When will Brighton lose

[Ramzabac]

It is easy to underestimate Brighton. They were consistently doing well in the championship with Poyet, then appointed Hypia. Thanks to a mate, I get two seats in the home exec bit each season and they give the impression of a well run club with strong fan base and with a clear ambition to get into the Prem. will be interesting to See how they do against other teams In the top 7 as they have only played Hull so far. I am expecting a tough game when they come to Derby. It's still too early to tell how strong they are, until they get a few injuries and suspensions.  

[Thierry Ennui]

There's no sensible grammatical rule that I can think of that should prevent were and was from being interchangeable. They're basically the same word.

Edit - in fact I'm not keen on interchangeable either. Changeable will suffice.

'We was' is 100% wrong.

[Carl Sagan]

*weren't

*were

*were

The first one's arguable because some would say a football team should be treated as a singular noun. In my experience, fans tend to treat their team as a plural noun, but the grammarists would probably be on @Daveo's side there.

However, to say "we was" is as bad as those who write "should of". In this case, he's let Grimsby down, he's let himself down and he's let the forum down.

[Day]

Me and George Harrison will hang our heads in shame and beg for you're forgiveness, their was a time when I knew me grammer but you're right, we should of known better

 

[StringerBell]

'We was' is 100% wrong.

Depends on whether you believe in the grammar of the aristocracy or the grammar of making sense. What you're actually doing is deeming a local dialect to be incorrect in written English. That's fine to an extent, as long as it serves a purpose. Written English needed to be standardised, but when it was local dialects were deemed to be not standard in order to make things easier for us all to write like the  aristocracy, who merely spoke in another dialect, no worse, no better. However, there are instances where it has gone too far and has resulted in snobbery. English that makes perfect sense to everyone has been deemed incorrect. For instance, Star Trek's "Boldy go" was regarded as grammatically wrong for years but has now been deemed fine.

If language makes sense, it make sense. 'We was' might sound wrong but it only sounds wrong because we've been taught it sounds wrong. But it makes perfect grammatical sense. It is basically the same word as were after all, serving the same function. Therefore any criticism of it is pure snobbery. "Are" and "Am" are another two words that are practically the same. I used to know an old woman who said "I are" instead of "I am". It sounded weird, but I couldn't accuse her of not making any sense.

The first one's arguable because some would say a football team should be treated as a singular noun. In my experience, fans tend to treat their team as a plural noun, but the grammarists would probably be on @Daveo's side there.

However, to say "we was" is as bad as those who write "should of". In this case, he's let Grimsby down, he's let himself down and he's let the forum down.

No because have and of are two different words with two different meanings. It requires interpretation from the reader for it to make sense. Using was instead of were doesn't. 

[Bris Vegas]

After 12 games last season Bournemouth had scored 17 goals. Brighton have 18 goals over the same number of games this season. Long way to go yet. Might hit 4 or 5 past Preston on Saturday you just don't know.

But Bournemouth had actually scored a lot the season before, and they were devloping. It was fairly obvious, even after the first set of games, that they had those attacking instincts to really hurt teams.

I genuinely could be wrong about Brighton. But I look at your team, your style of play and the results you've been getting and I just see a well-drilled team without any outstanding players.

This may seem harsh, and the Wolves game aside Derby haven't exactly played great either (we were awful at MK Dons and the 3-1 result was an injustice) so don't think I'm saying we're miles better than you.

But there are teams who play a certain way and have the ability to hammer their opponents - Watford, Bournemouth, Norwich and Derby (at times) were like that last season and the GD told you a lot.

Brighton could go up being well-drilled (Derby did it under Billy Davies and Hull City did it under Steve Bruce) but playing such a way has its problems when facing the better sides - believe me, we saw that under Billy Davies.

I wish you luck for the future. I wouldn't begrudge you getting promoted in the slightest. But seeing you top iright now just makes me think this league really is for the taking and full of mediocre sides.

[Carl Sagan]

Depends on whether you believe in the grammar of the aristocracy or the grammar of making sense. What you're actually doing is deeming a local dialect to be incorrect in written English. That's fine to an extent, as long as it serves a purpose. Written English needed to be standardised, but when it was local dialects were deemed to be not standard in order to make things easier for us all to write like the  aristocracy, who merely spoke in another dialect, no worse, no better. However, there are instances where it has gone too far and has resulted in snobbery. English that makes perfect sense to everyone has been deemed incorrect. For instance, Star Trek's "Boldy go" was regarded as grammatically wrong for years but has now been deemed fine.

If language makes sense, it make sense. 'We was' might sound wrong but it only sounds wrong because we've been taught it sounds wrong. But it makes perfect grammatical sense. It is basically the same word as were after all, serving the same function. Therefore any criticism of it is pure snobbery. "Are" and "Am" are another two words that are practically the same. I used to know an old woman who said "I are" instead of "I am". It sounded weird, but I couldn't accuse her of not making any sense.

No because have and of are two different words with two different meanings. It requires interpretation from the reader for it to make sense. Using was instead of were doesn't. 

You've been reading too much 1984 and with it the introduction of newspeak to simplify the language. Part of the beauty of English is its richness and the nuances, even when they're not logical. Of course language evolves and sometimes the subtleties are lost, so nowadays we say "you" for both singular and plural instead of keeping "thee" (unlike the French who retain "tu" as well as "vous").

Your "I are" example is fascinating because in the Queen's English we do say "aren't I", but the Scots I know all say "am't I" which is surely more logical. Lose tonight and I daresay there'll be a fair few saying "we was robbed".

[StringerBell]

You've been reading too much 1984 and with it the introduction of newspeak to simplify the language. Part of the beauty of English is its richness and the nuances, even when they're not logical. Of course language evolves and sometimes the subtleties are lost, so nowadays we say "you" for both singular and plural instead of keeping "thee" (unlike the French who retain "tu" as well as "vous").

Your "I are" example is fascinating because in the Queen's English we do say "aren't I", but the Scots I know all say "am't I" which is surely more logical. Lose tonight and I daresay there'll be a fair few saying "we was robbed".

When Samuel Johnson first attempted to standardise written English he chose the dialect spoken between Oxford, Cambridge and London as the dialect he would standardise, thereby making all other dialects in the nation 'incorrect'. No 1984, just history. He did only intend on written English being standardised however, but many snobs took it upon themselves to correct people's spoken English too.

[SimonBHA]

But Bournemouth had actually scored a lot the season before, and they were devloping. It was fairly obvious, even after the first set of games, that they had those attacking instincts to really hurt teams.

I genuinely could be wrong about Brighton. But I look at your team, your style of play and the results you've been getting and I just see a well-drilled team without any outstanding players.

This may seem harsh, and the Wolves game aside Derby haven't exactly played great either (we were awful at MK Dons and the 3-1 result was an injustice) so don't think I'm saying we're miles better than you.

But there are teams who play a certain way and have the ability to hammer their opponents - Watford, Bournemouth, Norwich and Derby (at times) were like that last season and the GD told you a lot.

Brighton could go up being well-drilled (Derby did it under Billy Davies and Hull City did it under Steve Bruce) but playing such a way has its problems when facing the better sides - believe me, we saw that under Billy Davies.

I wish you luck for the future. I wouldn't begrudge you getting promoted in the slightest. But seeing you top iright now just makes me think this league really is for the taking and full of mediocre sides.

Fair enough. I honestly don't know if we have what it takes. Just enjoying it at the moment and hoping we can keep it up. 

We have more about us than just being well drilled though. I haven't seen movement up front as good as ours since we lost the home leg of the play-offs to you. Hemed and Baldock linking up really well together. We're playing with a quick tempo, it's so end to end at times it the closest I've ever seen us to Premier League style fast paced football. We're getting bodies forward, into the box and causing sides problems. It feels like we're playing very well but there's more to come. 

We're certainly not sat in, hard to beat and nicking goals from set pieces. We've created plenty of chances in every game. The games we've drawn we felt we should have won. How we didn't get a winner against Cardiff I'll never know.

Anyway, don't mean to drone on, it's your forum. Just wanted to address some of the points that I didn't think were really accurate. Suspect our first loss will come at Reading. 

 

[Van der MoodHoover]

Fair enough. I honestly don't know if we have what it takes. Just enjoying it at the moment and hoping we can keep it up. 

We have more about us than just being well drilled though. I haven't seen movement up front as good as ours since we lost the home leg of the play-offs to you. Hemed and Baldock linking up really well together. We're playing with a quick tempo, it's so end to end at times it the closest I've ever seen us to Premier League style fast paced football. We're getting bodies forward, into the box and causing sides problems. It feels like we're playing very well but there's more to come. 

We're certainly not sat in, hard to beat and nicking goals from set pieces. We've created plenty of chances in every game. The games we've drawn we felt we should have won. How we didn't get a winner against Cardiff I'll never know.

Anyway, don't mean to drone on, it's your forum. Just wanted to address some of the points that I didn't think were really accurate. Suspect our first loss will come at Reading. 

 

We proved you can nick a 1-0 there.

I like Brighton - my favourite awayday. Good knowledgeable fans. And having followed their team to the wilderness of withdean they deserve some of the good times.

We were I think linked with both dale stephens and lewis dunk in the close season.

It is I suppose a Derby habit to suffer acute amnesia and write off all transfer targets who don't join as mediocre. 

Had they signed both would of course have been paragons of towering excellence in their respective positions. 

Good luck for the season -however it turns out. 

[Perseus]

But Bournemouth had actually scored a lot the season before, and they were devloping. It was fairly obvious, even after the first set of games, that they had those attacking instincts to really hurt teams.

I genuinely could be wrong about Brighton. But I look at your team, your style of play and the results you've been getting and I just see a well-drilled team without any outstanding players.

This may seem harsh, and the Wolves game aside Derby haven't exactly played great either (we were awful at MK Dons and the 3-1 result was an injustice) so don't think I'm saying we're miles better than you.

But there are teams who play a certain way and have the ability to hammer their opponents - Watford, Bournemouth, Norwich and Derby (at times) were like that last season and the GD told you a lot.

Brighton could go up being well-drilled (Derby did it under Billy Davies and Hull City did it under Steve Bruce) but playing such a way has its problems when facing the better sides - believe me, we saw that under Billy Davies.

I wish you luck for the future. I wouldn't begrudge you getting promoted in the slightest. But seeing you top iright now just makes me think this league really is for the taking and full of mediocre sides.

 

I thought Bournemouth were better than Brighton when they came out of League One, so although I was surprised when they won automatic I fully expected them to be in with a chance.

I personally prefer the possession/passing style of Brighton to the current % football, but it was not working with bog ordinary players at Championship level. Too many teams were playing deep and relying on breakaways so the home form suffered too many upsets.  Erosion of the style does not bode well for the Premier League if we get there. 

Otherwise, the jury is still out and whether Albion midfield can compete against the better teams (not sure who they are?). None of the teams we have played so far have been any good. Brighton team will have to improve in attack (deficient in quite a lot of ways) even to make the play-offs.  Now comparable with the Hull, Reading, Cardiff teams that went up and came back down again.  

Not so much if Brighton will fall away but whether the other teams can catch us. Are they good enough? 

I see Derby as a well drilled team without any flair players as well. A bit more heavyweight than the Brighton team who had too many lightweight flair (not necessarily good) players. The game is on.  

PS: Beware of Blackburn. Conway is an efficient crosser of the ball (more than any other in the Championship) and they have Rhodes. They can look down and out and sneak a draw. 

 

 

 

[SimonBHA]

 

I thought Bournemouth were better than Brighton when they came out of League One, so although I was surprised when they won automatic I fully expected them to be in with a chance.

I personally prefer the possession/passing style of Brighton to the current % football, but it was not working with bog ordinary players at Championship level. Too many teams were playing deep and relying on breakaways so the home form suffered too many upsets.  Erosion of the style does not bode well for the Premier League if we get there. 

Otherwise, the jury is still out and whether Albion midfield can compete against the better teams (not sure who they are?). None of the teams we have played so far have been any good. Brighton team will have to improve in attack (deficient in quite a lot of ways) even to make the play-offs.  Now comparable with the Hull, Reading, Cardiff teams that went up and came back down again.  

Not so much if Brighton will fall away but whether the other teams can catch us. Are they good enough? 

I see Derby as a well drilled team without any flair players as well. A bit more heavyweight than the Brighton team who had too many lightweight flair (not necesarily good) players. The game is on.  

PS: Beware of Blackburn. Conway is an efficient crosser of the ball (more than any other in the Championship) and they have Rhodes. They can look down and out and sneak a draw. 

 

 

 

Please. Stop. 

It's embarrassing.

[Rampage]

I sometimes deliberately write short sentences or simply clauses just for effect. One of the good things about the Forum, where you cannot see the other posters, is to be free to write in an informal, not so correct way in order to be friendly and to feel part of it. Not everyone has had the same education and a lack of it does not lessen the validity of their comments.The big no no for me is telling other posters that their possts are invalided or misinfumed.or complining about their speeling or sintax. The common denominator on here is being a Derby fan and being allowed to have your own opinion. I taught some dylsexic kids and they were generally nicer people than average.Variety and humour is/was/were/whirr/where is the key to a good forum.CYOR 

Worst and funniest speellings that I ever sore:- yrnetin - wire netting, and egog - hedgehog. I struggled with the first but not with the second. The lad who spelt those words wanted to join the army but someone hit him in the eye with a paper pellet on the school bus home and he was turned down because of it. He was a really nice guy.Have mercy and enjoy the banter.CRYO

[Brighton]

Can't wait to play the so called top teams as all these teams below 11th are no challenge. 

[uttoxram75]

When Samuel Johnson first attempted to standardise written English he chose the dialect spoken between Oxford, Cambridge and London as the dialect he would standardise, thereby making all other dialects in the nation 'incorrect'. No 1984, just history. He did only intend on written English being standardised however, but many snobs took it upon themselves to correct people's spoken English too.

There's a monument to Dr. Johnson in Uttoxeter market place.

I'll get my 7 stone chocolate Labrador to poo on it fost thing int morning.

[Derby_Dave]

Well if you lose bobby your ****** and everybody knows it.

No need at all.  

[Perseus]

If Martin is a 7.5, Zamora must be at least a 9 surely?

Zamora 7 (7.5 > 8 if fit)  Darren Bent 5.5 (perhaps 6)  cf. Leon Best 2

[SimonBHA]

Said it in another thread - they're just like we were under Billy Davies.

Don't have any outstanding players at this level, but a well-drilled team with a good manager who certainly can get the most out of his players. They're a good team.

But... They're also lucky, like we were under BD and they'll get found out against better teams. How many late goals have they scored already? Exactly like us under BD. All 8 wins by the odd goal, exactly like us under BD.

They haven't dominated possession too often, and they don't really counter at real speed. They're just a solid outfit on the sort of run of form where you think 'surely they have to lose soon?'.

Bournemouth, Watford and Norwich were clearly really good teams last season. They hammered teams. Brighton don't.

You can point to Burnley too, but they had some decent players in that team and a striker who now plays for Liverpool.

Brighton have Sam Baldock upfront with Bobby Zamora as competition. They have nobody that would actually make our first-team XI, though that's not to say they're not a good 'team' as you can get out of this league without a squad of high-profile names which cost about 20m plus to put together.

I like them. Rate their manager, their stadium, their fans, their ways of doing things.

But we all found out what happens when you go up with a pretty mediocre team considering. I reckon they'll be in a battle for the playoffs, and given their start they have a good shot at making them.

 

 

 

Just seen a post on another forum with some stats which kinda dispel a few of the suggestions about possession and scoring etc:

Highest average possession (after 11 games):

Brentford 56%
MK Dons 55.6%
Derby 54.5%
Wolves 53.8%
Brighton 53.2%
Fulham 51.6%
Middlesbrough 51.6%
Hull 50.8%
Leeds 50.7%
Ipswich 50.5%
Bolton 50.4%
Nottingham Forest 49.8%
Cardiff 49.3%
QPR 49.2%
Bristol City 48.8%
Huddersfield 48.4%
Charlton 48.4%
Blackburn 47.7%
Reading 47.5%
Burnley 47.5%
Sheffield Weds 47.4%
Preston 47.1%
Rotherham 46.4%
Birmingham 44%

Highest average shots per goal (after 11 games):

Nottingham Forest 17.5
Brighton 16
Reading 15.8
Derby 15.5
Blackburn 14.1
Hull 14.1
MK Dons 13.5
Brentford 13.1
Wolves 12.9
Ipswich 12.9
Rotherham 12.8
Charlton 12.7
Middlesbrough 12.6
Bolton 12.6
Leeds 12.5
Birmingham 12.5
QPR 12.5
Preston 12.2
Huddersfield 12.1
Fulham 12.1
Cardiff 12.1
Bristol City 11.6
Burnley 11.6
Sheffield Weds 10.4

 

[eddie]

I'm willing to wager a tenner (loser makes payment to charity of winner's choice) that Derby lose less league games than Brighton this season.

 

[Van der MoodHoover]

Can't wait to play the so called top teams as all these teams below 11th are no challenge. 

....cough.....Blackburn.......