|
Post by m14hatter on Sept 19, 2021 22:45:52 GMT
Did nothing of note (barring the worldie against Halifax) in 18 months at this level under Gannon. Didn’t get a chance under Rusk. Would be fine playing for Halifax or Alty but we’ve got better than him in MSH and others. MSH has done nothing in 7 games… just saying. Most of our players sadly haven’t. But if Thomas was the answer why didn’t the likes of Chesterfield or Wrexham or Notts County pick him up on a free for their title challenges or any other conf club pick him up? I’m not trying to belittle him. He was a great servant and mr reliable for us in the NLN but we needed better to kick on.
|
|
|
Post by oakwoodbank on Sept 19, 2021 22:48:52 GMT
I think leicesterhatter’s post just above sums it up better than I could. Use stats well or they might as well be in the “lies, damned lies” category. Exactly. Stats should be factual by their very nature. Having a statistician is great, but if you've got someone looking at their output and making decisions which fly in the face of them, then there's no point in them really. Now those stats play into squad selection, performance, fitness amongst other things. You have to think those stats will show a decline across the board - yet nothing is changing. Which suggests the style of play and tactics aren't working/the personnel aren't either. It seems to me that this analytical/statistical thing is used to fill in where natural ability, instinct and good experience at the job are not there in sufficient quantity/quality for any individual manager.
|
|
|
Post by Stranded Hatter on Sept 19, 2021 22:55:37 GMT
People point out top scorers in the NLN as possible options for us, well Adam Thomas is one of those joint top scorers... Did nothing of note (barring the worldie against Halifax) in 18 months at this level under Gannon. Didn’t get a chance under Rusk. Would be fine playing for Halifax or Alty but we’ve got better than him in MSH and others. He was always an effective option at getting us up the pitch, even at this level. I genuinely think he’s the most underrated County player in the last 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by leicesterhatter on Sept 20, 2021 5:20:21 GMT
Exactly. Stats should be factual by their very nature. Having a statistician is great, but if you've got someone looking at their output and making decisions which fly in the face of them, then there's no point in them really. Now those stats play into squad selection, performance, fitness amongst other things. You have to think those stats will show a decline across the board - yet nothing is changing. Which suggests the style of play and tactics aren't working/the personnel aren't either. Lies, damned lies and statistics. “While many of us pride ourselves in our objective thinking, the reality is that we humans are terrible at evaluating situations and predicting outcomes based on facts only. Confirmation bias is our tendency to seek, interpret, favour, and remember information in a way that confirms our prior hypotheses or personal beliefs. The more we desire a specific outcome or believe in a specific principle, the more likely we are to search for confirming evidence.” And, it seems, go on believing it, even when it isn't working. And without any factual reference points, i.e. statistics... What is there to keep any bias in check?
|
|
|
Post by Nik on Sept 20, 2021 6:32:12 GMT
Did nothing of note (barring the worldie against Halifax) in 18 months at this level under Gannon. Didn’t get a chance under Rusk. Would be fine playing for Halifax or Alty but we’ve got better than him in MSH and others. MSH has done nothing in 7 games… just saying. Whilst that's true, he's hardly seen the ball compared to other players. There were countless times on Saturday alone where he was free on the right, yet the ball gets recycled back to the CBs, back to Hinchliffe and then pumped up to Reid/Madden/nobody and possession is lost. It's the story of his season so far. I wish Sam was fit, as I think he could switch to 4 at the back and commit to both MSH and Whitfield as wingers (rather than wing backs). I see MSH like Gareth Bale (not just because he's Welsh) in that he's a defender but isn't the greatest defensively and has the attributes to play further forward with a competent RB behind him. Another thing I've noticed this season is they no longer leave MSH as the furthest forward when defending corners or free kicks. That won at least 2/3 penalties/red cards last season when he countered with his pace and yet it's been binned off. It feels like all creative and attacking outlets have been stifled by the tactics this season.
|
|
|
Post by leicesterhatter on Sept 20, 2021 6:45:51 GMT
MSH has done nothing in 7 games… just saying. Whilst that's true, he's hardly seen the ball compared to other players. There were countless times on Saturday alone where he was free on the right, yet the ball gets recycled back to the CBs, back to Hinchliffe and then pumped up to Reid/Madden/nobody and possession is lost. It's the story of his season so far. I wish Sam was fit, as I think he could switch to 4 at the back and commit to both MSH and Whitfield as wingers (rather than wing backs). I see MSH like Gareth Bale (not just because he's Welsh) in that he's a defender but isn't the greatest defensively and has the attributes to play further forward with a competent RB behind him. Another thing I've noticed this season is they no longer leave MSH as the furthest forward when defending corners or free kicks. That won at least 2/3 penalties/red cards last season when he countered with his pace and yet it's been binned off. It feels like all creative and attacking outlets have been stifled by the tactics this season. Our wing backs have largely been reduced to being a pivot point, instead of an attacking outlet. They're stood on the touchline facing inwards, instead of trying to push their opposition fullback backwards/get in behind.
|
|
|
Post by Cale Green Hatter on Sept 20, 2021 6:53:32 GMT
For me SW and SR and his assistants could go tomorrow but we will need some sort of continuity. Half of the players seem happy to play in a system that doesn't work playing turgid slow predictable crap and they could go as well. Dagenham, Yeovil and Halifax have taken us to the cleaners yet the manner of the defeats hasn't hit home - its just a case of "you win some you lose some" bollox. I cannot see any advantage in the sort of continuity you seem to be advocating. The duo of Wilson/Rusk are the architects of our downfall this season. Getting rid of Rusk is a natural football exercise; but Wilson is a more difficult one because his involvement with Mr Stott. That is something that only the owner can resolve and it may be that Mr Stott wouldn't be confident about the future without Wilson still at the club. However, the other side of the continuity (the players) is something that must at least remain for the rest of the season, apart from normal transfer arrangements. The continuity issue relates to the interim period between Managers etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2021 7:55:41 GMT
Stats aren't a bad thing by themselves though - they pay a major role in football now (with assessing performance levels, fitness, etc). If we use them poorly though, they're completely pointless. I completely endorse this. For a large part of my career in the last 25 years I have advised companies on the use of performance statistics to improve their businesses - they're called KPIs (key performance indicators) in my trade. The point is that its dead easy to design KIs - yeah; bad ones. You have to think which things affect the desired end result and measure them in the right way. For instance one might think that number of customers on the books would be a good KPI, or even number of customers won. But if you have a leaky bucket and are losing customers as fast as you win them, maybe not. So customer retention may be better, then. But no point in having customers unless you sell a lot to them. So sales per customer then, perhaps. Better, but many companies suffer from what's known as the whale curve - a few really good customers who build your profits and a load who actually cost you more to serve than you earn from them. So profit per customer, or numbers of customers with profit over a certain threshold makes more sense. And you know what, that's actually much harder to measure. Good information generally requires sophistication of thought and design - but then the KPI score needs careful interrogation and understanding. We have all seen % possession and % pass completion. Easy, lazy KPIs. What's really important to understand as well is that people behave the way they are measured. Much easier to keep possession in our half rather than to try to keep it in the final third, where it can do some damage. And why risk an offensive, tricky, forward pass when a nice easy sideways one keeps my pass completion stats looking good. My wife used to work as a nurse in cardiology (I won't say where because of what I'll say next). She worked with various surgeons, one of whom was brilliant and would take on cases of patients whose outlook was hopeless and that other doctors had written off and wouldn't touch. He saved a lot, but lost a lot too. I reckon his mortality stats weren't as good as the others. But who would you rather have when you're at death's door? The doctor who can recommend a good undertaker or the chap who will take a risk to try to save you. At the moment it looks like we have a team of talented doctors who have learnt that it is better to keep the mortality stats looking good, rather than to save us, the patients, who are slowly dying.
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Sept 20, 2021 8:11:03 GMT
Stats aren't a bad thing by themselves though - they pay a major role in football now (with assessing performance levels, fitness, etc). If we use them poorly though, they're completely pointless. I completely endorse this. For a large part of my career in the last 25 years I have advised companies on the use of performance statistics to improve their businesses - they're called KPIs (key performance indicators) in my trade. The point is that its dead easy to design KIs - yeah; bad ones. You have to think which things affect the desired end result and measure them in the right way. For instance one might think that number of customers on the books would be a good KPI, or even number of customers won. But if you have a leaky bucket and are losing customers as fast as you win them, maybe not. So customer retention may be better, then. But no point in having customers unless you sell a lot to them. So sales per customer then, perhaps. Better, but many companies suffer from what's known as the whale curve - a few really good customers who build your profits and a load who actually cost you more to serve than you earn from them. So profit per customer, or numbers of customers with profit over a certain threshold makes more sense. And you know what, that's actually much harder to measure. Good information generally requires sophistication of thought and design - but then the KPI score needs careful interrogation and understanding. We have all seen % possession and % pass completion. Easy, lazy KPIs. What's really important to understand as well is that people behave the way they are measured. Much easier to keep possession in our half rather than to try to keep it in the final third, where it can do some damage. And why risk an offensive, tricky, forward pass when a nice easy sideways one keeps my pass completion stats looking good. My wife used to work as a nurse in cardiology (I won't say where because of what I'll say next). She worked with various surgeons, one of whom was brilliant and would take on cases of patients whose outlook was hopeless and that other doctors had written off and wouldn't touch. He saved a lot, but lost a lot too. I reckon his mortality stats weren't as good as the others. But who would you rather have when you're at death's door? The doctor who can recommend a good undertaker or the chap who will take a risk to try to save you. At the moment it looks like we have a team of talented doctors who have learnt that it is better to keep the mortality stats looking good, rather than to save us, the patients, who are slowly dying. Looks like we have a competent and serious explanation of my amateurish and sarcastic “wrong kind of possession” comment from a little while ago!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2021 8:21:33 GMT
I completely endorse this. For a large part of my career in the last 25 years I have advised companies on the use of performance statistics to improve their businesses - they're called KPIs (key performance indicators) in my trade. The point is that its dead easy to design KIs - yeah; bad ones. You have to think which things affect the desired end result and measure them in the right way. For instance one might think that number of customers on the books would be a good KPI, or even number of customers won. But if you have a leaky bucket and are losing customers as fast as you win them, maybe not. So customer retention may be better, then. But no point in having customers unless you sell a lot to them. So sales per customer then, perhaps. Better, but many companies suffer from what's known as the whale curve - a few really good customers who build your profits and a load who actually cost you more to serve than you earn from them. So profit per customer, or numbers of customers with profit over a certain threshold makes more sense. And you know what, that's actually much harder to measure. Good information generally requires sophistication of thought and design - but then the KPI score needs careful interrogation and understanding. We have all seen % possession and % pass completion. Easy, lazy KPIs. What's really important to understand as well is that people behave the way they are measured. Much easier to keep possession in our half rather than to try to keep it in the final third, where it can do some damage. And why risk an offensive, tricky, forward pass when a nice easy sideways one keeps my pass completion stats looking good. My wife used to work as a nurse in cardiology (I won't say where because of what I'll say next). She worked with various surgeons, one of whom was brilliant and would take on cases of patients whose outlook was hopeless and that other doctors had written off and wouldn't touch. He saved a lot, but lost a lot too. I reckon his mortality stats weren't as good as the others. But who would you rather have when you're at death's door? The doctor who can recommend a good undertaker or the chap who will take a risk to try to save you. At the moment it looks like we have a team of talented doctors who have learnt that it is better to keep the mortality stats looking good, rather than to save us, the patients, who are slowly dying. Looks like we have a competent and serious explanation of my amateurish and sarcastic “wrong kind of possession” comment from a little while ago! You do yourself a serious disservice. As I said, this is my specialist subject as it were. I often read stuff on this board and marvel at insights about methods of play I haven't a clue about. Over the years I've met plenty of managers in businesses who had a gut feel that what was being done wasn't right and would speak up about it, but couldn't quite put their finger on what it was because it wasn't their specialism. Much, much better that than not to recognise the problem at all or to just go along with the status quo for an easy life.
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Sept 20, 2021 8:39:52 GMT
Looks like we have a competent and serious explanation of my amateurish and sarcastic “wrong kind of possession” comment from a little while ago! You do yourself a serious disservice. As I said, this is my specialist subject as it were. I often read stuff on this board and marvel at insights about methods of play I haven't a clue about. Over the years I've met plenty of managers in businesses who had a gut feel that what was being done wasn't right and would speak up about it, but couldn't quite put their finger on what it was because it wasn't their specialism. Much, much better that than not to recognise the problem at all or to just go along with the status quo for an easy life. Very kind of you to say! One thing I will also say - which unusually for me is in defence of Simon Wilson - is that he *did* talk about possession in the final third once (first or second JK v SW fixture). At the time goals were a little scarce but not unheard-of, so it didn’t seem unreasonable to assume general possession and possession in the final third were proportional in some way since (Rooney excepted) most goals would come from the final third. General possession stats are easier to find in the public domain than final-third possession stats and the possession stats were strong then as they are now, so at the time it was an oddity. As far as I can recall, discussion of possession in stuff coming out of the club since has just been in the general sense, and your point about one not necessarily leading on to the other seems both enlightening and explanatory. What’s most puzzling is that this is the domain where SW made his name. There are even magazine and newspaper articles about him doing it! The only analogy I can think of is that SW, the performance analyst, and the coaching team (horde?) and busy trying to decide if we’d be better off with a diesel, petrol or electric motor, when we haven’t in fact invented the wheel yet… I reckon the only way we could get closer to the McKnight days would be if we started having cheerleaders at half-time “to get the fans going”, but that’s my prejudices showing through again!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2021 9:02:12 GMT
Very kind of you to say! One thing I will also say - which unusually for me is in defence of Simon Wilson - is that he *did* talk about possession in the final third once (first or second JK v SW fixture). At the time goals were a little scarce but not unheard-of, so it didn’t seem unreasonable to assume general possession and possession in the final third were proportional in some way since (Rooney excepted) most goals would come from the final third. General possession stats are easier to find in the public domain than final-third possession stats and the possession stats were strong then as they are now, so at the time it was an oddity. As far as I can recall, discussion of possession in stuff coming out of the club since has just been in the general sense, and your point about one not necessarily leading on to the other seems both enlightening and explanatory. What’s most puzzling is that this is the domain where SW made his name. There are even magazine and newspaper articles about him doing it! The only analogy I can think of is that SW, the performance analyst, and the coaching team (horde?) and busy trying to decide if we’d be better off with a diesel, petrol or electric motor, when we haven’t in fact invented the wheel yet… I reckon the only way we could get closer to the McKnight days would be if we started having cheerleaders at half-time “to get the fans going”, but that’s my prejudices showing through again! A very good point in your penultimate paragraph. Success requires an effective strategy, effectively executed. KPIs derive (or should do) from strategy. Designed and used correctly they can help a great deal with strategy execution. But of course a terrible strategy really well executed just gets you to failure more quickly! So you need both - a good strategy and good execution. And ideally a strategy that comes as a complete surprise to competitors. (For instance the way Ipswich under Alf Ramsey won the league in 61-62). I think you could be onto something big here. The point is of course that there is more than one way to be successful at football as we have seen over the years. Maybe the strategy for doing that at County hasn't been fully set or its evolving in an experimental way (hence the scattergun signing of players). Or maybe, and lets hope not, its just a terrible strategy that's being executed really well.....
|
|
|
Post by ebbs on Sept 20, 2021 9:44:09 GMT
For me SW and SR and his assistants could go tomorrow but we will need some sort of continuity. Half of the players seem happy to play in a system that doesn't work playing turgid slow predictable crap and they could go as well. Dagenham, Yeovil and Halifax have taken us to the cleaners yet the manner of the defeats hasn't hit home - its just a case of "you win some you lose some" bollox. I cannot see any advantage in the sort of continuity you seem to be advocating. The duo of Wilson/Rusk are the architects of our downfall this season. Getting rid of Rusk is a natural football exercise; but Wilson is a more difficult one because his involvement with Mr Stott. That is something that only the owner can resolve and it may be that Mr Stott wouldn't be confident about the future without Wilson still at the club. However, the other side of the continuity (the players) is something that must at least remain for the rest of the season, apart from normal transfer arrangements. If I were Mr Stott I wouldn't be confident about the future of the club WITH Wilson in situ.
|
|
|
Post by ricky on Sept 21, 2021 13:01:24 GMT
Whatever the ins and outs of the matter, Simon Wilson has made an absolute pigs ear of his role. He’s completely lost the trust of the supporters, he’s introduced players who are past their best on high wages and long contracts, characters who may or may not be, good influences on the squad. Whilst Jim Gannon has to take some responsibility for his own demise, whatever Jim’s way of doing things was, it was definitely far less profligate and more successful than Wilson’s MO, what’s more, Jim represented the soul of the club, the lineage back to Danny Bergara, amongst so many other things. The introduction of Simon Rusk, on paper at least, could have been a good appointment, but he was clearly doomed from the start, in a David Moyes type way (at least Ferguson left of his own accord). The weight of expectation and following a club legend who was doing well, was nigh on impossible, surely a middling NL team would have been a better starting point for Rusk to learn the ropes of management. Wilson needs to take a long hard look at himself, he’s wasted so much potential, if he doesn’t get the next part right he has to resign, in fairness to Mark Stott (who, thankfully, remains popular) and to the supporters and to Simon Rusk if he goes, because he has let them all down badly.
|
|
|
Post by houldsworthhatter on Sept 21, 2021 13:04:56 GMT
Whatever the ins and outs of the matter, Simon Wilson has made an absolute pigs ear of his role. He’s completely lost the trust of the supporters, he’s introduced players who are past their best on high wages and long contracts, characters who may or may not be, good influences on the squad. Whilst Jim Gannon has to take some responsibility for his own demise, whatever Jim’s way of doing things was, it was definitely far less profligate and more successful than Wilson’s MO, what’s more, Jim represented the soul of the club, the lineage back to Danny Bergara, amongst so many other things. The introduction of Simon Rusk, on paper at least, could have been a good appointment, but he was clearly doomed from the start, in a David Moyes type way (at least Ferguson left of his own accord). The weight of expectation and following a club legend who was doing well, was nigh on impossible, surely a middling NL team would have been a better starting point for Rusk to learn the ropes of management. Wilson needs to take a long hard look at himself, he’s wasted so much potential, if he doesn’t get the next part right he has to resign, in fairness to Mark Stott (who, thankfully, remains popular) and to the supporters and to Simon Rusk if he goes, because he has let them all down badly. Good post. My issue is will there be a “next part “? I can’t see Rusk going now. I was convinced yesterday was the day but hey ho, we carry on regardless with next to no hope.
|
|