easthull fc fan wrote:You've compared points from different seasons, but did you take into account the number of games? Without looking I would have thought in 2016 we played more minutes, as we reached the CC final & semi final of the GF, maybe you should compare minutes of all campaigns then come back with your stats correctly.
You know what an average means so of course I took into account all the games (went up to 30 in 2015) otherwise that wouldn't be an average
knockersbumpMKII wrote:You know what an average means so of course I took into account all the games (went up to 30 in 2015) otherwise that wouldn't be an average
How did you accurately factor in the other variables between the two tenures?
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Chris71 wrote:To be honest who really cares after one of our most successful seasons ever in SL history? I know I dont. I was critical of Radfords appointment but will admit AP got it right and was right to give Radford time to make changes behind the scenes that were needed. There are so many factors that differ in the teams over the past 10 years or so its impossible to to compare like for like.
Bumpy you seem to take some sort of personal pride on finding negatives or negative slants with the club so why the hell do you supposedly follow the club?
For me the club is at last moving in the right direction and AP has learnt from his earlier mistakes along with Radford. The addition of Motu behind the scenes is paying dividends. The 2016 team have achieved something no other Hull FC team in history has and that was winning the cup at Wembley. So just reel ya neck in and enjoy the upturn in the fortunes of Hull FC, if you can't do that and just want to post negative slants on anything Hull FC then I say politely go forth and multiply elsewhere.
No, someone mentioned griffin's defensive weaknesses, another said Radford would improve that and I disagreed and stated why. That's not personal, it was an honest assessment based on facts. 1. Under Radford we (in his comparison 2 seasons to Gentle) had an overall worse defesive record. This is from the average of the league games. despite then getting the most expensive and best squad in decades & his 'own team' something gentle never had chance to and in part down to a terrible run of injuries was still only 1.5 points better in 2016, Gentle never got that chance to 'kick on'. 2. Certain players as I mentioned needed to improve defensively, that so far hasn't happened. 3.Our defense on the right was criminally exposed time and time again. 4. Again as i said, the main reason we improved dramatically was down to attack, a huge jump in points scored on average. If we score a shed load of points/outscore the opposition defence is less of a problem in itself a la Brasil soccer team ethos of old.
discussing where we need to improve is not having a personal pop, it's highlighting realities and if those amongst other things improve then we increase chances of success, I just don't agree that Radford has improved us defensively nor individuals for the reasons I gave.
knockersbumpMKII wrote:No, someone mentioned griffin's defensive weaknesses, another said Radford would improve that and I disagreed and stated why. That's not personal, it was an honest assessment based on facts. 1. Under Radford we (in his comparison 2 seasons to Gentle) had an overall worse defesive record. This is from the average of the league games. despite then getting the most expensive and best squad in decades & his 'own team' something gentle never had chance to and in part down to a terrible run of injuries was still only 1.5 points better in 2016, Gentle never got that chance to 'kick on'. 2. Certain players as I mentioned needed to improve defensively, that so far hasn't happened. 3.Our defense on the right was criminally exposed time and time again. 4. Again as i said, the main reason we improved dramatically was down to attack, a huge jump in points scored on average. If we score a shed load of points/outscore the opposition defence is less of a problem in itself a la Brasil soccer team ethos of old.
discussing where we need to improve is not having a personal pop, it's highlighting realities and if those amongst other things improve then we increase chances of success, I just don't agree that Radford has improved us defensively nor individuals for the reasons I gave.
You are saying Radders won't improve Griffins defence, how do you know this? Can you see into the future? You've also said Radfords rubbish, yet he's done something no other FC coach in history has done, you know nothing other then to post negative about certain people at the club.
DGM wrote:How did you accurately factor in the other variables between the two tenures?
You know that really can't be done but the two years of Gentle were far more successful than Radford's and better defence/attack points wise.
However, my opinion is Radford had more experienced youth players that Gentle had just as they stepped up from academy as they had to step due to injuries to senior players. Radford had the luxury of getting 'his team' in a third year. Radford had the most expensive squad assembled and quality everywhere especially in the pack and in depth, soething we haven't had in a decade, oh and a relatively injury free Gaz Eliis last season. Yeah defensively Gentle worked wonders given what he had.
easthull fc fan wrote:You are saying Radders won't improve Griffins defence, how do you know this? Can you see into the future? You've also said Radfords rubbish, yet he's done something no other FC coach in history has done, you know nothing other then to post negative about certain people at the club.
I never said "won't", you've just made that up, please re-read what I said in all my posts. It's stating I don't see any noticeable improvement in defence under Lee Radford.
knockersbumpMKII wrote:You know that really can't be done but the two years of Gentle were far more successful than Radford's and better defence/attack points wise.
However, my opinion is Radford had more experienced youth players that Gentle had just as they stepped up from academy as they had to step due to injuries to senior players. Radford had the luxury of getting 'his team' in a third year. Radford had the most expensive squad assembled and quality everywhere especially in the pack and in depth, soething we haven't had in a decade, oh and a relatively injury free Gaz Eliis last season. Yeah defensively Gentle worked wonders given what he had.
Quality everywhere? I thought you said Shaul, Talanoa & Fonua are no good?
knockersbumpMKII wrote:You know that really can't be done but the two years of Gentle were far more successful than Radford's and better defence/attack points wise.
However, my opinion is Radford had more experienced youth players that Gentle had just as they stepped up from academy as they had to step due to injuries to senior players. Radford had the luxury of getting 'his team' in a third year. Radford had the most expensive squad assembled and quality everywhere especially in the pack and in depth, soething we haven't had in a decade, oh and a relatively injury free Gaz Eliis last season. Yeah defensively Gentle worked wonders given what he had.
knockersbumpMKII wrote:You know that really can't be done but the two years of Gentle were far more successful than Radford's and better defence/attack points wise.
However, my opinion is Radford had more experienced youth players that Gentle had just as they stepped up from academy as they had to step due to injuries to senior players. Radford had the luxury of getting 'his team' in a third year. Radford had the most expensive squad assembled and quality everywhere especially in the pack and in depth, soething we haven't had in a decade, oh and a relatively injury free Gaz Eliis last season. Yeah defensively Gentle worked wonders given what he had.
What about the other side of the argument...
Radford's side the past two years are playing more games a year, therefore they could be more fatigued? Radford's side in the past two years are playing in Super 8 games against better opposition in the new league structure. How many injuries did Radford have to content with in 2015 vs Gentle? What were the areas of expertise within their backroom staff at the time?
Basically, comparing Gentle vs Radford defensive stats is an utterly futile exercise as there are so many other variables playing a part - Radford himself was involved in both setups in different positions. A simple average points against stat isn't a reliable indicator at all, except when trying to create a stick to beat Radford with.
I would also dispute your point about certain players not improving. Is there still room for improvement? Yes. Have they improved? Also yes. Particularly Talanoa the past couple of seasons. Who else do you feel hasn't improved?
We did ship in more points down the right hand side, but every team do. That's because most teams attack down their left more often as it's usually faster to ship the ball that way with right handed players. We also had a winger playing in the hardest position to defend in at right centre.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29811 Location: West Yorkshire
knockersbumpMKII wrote:No, someone mentioned griffin's defensive weaknesses, another said Radford would improve that and I disagreed and stated why.
Who said Radford would improve Griffin's defence? Wasn't our points against average only 18.7 in 2016? Pretty impressive to say we were in the Super 8s and our cup run included all top 8 SL sides.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum