Manchester United 2 Chelsea 1

[paulw66]

24 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Kepa, Ziyech and Lukaku might say hello (but I suspect they are not looking back).  There is only one senior front 3 player out.  The shortage of players a manager might actually want to pick is largely the clubs decision.
So acknowledging your point, but this is not an injury crisis, just a crisis.
What we are really missing is Azpi, Kovacic, Jorginho, Rudiger.  Even if 3 of them wouldn't be starting most games.
Where are they now?  Kicked out like TT and Kepa.

 

 

Nkunku, Chukwemeka and Madueke all out, plus Lavia and Gallagher (his own fault granted) but having an extra midfielder could have meant Palmer playing in a front 3, so it increases options.  Certainly 5 useable players.

As I said, not using the injuries to defend the performance of those that started, but it certainly restricted the options on the bench to try and change the tide.

The idea that Rudiger was kicked out is also hilarious, equally along with the idea that Kepa would have made a blind bit of difference to the last two away defeats.

[Original 21]

1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

I wasn't excusing the performance at all.

I was contesting the criticism about him not making subs. There were no adequate subs to use

Poch was about to bring on Maatsen for Mudryk when they of course scored. Broja could’ve come on forJackson at half time. Jackson was floundering and his confidence was shot. Not the greatest bench I agree,  but Pochettino did have choices. Especially at half time after what was possibly the worst half of football I’ve seen from us in a while. Instead he brought on an injured James for Cucurella and left everything else as it was. In game management was poor. Never proactive and always too little, too late. He just let things drift. It’s so frustrating. 

[paulw66]

1 minute ago, Original 21 said:

Poch was about to bring on Maatsen for Mudryk when they of course scored. Broja could’ve come on forJackson at half time. Jackson was floundering and his confidence was shot. Not the greatest bench I agree,  but Pochettino did have choices. Especially at half time after what was possibly the worst half of football I’ve seen from us in a while. Instead he brought on an injured James for Cucurella and left everything else as it was. In game management was poor. Never proactive and always too little, too late. He just let things drift. It’s so frustrating. 

Do you think swapping Broja for Jackson would have changed much? I don't.

And I don't think bringing on Maatsen would have either. His last couple of cameos have been abysmal.

[Dwmh]

42 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

The idea that Rudiger was kicked out is also hilarious, equally along with the idea that Kepa would have made a blind bit of difference to the last two away defeats.

I said kicked out like TT and Kepa.
It was meant purely sarcastically - all of them ran and all of them went to bigger clubs

[Original 21]

34 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Do you think swapping Broja for Jackson would have changed much? I don't.

And I don't think bringing on Maatsen would have either. His last couple of cameos have been abysmal.

It might not have changed anything. But they couldn’t have been any worse.  I’m no fan of Broja but at least Broja had a header that hit the post which was more than Jackson managed all game. I don’t think it was possible to be any more ineffective than Mudryk. We gained nothing by keeping him on the pitch for so long. 

[Mark Kelly]

Just now, Dwmh said:

I said kicked out like TT and Kepa.
It was meant purely sarcastically - all of them ran and all of them went to bigger clubs

For all their statistics and measurements that they apply to their recruitment perhaps they've negated to realise that the best players might just want to play for a big club with a winning mentality.

And now , thanks to their policies we're neither 

And all those players happy to leave , may have realised this before we did.

[Dwmh]

4 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

And all those players happy to leave , may have realised this before we did.

This is the point I have been trying to hammer home since I came back to the site.

Only a manager out of work for 24 of the last 42 months was willing to join us.
Only players aged 21 or younger are willing to sign for us.

Of the 3 senior pros that have stayed 2 have been injured in the summer and much of this season already, the other is 39.  I'm guessing they haven't received offers yet (though Silva is playing like he is not on a 7 year contract).

This is not coincidence.
It might not even be the plan.  Effect not cause.

[east lower]

15 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

This is the point I have been trying to hammer home since I came back to the site.

Only a manager out of work for 24 of the last 42 months was willing to join us.
Only players aged 21 or younger are willing to sign for us.

Of the 3 senior pros that have stayed 2 have been injured in the summer and much of this season already, the other is 39.  I'm guessing they haven't received offers yet (though Silva is playing like he is not on a 7 year contract).

This is not coincidence.
It might not even be the plan.  Effect not cause.

Of those 3 - James looks as though he's got Madrid on his mind, he's at 70% when on the pitch currently, Chilwell can't stay on the pitch and Silva is generally doing stuff a 39 year old usually can't do.

Frank said effectively he couldn't believe what he saw when he came in for the interim stint and as you've stated here on multiple occasions (paraphrasing) the experience has cut and run.

As for the coach - just one of those occasions where his absence from any coaching duties made him more desirable and others didn't want or take the job.

And, as is the way the football recruitment, statistics people and new ones in will sit in the background watching the coach and players getting publicly derided (some rightly so) whilst they collect their probably not insubstantial salaries and when the time is right for them will slopey-shoulder off to another role somewhere else - Good work if you can get it. 10 years at that and you'd not have to worry too much financially in the future. Emperors New Clothes adage springs to mind - they've fooled the Owners/Investors already.   

[jasonb]

1 hour ago, Original 21 said:

It might not have changed anything. But they couldn’t have been any worse.  I’m no fan of Broja but at least Broja had a header that hit the post which was more than Jackson managed all game. I don’t think it was possible to be any more ineffective than Mudryk. We gained nothing by keeping him on the pitch for so long. 

He mis-headed it, he was aiming for the centre......

I still think Jackson is our best bet though give Broja more time if Jackson is struggling.

I think we should get Santos back we seem light  on the bench if either Enzo or Caicedo are not on form. 

Also think we will be better on having Sterling on the left and Mudryk on the bench once Gallagher is back,.

 

 

[ROTG]

2 hours ago, paulw66 said:

Do you think swapping Broja for Jackson would have changed much? I don't.

Correct 

because both are not Chelsea level players of old. 

[Dwmh]

12 minutes ago, east lower said:

And, as is the way the football recruitment, statistics people and new ones in will sit in the background watching the coach and players getting publicly derided (some rightly so) whilst they collect their probably not insubstantial salaries and when the time is right for them will slopey-shoulder off to another role somewhere else - Good work if you can get it. 10 years at that and you'd not have to worry too much financially in the future. Emperors New Clothes adage springs to mind - they've fooled the Owners/Investors already.   

To those that understand the vagaries of Investment styles (I only know a little) this should not be surprising.

[This gets a bit technical - skip if not interested]
Identifying good stock pickers from those that just happened to adopt a pattern that worked for that period is difficult.  Did A do well because he just went for growth stocks (as opposed to value stocks) in a period when growth was fashionable?  Luck rather than judgement?  Or because he was fashion neutral but chose good stocks, both growth and value.  (In other words there is good reason to expect continued outperformance).

If anyone should understand the difficulties of applying Moneyball to player picking it ought to be the CreamCakes.

A few generalities.  

• Buying players to play for mid-table PL teams is not the same as buying them for top teams.
• Trading players on a net-zero budget is different to trading on a net £ half billion spend.
• New algorithms often start with new measures of performance.  "Touches in oppo box" or "passes that create space" or "speed over 20m" are I guess out of date ones.  New measures get copied and overtaken by others.  Good algorithms get overtaken.
• Moneyball works better on "all other players out there" than it does on "the handful of players we already have".  Applying a set of rules to a very large set of other clubs players might identify a good 20 or 30 players.  It doesn't matter if you miss some gems if you find enough winners.  But applying the set of rules to an existing set of 25 players that did not go through that process is dangerous.  You may be casting out gems without realising because they fit another scouts wish list not yours.  
• Persuading £20m players to join you is easy for any PL club, those players will jump at any opportunity in the Prem.  Persuading £100m players to join you is harder.  That requires a top 4 CL place and an upward or steady trend.
• Once players start self-selecting where to go Moneyball falls apart.  Some hard to detect attributes (ambition, confidence) are no longer randomly allocated, but go to where the players want to go.
• Stock markets are famously fat-tailed, that is normally independent factors all get correlated when a black swan comes along leading to extreme swings on occasion.  The same applies to Football teams, the team performance is not the sum of the player performance because team cohesion is so important.  3 players play badly and the 11 has played badly.  (This is probably not so true for Baseball teams; TB and Billy Beane take note).

In other words, everyone may genuinely be doing their best, but it is not simple, and the trick is not just learnt once but has to be continually re-invented.  And circumstances can severely impact the chances of success.

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, east lower said:

And, as is the way the football recruitment, statistics people and new ones in will sit in the background watching the coach and players getting publicly derided (some rightly so) whilst they collect their probably not insubstantial salaries and when the time is right for them will slopey-shoulder off to another role somewhere else

Football is the only business in the world where unqualified people get the top jobs. 
The gang of 3 recruitment / sports gurus have zero qualifications between, yet they got employed to restructure and revamp the playing staff at a £4bn company. 
 

Absolutely Bizarre and a UEFA B coaching badge is not a qualification 

[Original 21]

1 hour ago, jasonb said:

He mis-headed it, he was aiming for the centre......

I still think Jackson is our best bet though give Broja more time if Jackson is struggling.

I think we should get Santos back we seem light  on the bench if either Enzo or Caicedo are not on form. 

Also think we will be better on having Sterling on the left and Mudryk on the bench once Gallagher is back,.

 

 

The Sterling pass to Jackson where he decides to try and control it instead of shooting. Just awful. Really awful. Whoever thought it was a good idea to go into this season with Jackson as our main man upfront is an idiot and should be fired.

I feel sorry for Poch. He was badly let down by the Board. He’s got no choice but to persevere with Jackson as Broja is clearly not ready and Nkunku will be eased back slowly by the looks of it. Poch has clearly not given up on Jackson, but really it’s not out of any belief in him. Just that he doesn’t know what else to do. 

[Alex]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

To those that understand the vagaries of Investment styles (I only know a little) this should not be surprising.

[This gets a bit technical - skip if not interested]
Identifying good stock pickers from those that just happened to adopt a pattern that worked for that period is difficult.  Did A do well because he just went for growth stocks (as opposed to value stocks) in a period when growth was fashionable?  Luck rather than judgement?  Or because he was fashion neutral but chose good stocks, both growth and value.  (In other words there is good reason to expect continued outperformance).

If anyone should understand the difficulties of applying Moneyball to player picking it ought to be the CreamCakes.

A few generalities.  

• Buying players to play for mid-table PL teams is not the same as buying them for top teams.
• Trading players on a net-zero budget is different to trading on a net £ half billion spend.
• New algorithms often start with new measures of performance.  "Touches in oppo box" or "passes that create space" or "speed over 20m" are I guess out of date ones.  New measures get copied and overtaken by others.  Good algorithms get overtaken.
• Moneyball works better on "all other players out there" than it does on "the handful of players we already have".  Applying a set of rules to a very large set of other clubs players might identify a good 20 or 30 players.  It doesn't matter if you miss some gems if you find enough winners.  But applying the set of rules to an existing set of 25 players that did not go through that process is dangerous.  You may be casting out gems without realising because they fit another scouts wish list not yours.  
• Persuading £20m players to join you is easy for any PL club, those players will jump at any opportunity in the Prem.  Persuading £100m players to join you is harder.  That requires a top 4 CL place and an upward or steady trend.
• Once players start self-selecting where to go Moneyball falls apart.  Some hard to detect attributes (ambition, confidence) are no longer randomly allocated, but go to where the players want to go.
• Stock markets are famously fat-tailed, that is normally independent factors all get correlated when a black swan comes along leading to extreme swings on occasion.  The same applies to Football teams, the team performance is not the sum of the player performance because team cohesion is so important.  3 players play badly and the 11 has played badly.  (This is probably not so true for Baseball teams; TB and Billy Beane take note).

In other words, everyone may genuinely be doing their best, but it is not simple, and the trick is not just learnt once but has to be continually re-invented.  And circumstances can severely impact the chances of success.

Who on earth are the 'CreamCakes'?!. I've been browsing the forum for the first time in a while and seen you say that in at least five different posts. 

[Backbiter]

26 minutes ago, Alex said:

Who on earth are the 'CreamCakes'?!. I've been browsing the forum for the first time in a while and seen you say that in at least five different posts. 

Clearlake, I think

[Dwmh]

59 minutes ago, Alex said:

Who on earth are the 'CreamCakes'?!. I've been browsing the forum for the first time in a while and seen you say that in at least five different posts. 

I wasn't paying clear attention when the first bid went in so I have been a bit confused about who precisely the new investors are, if not what they do.
I think it was Ham who first mistyped Clearcake for Clearlake.  I just took it a bit further.

[thevelourfog]

I actually like cream cakes, though.

[asvaberg]

1 minute ago, thevelourfog said:

I actually like cream cakes, though.

Perfect! 👍

[Dwmh]

32 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

I actually like cream cakes, though.

Naughty...

 

... but nice

[Ham]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

I think it was Ham who first mistyped Clearcake for Clearlake.  I just took it a bit further.

 

[Max Fowler]

1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

I actually like cream cakes, though.

I used to like clear lakes. Whenever I looked into one I would see the reflection of a winner.

[chiswickblue]

1 hour ago, Max Fowler said:

I used to like clear lakes. Whenever I looked into one I would see the reflection of a winner.

How can you see a reflection in a clear lake?

[asvaberg]

23 minutes ago, chiswickblue said:

How can you see a reflection in a clear lake?

Or eat a clear cake...... 😁

[Max Fowler]

27 minutes ago, chiswickblue said:

How can you see a reflection in a clear lake?

Actually a clear lake is a lake without ripples, perfect for reflections.

Whereas our clear lake has a giant whale turd at the bottom.

[east lower]

6 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Whereas our clear lake has a giant whale turd at the bottom.

Is that a euphemism for someone?