Baldock and Stephens - Argus stats.

[chucky1973]

Sure.But its Hughton you're choosing not to believe , not the Argus.

to be fair, he is never too honest with the injuries!!!! (more often than not the nearly there or its minor talk takes 4-6 weeks to get better)

but I get your point.

 

[spence]

to be fair, he is never too honest with the injuries!!!! (more often than not the nearly there or its minor talk takes 4-6 weeks to get better)

but I get your point.

Never honest with injuries? Maybe he is protecting the interests of BHA rather than being dishonest.

 

[chucky1973]

Never honest with injuries? Maybe he is protecting the interests of BHA rather than being dishonest.

he probably is and its the right thing, but as a fan its very frustrating to hear the maybe, could be, should be stories on a Thursday and then 2pm Sat, not in squad.

but he is protecting the interest of the club.

 

[royceyboy]

Apologies if fixtures, but while the Stephens stats appear to be much discussed, the Baldock ones are eye opening.

I shall enjoy showing these to his doubters around me in WSU as I seem to be in the minority as a supporter of his - along with [MENTION=457]sheebo[/MENTION] - when it comes to the inevitable debates about his influence.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/sport/15075477.article/?ref=fbpg

Really interesting reading. Especially about Baldock.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Baldock is a key player mainly because there isn't another one, he's not necessarily a key player because of what he personally brings to the team.

I think there's some truth in this, in that we become far too predictable when, for example Murray and Hemed play together, much as we did when it was Zamora and Hemed last year. Both of those combinations lack the mobility, movement and pace to stretch teams and it allows the opposition to play 10-15 yards higher up the pitch, compressing play and allowing them to pressure our defence more readily. But, were we willing to spend the money, we could upgrade Baldock and get someone with his attributes that is probably even more effective.

As for Stephens, I don't think anyone can doubt he's one of our top two midfielders. He brings a balance, both defensively and offensively in terms of his ability to dictate games through his composure, which are attributes that none of our other midfielders can marry (albeit, they each have elements of his game in their own).

 

[NooBHA]

Never honest with injuries? Maybe he is protecting the interests of BHA rather than being dishonest.

Or maybe he doesn't want to make the opposition planning for the match easy.

When Alex Neil brought Norwich to the Amex he said in his Press Conference '' I know what to expect when we play Brighton and we are ready for it'' - Yes Alex and look where your preparation got you

 

[dazzer6666]

The goals tally is an interesting argument. Many of us spent the whole of last season sticking up for Baldock because we believe the work he does for the team is more important than the number of goals attributed to him personally. Other players score more goals because of how Baldock affects the game, other players score more goals and win more games when he's on the pitch, it's as simple as that.

I think the frustration is when people refuse point blank to acknowledge how Baldock affects the whole shape of the game and just point to the number of goals he scores to shut down the debate about what else he does, it's a very typical view of a ball watching supporter who's never played at any level.

There used to be a similar debate about Theo Walcott for Arsenal. Their win ratio when he played was much higher and eventually the pundits pointed out that his pace forced the opposition defence to play 10 yards deeper, which in turn opened the game up for the midfield, but still people questioned his place in the side because he didn't score enough goals.

Nailed it.

 

[warmleyseagull]

I have no idea why posters seem to think CH won't play his strongest available team.

Have they not been paying attention, all season.

Well, they might have and noticed there are 3 games in eight days. Guess that CH might think starting two players for all three games after injury layoff might be optimistic; Burton is first and on paper easiest so my hunch is bench for each on Saturday.

 

[Stat Brother]

Well, they might have and noticed there are 3 games in eight days. Guess that CH might think starting two players for all three games after injury layoff might be optimistic; Burton is first and on paper easiest so my hunch is bench for each on Saturday.

So all of a sudden CH has started banking points from games not played.

That's a new twist on how the Albion got to second in the table.

 

[Wardy's twin]

He is not banking on points he is questioning the level of fitness of players and whether it would be sensible to play them quickly after a lay off especially as potentially the Burton game should be the easiest. Its called risk management.

 

[Wardy's twin]

it's a very typical view of a ball watching supporter who's never played at any level. - sorry but this is just another 'snobby' comment from someone who believes their perception of how the game should be played is the only way.

 

[warmleyseagull]

So all of a sudden CH has started banking points from games not played.

That's a new twist on how the Albion got to second in the table.

see post #70, exactly my point.