Flat track bullies ? ;

[jaffa1]

http://www.kickoff.co.uk/teams/southend-united/2014/results/

 

[Pubey]

Nice visualisation that. Looks like an interesting website.

 

[Pubey]

Interesting that out of our 10 remaining home games, 4 of them are against teams in the bottom 6.

 

[leeblue]

Generally yes...but last season we taught a couple of the top teams a lesson

 

[Somerset Ex-TTB]

The complete opposite of the last couple of years. What is does show is our excellent away form may be due to the fact we only have 2 away games left against teams in the bottom half.

Also on the flip side of that, we only have 4 home games against teams in the top half, which may explain our poor home form (although only 2 defeats, too many draws).

Hopefully our home form will improve with wins against the bottom teams that we have to play, but our away form may suffer a bit with tough trips to other teams in the top half.

 

[Shrimpergonzo]

The complete opposite of the last couple of years. What is does show is our excellent away form may be due to the fact we only have 2 away games left against teams in the bottom half.

Also on the flip side of that, we only have 4 home games against teams in the top half, which may explain our poor home form (although only 2 defeats, too many draws).

Hopefully our home form will improve with wins against the bottom teams that we have to play, but our away form may suffer a bit with tough trips to other teams in the top half.

Nicely summarised - think it's amazing that we've only lost one game (out of 15 played) against teams in the bottom half of the table.

Contrast that with York who have only won one game (out of 16 played) against teams in the top half of the table

http://www.kickoff.co.uk/teams/?team_id=87&season=2014&area=results


I'm a bit of a statto and love sites like these. I've also recently come across this site if you want some real in depth analysis. http://www.soccerstats.com/pmatch.asp?league=england4&matchid=886&t1=26&t2=48&ly=2015

 

[chapperzUK]

I'm a bit of a statto and love sites like these. I've also recently come across this site if you want some real in depth analysis. http://www.soccerstats.com/pmatch.asp?league=england4&matchid=886&t1=26&t2=48&ly=2015

Love that site!

Just looking at this bit:

0-0 at HT:
Southend - 53.8% (highest)
York - 38.5% (highest)

1-1 at FT:
Southend - 23.1% (joint highest)
York - 30.8% (highest)

Odds on it being 0-0 at HT and then 1-1 at FT?

 

[Murkey_Mouse]

At least I don't get annoyed anymore about us losing to bag of c**p like the last 4 season!!

 

[wakes123]

Interesting that out of our 10 remaining home games, 4 of them are against teams in the bottom 6.

Didn't realise that. That's encouraging.

I can't remember the last season where we generally lost to the teams at the top, and beat the teams at the bottom (it's usually the other way around!)

 

[mrsblue]

I believe we have had poor results against the better teams is basically down to terrible tactics which look to contain and pray we score at the other end.

Managers do their homework and know how to play us because our ridiculous formations offer virtually zero attacking threat.

I hope Phil has ditched forever his original game plan and just go for it.

 

[Somerset Ex-TTB]

I believe we have had poor results against the better teams is basically down to terrible tactics which look to contain and pray we score at the other end.

Managers do their homework and know how to play us because our ridiculous formations offer virtually zero attacking threat.

I hope Phil has ditched forever his original game plan and just go for it.

If we had played 4-4-2 all season I am sure we would have over 60 points by now. :winking:

On the other had, you could argue that these tactics make it difficult, if not almost improbable for the poorer teams to score against us only conceding 11 goals in 15 games and keeping 5 clean sheets.

 

[wakes123]

I believe we have had poor results against the better teams is basically down to terrible tactics which look to contain and pray we score at the other end.

Managers do their homework and know how to play us because our ridiculous formations offer virtually zero attacking threat.

I hope Phil has ditched forever his original game plan and just go for it.

I think it's mainly because the teams at the top are better than the teams at the bottom, and it's more difficult to beat them. The tactics you play against these teams does come into it and there could be some truth in what you say, but that's not the main factor for me.

Whatever formation we played away at Luton (for example) I think we would have lost, because they are such a strong team at home.

 

[mrsblue]

If we had played 4-4-2 all season I am sure we would have over 60 points by now. :winking:

On the other had, you could argue that these tactics make it difficult, if not almost improbable for the poorer teams to score against us only conceding 11 goals in 15 games and keeping 5 clean sheets.

We are on a fairly good run yet still remain 4 points from the autos with a far inferior GD,true the tactics make us diffulcult to beat but the question is will those tactics bring success we all want nay demand,I have my doubts.

At some point we have to beat those around us,if Phil poses them a problem having 2 in attack and we win 4 3 then brilliant BUT if he reverts to type and we lose 1 0 then what is the point.

 

[chapperzUK]

We are on a fairly good run yet still remain 4 points from the autos with a far inferior GD,true the tactics make us diffulcult to beat but the question is will those tactics bring success we all want nay demand,I have my doubts.

At some point we have to beat those around us,if Phil poses them a problem having 2 in attack and we win 4 3 then brilliant BUT if he reverts to type and we lose 1 0 then what is the point.

Oh I do love your hypothetical conclusions. So if we play 2 in attack and win then great, but if we play 4-5-1 and lose then bad. What if we play 4-5-1 and win? What if we play 2 in attack and lose?

 

[mrsblue]

Oh I do love your hypothetical conclusions. So if we play 2 in attack and win then great, but if we play 4-5-1 and lose then bad. What if we play 4-5-1 and win? What if we play 2 in attack and lose?

We we have played the top 12 teams and used 451,those 12 games yielded 13 points and only 7 goals...Do you think we should play the same 451 or try something different?

 

[chapperzUK]

We we have played the top 12 teams and used 451,those 12 games yielded 13 points and only 7 goals...Do you think we should play the same 451 or try something different?

Last season we played 4-5-1 and got 38 points against those in the top 12 and scored 30 goals.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, formations don't win games.

I don't care if we play 4-5-1, 4-4-2 or some random 3-6-1 as long as we keep getting players in the box and only have 1 midfielder sitting in front of the back 4.

 

[mrsblue]

Last season we played 4-5-1 and got 38 points against those in the top 12 and scored 30 goals.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, formations don't win games.

I don't care if we play 4-5-1, 4-4-2 or some random 3-6-1 as long as we keep getting players in the box and only have 1 midfielder sitting in front of the back 4.

Last season we played 451 and ultimately failed !

This season so far we have played 451 until recently and it's been horrid viewing at home and we are still chasing the top 3.

 

[Somerset Ex-TTB]

There was a quote from someone this week, might have been Atkinson I think, that until the last couple of matches we have been playing with 2 sitting in front of the back 4 (Leonard and Deegan mostly).

Leonard has now been given licence to get forward more, and we are only playing 1 defensive midfielder, not two.

This has and will have more impact with how the team has played than playing 1 or 2 up front.

For what it's worth, I think that Brown has been too slow in making this change, especially at home, but who is to say that we would not have lost a game or two instead?

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, formations don't win games.

I have no statistics to back this up but .............. I think that the more goals we score whilst not letting in goals leads to winning.

All these figures about possession, attempts on goal, assists and whatever are largely meaningless.

I remember seeing an F.A. Cup game many, many seasons ago when a non-league team scored in the 1st minute away from home at a 3rd division ground and then hardly touched the ball again for the remainder of the game. At that time there was only the one statistic - and that's the one that counts - the final score. :omg:

 

[mrsblue]

There was a quote from someone this week, might have been Atkinson I think, that until the last couple of matches we have been playing with 2 sitting in front of the back 4 (Leonard and Deegan mostly).

Leonard has now been given licence to get forward more, and we are only playing 1 defensive midfielder, not two.

This has and will have more impact with how the team has played than playing 1 or 2 up front.

For what it's worth, I think that Brown has been too slow in making this change, especially at home, but who is to say that we would not have lost a game or two instead?

I agree,

The players at home must be in total fear of playing,Brown and Penney must drill into them don't concede at all costs then the fans slag the lads off..These guys need to be unleashed and entertain us with a brand of sparkling play resulting in either 3 0 or 3 1 win if Phil goes 442.