No problems. I used the same source for the 2016/7 figures.
comment by Robbing_Hoody (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yes you're right.
Surprised Spurs are so high actually.
Somewhat ironically it would probably be the best tactic against LFC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only missed one United game this season and can't make out where this 'hoofball' thing has come from, because we haven't played that way at all.
I think it's probably one or both of general wumming or the fact that, understandably, most non-United fans will only have watched the City game and MOTD highlights.
In any case, if it hasn't clicked going forwards until the last couple of games, it's been much, much better to watch than the last couple of seasons. Even with Rooney and Fellaini in the side (when we've been much more sluggish and less fluid), at least we've shown attacking intent; and in the last two league games, it has looked like it's really coming together.
Hopefully Jose sticks with the 4-3-3/4-1-2-3. It's the best way to get the most out of Pogba and Mata in the same team, IMO.
But I think we'll see a reversion to the 4-2-3-1 with Pogba-Fellaini or Pogba-Herrera in a double pivot for the derby, unfortunately.
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody (U6374)
posted 57 seconds ago
It's a fact that in the games where Utd are struggling, and there has been a few lately, they've gone long in the last 10-15 mins.
They should be ashamed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that's not a tactic that any manager has ever used before when their team is behind with a few minutes to go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Pep used long ball tactic in a match against Jose's Real team when they were high pressing one match.
I'm fine with it as a tactic
comment by Robbing_Hoody (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
It's a fact that in the games where Utd are struggling, and there has been a few lately, they've gone long in the last 10-15 mins.
They should be ashamed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Klopp brought on Stephen caulker and played him up front against us at Anfield last season
United haven't been a long ball team this season. In fact their football was excellent against Stoke, despite drawing the game. It's the best I've seen them play in a long time. They look like they're slowly starting to play as a team again. I wouldn't write them off as it could just click any time now. I think they'll be there or thereabouts for top four but really with the money they've spent they should be doing much better than that.
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
Define 'long pass'.
United play hoofball and crosses most of the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Factually incorrect.
Crosses, yes. Leading the league in fact.
Long balls, entirely false. Second lowest in the league.
Don't let the fackhts bother you though.
-----------
Facts
The fact that you admit the crosses would make it partially correct not factually incorrect, so it's not correct to say its factually incorrect.
Everyone appreciates a good long ball whether its into space or to stretch the play. Hoofball is something else especially when you look most dangerous when playing it.
United have scored a few well worked goals but we know where their strengths on the pitch are.
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
Define 'long pass'.
United play hoofball and crosses most of the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Factually incorrect.
Crosses, yes. Leading the league in fact.
Long balls, entirely false. Second lowest in the league.
Don't let the fackhts bother you though.
-----------
Facts
The fact that you admit the crosses would make it partially correct not factually incorrect, so it's not correct to say its factually incorrect.
Everyone appreciates a good long ball whether its into space or to stretch the play. Hoofball is something else especially when you look most dangerous when playing it.
United have scored a few well worked goals but we know where their strengths on the pitch are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly, I'm not getting into the verisimilitude of propositional calculus with you Mamba, because - amongst other reasons - it's been well studied by smarter people than you or I over a few hundred years. But it is correct for me to say your statement was factually incorrect. (If you're interested, look up De Morgan's Theorem.)
Secondly, if you'd either watched United play more than one game this season or otherwise bothered educating yourself, you'd know we've scored our goals firstly from moves worked through the centre in the opposition's half, secondly from open play from out wide, and thirdly from set pieces in the final third. And not from 'hoofball' or long passes.
I don't talk about Liverpool's style of play, because I've not watched them this season. And a sure-fire way to make yourself look really stupid is by talking about things you don't know about.
Firstly, I'm not getting into the verisimilitude of propositional calculus with you Mamba, because - amongst other reasons - it's been well studied by smarter people than you or I over a few hundred years. But it is correct for me to say your statement was factually incorrect. (If you're interested, look up De Morgan's Theorem.)
-------------
However, the grounds you relied upon suggest a partially correct statement was made seeing as you begin by admitting part of said statement.
It is therefore not only scientifically inappropriate to use the term but also a result of your discombobulated thought process.
Science has nothing to do with it; logic does.
Any statement that is in any part factually inaccurate is, in whole, factually inaccurate. Again, De Morgan's theorem. It's propositional logic 101.
Semantics aside, the bottom line is you're talking nonsense, likely because you're attempting a wind up, or you haven't watched us play and have lazily read and blindly accepted something somebody else has written somewhere, or both.
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
Science has nothing to do with it; logic does.
Any statement that is in any part factually inaccurate is, in whole, factually inaccurate. Again, De Morgan's theorem. It's propositional logic 101.
--------
So now you admit the statement is partially correct. It would have been a more appropriate choice of words.
Semantics aside, it seems you've made a small gaffe in your attempt to look like a genius and now trying to stay afloat
From your last two posts I can tell you like good presumption... or 50.
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
Science has nothing to do with it; logic does.
Any statement that is in any part factually inaccurate is, in whole, factually inaccurate. Again, De Morgan's theorem. It's propositional logic 101.
--------
So now you admit the statement is partially correct. It would have been a more appropriate choice of words.
Semantics aside, it seems you've made a small gaffe in your attempt to look like a genius and now trying to stay afloat
From your last two posts I can tell you like good presumption... or 50.
"I don't talk about Liverpool's style of play, because I've not watched them this season. And a sure-fire way to make yourself look really stupid is by talking about things you don't know about."
Does that make it sound like I'm a big fan of presumptions?
I've had a couple of guesses as to possible reasons you might have posted that 'United play hoofball'. I can't think of any others. If I'm wholly wrong and it's not a WUM attempt and/or ignorance, please enlighten me.
Not the end of the world, Sturridge and emre will come in
One of us is blinkered and it ain't me. I've watched enough United games etc etc. I won't really gain anything by enlightening you. Let me put it this way, if you had any more wit, you'd be a halfwit.
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 2 minutes ago
One of us is blinkered and it ain't me. I've watched enough United games etc etc. I won't really gain anything by enlightening you. Let me put it this way, if you had any more wit, you'd be a halfwit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, I'm not going to engage in an ad hominem slagging match.
The statistics and analysis are there for all to see. If you choose to ignore them, that's your prerogative. Again, I'd just suggest you don't continue to make statements that are directly contradictory to empirical evidence; it doesn't look clever.
I'm old school you see. I prefer to rely on what I see with my own eyes over stats and especially analysis.
You've embarrassed yourself here Member
Sign in if you want to comment
Wijnaldum Injured
Page 3 of 3
posted on 11/10/16
No problems. I used the same source for the 2016/7 figures.
posted on 11/10/16
comment by Robbing_Hoody (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yes you're right.
Surprised Spurs are so high actually.
Somewhat ironically it would probably be the best tactic against LFC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only missed one United game this season and can't make out where this 'hoofball' thing has come from, because we haven't played that way at all.
I think it's probably one or both of general wumming or the fact that, understandably, most non-United fans will only have watched the City game and MOTD highlights.
In any case, if it hasn't clicked going forwards until the last couple of games, it's been much, much better to watch than the last couple of seasons. Even with Rooney and Fellaini in the side (when we've been much more sluggish and less fluid), at least we've shown attacking intent; and in the last two league games, it has looked like it's really coming together.
Hopefully Jose sticks with the 4-3-3/4-1-2-3. It's the best way to get the most out of Pogba and Mata in the same team, IMO.
But I think we'll see a reversion to the 4-2-3-1 with Pogba-Fellaini or Pogba-Herrera in a double pivot for the derby, unfortunately.
posted on 11/10/16
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody (U6374)
posted 57 seconds ago
It's a fact that in the games where Utd are struggling, and there has been a few lately, they've gone long in the last 10-15 mins.
They should be ashamed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that's not a tactic that any manager has ever used before when their team is behind with a few minutes to go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even Pep used long ball tactic in a match against Jose's Real team when they were high pressing one match.
I'm fine with it as a tactic
posted on 11/10/16
comment by Robbing_Hoody (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 38 minutes ago
It's a fact that in the games where Utd are struggling, and there has been a few lately, they've gone long in the last 10-15 mins.
They should be ashamed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Klopp brought on Stephen caulker and played him up front against us at Anfield last season
posted on 11/10/16
Longballchester United
posted on 11/10/16
United haven't been a long ball team this season. In fact their football was excellent against Stoke, despite drawing the game. It's the best I've seen them play in a long time. They look like they're slowly starting to play as a team again. I wouldn't write them off as it could just click any time now. I think they'll be there or thereabouts for top four but really with the money they've spent they should be doing much better than that.
posted on 11/10/16
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
Define 'long pass'.
United play hoofball and crosses most of the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Factually incorrect.
Crosses, yes. Leading the league in fact.
Long balls, entirely false. Second lowest in the league.
Don't let the fackhts bother you though.
-----------
Facts
The fact that you admit the crosses would make it partially correct not factually incorrect, so it's not correct to say its factually incorrect.
Everyone appreciates a good long ball whether its into space or to stretch the play. Hoofball is something else especially when you look most dangerous when playing it.
United have scored a few well worked goals but we know where their strengths on the pitch are.
posted on 11/10/16
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
Define 'long pass'.
United play hoofball and crosses most of the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Factually incorrect.
Crosses, yes. Leading the league in fact.
Long balls, entirely false. Second lowest in the league.
Don't let the fackhts bother you though.
-----------
Facts
The fact that you admit the crosses would make it partially correct not factually incorrect, so it's not correct to say its factually incorrect.
Everyone appreciates a good long ball whether its into space or to stretch the play. Hoofball is something else especially when you look most dangerous when playing it.
United have scored a few well worked goals but we know where their strengths on the pitch are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly, I'm not getting into the verisimilitude of propositional calculus with you Mamba, because - amongst other reasons - it's been well studied by smarter people than you or I over a few hundred years. But it is correct for me to say your statement was factually incorrect. (If you're interested, look up De Morgan's Theorem.)
Secondly, if you'd either watched United play more than one game this season or otherwise bothered educating yourself, you'd know we've scored our goals firstly from moves worked through the centre in the opposition's half, secondly from open play from out wide, and thirdly from set pieces in the final third. And not from 'hoofball' or long passes.
I don't talk about Liverpool's style of play, because I've not watched them this season. And a sure-fire way to make yourself look really stupid is by talking about things you don't know about.
posted on 11/10/16
Firstly, I'm not getting into the verisimilitude of propositional calculus with you Mamba, because - amongst other reasons - it's been well studied by smarter people than you or I over a few hundred years. But it is correct for me to say your statement was factually incorrect. (If you're interested, look up De Morgan's Theorem.)
-------------
However, the grounds you relied upon suggest a partially correct statement was made seeing as you begin by admitting part of said statement.
It is therefore not only scientifically inappropriate to use the term but also a result of your discombobulated thought process.
posted on 11/10/16
Science has nothing to do with it; logic does.
Any statement that is in any part factually inaccurate is, in whole, factually inaccurate. Again, De Morgan's theorem. It's propositional logic 101.
Semantics aside, the bottom line is you're talking nonsense, likely because you're attempting a wind up, or you haven't watched us play and have lazily read and blindly accepted something somebody else has written somewhere, or both.
posted on 12/10/16
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
Science has nothing to do with it; logic does.
Any statement that is in any part factually inaccurate is, in whole, factually inaccurate. Again, De Morgan's theorem. It's propositional logic 101.
--------
So now you admit the statement is partially correct. It would have been a more appropriate choice of words.
Semantics aside, it seems you've made a small gaffe in your attempt to look like a genius and now trying to stay afloat
From your last two posts I can tell you like good presumption... or 50.
posted on 12/10/16
comment by rossobianchi - Rock the Pogbah (U17054)
Science has nothing to do with it; logic does.
Any statement that is in any part factually inaccurate is, in whole, factually inaccurate. Again, De Morgan's theorem. It's propositional logic 101.
--------
So now you admit the statement is partially correct. It would have been a more appropriate choice of words.
Semantics aside, it seems you've made a small gaffe in your attempt to look like a genius and now trying to stay afloat
From your last two posts I can tell you like good presumption... or 50.
posted on 12/10/16
Wtf?
Goodnight < laugh>
posted on 12/10/16
"I don't talk about Liverpool's style of play, because I've not watched them this season. And a sure-fire way to make yourself look really stupid is by talking about things you don't know about."
Does that make it sound like I'm a big fan of presumptions?
I've had a couple of guesses as to possible reasons you might have posted that 'United play hoofball'. I can't think of any others. If I'm wholly wrong and it's not a WUM attempt and/or ignorance, please enlighten me.
posted on 12/10/16
Not the end of the world, Sturridge and emre will come in
posted on 12/10/16
One of us is blinkered and it ain't me. I've watched enough United games etc etc. I won't really gain anything by enlightening you. Let me put it this way, if you had any more wit, you'd be a halfwit.
posted on 12/10/16
comment by Mamba (U1282)
posted 2 minutes ago
One of us is blinkered and it ain't me. I've watched enough United games etc etc. I won't really gain anything by enlightening you. Let me put it this way, if you had any more wit, you'd be a halfwit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, I'm not going to engage in an ad hominem slagging match.
The statistics and analysis are there for all to see. If you choose to ignore them, that's your prerogative. Again, I'd just suggest you don't continue to make statements that are directly contradictory to empirical evidence; it doesn't look clever.
posted on 12/10/16
I'm old school you see. I prefer to rely on what I see with my own eyes over stats and especially analysis.
posted on 12/10/16
You've embarrassed yourself here Member
Page 3 of 3