Long - time for a change?

810 posts
User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Ian Royal » 04 Jan 2011 17:35

Snowball Frankly, I'm not interested in Senior & Co, but chasing Doyle and Kitson
(if the lad isn't picked off by a Premiership club) IS of interest


Bandwagon jumping, johnnie come lately, with no respect for the club's history. :wink:

Given the way football has changed I think it's extremely unlikely we'll see that sort of record broken for the forseeable future as strikers who score well for clubs will be picked up by bigger teams within a couple of seasons. Seeing as we only have one possible promotion and the chances of us then going on to compete for Europe or the title are slim in the extreme, if Long puts away 15+ this season and then another 15+ next he'll almost certainly be off.

andrew1957
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4429
Joined: 29 Sep 2006 14:40
Location: Reading

Re: Long - time for a change?

by andrew1957 » 04 Jan 2011 17:37

Man Friday Talking to oppo fans after matches, they really rate Long. Seeems like we've taken him for granted of late. He'll be gone next season of course (even if we go up, which we shan't).


I am sure he will stay if we get promoted but if we don't we will probably see the back of Long, Fed, Kebe and McAnuff. It really is make or break for us this season I fear.

User avatar
RoyalBlue
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 11970
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:39
Location: Developed a pathological hatred of snakes on 14/10/19

Re: Long - time for a change?

by RoyalBlue » 04 Jan 2011 21:56

andrew1957
Man Friday Talking to oppo fans after matches, they really rate Long. Seeems like we've taken him for granted of late. He'll be gone next season of course (even if we go up, which we shan't).


I am sure he will stay if we get promoted but if we don't we will probably see the back of Long, Fed, Kebe and McAnuff. It really is make or break for us this season I fear.


What a shame that the chairman doesn't appear to see things the same way. :twisted: So make the most of Long, Fed, Kebe and McAnuff's appearances for the rest of the season because the cloth cutter will be sharpening his scissors again before the start of next.

User avatar
winchester_royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11160
Joined: 28 Aug 2007 21:32
Location: How many Spaniards does it take to change a bulb? Just Juan.

Re: Long - time for a change?

by winchester_royal » 04 Jan 2011 23:33

Maybe they were raving about Mooney......

User avatar
Wimb
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4399
Joined: 21 Nov 2005 09:43
Location: www.thetilehurstend.com

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Wimb » 05 Jan 2011 07:12

Happy to see Shane hitting the net from open play on a consistent basis, he's deserved the goals for all of the hard graft he's put in this year.

I'm still not 100% convinced that he's the answer going forward but I'm a lot more convinced then I was going into the season. Keep up the good work Shane and Long may it continue.


Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 10:04

Have a season ticket but took daughter to the game and sat in G4.

Second half the ball came flying at us, thought it would smack my
daughter in the face, so smacked it back into play with my fist.

Daughter says, "Dad, dad! You've touched the football SHANE touched!"

User avatar
Wycombe Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6684
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 19:31
Location: Churchdown, Glos

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Wycombe Royal » 05 Jan 2011 10:06

Snowball Have a season ticket but took daughter to the game and sat in G4.

Second half the ball came flying at us, thought it would smack my
daughter in the face, so smacked it back into play with my fist.

Daughter says, "Dad, dad! You've touched the football SHANE touched!"

csb

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 11:10

Catholic Sperm Bank?

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 12:21

Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in (ha-ha) and noticed how many had a number of penalties as part of their tally.


There are five with higher percentages than Long,
one with the same, five more within a couple and a half percent


10 (5) 50.0% Rankine (York )
12 (5) 41.7% Taraabt (QPR)
12 (5) 41.7% Jones (Rochdale)
13 (5) 38.5% Wright-Phillips (Plymouth)

16 (5) 31.3% Reid (Newport)


09 (4) 44.4% Rendell (Wycombe)
09 (4) 44.4% McPhee (Kidderminster)
10 (4) 40.0% Sharp
10 (4) 40.0% Long
11 (4) 36.4% Walker (Barrow)

18 (4) 22.2% Connell (Grimsby)
21 (4) 19.0% Tubbs (Crawley)


08 (3) 37.5% Hoolihan
08 (3) 37.5% Pitman
08 (3) 37.5% Wilmott (Kettering)

10 (3) 33.3% Drogba
10 (3) 33.3% Bent
09 (3) 33.3% Mohamed (Bath)
13 (3) 23.1% Nasri
14 (3) 21.4% Lowe (Bury)

09 (2) 22.1% Holt
09 (2) 22.1% Pavlychenko
10 (2) 20.0% Van de Vart
08 (2) 25.0% Balotelli

10 (2) 20.0% McGugan
12 (2) 16.7% Tevez
13 (2) 15.4% Commons
Last edited by Snowball on 05 Jan 2011 12:48, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
T.R.O.L.I.
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6526
Joined: 17 Mar 2005 14:47
Location: 2 down, far right - Still recovering from the weekend's excesses

Re: Long - time for a change?

by T.R.O.L.I. » 05 Jan 2011 12:35

Can't see Charlie Austin in that list.

User avatar
Wycombe Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6684
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 19:31
Location: Churchdown, Glos

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Wycombe Royal » 05 Jan 2011 12:36

T.R.O.L.I. Can't see Charlie Austin in that list.

Or the guy at Carlisle (Madine).

Just looks like a random list to me. Why include players who we would have no chance of signing?

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 12:46

SLAMMED I think Snowball has finally been silenced :lol:



So how's things, Slammed?

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 12:47

Wycombe Royal
T.R.O.L.I. Can't see Charlie Austin in that list.

Or the guy at Carlisle (Madine).

Just looks like a random list to me. Why include players who we would have no chance of signing?




I STARTED looking at players who were getting goals, THEN noted the penalties.

The post is about penalties not signings


User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Ian Royal » 05 Jan 2011 12:51

You really don't do a lot to help yourself.

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 12:53

Ian Royal You really don't do a lot to help yourself.



Thank-you for your comment, Mr Royal. I have given it all the respect it deserves.

User avatar
Wycombe Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6684
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 19:31
Location: Churchdown, Glos

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Wycombe Royal » 05 Jan 2011 13:53

Snowball
Wycombe Royal
T.R.O.L.I. Can't see Charlie Austin in that list.

Or the guy at Carlisle (Madine).

Just looks like a random list to me. Why include players who we would have no chance of signing?




I STARTED looking at players who were getting goals, THEN noted the penalties.

The post is about penalties not signings

So why start your post "Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in "?

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20786
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Snowball » 05 Jan 2011 14:48

Wycombe Royal So why start your post "Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in "?


Because that's what I was doing.

it's called a narrative. but the bolded bit should make it clear to anyone who reads properly
and the underlined bit below (and all the players I bolded there) should also make it totally clear

Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in (ha-ha) and noticed how many had a number of penalties as part of their tally.

There are five with higher percentages than Long, one with the same, five more within a couple and a half percent

Mr Angry
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6254
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 16:05
Location: South Oxfordshire

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Mr Angry » 05 Jan 2011 14:51

Snowball Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in (ha-ha) and noticed how many had a number of penalties as part of their tally.


There are five with higher percentages than Long,
one with the same, five more within a couple and a half percent


10 (5) 50.0% Rankine (York )
12 (5) 41.7% Taraabt (QPR)
12 (5) 41.7% Jones (Rochdale)
13 (5) 38.5% Wright-Phillips (Plymouth)

16 (5) 31.3% Reid (Newport)


09 (4) 44.4% Rendell (Wycombe)
09 (4) 44.4% McPhee (Kidderminster)
10 (4) 40.0% Sharp
10 (4) 40.0% Long
11 (4) 36.4% Walker (Barrow)

18 (4) 22.2% Connell (Grimsby)
21 (4) 19.0% Tubbs (Crawley)


08 (3) 37.5% Hoolihan
08 (3) 37.5% Pitman
08 (3) 37.5% Wilmott (Kettering)

10 (3) 33.3% Drogba
10 (3) 33.3% Bent
09 (3) 33.3% Mohamed (Bath)
13 (3) 23.1% Nasri
14 (3) 21.4% Lowe (Bury)

09 (2) 22.1% Holt
09 (2) 22.1% Pavlychenko
10 (2) 20.0% Van de Vart
08 (2) 25.0% Balotelli

10 (2) 20.0% McGugan
12 (2) 16.7% Tevez
13 (2) 15.4% Commons



Oh look, yet another utterly pointless Snowball stat oxf*rd.

:roll:

User avatar
Wycombe Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6684
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 19:31
Location: Churchdown, Glos

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Wycombe Royal » 05 Jan 2011 15:11

Snowball
Wycombe Royal So why start your post "Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in "?


Because that's what I was doing.

it's called a narrative. but the bolded bit should make it clear to anyone who reads properly
and the underlined bit below (and all the players I bolded there) should also make it totally clear

That simple fact that you need to use bold and underlining means that your writing style is not clear, despite what you may think.

Now I know you'll respond and talk to me like a I'm one of your students again in your normal condescending tone but I don't notice many others on this forum having to use bold and underlining to make their comments more easily understood.

This is a football forum, not a piece of literature or a thesis.........

User avatar
Wimb
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4399
Joined: 21 Nov 2005 09:43
Location: www.thetilehurstend.com

Re: Long - time for a change?

by Wimb » 06 Jan 2011 06:46

Wycombe Royal
Snowball
Wycombe Royal So why start your post "Was looking at possible strikers we might be interested in "?


Because that's what I was doing.

it's called a narrative. but the bolded bit should make it clear to anyone who reads properly
and the underlined bit below (and all the players I bolded there) should also make it totally clear

That simple fact that you need to use bold and underlining means that your writing style is not clear, despite what you may think.

Now I know you'll respond and talk to me like a I'm one of your students again in your normal condescending tone but I don't notice many others on this forum having to use bold and underlining to make their comments more easily understood.

This is a football forum, not a piece of literature or a thesis.........


This ^^^

810 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Royals and Racers and 410 guests

It is currently 10 Aug 2025 12:27