Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

George Dobson - Gone to Wrexham p136, farewell message p142

12627293132150

Comments

  • Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
  • edited November 2023
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
  • Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    I'd like to see the stats. Tackles won versus goals conceded. On a scatter graph. For League One. 

    Then I'd like to see interceptions versus goals conceded, where I'd say there's likely a different story
  • edited November 2023
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    I'd like to see the stats. Tackles won versus goals conceded. On a scatter graph. For League One. 

    Then I'd like to see interceptions versus goals conceded, where I'd say there's likely a different story
    The results would be meaningless since teams who spend more time defending will spend more time tackling and intercepting. 

    The clearer test is whether a three-man midfield without a tackler will concede more goals than a midfield that features a tackler. But that's just basic football. 
  • Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    I'd like to see the stats. Tackles won versus goals conceded. On a scatter graph. For League One. 

    Then I'd like to see interceptions versus goals conceded, where I'd say there's likely a different story
    The results would be meaningless since teams who spend more time defending will spend more time tackling and intercepting. 

    The clearer test is whether a three-man midfield without a tackler will concede more goals than a midfield that features a tackler. But that's just basic football. 
    Midfielders are not 'tacklers' or 'non-tacklers' (unless they're Kirk, or Gilbey. Yes even Fraser gets a foot in more than them) - they can generally all tackle. Positioning and anticipation is much more important than execution of the sliding tackle, which is a last resort after all
  • Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    I'd like to see the stats. Tackles won versus goals conceded. On a scatter graph. For League One. 

    Then I'd like to see interceptions versus goals conceded, where I'd say there's likely a different story
    The results would be meaningless since teams who spend more time defending will spend more time tackling and intercepting. 

    The clearer test is whether a three-man midfield without a tackler will concede more goals than a midfield that features a tackler. But that's just basic football. 
    Midfielders are not 'tacklers' or 'non-tacklers' (unless they're Kirk, or Gilbey. Yes even Fraser gets a foot in more than them) - they can generally all tackle. Positioning and anticipation is much more important than execution of the sliding tackle, which is a last resort after all
    For my own sanity, I'm going to stop talking about football with you. 

    Not to say I don't like you, I very much do. But you have some bloody funny ideas.
  • edited November 2023
    Scoham said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    There’s some truth in that though. The teams at the top will generally have more possession so you may find they put in fewer tackles. They likely read the game and position themselves better so win the ball from interceptions rather than always needing tackles.

    Here’s an article from March last season with a few interesting graphs.

    We won the highest % of individual duels but were mid table. Ipswich won automatic promotion soon after despite the fewest duels in terms of volume in the league.



    Fleetwood were by far the best at slide tackling. Ipswich and Cambridge rarely used slide tackles but were at opposite ends of the table.




    There are many ways teams can be successful and stats will look very different based on style of play when they have the ball but also how and where they defend.

    Lots of benefit if stats are used effectively but also very easy to misinterpret or miss something and not tell the whole story.
    Yeah, that's what I've said above. Teams who spend more time defending will naturally tackle more. Dominant teams aren't going to spend 80% of the game winning the ball back. 

    The top three sides for winning tackles and interceptions this season are in the relegation zone. 

    But in talking about a midfield setup, there is almost certainly a correlation between a team conceding goals when it lacks players who can win the ball. 

    The idea that there would be no difference between playing a midfield of Fraser, Watson & May - and having one that included a Dobson/Pratley type... Is for the birds. 
  • Chunes said:
    Scoham said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    There’s some truth in that though. The teams at the top will generally have more possession so you may find they put in fewer tackles. They likely read the game and position themselves better so win the ball from interceptions rather than always needing tackles.

    Here’s an article from March last season with a few interesting graphs.

    We won the highest % of individual duels but were mid table. Ipswich won automatic promotion soon after despite the fewest duels in terms of volume in the league.



    Fleetwood were by far the best at slide tackling. Ipswich and Cambridge rarely used slide tackles but were at opposite ends of the table.




    There are many ways teams can be successful and stats will look very different based on style of play when they have the ball but also how and where they defend.

    Lots of benefit if stats are used effectively but also very easy to misinterpret or miss something and not tell the whole story.
    Yeah, that's what I've said above. Teams who spend more time defending will naturally tackle more. Dominant teams aren't going to spend 80% of the game winning the ball back. 

    The top three sides for winning tackles and interceptions this season are in the relegation zone. 

    But in talking about a midfield setup, there is almost certainly a correlation between a team conceding goals when it lacks players who can win the ball. 

    The idea that there would be no difference between playing a midfield of Fraser, Watson & May - and having one that included a Dobson/Pratley type... Is for the birds. 
    Good modern midfielders can do it all. Bolton's all could. Dobson almost can but his positioning and decision-making on the ball are sometimes amiss. McGrandles, Watson and Fraser almost can too, but may all lack a bit of burst speed.

    If our midfield lacks anything it's a bit of pace and drive, but technicality and combativity are not issues 
  • Sponsored links:


  • (May playing a deeper wing role is a good way of exploiting his own drive, which is one of his best assets. In fact I'm sure he'd be great in centre midfield too) 
  • Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Scoham said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    There’s some truth in that though. The teams at the top will generally have more possession so you may find they put in fewer tackles. They likely read the game and position themselves better so win the ball from interceptions rather than always needing tackles.

    Here’s an article from March last season with a few interesting graphs.

    We won the highest % of individual duels but were mid table. Ipswich won automatic promotion soon after despite the fewest duels in terms of volume in the league.



    Fleetwood were by far the best at slide tackling. Ipswich and Cambridge rarely used slide tackles but were at opposite ends of the table.




    There are many ways teams can be successful and stats will look very different based on style of play when they have the ball but also how and where they defend.

    Lots of benefit if stats are used effectively but also very easy to misinterpret or miss something and not tell the whole story.
    Yeah, that's what I've said above. Teams who spend more time defending will naturally tackle more. Dominant teams aren't going to spend 80% of the game winning the ball back. 

    The top three sides for winning tackles and interceptions this season are in the relegation zone. 

    But in talking about a midfield setup, there is almost certainly a correlation between a team conceding goals when it lacks players who can win the ball. 

    The idea that there would be no difference between playing a midfield of Fraser, Watson & May - and having one that included a Dobson/Pratley type... Is for the birds. 
    Good modern midfielders can do it all. Bolton's all could. Dobson almost can but his positioning and decision-making on the ball are sometimes amiss. McGrandles, Watson and Fraser almost can too, but may all lack a bit of burst speed.

    If our midfield lacks anything it's a bit of pace and drive, but technicality and combativity are not issues 
    On the last point to be fair to the club they identified that and brought in Camara. They’re not the easiest players to find, and before his Ipswich injury he had a very good fitness record so I can see why we gambled on him.
  • Scoham said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Scoham said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Chunes said:
    Leuth said:
    Would like to see if there is a correlation between tackles won and goals conceded tbh
    You really need to see some data on that?
    I think the results might be quite surprising, for you 
    There we have it... The biggest breakthrough in football tactics since the 4231: You don't stop the other team scoring by tackling. 

    No wonder you're a Hector fan.
    There’s some truth in that though. The teams at the top will generally have more possession so you may find they put in fewer tackles. They likely read the game and position themselves better so win the ball from interceptions rather than always needing tackles.

    Here’s an article from March last season with a few interesting graphs.

    We won the highest % of individual duels but were mid table. Ipswich won automatic promotion soon after despite the fewest duels in terms of volume in the league.



    Fleetwood were by far the best at slide tackling. Ipswich and Cambridge rarely used slide tackles but were at opposite ends of the table.




    There are many ways teams can be successful and stats will look very different based on style of play when they have the ball but also how and where they defend.

    Lots of benefit if stats are used effectively but also very easy to misinterpret or miss something and not tell the whole story.
    Yeah, that's what I've said above. Teams who spend more time defending will naturally tackle more. Dominant teams aren't going to spend 80% of the game winning the ball back. 

    The top three sides for winning tackles and interceptions this season are in the relegation zone. 

    But in talking about a midfield setup, there is almost certainly a correlation between a team conceding goals when it lacks players who can win the ball. 

    The idea that there would be no difference between playing a midfield of Fraser, Watson & May - and having one that included a Dobson/Pratley type... Is for the birds. 
    Good modern midfielders can do it all. Bolton's all could. Dobson almost can but his positioning and decision-making on the ball are sometimes amiss. McGrandles, Watson and Fraser almost can too, but may all lack a bit of burst speed.

    If our midfield lacks anything it's a bit of pace and drive, but technicality and combativity are not issues 
    On the last point to be fair to the club they identified that and brought in Camara. They’re not the easiest players to find, and before his Ipswich injury he had a very good fitness record so I can see why we gambled on him.
    Definitely agree with that, that's exactly what we've been missing in the midfield.

    Camara has been a big miss. 
     
    Terry Taylor too: young, nimble, tenacious, covers the ground, good passing range, etc  

     

  • Needs to cut down on his hollywood balls, does my head in. 
  • I’m hearing that a contract is on the table but that it is not that great. It suggests that Andy Scott has a lower opinion of George’s influence/impact/importance than both us, the fans and the manager who, probably has GD down as one of the first 3 names on his team sheet each week. Time will tell. Stats tell too and will speak loudly to potential alternative suitors looking for an impact midfielder.
  • meldrew66 said:
    I’m hearing that a contract is on the table but that it is not that great. It suggests that Andy Scott has a lower opinion of George’s influence/impact/importance than both us, the fans and the manager who, probably has GD down as one of the first 3 names on his team sheet each week. Time will tell. Stats tell too and will speak loudly to potential alternative suitors looking for an impact midfielder.
    Perhaps thats why they signed Terry Taylor ?
  • Sponsored links:


  • mendonca said:
    It would be huge to see Dobbo go. Especially if you look at Fraser/McGrandles consistency.

    Apparently the club are offering pretty piss poor contract to him to extend.

    If that's the case, don't expect some magical squad improvements in Jan. There's a reason we have Tedic, Abankwah, Campbell etc (£ v ££) 
    It’s funny how different people hear different things, I actually I have heard the contract offer would make him our highest paid player.
    If true I think that’s a mistake…
  • only a few months left on his contract .. I hope the club are making plans to offer a new deal .. he's not Declan Rice, but he's the best that we've got
  • meldrew66 said:
    I’m hearing that a contract is on the table but that it is not that great. It suggests that Andy Scott has a lower opinion of George’s influence/impact/importance than both us, the fans and the manager who, probably has GD down as one of the first 3 names on his team sheet each week. Time will tell. Stats tell too and will speak loudly to potential alternative suitors looking for an impact midfielder.
    Similar to what I heard. Well if I succession planning involves Camara and T Taylor, not much has changed in terms of where we are shopping. Replacing your best performing players with injury hit ones is not the, erm one.
  • It's funny how across the forum there is opinion among different people that we'd be fine losing Dobson, CBT and Leaburn. That's our best 3 players from last season, and really only May would come above them now.

    That being said, I've also been curious in previous seasons whether Dobson is in some way holding us back despite his obvious strengths. Think he's been alot better on the ball this season though.

    However if there's 1 thing we should have learnt over this long period of decline its that losing our key players is never a good thing.
  • Dobson isn't necessarily the cause of our problems so much as a symptom. Having someone thundering around, flying into tackles etc looks and feels good on an emotional level but realistically the fact that we "need" someone to do that is due to a poorly balanced midfield - as GM already said.

    If you control the ball and have a proper, fluid midfield then someone like Dobson is obsolete because there wouldn't be so many attacks that need to be stopped with a tackle.

    That's why I really don't think that Dobson is going anywhere yet. Teams bigger and better than us don't need him, teams below us can't afford him.
  • My only issue with Dobson is that his single minded determination to get to the ball can leave gaping spaces behind him if he doesn't get the ball.

    This season it definitely feels that he's changed his game, running forward more and making more passes, rather than his previous style of play which was winning the ball and laying it off to the "ball players".
  • mendonca said:
    It would be huge to see Dobbo go. Especially if you look at Fraser/McGrandles consistency.

    Apparently the club are offering pretty piss poor contract to him to extend.

    If that's the case, don't expect some magical squad improvements in Jan. There's a reason we have Tedic, Abankwah, Campbell etc (£ v ££) 
    That’s totally incorrect .. the club have offered him a 2 year deal with option of a 3rd year ..
    Cheers Ronnie. Always appreciate your information. 
  • mendonca said:
    It would be huge to see Dobbo go. Especially if you look at Fraser/McGrandles consistency.

    Apparently the club are offering pretty piss poor contract to him to extend.

    If that's the case, don't expect some magical squad improvements in Jan. There's a reason we have Tedic, Abankwah, Campbell etc (£ v ££) 
    That’s totally incorrect .. the club have offered him a 2 year deal with option of a 3rd year ..

    Value of the contract?

    It is not enough at the moment.
  • Dobson has changed his style since Apples arrived as is shown by the yellow cards drying up (keeps fingers crossed).
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!