*EXCUSE WATCH*

[Wycombe Royal]

LOL.

I think we are improving slighty under Clarke but using a sample of 7 games, comparing it to a sample of 24 games and extrapolating ppg is an odd way of trying to prove it. Even by Snowball's standards.

I can feel a Shane Long moment coming on.......

[marlowuk]

Adkins results, including cups (one win against league 2 opposition)

W9 D4 L11 1.33 ppg and a -9 GD (37.5% win ratio)

Clarke (excluding the too-soon Watford game) W3 D3 L1 and 1.79 ppg with a GD of 8-6

INCLUDING the Watford game Clarke is on 37.5% win ratio (but more draws, so better)
excluding that game Clarke is on a 43% win ratio

Extrapolate both managers’ results (excluding Watford) to a 46-Game League Season

NA 61 Points 58F - 75A (13th Last Season)
SC 79 Points 52F - 34A (5th Last Season, one point off 4th)

and we are getting better under Clarke, were going downhill under Adkins

Sorry Snowball (and I generally welcome your statistical comments) but this 'analysis' is deeply flawed.

1. Why ignore the Watford game? Too soon? It was the first game under SC and the players should have been well up for this and wanting to impress the new boss. In fact they did play well and it was a game (against 10 men for 45 mins, remember) that we should have won. But we didn't. No reason to exclude this game!
2. In extrapolating to a 46 game league season it is wrong to include cup games! There is a different atmosphere to these games and managers field teams which they would not do so in a straight league game.

SC's league results for us so far are 6 points from 6 games. It doesn't take a statistician to work out that is 1ppg which extrapolates to 46 points in a full season which, last year, would have put us 2 points above relegation. I can't be a**ed to extrapolate the goal difference!!

NA's record in the league this season was 25 points from 21 games until he was sacked. That is 1.19ppg. If we take his record in his last 6 games as manager of Reading (to compare with SC's first 6) he managed 7 points from those 6 games which is 1.17ppg - still better than SC!

For the record I think we have improved under SC and are, as just about all acknowledge, defensively more sound. But our results so far are not reflecting that and no amount of fiddling the figures can alter that fact.

[Snowball]

I responded to the crap pessimism. Of course we haven't had enough games to truly judge Clarke but I included the cup games because they are clearly "part of run" and were away, and against Championship opposition. OTOH I could have waited two more months...

But under Adkins we were all over the place, winning 3-0 losing 3-0, 4-0, 6-1 and generally looking like serious relegation candidates with confidence shot..


We are a MUCH better side now, tighter, more reliable, just a bit short in front of goal.

Previously I worried, now things look likely to be steadily on the up.

I'll go on record now as saying without some fresh, bigger financial disaster, I think we'll comfortably make the POs next season.


I still think it's wrong to include the Watford game. It was far too early to dismiss the Adkins effect and to bring in the SC effect.

[floyd__streete]

I'll go on record now as saying without some fresh, bigger financial disaster, I think we'll comfortably make the POs next season.

I guess that will be the aim, but League 1 is tougher than you think.

[Snowball]

You want to put money on RFC being relegated?

[Ian Royal]

You want to put money on RFC being relegated?

I can assure you I'm not biting this time.

[sandman]

Think we need to merge this with the Danny Guthrie thread.