Away Match Day Thread +++ 18/01/20 Gillingham v OUFC L1 +++

I beg to differ regarding having the best squad behind Rotherham. If that was the case, how are we so perversely affected by injuries, due to lack of depth in quality nearly every season.
I don't think we are being too adversely affected by injuries. In previous seasons we'd flounder completely with only one or two key players out. This season we've had more injuries then I can remember but we've managed to climb steadily up the table.

Obviously we can't play as well as we did in the autumn, and a few recent draws and losses haven't helped the mood, but this is the strongest team in terms of depth that we've had for a very long time. We've not done badly considering the players we're missing and we'll come good when they're back.
 
We are missing the effect Cadden had on opposition teams with his pace and positioning at RB - Long is a different type of defender so it's not a slight at him, but we are lacking the same impact at RB. It doesn't help that Henry has been injured.

KR did mention he wanted to be careful playing Browne for 3 games in a week and that played a big part in him being on the bench yesterday.

We really need careful transfers now - the loanee limit will make it tricky if the club want to retain Thorne. But in another month, Holland will be acclimatised to League football, Woodburn will nearly be back?and some other injuries will have cleared up too. And the sun will shine, so it should suit Fosu more too - blame Rad Ox for that one. The reality is we are going to have to dig in for a month or so and hope that we can get by and make the squad better in this window.

Hope is not lost but a positive mindset is needed.

ps. Steve Evans is still a fat b*stard.
 
Sorry, I was bored ploughing through this thread and I noticed this interesting comment. I haven't studied the matter in depth but I'd have thought about the same percentage of teams would do as well is the second half of the season. Do you have any figures to prove this?

Well I was bored, and this was easy to run, so I checked the numbers for League One last season.

Teams earned a total of 765 points in their first 23 games and 744 in their final 23 games. All well and good so far.

11 teams gained more points in the first half of the season than the second half, getting worse as the season goes on. The range runs from Bradford (1 point difference) to Walsall (15).

11 teams gained less points in the first half of the season than the second half, improving as the season went on. Bookends were Charlton (2 points) to Wimbledon and Bristol Rovers (14).

Luton and Rochdale both gained the same number of points in each half.

So a pretty even split, which makes sense in football because any time a team loses an extra game, someone else should be winning one.

One thing that is definitely noticeable is that teams at the top end after 23 games tended to do worse, and teams at the bottom tended to improve. Of the 12 highest teams after 23 games, 3 improved their performance, 1 stayed the same, and 8 declined. For the 12 lowest teams after 23 games the exact opposite is therefore true - 3 got worse, 1 stayed the same, 8 improved.

Therefore, using one tiny sample as evidence, we can't support the idea that teams generally struggle to maintain their points performance. But we can say that Oxford, in the play off spaces after 23 games this year, are prime candidates to dip.

A quick edit to comment on the play off places. Doncaster (-5), Sunderland (-9) and Pompey (-14) all made the play offs despite a second half decline, whilst Peterborough (-10) just missed out and finished 7th. More ominously, the three teams missing are Luton (0), Charlton (+2) and Barnsley (+7). You might remember that they are the three that got promoted...
 
Last edited:
What a load of sh1te,embarrasingly timewasting and give away a pathetic penalty,we have gone from a team who pass and move to a team of hoofers.....promotion??? not with that lot...... hurry up and return Henry,Taylor and Brannigan.......else not a chance.

we are still top of possession & passing accuracy stats and are now in the top 5 for shots per game! Take a chill pill ffs
 
I didn't do any in depth analysis. The idea is just based on 70 years of following United. 70 years of watching football in fact. Glad to see that the analysis has been done. Interesting to say the least.
 
I don't think we are being too adversely affected by injuries. In previous seasons we'd flounder completely with only one or two key players out. This season we've had more injuries then I can remember but we've managed to climb steadily up the table.

Obviously we can't play as well as we did in the autumn, and a few recent draws and losses haven't helped the mood, but this is the strongest team in terms of depth that we've had for a very long time. We've not done badly considering the players we're missing and we'll come good when they're back.


As Middle Barton Yellow pointed out this is the third season that we have had a chronic injury problem at roughly this time of the season. Why is this?
 
As Middle Barton Yellow pointed out this is the third season that we have had a chronic injury problem at roughly this time of the season. Why is this?

Too much football according to prem clubs and our League play more games
 
Just watched the highlights. Possibly just the way it was edited, but we seemed all over the ’rockin jock’s’ mob...

what an odious chap he seems.
 
Well I was bored, and this was easy to run, so I checked the numbers for League One last season.

Teams earned a total of 765 points in their first 23 games and 744 in their final 23 games. All well and good so far.

11 teams gained more points in the first half of the season than the second half, getting worse as the season goes on. The range runs from Bradford (1 point difference) to Walsall (15).

11 teams gained less points in the first half of the season than the second half, improving as the season went on. Bookends were Charlton (2 points) to Wimbledon and Bristol Rovers (14).

Luton and Rochdale both gained the same number of points in each half.

So a pretty even split, which makes sense in football because any time a team loses an extra game, someone else should be winning one.

One thing that is definitely noticeable is that teams at the top end after 23 games tended to do worse, and teams at the bottom tended to improve. Of the 12 highest teams after 23 games, 3 improved their performance, 1 stayed the same, and 8 declined. For the 12 lowest teams after 23 games the exact opposite is therefore true - 3 got worse, 1 stayed the same, 8 improved.

Therefore, using one tiny sample as evidence, we can't support the idea that teams generally struggle to maintain their points performance. But we can say that Oxford, in the play off spaces after 23 games this year, are prime candidates to dip.

A quick edit to comment on the play off places. Doncaster (-5), Sunderland (-9) and Pompey (-14) all made the play offs despite a second half decline, whilst Peterborough (-10) just missed out and finished 7th. More ominously, the three teams missing are Luton (0), Charlton (+2) and Barnsley (+7). You might remember that they are the three that got promoted...
The team that is 1st at mid season can't improve but can decline by finishing in twenty three other places; the team that is 2nd can only improve by finishing first but can decline by finishing in twenty two other places; .... ; the team that is 12th at mid season can improve by finishing in eleven other positions or decline by finishing in twelve other places.

i.e. it is likely that the teams in the top half after 23 games tend to do worse in the second half of the season because at mid season each of them has more places below them than above them. Thinking of just one game at a time, if one team in the top end moves up the table then one or more other teams must move down.

Not impossible to have more teams improving than declining - the team that was 1st at mid season could finish 12th, with all the other teams in the top half each moving up one place. The bottom half could remain in the same order - so you don't necessarily have symmetry over the whole table with the same number improving as declining.

And the same argument apply for teams in the bottom half, swapping round improving and declining.
 
I wondered how long it would be before our amazing passing was rolled out!
Maybe they will roll out our amazing goal scoring, or the quality of our attacking play, or that we considered no league goals between the end of August and the beginning of January, or that we're still 5th despite a poor start and a rocky few weeks, or that we destroyed West Ham, gave Man City a game, got to the quarterfinals of a national cup, still got a big game against Newcastle next week, or that in Dickie, Brannagan, Fosu, Baptiste and Gorrin we have players who would walk into any team in this league or higher and are worth many millions.

So, there are many positive aspects of what will (in all likelihood) be our best season for 20+ years. Or you can be a dick and moan all the time!!!
 
The team that is 1st at mid season can't improve but can decline by finishing in twenty three other places; the team that is 2nd can only improve by finishing first but can decline by finishing in twenty two other places; .... ; the team that is 12th at mid season can improve by finishing in eleven other positions or decline by finishing in twelve other places.

But the team in 1st could get more points in the second half of the season, which is why I think points are the better thing to look at.

i.e. it is likely that the teams in the top half after 23 games tend to do worse in the second half of the season because at mid season each of them has more places below them than above them.

If all teams are equal I would agree, one would assume that the team top after 23 games is better than the team that is 12th, and should therefore pick up more points in the rest of the season.

Not impossible to have more teams improving than declining - the team that was 1st at mid season could finish 12th, with all the other teams in the top half each moving up one place. The bottom half could remain in the same order - so you don't necessarily have symmetry over the whole table with the same number improving as declining.

It's certainly not impossible from a mathematical perspective, which is why I looked at whether it happened last season.

In order for more teams to decline in the second half of the season, you would have to have a smaller number of teams picking up proportionally more points. It seems reasonable to start from the point of view that a team is just as likely to "run hot" at one point of the season as in any other. If that were the case, you would not expect much of a mismatch in terms of teams who improved vs teams who regressed.

However, once you knew 11 teams improved and 11 teams got worse, and you knew that the top 12 included 3 teams that got better and 8 teams that got worse, you did know (for a mathematical certainty) that the bottom 12 included the mirror of that.
 
Last edited:
we are still top of possession & passing accuracy stats and are now in the top 5 for shots per game! Take a chill pill ffs
I'm sorry but stats are a smokescreen in many ways.
We had 68% possession at Donny and more shots and corners but lost.
We had 61% possession at home to Rotherham and more shots and corners but lost.
Its all about getting the ball in that white rectangle covered with a net and at the moment we have lost our way in that respect!!
 
I'm sorry but stats are a smokescreen in many ways.
We had 68% possession at Donny and more shots and corners but lost.
We had 61% possession at home to Rotherham and more shots and corners but lost.
Its all about getting the ball in that white rectangle covered with a net and at the moment we have lost our way in that respect!!

It shows that fundamentally, we're not playing badly. But, as we do know, we're not taking our chances but making mistakes at both ends.

Taylor's shot against Doncaster goes in rather than being cleared off the line, we smash the ball into the crowd at the end of the first half against Rotherham then Taylor scores the one on one, Gorrin doesn't stick a leg out in the box yesterday. Collectively we could be sat at the top of the table looking smug with a few tweaks at important times, but that's football.

I'd rather be in the situation where we are, than where we are losing control of the game and need to make big changes throughout the team.
 
It’s clear we are missing Branagan, Henry and Cadden. Plus our style doesn’t suit gloopy pitches.
But most importantly those were three tough games. Argument to be made that we are only a point under par.
Think we’ve got a decent chance next Saturday, Geordies nothing special.
 
We will have to win our next 4 matches then. blackpool, peterboro, burton and sunderland. They look as hard as doncaster, rotherham, ipswich and gillingham.
 
Rather unsurprisingly the two players that assist the most shots in the team not being present has had an impact.

Using possession stats, lulz
 
Back
Top Bottom