (per open play goal)

[Snowball]

Snowball, In 100 pages or so you have given us your version of Shane's life story ever since he came to our club and occasionally bits about his achievements in the old country. However I don't think I have read anywhere whether you actually think he is any good. Most of us on here see him as yet another Irish labourer-one who gets on with the job,works very hard at something he is not very good at and somehow gets paid more in a fortnight than most Irish labourers get paid in a whole year but unlike the others he goes crying to his boss when a few people moan at him.I would seriously like to read your critique on him (no so called facts) because as a professional writer (and one who has spent such a ridiculous amount of time on the subject matter you must now be an expert) you could easily put your feelings into words. I am sure I speak for others in that we just don't get what you,Father McDermott and the ancient Italian see in him and quite seriously would appreciate your views but please no stats.

I am on record as saying I believe Shane Long is a very, very good player but has to be played in a 4-4-2, and is wasted in 4-5-1.

I am on record as saying (but often misquoted) that playing a full season he is fully capable of scoring

10 Goals for a Premiership side
20 Goals for a Championship side
30 Goals for a League 1 side

Just on the off-chance that some smart-arse emerges, I am NOT saying 60 goals while playing for three clubs simultaneously.

I will go on record as saying Shane Long is a GOOD finisher. Not in the class of the deadliest players like, say Chopra at his best, but prior to this anomalous season he has always finished his chances at a better rate than, for example, Kevin Doyle.

I will go on record as saying that if we change to a 4-4-2 and Long keeps playing, the goals will come and he will score 10+ this season, but that if we played 4-4-2 for a whole season and he was pretty much ever-present he'd get close to 20, even with the pretty-crap service at RFC

I will go on record as saying he will get better for the next 3 seasons after this one, and possibly a fourth and will be highly regarded by the end of his career (all these statements presume he will avoid a career-changing injury)

He has to be played in a way that utilises his strengths and they are speed, power, strength, guts and heading. That for me is a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-3 with three strikers. The most likely future is we eventually drive the lad out and he really comes to power for another club.

[Snowball]

Comparing Doyle's Shooting-Goals-Games to Long

Actual Figures then Percentages

Doyle

ON OFF Goal Year
51 37 19 2005-06
24 21 13 2006-07
26 41 06 2007-08
43 31 18 2008-09


144 130 56

Doyle played 145 (17) = 148 Games so you can see he did not average two shots/headers per game. (1.85 chances pg)


LONG

06 05 04 2005-06
11 08 04 2006-07
10 05 03 2007-08
17 18 09 2008-09
24 20 09 2009-10
19 15 04 2010-11

87 71 33

Long played 84 (83) = 98 Games so averaged 1.61 shots/headers per game

Doyle Percentages

%ON %OFF Gl/Gm
0.58 0.42 0.37 2005-06
0.53 0.47 0.54 2006-07
0.39 0.61 0.23 2007-08
0.58 0.42 0.42 2008-09


That is 53% ON 47% OFF
39% of ON Target shots became goals 20.44% of all shot/headers became goals



LONG

%ON %OFF Gl/Gm
0.55 0.45 0.67 2005-06
0.58 0.42 0.36 2006-07
0.67 0.33 0.30 2007-08
0.49 0.51 0.53 2008-09
0.55 0.45 0.38 2009-10
0.56 0.44 0.27 2010-11

That is 55% ON 45% OFF
38% of ON Target shots/headers became goals 20.88% of all shot/headers became goals

I'll put those together for easy comparison

1.61 Chances per game: 55% ON 45% OFF - - - 38% of ON Target shots/headers became goals 20.88% of all shot/headers became goals LONG
1.85 Chances per game: 53% ON 47% OFF - - - 39% of ON Target shots/headers became goals 20.44% of all shot/headers became goals Doyle


So Doyle managed a quarter of a chance more per game, 11 extra chances per season which would mean two more goals.

Long actually gets on target slightly more 55% v 53% but Doyle shades conversion 39% v 38%

Overall Long converted 0.44% more of his chances than Doyle

The crunch, bottom-line is this one, below

Overall Doyle needed 2.64 Games to get a goal
Overall LONG needed 2.78 games to get a goal (to end 2009-10)
With this bad run Long's overall figures are now 2.97 games

So, even with Long's current barren run

In a 46-game season Doyle would average 17.42 Goals
In a 46-game season LONG would average 15.49 Goals

Doyle's actual average was 14 goals per season playing an average 36 games (2.57 due to rounding)

LONG's actual average for the 5 seasons was 5.8 goals playing an average of 16 games (2.75 due to rounding)

[Snowball]

You don't expect Sigurdsson, our set piece taker and player who scored a good number of long range free kicks, .

A good number?

THREE, all about 22 yards

to score with the same ratio as Shane Long when his shots were, on the whole, taken a lot further out? A 28% conversion rate for shots on target, the majority of which were mainly outside the area, or in other words a slightly more than a 1 in 4 conversion rate, I would class as pretty damn superb. Probably part of the reason why Sigurdsson was sold for £7 million. Shane Long, if ever sold by Reading, won't be sold for anything near seven figures

I did an analysis of all the goals and posted them a while back. From memory Gylfi averaged being about an extra 1-2 yards out. He had one really long-range goal (versus league 2 Burton) but otherwise he was usually just outside the box. Almost all his long shots (except for 3 free-kicks were WASTED)

[Snowball]

You don't expect Sigurdsson, our set piece taker and player who scored a good number of long range free kicks, to score with the same ratio as Shane Long when his shots were, on the whole, taken a lot further out? A 28% conversion rate for shots on target, the majority of which were mainly outside the area, or in other words a slightly more than a 1 in 4 conversion rate, I would class as pretty damn superb. Probably part of the reason why Sigurdsson was sold for £7 million. Shane Long, if ever sold by Reading, won't be sold for anything near seven figures.

No, Gylfi was a wasteful player.

LOL.

I can't really add anything more than that.

Gylfi was a WONDERFUL player. That doesn't mean he wasn't wasteful. He was CRIMINALLY wasteful. Take away the penalties and he got 12 or 13 goals from 122 shots, a conversion rate of 10%. Doyle's was 20.44%

But if you analyse closer, you'll discover that Gylfi was very very accurate in the box. He scored 3 x 20+ yard free-kicks, one 30-35 yarder on the run and a couple in open play from just outside the box. IN the box he was lethal. If you say at worst he scored 25% that means he had 28 shots in the box for his seven goals (I think he was far more deadly, but...) 131-28 = 103, take away 9 pens (one missed) leaves 94. Take away the three FCs we know he scored leaves 91 shots which produced 2 or 3 goals.

I said in another thread that he was wasteful because he took pot-shots from 5-10 yards too far away.

I wrote in that thread that his new club would get him to stop wasting so many chances and that his accuracy and conversion would improve.

71 ON (54%) 60 OFF for 20 Goals incl 8 penalties. 122 chances for 12 goals. A 10% conversion rate with pens removed

NOW (as predicted)

12 ON (75%) 4 OFF for 5 Goals incl 2 penalties. 14 chances for 3 goals. A 21.4% conversion rate with pens removed

WITH PENS?

131/20 = A goal every 6.5 Chances
16/5 = A goal every 3.33 Chances

He is already twice as deadly, with or without pens. In other words he was wasteful before.

[Snowball]

If Gylfi is a wasteful player, what is the definition of a player who scores 1 in 34 attempts on goal?

A Gylfi

[Wycombe Royal]

Congratulations Snowball. I think 7 posts in a row is a new record.

[Wycombe Royal]

Last season Gylfi played 2,609 minutes and scored 13 goals that were not penalties.
In Shane's first three season combined he played 2,686 minutes and scored 11 goals, no penalties

Gylfi's penalties completely distort his profile. He also took the free-kicks (scoring three)

If you look only at open-play goals Gylfi got 10 in 2609 minutes, 1 every 261 minutes.

Long got his first 11 goals in 2686 minutes, 1 every 244 minutes

Long reached 20 goals (1 pen) in 4,549 minutes, Removing the pen that's 1 goal every 239 minutes

Up to the end of last season Long was 29 goals (2 pens) so 27 in 6,885 minutes, 1 goal every 255 minutes.

Gylfi is a MIDFIELDER. Long is a STRIKER. I think Gylfi only being 17 minutes worse per goal than Long shows again that Shane is not doing as well as he should be.

Also I think if you looked at it more closely a striker who makes a lot of short sub appearances as Shane did early in his career will have a better minutes per goal ratio (and yes there will be exceptions to this) because these appearances often come when one of the teams is chasing the match and therefore the game is more open. I haven't checked but I would hazard a guess that one of the most common periods of time in which goals are scored is the last 10 minutes of a match....

[Snowball]

Congratulations Snowball. I think 7 posts in a row is a new record.

Thank-you.

[Man Friday]

Why were my posts at the bottom of page 99 deleted by the Stalinist moderators but Red's left in?

[Snowball]

Last season Gylfi played 2,609 minutes and scored 13 goals that were not penalties.
In Shane's first three season combined he played 2,686 minutes and scored 11 goals, no penalties

Gylfi's penalties completely distort his profile. He also took the free-kicks (scoring three)
If you look only at open-play goals Gylfi got 10 in 2609 minutes, 1 every 261 minutes.
Long got his first 11 goals in 2686 minutes, 1 every 244 minutes
Long reached 20 goals (1 pen) in 4,549 minutes, Removing the pen that's 1 goal every 239 minutes
Up to the end of last season Long was 29 goals (2 pens) so 27 in 6,885 minutes, 1 goal every 255 minutes.

Gylfi is a MIDFIELDER. Long is a STRIKER. I think Gylfi only being 17 minutes worse per goal than Long shows again that Shane is not doing as well as he should be.

We played Gylfi as a deep striker, in the hole, and you know that. He was played primarily for his GOALS. As far as I'm concerned his role was mainly "goal-scorer", that was his job. To call him a mid-fielder as say Howard or Tabb or Karacan or Leighterwood are midfielders is a deliberate, conscious distortion of the truth.

Also I think if you looked at it more closely a striker who makes a lot of short sub appearances as Shane did early in his career will have a better minutes per goal ratio (and yes there will be exceptions to this) because these appearances often come when one of the teams is chasing the match and therefore the game is more open. I haven't checked but I would hazard a guess that one of the most common periods of time in which goals are scored is the last 10 minutes of a match....

In that case we'd need to look only at goals scored prior to 75 minutes, or goals scored only when starting. Of course that dramatically disadvantages a player used as an impact sub.


League Games

I am amazed to discover we have not let in a SINGLE GOAL in the last 11 minutes plus 2-4 minutes injury time.

When I did the stats on this last season there WASN'T a marked difference except that the last ten minutes is often 13 or 14, or even 15 minutes and is thus, much longer than any other "10"s. This season the OS was talking about late goals and noting how RFC in particular had cornered that market.

THIS SEASON (Haven't done 2005-6-7-8)

The goals in 15 minute spells are 4-4-2-3-4-10 RFC
The goals in 15 minute spells are 3-6-5-4-3-01 Opponents (we have not let in a goal later than the 79th minute!)

So, you can see RFC DO "go for it". It's definitely NOT "tiredness" but ATTITUDE. McDermott clearly going for the win.
Our opponents aren't doing it. Are we for some reason the fittest side in the league? I doubt it. I think it's simply "not settling for a point"

If I had looked just at goals (RFC and Opps) the most-goals-scored per minute period is 16-30 minutes

7-10-7 (First Half) 7-7-11 (Second Half) (remember the last 15 is extended by added time usually 2-5 minutes)

Of the 10 late goals for RFC, 5 have been scored by subs, but that is hardly surprising since usually they are on REPLACING other strikers.

Long off, Church on (Doncaster)(Church scores 88)
Church off for HRK 73. Long off for Hunt 85 (Barnsley) (HRK scores 88)
HRK off for Church 85, Long off for Hunt 80 (Ipswich) (Church scores 88)
Karacan off for Church 74, Tabb off for Antonio 84, (Burnley) (Antonio scores 85) (Church scores 90)

[Snowball]

Congratulations Snowball. I think 7 posts in a row is a new record.

I can't win. If I DON'T answer, someone like cmonurz says I'm ducking.

If I DO answer, then...

[Svlad Cjelli]

Congratulations Snowball. I think 7 posts in a row is a new record.

I can't win. If I DON'T answer, someone like cmonurz says I'm ducking.

If I DO answer, then...

I'd advise you to give up then, and let us have our forum back.

[Wycombe Royal]

Congratulations Snowball. I think 7 posts in a row is a new record.

I can't win. If I DON'T answer, someone like cmonurz says I'm ducking.

If I DO answer, then...

I'm just jesting. Lighten up a bit.......

[Wycombe Royal]

Last season Gylfi played 2,609 minutes and scored 13 goals that were not penalties.
In Shane's first three season combined he played 2,686 minutes and scored 11 goals, no penalties

Gylfi's penalties completely distort his profile. He also took the free-kicks (scoring three)
If you look only at open-play goals Gylfi got 10 in 2609 minutes, 1 every 261 minutes.
Long got his first 11 goals in 2686 minutes, 1 every 244 minutes
Long reached 20 goals (1 pen) in 4,549 minutes, Removing the pen that's 1 goal every 239 minutes
Up to the end of last season Long was 29 goals (2 pens) so 27 in 6,885 minutes, 1 goal every 255 minutes.

Gylfi is a MIDFIELDER. Long is a STRIKER. I think Gylfi only being 17 minutes worse per goal than Long shows again that Shane is not doing as well as he should be.

We played Gylfi as a deep striker, in the hole, and you know that. He was played primarily for his GOALS. As far as I'm concerned his role was mainly "goal-scorer", that was his job. To call him a mid-fielder as say Howard or Tabb or Karacan or Leighterwood are midfielders is a deliberate, conscious distortion of the truth.

Gylfi was played out on the left a fair bit as well, as well as playing a conventional midfield role at times. He was never a deep striker, an attacking midfielder for quite a lot of games, but not a deep striker.

[Wycombe Royal]

Of the 10 late goals for RFC, 5 have been scored by subs, but that is hardly surprising since usually they are on REPLACING other strikers.

Thank you. That confirms what I thought.