nottingram

1 hour ago, Returning ram said:

I can't remember yesterday, let alone something like that.

I believe Stevange away and ones prior to that he was played in an advanced position. (Only because someone mentioned it at weekend, so it may or may not be true)

The trouble is (and this is a generalisation rather than specific to Stevenage away) but that was a honking team performance and when they crop up, it seems to be him who gets hooked at half time or him who gets dropped the next game.

I don’t think he is totally blameless, there must be a reason he is easy to drop and it’s not just Warne but a few managers before him, but he seems to have to do so much more to a) stay on the pitch and then b) retain his place than so many others who are allowed a run of bad games. It worked out on Saturday but ignoring having the benefit of hindsight to know for sure, he only got 10 minutes in a game we literally didn’t have a shot in anger in until the 75th minute. 

36 minutes ago, Ram a lamb a ding dong said:

The point I was making was that under Liam he wanted to play football for the sake of it and at all costs. 

Exeter looked the same last night.

I'm all for pragmatism and last night was the epitome of that. I really enjoyed the fact we defended resolutely and then looked to get in behind their fullbacks.

Away from home we are perfectly set up as the onus is always on the home team to press. 

Home is where the problem is. Maybe win all the away matches and draw all the hone matches???

 

In danger of getting into Rosenior v Warne territory which I’ve no interest in, but us playing passing football with better players could or should be different to Exeter playing it with the players they can attract with their budget.

The way Warne plays (or more extreme versions) could probably elevate a side like Exeter to a higher position in the table but possibly foregoes their chance to put their home grown talent in the shop window as much, as seems to have been their model over the last few years. 

10 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

The crazy thing is, I fully regard you as pro-Warne. I know you're not and it's interesting thinking about it now that your sheer common sense stands at such odds with the rhetoric of the 'Warne Out' brigade that it makes you seem directly opposed to them... 

When I think about it, there's very few posters I would say are out and out 'pro-Warne', it's almost like the moderates have been radicalised into backing the manager more than they feel naturally, because of the ridiculous amount of negativity from the other side?

You could copy and paste this almost word for word the other way about any number of different posters. It depends on your perspective. 

49 minutes ago, MadAmster said:

The last sentence of my post to which you replied reads... In the interest of balance, there were other games where the side with the best xG won. 

The problem  with xG is that the various sources use different statistical models and their own algorithms, hence the variance in the figures. Same goes for shots/SOT. The BBC stats are often different to those of DCFC or Sporting Life or "insert newspaper name of your choice".

I've not looked up last night's xG stats but I think our 3 goals wouldn't score well under xG but Collo's early, saved strike would. Conversely, they created a few chances inside our box but either mis-controlled or shot wide/over and those missed chances would probably attract a better xG than our actual goals.

The old adage of there are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics is as true as it ever was. Same with opinion polls, questions get formulated in order to virtually guarantee producing the required outcome.

Whatever any stats say about last night's game, the fact of the matter is that we set out with a game plan, executed it very well and won 3-0. I expect Stevenage to play similarly and to be very physical at Pride Park on Saturday and I hope we don't succumb to this type of game which is one we, historically, haven't been consistent in combatting.

There will always be variations though - the problem is as soon as you add more variables (defensive positioning, height of ball etc) your sample size from which the xG is drawn gets ever smaller, so there is a balance. Internal data within football clubs is likely to be pretty sophisticated though. 

Your last paragraph shows the pitfalls of using it for individual games. I see sometimes people say it is subjective but if anything the problem is that it is totally objective. A team can score early (ish) and then let the other team rack up low quality chances and they end up “losing” on xG. The reality is they might have been totally in control of the game. The longer term look at that might be that letting that happen every week will probably catch up on you when some of those low quality chances you’re happy to give up fly in to the top corner. 

Very good performance 

Bird adding the goal contributions that would triple his value, the month after we sell him 

God he is awful

This ref desperate to show he’s not swayed by the bigger team

Think I’ve said it before but if it was called something like “chance quality” instead of expected goals then you’d have a lot less people poo-pooing it for whatever reason they do.

It’s not the be all and end all but can add context if you want it to. Does make me laugh when people will say it’s meaningless and then happily sit there quoting shots or shots on target.

4 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

IF I remember correctly, they were meant to play at Forest Fields and there were pretty extensive plans to build a ground where the Forest Recreation Ground is (where they currently have the Goose Fair) at the turn of the 20th century. Not quite sure why they ended up at West Bridgeford, I think possibly because the ‘powers that be’ saw Nottingham as a centre for sport and recreation and wanted to build a centre out of the city that was prestigious. Essentially keeping the riff raff away. To put it simply they made a rather ‘19th century’ decision rather than foreshadowing the changing urban landscape, not saying they should have seen it but I think it’s something that’s been a bit of a regret for them overall.

Genuinely good to know albeit I was merely making a jab about their pathetic insistence on being called Nottingham Forest despite it being factually inaccurate.

It is enjoyable that they now play in a tin shed they all pretend to love, that will never ever get extended despite the millions they are pouring into trying, and will refuse to move because they think playing near a river makes them an interesting football club. 

19 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

Why do Nottingham Forests women's football team play their home matches in Derbyshire?

Why don’t Nottingham Forest play in Nottingham?

9 hours ago, Rich84 said:

Am I missing remembering yesterday's game, but didn't we concede when we were playing with a back 4...... but not when we had a 3, yes we were mote attacking after switching, but that was as much to do with the tempo and energy increasing imo 

Yeah although we played more of the game with a 4 etc etc 

I am personally not really fussed what formation we play as I don’t think we look fantastic in either, but I think the reasoning Warne gave after the game for playing 3-5-2 was poor and indicative of his mindset.

Shrewsbury are a crap team who barely score goals and we played a 3 for primarily defensive reasons. That’s before you get on to the implication that he felt he needed an extra body back there for that solidity alongside Nelson and Bradley, both of which he signed. 

14 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

I think the players need to take a lot of responsibility for yesterday too. Shrewsbury are bang average and yesterday was a nailed on three points if the players had just a little imagination. Neither Sibley nor Ward are quick enough to knock the ball past defenders and cross it. However a quick wall pass with the midfield should get them in a crossing position.

We all know Ward is the best crosser of a ball in the club but other than a sublime free kick, he didn’t fashion an opportunity.

He is experienced enough to work out that without his crossing he’s nothing but he couldn’t change it.

Agree to an extent but I think a key issue we have is off the ball movement and players making themselves available.

I think that is largely something that is coached - filling gaps, knowing where to be etc.

If the entire “unit” of a side looks bad at one time it’s hard to pinpoint it to individuals in my opinion. 

One game closer to this mind numbing season ending

7 minutes ago, sage said:

We looked much better in a 433.

Hopefully we'll be back to the Nyambe, Nelson, Cashin and Fozzy defence for the run in, with Adams being more match fit.

 

Sometimes it’s unavoidable going 3 at the back though. For instance when Cashin is out and you need to retain defensive solidity against a team who had scored 21 goals in 30 games prior to today. 

6 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Just a reminder for some people. Paul Warne has won automatic promotion from this league twice. But if we fail autos, Paul Warne has also won a playoff final in this league. He also won the EFL trophy which I think means he has 100% record in Wembley finals.  Just for those saying he doesn’t have the tactics to win the big games. 

If we end up in the play off final I’ll make sure I buy a seat in the top tier so the ball is at eye level the majority of the time

3 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Drop points we have the usual Warne pile on from the same individuals talking about his tactics. Credit to Shrewsbury in their cup final, they made every ball a scrap and I’m impressed they managed that intensity for the whole game. We tried to play and were consistently stopped from doing so, then forced it at times and turned the ball over too regularly and easily. The switch to the back 4 second half helped we gained more control and in a game of few chances we created enough to win but didn’t get that second goal, a few if onlys Wilson hitting the bar, Collo in first half from the ward set piece was an inch wide at the most, a couple of dubious offsides and penalty shouts. Their goal came from nothing, i need to see it back but  Wilson and Mendez lose the ball trying to be too intricate (Nyambe would’ve possibly made a difference in that situation), but then their player has mishit the pull back causing Sibley to slide past the ball and it’s landed perfectly for him to finish it. Real shame thought Wilson had won it and there definitely should’ve been more than 6 minutes added time.

One of those games, we didn’t lose and are still second it’s just annoying that we couldn’t capitalise on our rivals slipping up. This is going to be one close promotion race. Right to the wire.

On the fans today, with the exception of the fans in the North Stand who flooded the exits when Shrewsbury equalised, I thought they were immense. South stand trying to get Paul Warne’s barmy army going all first half, the stadium came alive second half and were with the team (the majority) right to the end. Show frustration at final whistle by all means but the lads need that support every game now.

Pile on, valid criticism. Tomayto, tomarto.

Didn’t have much sympathy for any of our players for their offsides in the first half, but it was a shame the east stand Lino’s sharp eye deserted him in time for their equaliser 

I wonder if one of these days we might try and actually out football one of these crap outfits who turn up to play like this, or whether we will continue to willingly play them at exactly the game they want us to.

When you play win at all costs football and don’t win then you should absolutely expect criticism.

Great result against a very good side, well coached by a manager recently sacked by the team 21st in League 2.

50 minutes ago, David said:

Didn't watch the game, but looking at BBC Football they have Tom Lawrence playing in the midfield 2 in a 4231, can't be right surely?

They could play him in goal in 90% of games.

It’s a shame Bolton didn’t get through in the EFL Trophy. They have a lot of fixtures to catch up on

Can he play up top?

3 minutes ago, Srg said:

The calibre of loan player we want they want to send to the league above. The calibre available to us, won't be given the game time they want them to have. Don't think it's much more complicated than that.

Bit of both I think.

In general there is not a high standard of loans in L1 this year but Warne has also said he is not overly keen on players on their first loans (not saying that’s good or bad), so you’re limiting your market a little straight away. 

And for the ones that do come to this level, style of play and coaching must be a consideration for the loaning club. If Bolton had come in for Bobby Clark, say, Liverpool might look at Conor Bradley’s development there last year and be more inclined to go for it.

I think if the “restrictions” were particularly prohibitive the club should simply not come out and say they made a very good offer for a striker.

That way they can actually blame the “restrictions” without it looking like an excuse for being woefully underprepared and / or deleting every number in their phones except Dejphon Chansiri’s.