Peterborough flat track bullies

[BillyStubbsTears]

I noticed last season that Peterborough were steamrollering lower sides but struggled against better ones. Not quite as extreme this season, but similar.

Matches against top half opponents
P10 W4 D1 L5 PPG 1.30

Matches against lower half opponents
P14 W9 D3 L2 PPG 2.14


Compare that to us.

Matches against top half opponents
P9 W6 D1 L2 PPG 2.11

Matches against lower half opponents
P13 W8 D2 L3 PPG 2.00.

[Alan Southstand]

I hope Oxford are the same, BST!

[Chris Black come back]

They’ve spent a fair wedge as well.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Oxford appear to be the all-time classic flat-track bullies.

Matches against top half opponents
P10 W1 D4 L5 PPG 0.70

Matches against lower half opponents
P12 W10 D0 L2 PPG 2.50

In their case, it is possible that this is down to the side improving over time. They just happened to play a alot of their games against top half opponents in the first dozen or so games of the season, when they were crap. In the first 16 games, they played 10 sides currently in the top half and only one of the current bottom 6. They picked up a total of just 16 points. Since then, they have played 7 games, all against bottom half sides, including 4 of the bottom 6. They have won all 7.

Question is: Did they get few points against good teams because they are just not very good against good teams? Or did they get few points against good teams because they weren't very good when they played the good teams and they are a lot better now?

I guess we'll get an idea on Saturday.

[BobG]

Well I regretted, right from its postponement, that we hadn't played Oxford when they were really poor. I would have played them then even with one or two people out with injuries. Lack of confidence is a huge factor. Instead of playing them when they had none, we are playing them now when they have shedloads.

No guarantees of course, but I would have risked playing them on the original date unlesss there was a cast iron reason not to.

BobG

[GazLaz]

Oxford appear to be the all-time classic flat-track bullies.

Matches against top half opponents
P10 W1 D4 L5 PPG 0.70

Matches against lower half opponents
P12 W10 D0 L2 PPG 2.50

In their case, it is possible that this is down to the side improving over time. They just happened to play a alot of their games against top half opponents in the first dozen or so games of the season, when they were crap. In the first 16 games, they played 10 sides currently in the top half and only one of the current bottom 6. They picked up a total of just 16 points. Since then, they have played 7 games, all against bottom half sides, including 4 of the bottom 6. They have won all 7.

Question is: Did they get few points against good teams because they are just not very good against good teams? Or did they get few points against good teams because they weren't very good when they played the good teams and they are a lot better now?

I guess we'll get an idea on Saturday.

They had defensive injury issues during their bad run and have definitely improved. The truth will be somewhere between the two statements.

[DMnumber4]

Think Lincoln might give you similar numbers. They've only lost two games to bottom half sides. They've only won ONE game against the top six though and that was against 10 man Portsmouth in the week before the Rovers game.

Recently they had seen off Northampton (twice), Wimbledon, Burton, Rochdale, Wigan and Swindon. But came unstuck against Sunderland (0-4) and Shrewsbury (0-1)
Once I saw that, I was quietly content in the knowledge that Rovers would provide one of their stiffest tests for a while and so it proved.

One final point: they still have to play Hull TWICE - someone's got to drop points somewhere!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Lincoln.

Matches against top half opponents
P12 W6 D2 L4 PPG 1.67

Matches against lower half opponents
P12 W9 D1 L2 PPG 2.33

Again, I stress these are the halves of the table that the opponents are CURRENTLY in.

[POD]

There are some great stats on here.... thanks all.
Does anyone else like me miss ‘old fashioned’ league tables, where you get the W, D & L stats for each team in the league for both Home and Away matches, plus goals for and against both Home and Away.
I know it would take up a bit more space but other than that, I don’t know why TV / Websites etc don’t publish tables in full.
I haven’t bought a newspaper in years and don’t know if what I am looking for would be there?

[robchester]

It’s on the table on here

[POD]

It’s on the table on here

The table on this site only gives a snapshot.  It has 3 columns of stats ‘Played’ ‘GD’ & ‘Points’ which is even less than most other sites and wasn’t what I was looking for in my post. 

[dickos1]

I think it’s natural that decent sides will have better records against the poorer sides, we are the exception to the rule

[IDM]

Surely average sides would have good records against poor ones, but good or the best sides would have better records against their peers.?

[Campsall rover]

There are some great stats on here.... thanks all.
Does anyone else like me miss %u2018old fashioned%u2019 league tables, where you get the W, D & L stats for each team in the league for both Home and Away matches, plus goals for and against both Home and Away.
I know it would take up a bit more space but other than that, I don%u2019t know why TV / Websites etc don%u2019t publish tables in full.
I haven%u2019t bought a newspaper in years and don%u2019t know if what I am looking for would be there?

If you google home and away stats for League 1 you can see the full tables.
Like you I do like to see the difference in home and away results.

[Grouchy_Git]

Well I regretted, right from its postponement, that we hadn't played Oxford when they were really poor. I would have played them then even with one or two people out with injuries. Lack of confidence is a huge factor. Instead of playing them when they had none, we are playing them now when they have shedloads.

No guarantees of course, but I would have risked playing them on the original date unlesss there was a cast iron reason not to.

BobG

shedloads of confidence, on a 9;game winning run and 4 good loans in the xterm window.

[POD]

There are some great stats on here.... thanks all.
Does anyone else like me miss %u2018old fashioned%u2019 league tables, where you get the W, D & L stats for each team in the league for both Home and Away matches, plus goals for and against both Home and Away.
I know it would take up a bit more space but other than that, I don%u2019t know why TV / Websites etc don%u2019t publish tables in full.
I haven%u2019t bought a newspaper in years and don%u2019t know if what I am looking for would be there?

If you google home and away stats for League 1 you can see the full tables.
Like you I do like to see the difference in home and away results.

Thanks for that CR.

I’ve found a site called ‘Soccerstats.com’ which gives all the information I was looking for and much more.   

[pigeonhole]

11v11.com is good for historical stats.  It has lot of clickbaity adverts, though.  One popped up the other day that said,  "You won't recognise The Beast from the Chase when you see him now.  He's so skinny and looks gorgeous"  It took a lot of willpower not to click on it...

[BillyStubbsTears]

Some other examples.
Hull City

Matches against top half opponents
P13 W6 D3 L4 PPG 1.62

Matches against lower half opponents
P12 W9 D0 L3 PPG 2.25

Portsmouth

Matches against top half opponents
P13 W7 D1 L5 PPG 1.69

Matches against lower half opponents
P11 W6 D4 L1 PPG 2.00

Sunderland
Matches against top half opponents
P110 W6 D3 L1 PPG 2.10

Matches against lower half opponents
P13 W4 D6 L3 PPG 1.38


Accrington
Matches against top half opponents
P9 W4 D2 L3 PPG 1.55

Matches against lower half opponents
P13 W8 D2 L3 PPG 2.00


As I was saying in the OP. Peterborough definitely appear to be well over towards the flat-track bully end of the spectrum.

It might be a Ferguson thing. This was us in 2016/17
Matches against top half opponents
P22 W9 D5 L8 PPG 1.45

Matches against lower half opponents
P24 W16 D5 L3 PPG 2.21

That's an interesting thought. I frequently thought that Ferguson was slow to react when good teams switched their play against us during a match. I wonder if he's just not up to the task of taking on good teams, with sharp managers and he gets the success he does by having the resources to put together a squad that can batter the weaker sides?

[dickos1]

Surely average sides would have good records against poor ones, but good or the best sides would have better records against their peers.?

That’s not the point being made though,
Even the better sides will in general have better records against the poorer sides then they will against the good sides, even if they do have a decent record against the good sides that’s not going to mean their record against the poorer sides gets worse

[Alan Southstand]

Except for Sunderland, Dickos?

[BillyStubbsTears]

The point of the OP was that for the second consecutive season, of the main top 2 contenders, Peterborough have by some way the worst record against top end sides (I'm excluding Oxford because I don't see them as serious top 2 contenders).