[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Huddersfield were the better team as they scored more goals than we did. End of.
Sorry Henry, disagree. Charlton were the better team.
A bit like last night. Barca were the better team, but Real won.
No, Huddersfield defended better than us. Their defenders blocked our shots or their keeper saved our shots. They were therefore better at defending than we were at attacking.
They scored a goal, something we couldn't do as Hudds were better than us at the only vital aspect of the game. Corners, number of shots, pass completion, possession or any other opta stat are meaningless. Goals win games.
yes, we did some good things but we were NOT the better team. It was not luck it was good play by their defence. The free kick was a good free kick as it went in the net. None of our chances did.
Yes, in the long term you need good performances AND good results. Yes, a good performance is encouraging and something to praise and hope continues but we were NOT the better team ON THIS PARTICULAR DAY.
Well Henry, I think the majority thought Charlton were marginally the better team. But if you think Hudds were, that's your opinion. You're not alone of course, the Hudds supporter thought they were better as well (although he wasn't there) :-)
[cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Well Henry, I think the majority thought Charlton were marginally the better team. But if you think Hudds were, that's your opinion. You're not alone of course, the Hudds supporter thought they were better as well (although he wasn't there) :-)
I think you are mixing up "playing the better football" (which is subjective anyway) with "being the better team".
As football is not ice dancing or diving you don't get awarded points by judges for nice passing or creating more chances.
Maybe if we changed the question to "who were the more effective team?" then we'd have to agree it was not Charlton.
Agreed, Charlton played the better football, Huddersfield were the most effective team.
But when you talk to your mates about the game, me and my mates wouldn't say, "who do you think was the most effective team today ?"
We would say, "I thought we were the better team today and were unlucky to lose."
It's all about words I suppose.
Comments
Sorry Henry, disagree. Charlton were the better team.
A bit like last night. Barca were the better team, but Real won.
No, Huddersfield defended better than us. Their defenders blocked our shots or their keeper saved our shots. They were therefore better at defending than we were at attacking.
They scored a goal, something we couldn't do as Hudds were better than us at the only vital aspect of the game. Corners, number of shots, pass completion, possession or any other opta stat are meaningless. Goals win games.
yes, we did some good things but we were NOT the better team. It was not luck it was good play by their defence. The free kick was a good free kick as it went in the net. None of our chances did.
Yes, in the long term you need good performances AND good results. Yes, a good performance is encouraging and something to praise and hope continues but we were NOT the better team ON THIS PARTICULAR DAY.
I think you are mixing up "playing the better football" (which is subjective anyway) with "being the better team".
As football is not ice dancing or diving you don't get awarded points by judges for nice passing or creating more chances.
Maybe if we changed the question to "who were the more effective team?" then we'd have to agree it was not Charlton.
But when you talk to your mates about the game, me and my mates wouldn't say, "who do you think was the most effective team today ?"
We would say, "I thought we were the better team today and were unlucky to lose."
It's all about words I suppose.