@cafctom We'll have to agree to disagree on Hulse - I think he's awful.
Regarding the preconceived ideas thing: Difficult subject, but I try not to believe that race sometimes plays a part in the way other fans form ideas about players. I really hope it doesn't - but sometimes I'm not so sure.
I'd say it is something that comes more with profile. BWP is a high profile name, as is Frimpong. I even recall Abdul Razak getting put down for being a 'lazy loanee' by some after playing only 45 minutes for us.
with (just) Kermo: W2 D2 L5 (8/27 pts) with (just) Hulse: W3 D4 L2 (13/27 pts)
with neither: W2 D1 L2 (7/15 pts) with both: W0 D1 L0 (1/3 pts)
Updated after Derby: with (just) Kermo: W2 D3 L5 (9/30 pts)
WITH (just) KERMORGANT: 0.9 points per game. WITH (just) HULSE: 1.44 points per game.
WITH NEITHER: 1.4 points per game. WITH BOTH: 1.0 points per game.
What you can infer from the above is that our form with Kermorgant in the team is in fact relegation standard. Without him in the side, we're at a midtable level.
I love Kermorgant but he can't retain the ball, or gain us the territory in the way that Hulse's play can.
Some people haven't got a clue about football or footballers. Razak rated by Man City arguably the richest club in the world but he was lazy and overrated by the football inteligencia on here. Frimpong on fringes of Arsenal team and rated by one of the worlds best coaches Arsene Wenger yet like Razak lazy, uninterested and useless. Rob Hulse. Plied his trade for nigh on 15 years a good percentage of the time at the top level, still at a Premier League club yet is of course useless. It's great news that we have so many coaching experts on here to put Wenger, Mancini and Powell in their place.
@ShootersHillGuru So you're agreeing or disagreeing? Some of what you're saying makes sense, sure. Premier League clubs can afford the best, so your theory probably works in the case of Razak. However, to say Rob Hulse is essentially a top level player is complete nonsense. He has played around 12 games for QPR (depending on where you check), scoring twice. The rest of his career has been spent being not very prolific in the 2nd and 3rd tier.
Another thing - you don't need to be Arsene Wenger to deduce that a player has a crap touch. You just watch him for two or three games and observe the several times he miscontrols the ball.
As for those head to head stats - so what? There have been so many different combinations all over the pitch for us this year, and our form has been completely unpredictable. To use that to prove that the inclusion Hulse was responsible for some sort of upturn in team performance is pretty pointless in my view. What were the midfield and defensive combinations for those games? Who were the opposition? It doesn't quite stand up I'm afraid.
It wouldn't stand up so well if it was only a couple of games into the season but with 25 games now played and 75 points up for grabs, the more confident you can be in the results of the comparisons. Of course there'll be slight deviations and there may be other reasons for differences in results but a 0.5~ point per game difference adds up to about a conservative 20 points over the course of a season and I think the difference that's being shown is now significant.
I love a statistic too, but I just don't agree that this stat supports the theory that Hulse improves the side. How can it - taking your stats at face value? The team with neither player (i.e. no Hulse) has virtually the same ratio as the 'best' team which includes Hulse. This suggests he makes basically no difference?
Granted, I've only see him play once (Boxing Day), but his workrate up front was everything you want from a striker. He constantly chested the ball down, got it on the floor and laid it off for someone, exactly what he is supposed to do.
I accept his goalscoring record is poor. I accept that our other strikers are probably better than him. But saying he has nothing is laughable, in my opinion.
I think Hulse was unlucky to lose his place personally. Kermogant hasn't been as good as Hulse was for us since his return, although that is perhaps understandable.
Looks like injuries and his performance on Saturday may have provided BWP with his last chance. I have a sneaky feeling he might take it!
Comments
WITH (just) KERMORGANT: 0.9 points per game.
WITH (just) HULSE: 1.44 points per game.
WITH NEITHER: 1.4 points per game.
WITH BOTH: 1.0 points per game.
What you can infer from the above is that our form with Kermorgant in the team is in fact relegation standard. Without him in the side, we're at a midtable level.
I love Kermorgant but he can't retain the ball, or gain us the territory in the way that Hulse's play can.
However, to say Rob Hulse is essentially a top level player is complete nonsense. He has played around 12 games for QPR (depending on where you check), scoring twice. The rest of his career has been spent being not very prolific in the 2nd and 3rd tier.
Another thing - you don't need to be Arsene Wenger to deduce that a player has a crap touch. You just watch him for two or three games and observe the several times he miscontrols the ball.
As for those head to head stats - so what? There have been so many different combinations all over the pitch for us this year, and our form has been completely unpredictable. To use that to prove that the inclusion Hulse was responsible for some sort of upturn in team performance is pretty pointless in my view. What were the midfield and defensive combinations for those games? Who were the opposition? It doesn't quite stand up I'm afraid.
Sorry, being a maths nerd...
How can it - taking your stats at face value? The team with neither player (i.e. no Hulse) has virtually the same ratio as the 'best' team which includes Hulse. This suggests he makes basically no difference?
Granted, I've only see him play once (Boxing Day), but his workrate up front was everything you want from a striker. He constantly chested the ball down, got it on the floor and laid it off for someone, exactly what he is supposed to do.
I accept his goalscoring record is poor. I accept that our other strikers are probably better than him. But saying he has nothing is laughable, in my opinion.
Looks like injuries and his performance on Saturday may have provided BWP with his last chance. I have a sneaky feeling he might take it!