For those who suggest we are not playing more kids than anyone else i.e. Derby (1 Viewer)

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

The below was before we took on Nimely and Norwood

Average age analysis:
Burnley 23.18 Coventry City 24 Reading 24.27 Peterborough 24.36 Watford 24.45 Leeds United 24.55 Hull City 24.73 Derby County 25.18 Nottingham Forest 25.18 Crystal Palace 25.45 Barnsley 25.45 Middlesbrough 25.45 Cardiff City 26 Bristol City 26.09 Brighton 26.64 Leicester City 27.09 West Ham United 27.27 Southampton 27.55 Millwall 27.64 Birmingham City 27.64 Blackpool 27.82 Portsmouth 28.36 Doncaster Rovers 28.91 Ipswich Town 30.64
Number of players under 23:
Reading 6 Burnley 6 Coventry City 5 Hull City 5 Watford 4 Derby County 4 Crystal Palace 4 Leeds United 3 Blackpool 3 Peterborough 2 Nottingham Forest 2 Barnsley 2 Middlesbrough 2 Cardiff City 2 Brighton 2 Bristol City 1 Doncaster Rovers 1 West Ham United 1 Southampton 1 Millwall 1 Birmingham City 1 Leicester City 0 Portsmouth 0 Ipswich Town 0

Grendel · Feb 21, 2012

dongonzalos said:
The below was before we took on Nimely and Norwood

Average age analysis:
Burnley 23.18 Coventry City 24 Reading 24.27 Peterborough 24.36 Watford 24.45 Leeds United 24.55 Hull City 24.73 Derby County 25.18 Nottingham Forest 25.18 Crystal Palace 25.45 Barnsley 25.45 Middlesbrough 25.45 Cardiff City 26 Bristol City 26.09 Brighton 26.64 Leicester City 27.09 West Ham United 27.27 Southampton 27.55 Millwall 27.64 Birmingham City 27.64 Blackpool 27.82 Portsmouth 28.36 Doncaster Rovers 28.91 Ipswich Town 30.64
Number of players under 23:
Reading 6 Burnley 6 Coventry City 5 Hull City 5 Watford 4 Derby County 4 Crystal Palace 4 Leeds United 3 Blackpool 3 Peterborough 2 Nottingham Forest 2 Barnsley 2 Middlesbrough 2 Cardiff City 2 Brighton 2 Bristol City 1 Doncaster Rovers 1 West Ham United 1 Southampton 1 Millwall 1 Birmingham City 1 Leicester City 0 Portsmouth 0 Ipswich Town 0

Thanks so we're not then - why is this on twice?

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

If that is the way you read stats Duffy you must think we are second in the table right now

Apologies did post it on the other thread, deleted it straight away and put it here. You must have a keen eye, but just not when it comes to reading stats

Grendel · Feb 21, 2012

Sam Baldock and James Tomkins are 22 and are in the West Ham team so wrong as usual and I didn't even try hard for that one.

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

Will have to take that up with Reading it is their stat. You do seem right though. However 2 is still less than 50 % of what ours is. Even though ours maybe more if these stats are wrong

Grendel · Feb 21, 2012

dongonzalos said:
Will have to take that up with Reading it is their stat. You do seem right though. However 2 is still less than 50 % of what ours is. Even though ours maybe more if these stats are wrong

Luke Hyam has played for Ipswich this season he's 21.....Josh Carson has made 4 starts...he's 19.

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

The stats are rubbish look at our squad

L. Burge
19 years old

0

J. Clarke
20 years old

5

0

N. Cameron
20 years old

10

0

C. Christie
19 years old

29

0

J. Willis
17 years old

2

0
Midfielders

O. Norwood
20 years old

4

0

C. Thomas
18 years old

22

1

G. Bigirimana
18 years old

19

0

J. Ruffles
18 years old

1

0

A. Phillips
18 years old

0

0
Attackers

A. Tchuimeni-Nimely
20 years old

6

1

S. Jeffers
19 years old

rob9872 · Feb 21, 2012

Bigi
Christie
Clarke
Thomas
Norwood
Nimley
Hussey
Jeffers
Wilson
Cameron
Ruffles
Willis

I make that 12 under 23

rob9872 · Feb 21, 2012

Just beat me to it although Phillips not played so can't be counted and I see Hussey now 23 although wasn't at start of year

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

come on Duffy you like your stats where do we really sit then, I bet it is number 1 with the amount of under 23's in the squad

Disorganised1 · Feb 21, 2012

He who livs by the stats; dies by the stats - especially if he plays poker.

Colonel Mustard · Feb 21, 2012

dongonzalos said:
The below was before we took on Nimely and Norwood

Average age analysis:
Burnley 23.18 Coventry City 24 Reading 24.27 Peterborough 24.36 Watford 24.45 Leeds United 24.55 Hull City 24.73 Derby County 25.18 Nottingham Forest 25.18 Crystal Palace 25.45 Barnsley 25.45 Middlesbrough 25.45 Cardiff City 26 Bristol City 26.09 Brighton 26.64 Leicester City 27.09 West Ham United 27.27 Southampton 27.55 Millwall 27.64 Birmingham City 27.64 Blackpool 27.82 Portsmouth 28.36 Doncaster Rovers 28.91 Ipswich Town 30.64
Number of players under 23:
Reading 6 Burnley 6 Coventry City 5 Hull City 5 Watford 4 Derby County 4 Crystal Palace 4 Leeds United 3 Blackpool 3 Peterborough 2 Nottingham Forest 2 Barnsley 2 Middlesbrough 2 Cardiff City 2 Brighton 2 Bristol City 1 Doncaster Rovers 1 West Ham United 1 Southampton 1 Millwall 1 Birmingham City 1 Leicester City 0 Portsmouth 0 Ipswich Town 0

I struggle to see the gain in those statistics.

"Youth guarantees relegation" - Burnley, the youngest average age, is 11th in the table.

"Experience is needed" - Doncaster and Porstmouth, two of the three teams with the highest average age, are in the relegation zone.

"You can't win with kids on the bench" - Reading, the team with the highest number of youth players, is in 3rd place.

If anything those statistics just highlight the insignificance of age.

@richh87 · Feb 21, 2012

kduffy said:
Sam Baldock and James Tomkins are 22 and are in the West Ham team so wrong as usual and I didn't even try hard for that one.

Our kids aren't in the team because they're good enough or ready - it's because we've got nobody else. If West Ham's kids get injured an experienced 30 year old comes in.

@richh87 · Feb 21, 2012

Colonel Mustard said:
I struggle to see the gain in those statistics.

"Youth guarantees relegation" - Burnley, the youngest average age, is 11th in the table.

"Experience is needed" - Doncaster and Porstmouth, two of the three teams with the highest average age, are in the relegation zone.

"You can't win with kids on the bench" - Reading, the team with the highest number of youth players, is in 3rd place.

If anything those statistics just highlight the insignificance of age.

If you read the whole thread you'd see those stats were bollocks and that we have more like 12 In the squad.

Nobody else has near that amount and they're there because SISU won't pay for proper players.

You people trying to claim the squad is acceptable are a joke.

Grendel · Feb 21, 2012

As the stats are a joke no comparison can be drawn. 23 is odd as an age anyway. Many of our players of that age hardly play. You need to see the % of games played by players of an age you decide is too young. Still a bit irrelevant as thorn has insisted on playing Christie from day one when he never had to.

Having an unqualified manager needs factoring in as well perhaps? Just a thought.

Otis · Feb 21, 2012

The stat I find quite interesting is, that if you reflect on our season, though we are playing a number of kids, the majority of mistakes that lead to goals against us appear to come from the senior players, Murphy, Clingan, Baker, Cranie, Keogh, Deegan, McSheffrey etc.

The kids have been responsilbe for one or two, but on the whole I would say it is very much the senior plays (Baker trying to dribble out of his own area, Clngan's suicidal square or back passes, Keogh's penalties etc) who have led to our downfall.

@richh87 · Feb 21, 2012

kduffy said:
As the stats are a joke no comparison can be drawn. 23 is odd as an age anyway. Many of our players of that age hardly play. You need to see the % of games played by players of an age you decide is too young. Still a bit irrelevant as thorn has insisted on playing Christie from day one when he never had to.

Having an unqualified manager needs factoring in as well perhaps? Just a thought.

Why don't you just stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes and go "la la la la la, I can't hear you"

I promise it won't make you look any more stubborn and childish.

Grendel · Feb 21, 2012

@richh87 said:
Why don't you just stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes and go "la la la la la, I can't hear you"

I promise it won't make you look any more stubborn and childish.

Oh dear. We all post intelligent responses raising issues regarding thorns shortcomings. You have proved incapable of answering any. F off sisu and Jordan Clarke is shite seem to be all you ever say.

Brighton Sky Blue · Feb 21, 2012

Perhaps Michael Appleton should have a read of that.

ccfcway · Feb 21, 2012

Didnt middlesborough field a team with 10 players from their academy the other week ?

mark82 · Feb 21, 2012

ccfcway said:
Didnt middlesborough field a team with 10 players from their academy the other week ?

Probably not current academy players. They have a record of bringing players through so possibly 10 players who at some point played in their academy.

Sick Boy · Feb 21, 2012

ccfcway said:
Didnt middlesborough field a team with 10 players from their academy the other week ?

Indeed they did.

I am beginning to worry why some people have such an attachment to Thorn, it is bizarre and damaging to the club.

stupot07 · Feb 21, 2012

ccfcway said:
Didnt middlesborough field a team with 10 players from their academy the other week ?

It was 9 v Sunderland in FA cup, of which only 4 started and 1 came on. The four starters were bates and McMahon (both 25), Williams and Hines (both 23) and the sub keeper ripley (19) came on with 10 mins to go.

And as it was an FA cup game not league there was 2 extra spaces on the subs bench.

CUS Wyken · Feb 21, 2012

stupot07 said:
It was 9 v Sunderland in FA cup, of which only 4 started and 1 came on. The four starters were bates and McMahon (both 25), Williams and Hines (both 23) and the sub keeper ripley (19) came on with 10 mins to go.

And as it was an FA cup game not league there was 2 extra spaces on the subs bench.

Didn't Main start and Bennett as well who are both 19 and 20?

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 21, 2012

Here's a stat. Have a look at kids - that is aged 20 of below - that we are starting leagues games with.

Not looking at fleeting appearances on the bench, or a cup game when teams might be happy to take a punt with untried youth; I'm discussing have-to-win games, where you're starting with kids.

Coventry City: 76 starts
Derby County: 51 starts

Looking at other clubs mentioned on this thread....

Burnley: 0 starts
Middlesbrough: 2 starts

Or, how about Southampton and their 'excellent youthful team': 0 starts
Did someone mention Reading's team the other day: 0 starts

The point is, we are starting critical games with more kids than seemingly any other team in this division - and seemingly by a mile

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 21, 2012

Sick Boy said:
Indeed they did.

I am beginning to worry why some people have such an attachment to Thorn, it is bizarre and damaging to the club.

Cup game. Lots of clubs will take a punt on cup games. Look at the league starts I've posted. I look forward to hearing from you

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

Cracking Post Mungo. Pretty much seals it really.
Also those who say Thorn chose to start Christie. Yes he did because he is a bloody good full back my man of the match on many ocassions. However there have been times when he has been forced to play Biggi, Thomas, ruffles Jeffers, wilson. With Bigi and Thomas featuring I would imagine a lot more than Thorn would have liked. I think these boys are good players but Imagine with Thomas and Bigi Thorn would have liked to blood them as oppose to at times depending on them. I think if a player is as good as Christie you can do it like that. However players like that are rare and the other lads need a more of a gradual introduction. You should be in a position to pick and choose the right time to play them. Not have that dictated to you by firesales of the rest of your squad.

stupot07 · Feb 21, 2012

CUS Wyken said:
Didn't Main start and Bennett as well who are both 19 and 20?

They may have done in the replay, I didn't watch that game but I know the commentator mentioned it in the initial game.

Bennetts 21 (22 next month) and Curtis main (19) didn't come through their academy - he was signed from Darlington having scored 25 goals in 61 games.

Brighton Sky Blue · Feb 21, 2012

In ideal circumstances our kids would be either:

a) Back in the youth team sat top of the Academy league.
b) Out on loan with the likes of Callum Wilson at local non-league clubs.
c) Being brought on for the last 10-20 minutes of games where the result is beyond doubt, or in lower-pressure games in the Cups.

Instead, we have asked them to play week in, week out, full 90 minutes against teams containing much more seasoned professionals. There's being thrown in at the deep end, then there's this-these guys simply should not be having so much asked of them at this stage in their careers-you overpile a youngster, there's a good chance he'll be overwhelmed and will be put off developing further.
Clarke comes across as seriously low on confidence, and Bigi's been left out after Thorn's earlier criticism-you just wonder how many more clearly talented youth players we're going to lose because of SISU's complete lack of support.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 21, 2012

My ambition was not to make my stats an excuse for Thorn's performances - as I feel upon many occasions he's been found wanting - but it's part of my desire to understand the true strength of our squad. I hasten to add that we also appear to have played more of these kids than any other team too; so it's not simply a case of the number of appearances, its the number of players we are using to make those appearances.

West Ham - again - the academy of football - haven't started a single all-important league game with anyone on the age bracket being discussed here. Not one.

In my own mind, I can't decide. I know clearly that Thorn's not a great manager. That's obvious.

However, I can't decide if he could have been an okay manager. I suspect we'll never know.

We do have a wage structure within the bottom three in the league, and we are starting games with more kids than seemingly any other team in this division; which seems to be a product of having a thin squad and no strength in depth. Add atop this Thorn's naivety and we never stood a chance.

I just wish more folk would have the accommodation to understand the bigger picture, as opposed to simply dismissing our plight as simply the ill-hand of a fat oaf....

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 21, 2012

Double post being a function of a slow network / senility - who knows

CUS Wyken · Feb 21, 2012

stupot07 said:
They may have done in the replay, I didn't watch that game but I know the commentator mentioned it in the initial game.

Bennetts 21 (22 next month) and Curtis main (19) didn't come through their academy - he was signed from Darlington having scored 25 goals in 61 games.

Still young though eh. I believe if your good enough play regardless of your age. My only negative is, they will have this losing mentality which will be hard to get rid of next season if we start poorly.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Feb 21, 2012

CUS Wyken said:
Still young though eh. I believe if your good enough play regardless of your age. My only negative is, they will have this losing mentality which will be hard to get rid of next season if we start poorly.

But that's the point Wyken - he's not playing them because they're good enough. He's playing them as he has to. And yes, playing in this environment could have an adverse on their confidence. That's why every other club in this league cossets them from the bench

dongonzalos · Feb 21, 2012

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
My ambition was not to make my stats an excuse for Thorn's performances - as I feel upon many occasions he's been found wanting - but it's part of my desire to understand the true strength of our squad. I hasten to add that we also appear to have played more of these kids than any other team too; so it's not simply a case of the number of appearances, its the number of players we are using to make those appearances.

West Ham - again - the academy of football - haven't started a single all-important league game with anyone on the age bracket being discussed here. Not one.

In my own mind, I can't decide. I know clearly that Thorn's not a great manager. That's obvious.

However, I can't decide if he could have been an okay manager. I suspect we'll never know.

We do have a wage structure within the bottom three in the league, and we are starting games with more kids than seemingly any other team in this division; which seems to be a product of having a thin squad and no strength in depth. Add atop this Thorn's naivety and we never stood a chance.

I just wish more folk would have the accommodation to understand the bigger picture, as opposed to simply dismissing our plight as simply the ill-hand of a fat oaf....

Mungo you are a switched on cookie, thinking about and analysing it as oppose to diving into popular ill thoughtout stances

@richh87 · Feb 21, 2012

kduffy said:
Oh dear. We all post intelligent responses raising issues regarding thorns shortcomings. You have proved incapable of answering any. F off sisu and Jordan Clarke is shite seem to be all you ever say.

I said Jordan Clarke was Shite v Forest. 1st time i've ever said it though - he has good games too sometimes.

The F off SISU thing is a strange thing for you to be upset about - why do you like them so much? Bit odd. They send your club to league 1 by not even trying to compete since the start of the season - yet you defend them.

You even then embarrass yourself by saying there's nothing wrong with the squad - just so you can accuse Thorn of getting us relegated.

Thorn may not be Alex Ferguson - but pretending the squad is decent is absolute crap and everyone knows It.

You blood youngsters at the right time by giving them a game here and there, sending them out to lower leagues to get experience etc etc. What you don't do is throw them in at the deep end and expect them to produce results. Everyone knows that.

For those who suggest we are not playing more kids than anyone else i.e. Derby (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency