Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: DMnumber4 on June 05, 2010, 09:27:53 pm
-
I've been meaning to do this for a while, but I just wanted to see how much Mr Sharp contributed to the teams points total from just goals alone.
If we take his 15 goals in 32 appearances away completely, we would have finished 20th on 50 points rather than the 12th on 60 points.
Yes he missed a few chances and the penalty at Preston, and yes some of the chances he put away our respective grandma's could have scored, but he was there to knock them in.
I just hope JR et al make the right decision and I hope BS realises how much we appreciate him and want him here.
-
DMnumber4 wrote:
I've been meaning to do this for a while, but I just wanted to see how much Mr Sharp contributed to the teams points total from just goals alone.
If we take his 15 goals in 32 appearances away completely, we would have finished 20th on 50 points rather than the 12th on 60 points.
Yes he missed a few chances and the penalty at Preston, and yes some of the chances he put away our respective grandma's could have scored, but he was there to knock them in.
I just hope JR et al make the right decision and I hope BS realises how much we appreciate him and want him here.
Surely we wouldn't have played the season with only 10 men? We could have played Heffernan in those games and he could have got us a few more points.
-
DonnyOsmond wrote:
DMnumber4 wrote:
I've been meaning to do this for a while, but I just wanted to see how much Mr Sharp contributed to the teams points total from just goals alone.
If we take his 15 goals in 32 appearances away completely, we would have finished 20th on 50 points rather than the 12th on 60 points.
Yes he missed a few chances and the penalty at Preston, and yes some of the chances he put away our respective grandma's could have scored, but he was there to knock them in.
I just hope JR et al make the right decision and I hope BS realises how much we appreciate him and want him here.
Surely we wouldn't have played the season with only 10 men? We could have played Heffernan in those games and he could have got us a few more points.
I appreciate this fact, but dare I say Heffs would have only gained half as many, but I don't us to get in to a Heffs v Sharp contest.
-
That is why nobody can ever say that one player makes a team, or that any player is \"vital\" for the team. If they are not there somebody else is, and the game would be different and is therefore unpredictable. Bily Sharp is a good striker, no doubt about that, is he essential for Rovers to win games? No is the simple answer, does he make winning more likely? Posibly so, but then could a Steve Brooker or a Garner have the same effect, or an even better one? Maybe so again. It is the system of football being played that is the greatest influence, and why the biggest asset Rovers have is SOD and ROK.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
That is why nobody can ever say that one player makes a team, or that any player is \"vital\" for the team. If they are not there somebody else is, and the game would be different and is therefore unpredictable. Bily Sharp is a good striker, no doubt about that, is he essential for Rovers to win games? No is the simple answer, does he make winning more likely? Posibly so, but then could a Steve Brooker or a Garner have the same effect, or an even better one? Maybe so again. It is the system of football being played that is the greatest influence, and why the biggest asset Rovers have is SOD and ROK.
Delusion my friend.
-
Delusion? So you KNOW that Steve Brooker is not fit? You know he is not going to be able to retain fitness and play next season? I am impressed at your inside knowledge! I don't know these things, but I am impressed at your forsight, can you tell me what the numbers are for the lottery next week? If not can you tell me how you made your fortune on the stock market? I am not sure, but i don't think you know any more than I do.
-
Come off it Barmy.
Everyone knows more than you do.
-
I am quite happy to proclaim ignorance when it comes to the details of players home circumstances/ fitness/ intentions with regards to their contracts. At least I don't make wild assumptions then.
-
Fair enough, just saying.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
Delusion? So you KNOW that Steve Brooker is not fit? You know he is not going to be able to retain fitness and play next season? I am impressed at your inside knowledge! I don't know these things, but I am impressed at your forsight, can you tell me what the numbers are for the lottery next week? If not can you tell me how you made your fortune on the stock market? I am not sure, but i don't think you know any more than I do.
Brooker has never been a Rovers player in my eyes. Yes I was there at Watford when he scored, and I admit thinking \"we've got a player on our hands here.\"
However, I've come round to the understanding that he's unlikely to make the pitch.
The last time he started a league game was 12th April 2008 for Bristol at home to Wolves. If you seriously think he's going to be fit and well you're mad. 221 league games in 10 years is abysmal I'm afraid.
-
DMnumber4,
I think Barmby's reply was perfect but you seem so full of yourself that you're unable recognise the truth in his words.
You're giving your opinion (that Brooker wont regain fitness) and presenting it as a fact. You're welcome to your opinion, but don't try to dress it up as something other than that.
-
i_ateallthepies wrote:
DMnumber4,
I think Barmby's reply was perfect but you seem so full of yourself that you're unable recognise the truth in his words.
You're giving your opinion (that Brooker wont regain fitness) and presenting it as a fact. You're welcome to your opinion, but don't try to dress it up as something other than that.
Having read DMNumber4's posts again and again I cannot see where he has presented Brooker not regaining fitness as a fact?
It seems you see your opinion as correct and his incorrect
Strange things opinions aren't they?
-
yes they are but they are great on burgers or hot dogs with ketchup wellred.
-
nah ketchup is for kids big lads have mustard
-
Wellred wrote:
i_ateallthepies wrote:
DMnumber4,
I think Barmby's reply was perfect but you seem so full of yourself that you're unable recognise the truth in his words.
You're giving your opinion (that Brooker wont regain fitness) and presenting it as a fact. You're welcome to your opinion, but don't try to dress it up as something other than that.
Having read DMNumber4's posts again and again I cannot see where he has presented Brooker not regaining fitness as a fact?
It seems you see your opinion as correct and his incorrect
Strange things opinions aren't they?
\"If you seriously think he's going to be fit and well you're mad.\" Sounds like he's decided Brooker not regaining fitness is a fact to me.
P.S. Where is Fluence? Do a lot of honeymooners go there?
-
Do you know the meaning of the word fact??
It doesn't seem as though you do after reading your post.
What is this Fluence that you are talking about? Do we get an explanation?
-
FFS... Read the title mAte! ...
and I'll change it to help .....
Billy's In Fluence
OK ... it's shit, but it was someone's attempt at humour :D
-
If Billy's gone to Fluence it also shows he has a cultural interest in Italian Art, the lad is just golden.
Personally Billy's goals are important and he can do it, but for me, even when he isn't scoring, he's still:
A massive threat to defenders with his movement and making them have it
Offers so much to the team in dropping deep
takes up positions and finds space easily
gives the midfield options
jumps well to compete for headers
hard enough to hold the ball and buying an all important few seconds to allow others to come into play
has speed with the ball at his feet
runs his pods off
can play link up football
can play quick pass and move football
looks inspirational to his colleagues
can fire his colleagues to improve themselves
can fire the crowd up with a tackle, celebration, never say die attitude.
Other than that, he's shite