[Tibby Baggie]

I seem to have upset a few posters with my belief
that a point from a draw is useless.  At the moment
Leicester are top with 35 points and we are 13th
with 20 points. They have WON 5 more games than us.
We have LOST 5 more games than them.  These are
the important stats.  If Leicester lost 5 points they
would still be third in the table; if we lost 5 points we
would only drop 3 places.
Point is; we have both drawn 5 games.
In the great scheme of things those draws are useless.

I wouldn't say you've upset anyone mate. People will always have different opinions and it's healthy to have discussions that look at things from both angles so to speak.

It's what makes a forum worthwhile to visit and take part in discussions.

[meandbrenarebaggies]

Yes, there would be some out there gnashing their teeth and
bemoaning the loss of few crumbs of consolation all because
the team tried its best to win. Oh ….actually….there won’t.
Rather there will be fans proud to say they went down playing
the game the way it should be played, i.e. to win. Lets face
it survival in this crap-shoot called the Premiership is fast losing
its appeal and the prospect of playing a more realistic game
in the league below isn’t all bad news. A lot of people see
watching grass-roots football more rewarding these days
rather than continuing to kow-tow to the MoneyFootyScam
that is the Premiership. Draws are useless.

[Tibby Baggie]

Have we switched places in the table with Villa when I wasn't looking? Why is there so much bloody doom and gloom about at the minute? Baffling!

All teams begin the season with survival in mind first and foremost, and despite feeling disillusioned after the occasional setback such as on Sunday I'd much rather we were playing teams like Liverpool etc than any of the outfits in the Championship and lower at the minute.

[Ska'dForLife-WBA]

The earliest footballers would have thought the Victorians negative for playing with designated goalkeepers instead of rushbacks.
The Victorians thought the Edwardians were negative for making two players into "defenders".
Everyone under the sun thought 1930s Arsenal were negative for pulling the centre-half deep and creating the three-man defence.
And that Alf Ramsey was negative for using a four-man defence and no proper wingers.

Would the game be more skilled and entertaining if none of these innovations had been made, and everyone was still chasing willy-nilly after the ball in a twenty-two man pack? The history of football is the history of teams making themselves harder and harder to beat.

(I reckon we'll have to agree to disagree on all this).

[Beefy 1965]

So ...........

West Ham Away one point
Tottenham Home one point
Liverpool Away One point

Total 3 points

So MeandBren would you have been happier with hanging on for a win at Liverpool if .....

West Ham Away 0 Points
Tottenham Home 0 Points
Liverpool 3 Points

Total 3 points

Then you would have the extra win you craved for but the same amount of points anyway,

I Just don't think your argument stands up to be honest

[Tibby Baggie]

The earliest footballers would have thought the Victorians negative for playing with designated goalkeepers instead of rushbacks.
The Victorians thought the Edwardians were negative for making two players into "defenders".
Everyone under the sun thought 1930s Arsenal were negative for pulling the centre-half deep and creating the three-man defence.
And that Alf Ramsey was negative for using a four-man defence and no proper wingers.

Would the game be more skilled and entertaining if none of these innovations had been made, and everyone was still chasing willy-nilly after the ball in a twenty-two man pack?  The history of football is the history of teams making themselves harder and harder to beat.

(I reckon we'll have to agree to disagree on all this).

I dread to think of what the Victorians would have thought about Pulis haha

[Beefy 1965]

Moving on then ..........

The next 3 games ..............

How many points from this little lot

AFC Bournemouth
Swansea
Newcastle

As my predictions are usually below what we actually get ill go deliberately low again,

So i will go 3 points, either three draws or a win, hope its the win though as obviously according to MeandBren that would be much better !!!!!!!  

[Tibby Baggie]

3 points or nothing in every game till the end of the season.

Draws are https://youtu.be/I1UfM-PHExU

[St Charles Owl]

Yes, there would be some out there gnashing their teeth and
bemoaning the loss of few crumbs of consolation all because
the team tried its best to win.  Oh ….actually….there won’t.
Rather there will be fans proud to say they went down playing
the game the way it should be played,  i.e.  to win.  Lets face
it survival in this crap-shoot called the Premiership is fast losing
its appeal and the prospect of playing a more realistic game
in the league below isn’t all bad news.  A lot of people see
watching grass-roots football more rewarding these days
rather than continuing to kow-tow to the MoneyFootyScam
that is the Premiership.  Draws are useless.

I am not sure any fans will be "proud" to have been relegated, irrespective of the way they played!!  Sure for the teams just promoted its always going to be a slog to just stay up and they may say "we gave it our best shot", but surely WBA are above that in the general hierarchy???  Surely you would be bitterly disappointed after having spent so much time in the Prem to now be relegated??

As for the draws, I get what you are saying, with three points for a win they are simply not worth as much as they were before, but I thinks its much more complicated than that!!  The more important stat is maybe looking at who those draws are against.  Currently anytime a team can get a point away at a top 6 side, it has to be viewed as a point won, a bonus point as Ska'd put it, due to the realistic expectation of that game generally being a defeat.  Obviously if you only got a point at home against a team in the bottom three, then that point is worth less due to the expectation and need to beat the teams around and below you.

[Ska'dForLife-WBA]

The earliest footballers would have thought the Victorians negative for playing with designated goalkeepers instead of rushbacks.
The Victorians thought the Edwardians were negative for making two players into "defenders".
Everyone under the sun thought 1930s Arsenal were negative for pulling the centre-half deep and creating the three-man defence.
And that Alf Ramsey was negative for using a four-man defence and no proper wingers.

Would the game be more skilled and entertaining if none of these innovations had been made, and everyone was still chasing willy-nilly after the ball in a twenty-two man pack?  The history of football is the history of teams making themselves harder and harder to beat.

(I reckon we'll have to agree to disagree on all this).

I dread to think of what the Victorians would have thought about Pulis haha

Given that most Victorian players were public schoolboys, sending Pulis into their dressing room would be the stuff comedy sketches are made of


"I say, isn't it rather unsportsmanlike to have so many men behind the ball?"

*Headbutt*

"Sir, I must protest about this ungentlemanly time-wasting habit."

*Headbutt*

"Please, this is all too cruel, I want to go back to the Foxhunting Society."

*Headbutt*

"NOW LADS, WE'VE GOT 'EM BY THE MONOCLES - LET'S SEE SOME AAAAAARD WORK!"