WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,354
|
Post by WDB on Feb 24, 2017 8:14:24 GMT
Last spring even I heard that unfashionable and unfancied Leicester City had defied expectations and won ... something. Cue much excitement among lovers of underdogs, which is most of us in one way or another.
Since then, Leicester have come back to earth with a bump, and yesterday we heard the club had fired the manager.
My main source on football matters is a close, senior colleague, who contrasted Leicester's success with the struggles of his own Manchester United, especially in terms of their respective managers. His narrative last year was along these lines: an inspirational manager had forged a collection of middling individuals into a unit that could beat anyone, while in Manchester the recent managers had struggled to replicate their long-running predecessor's control over his squad of big egos.
But let's take a statistical view of this. Nobody continues to be unbeatable for ever. 'Beginner's luck' runs out when opponents have had the chance to work out your methods; other forms of luck run out too and a run of remarkably good results suddenly looks like a run of alarmingly bad ones.
So has the manager who was a hero in May become a chump in eight months? Or has his team simply regressed to the mean and slipped temporarily below it? If it's the latter, the performance will bounce back and the board will claim the credit for 'making a tough decision at the right moment'. And if he was a chump all the time and they picked him anyway...?
|
|
|
Post by Alanović on Feb 24, 2017 9:49:10 GMT
The latter. As Brian Clough said: "Anybody who can do anything in Leicester other than knit a jumper has got to be a genius".
Never liked Leicester, was non-plussed at their achievements last year, and now wish I'd followed my instinct and put money on them going down this year.
Anyway, Fulham's going to Wembley, via the play offs. I hope.
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Feb 24, 2017 11:46:49 GMT
Leicesters fate is not difficult to pinpoint, and was predicted. Overconfidence and Egos. They were not a great bunch of players, but they were a good team. As soon as overinflated individual egos got int he way of team, they were luncheon meat for everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Feb 24, 2017 11:47:33 GMT
Anyway, Fulham's going to Wembley, via the play offs. I hope. Ooo no. dont want to go there, they always loose in a place starting with W.
|
|
|
Post by Alanović on Feb 24, 2017 11:57:50 GMT
Anyway, Fulham's going to Wembley, via the play offs. I hope. Ooo no. dont want to go there, they always loose in a place starting with W. Lose.
I think we won in Wigan once.
Here's one you'll like:
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Feb 24, 2017 12:45:18 GMT
Alas the world cup had nothing to do with Fulham. (its an imitation one BTW)
|
|
|
Post by manatee on Feb 24, 2017 12:48:59 GMT
I don't think it's just statistical variation, there are too many matches in a season for the end result not to be reasonably representative of performance, even allowing that football has a sizeable element of randomness and complexity, and opponents' proficiency also affects success. But you're right, when performance improves whether relatable to the change of manager or not, the owners will claim that they made a good decision.
There are so many other things that could explain it, most of which are not quantifiable; unless they had reason to think the manager had done the wrong things, they might have done better to get behind him, extend his contract, and work on some of the other dimensions.
Health warning: I know sod all about fitbal.
|
|
|
Post by Alanović on Feb 24, 2017 12:58:53 GMT
Alas the world cup had nothing to do with Fulham. (its an imitation one BTW) Except for World Cup Winner's medal holder George Cohen. And captain Haynes who had to pull out of the tournament due to a car crash finishing his career, handing the captaincy to Moore who would otherwise not have lifted the trophy.
England only ever win the World Cup when there's a Fulham player in the squad. FACT.
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Feb 24, 2017 16:07:58 GMT
Alas the world cup had nothing to do with Fulham. (its an imitation one BTW) Except for World Cup Winner's medal holder George Cohen. And captain Haynes who had to pull out of the tournament due to a car crash finishing his career, handing the captaincy to Moore who would otherwise not have lifted the trophy.
England only ever win the World Cup when there's a Fulham player in the squad. FACT.
So Haynes not being in the squad, enabled England to win the world cup. England only ever win the world cup when there are THREE West Ham players in the team. FACT FACT FACT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 17:54:12 GMT
Overconfidence and Egos. They were not a great bunch of players, but they were a good team. As soon as overinflated individual egos got int he way of team, they were luncheon meat for everyone else. Yup.
|
|
|
Post by iancapetown on Feb 26, 2017 7:56:34 GMT
Anyway, Fulham's going to Wembley, via the play offs. I hope. Must find this in the cupboard...
|
|
|
Post by Alanović on Feb 27, 2017 9:05:24 GMT
Except for World Cup Winner's medal holder George Cohen. And captain Haynes who had to pull out of the tournament due to a car crash finishing his career, handing the captaincy to Moore who would otherwise not have lifted the trophy.
England only ever win the World Cup when there's a Fulham player in the squad. FACT.
So Haynes not being in the squad, enabled England to win the world cup. England only ever win the world cup when there are THREE West Ham players in the team. FACT FACT FACT No, it was George Cohen wot dun it.
|
|
|
Post by Alanović on Feb 27, 2017 9:06:17 GMT
Anyway, Fulham's going to Wembley, via the play offs. I hope. Must find this in the cupboard... That's a good one, ian, from the Keegan/Tigana era. Happy days.
|
|
|
Post by hobbit on Feb 27, 2017 13:06:20 GMT
Claudio is an excellent Manager and a true Gentleman, I think this year the Players have definitely let him down! their work-rate during matches is nowhere near what it was last year, and missing one man (Kante) should not have made that much of a difference, but it has, he was the glue in the middle which held them together. Claudio, being the type of man he is, I find it hard to think that he would have doled out the "hair-dryer" treatment ala Ferguson, that his squad really really needed! and they took advantage of this. Also last season the "big-names" were playing awful football, this gave Leicester the opening, and they grabbed it. Chelsea (reigning champs) were in 10th place! Tottenham would have won the title on the last day of the season if they beat us, but Chelsea did it for Claudio, and for the first time last season, pulled up their socks and played like they should have been doing, beating spurs, and giving the title to Leicester.Something they got revenge for this season by ending our record breaking run! Bah! Anyway, Claudio was made the scapegoat this year, he deserved longer and better, I don't think a New Manager will do any better of a job and i hope Leicester come to realise this. Meanwhile, Claudio will always be in demand and will move on upwards and onwards, Good luck to him.
|
|
|
Post by iancapetown on Feb 27, 2017 17:56:36 GMT
Must find this in the cupboard... That's a good one, ian, from the Keegan/Tigana era. Happy days. Yep. Friend of mine was playing (occasionally) for them at the time. Arendse, the keeper.
|
|