Norwich City Vs Birmingham City. MDT.

Without the benefit of seeing the game, I'm not sure a how they can all score so highly against a poor and struggling Birmingham side in a 1-0 win? But then, Paddy is always generous.

Bah!

 

For once I pretty much agree with Paddy's ratings. Klose brought a calm organisation to the defense assisted by the two CMs. It wasn't so much the result for me, but the willingness by DF to change the formation and the approach to one much better suited to the Championship. Burton will be the next test, but two wins would be a much clearer indication of progress.

 

On the subject of the rating for Gunn, it is, surely, impossible to give above a six when the player had absolutely nothing to do.

 

A tricky one, but Gunn was part of a clean sheet with his positioning and interaction with the defense. He doesn't just stand between the posts waiting for shots to come in.

 

Striker's ratings are nearly always overrated by a couple of points just because they score. Klose clearly had a significant impact at both ends of the pitch but still scores the same as Oliveira. I also wonder if Jerome had played and scored / missed as many chances as Oliveira whether he would have got the same score. I suspect many people would have focus more on the missed chances.

 

Oliveira (and Murphy) missed a few but none of them were sitters. I loved how Oliveira got about a bit too. Reminded me of a certain Mr Holt at times. I agree if Jerome had missed as many he'd have heard about it though.

 

I was actually at the game (behind the River End goal) and I think Basil missed one chance which was not easy and Josh just scuffed a shot (a superb pass from Basil).

 

Farke's comments about a lot of missed chances in the games support my view that the score line should have been more convincing. If Oliveria & Murphy only missed ob chance each then who do we think he's referring to?

 

There is an element of 'expectation perception' involved. If the perceiver expects Jerome to miss chances, any misses are more likely to be remembered. The statistics indicate that the difference isn't great, but the perception process exaggerates the difference. The same thing happens with other players, inviting the question as to why the manager keeps picking them. The answer is that he sees more professionally, not that he has been 'favourites'. It's irritating on here, but it will always happen I'm afraid.

 

The stats say nothing about the quality of the chances. perhaps Jeromes are more memorable because they are more glaring?

Bah!

 

That table is pretty depressing reading already.

 

Like the shot Oliveira put over from the penalty spot? Stats at least are objective where perceptions aren't, leaving people to believe what they want to believe.