you've misunderstood the point and used an incorrect (and irrelevant anyway) statistic

the point is that good defence is more likely to keep you up than a good attack - the teams that get relegated usually do so because their defences are poor than because their attacks are. The promoted teams last year stayed up not because they 'attacked' but because Reading and Wigan's defences were so poor (after all, Stoke us us had absolutely rotten attacks and yet stayed up so presumably the promoted teams could have done the same if they'd had decent defences).
And your comment about 4 of the last 6 promoted teams attacking and staying up presumably includes Swansea in the first season up, which means you have fallen for one of the great footballing media myths of our time. That Swansea team was a very defensive one (not an adventurous & refreshing attacking one), who just passed the ball about at the back all game to keep it away from the opposition (passing football is not the same as attacking football). They only scored 44 goals that season - less than two of the relegated teams (fitting in with the thrust of the article) and only 3 more than we managed last season. They stayed up because they only conceded 51 goals - defensively sound.

Posted By: mr carra on August 29th 2013 at 15:52:48

Message Thread

"scoring more goals doesn't keep you up, conceding fewer does" (NCFC) - Ralf Scrampton, Aug 29, 13:31:48
- read that earlier (NCFC) - scruffy, Aug 29, 13:56:27
  - *cough* (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Aug 29, 13:58:20
    - yes, I was being slightly ironic (NCFC) - scruffy, Aug 29, 14:08:09
      - and technically, you could score more goals the opposition (NCFC) - scruffy, Aug 29, 14:09:31
        
        whoosh accepted (n/m) (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Aug 29, 14:09:58
        
        nah, I saw what you were doing a mile off (NCFC) - scruffy, Aug 29, 14:11:18
        
        oops, and now I've completely misunderstood your post (NCFC) - scruffy, Aug 29, 14:12:55
- yeah but (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Aug 29, 13:51:03
  - suspect there's a reason a good defence is more important to survival (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 13:58:50
    - woods, watson & bruce (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Aug 29, 14:06:45
      - Strikers that season: Channon? (NCFC) - APB, Aug 29, 14:21:40
        
        put it like this (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Aug 29, 15:07:26
        
        Rosario was about, but still young. (NCFC) - APB, Aug 29, 14:30:40
        
        not sure about Bertschin. Deehan, yes - he played in Milk Cup final (n/m) (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 14:26:31
        
        not sure about Bertschin. I'd say Dehhan (n/m) (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 14:25:55
      - interesting what a staggeringly tight league it was that year (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 14:19:36
- no mention of Swansea or Norwich from 11-12 - Bucking the supposed trend (n/m) (NCFC) - phrankin, Aug 29, 13:37:11
  - their comment on us misses a crucial point (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 13:54:54
    - that's where the writer should really feel ashamed of himself (NCFC) - Ralf Scrampton, Aug 29, 14:04:58
      - our defence was actually better last year than the stats make it look (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 14:09:32
  - or Southampton and West Ham from last season (NCFC) - phrankin, Aug 29, 13:38:31
    - hang about, are you suggesting a small number of exceptions to what is quite clearly a (NCFC) - Ralf Scrampton, Aug 29, 13:52:50
      - Not quite clearly anything is it, 4 out of the last 6 promoted teams attack (NCFC) - phrankin, Aug 29, 15:04:11
        
        you've misunderstood the point and used an incorrect (and irrelevant anyway) statistic (NCFC) - mr carra, Aug 29, 15:52:48

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.