Tony's In 1yr Extention (rumour)

[Big Al]

Today's daily telegraph in A League confidential ( I read the actual paper - is available online to subscribers only which I am not).

The question was would TW the TD sack TW the coach? No need someone hirer up has approved a 1yr Extention for TW.

 

[Forum Phoenix]

Good. He's a good man so he deserves a proper crack.

 

[FFC Mariner]

2 years isn't it?

 

[Wombat]

2 years would be stupid.

Lets give him the benefit of the doubt.......but lets see some improvement and some continuity.

No one is going to poach him atm!?!

 

[nero]

Total joke if true. Let's spend the rumoured Garcia extension on a decent coach and push TW upstairs.
Living in Kotara for the past two years and driving down to watch my team play like that. I'm actually rather looking forward to seeing Mcbreen play for Edgeworth then watch the only team I support across the world. I have been a member since day one, but not sure if I'll renew if TW it's still there.

 

[FFC Mariner]

Talking to the membership manager at HT, the survey feedback is consistent with how you feel.

Sad

 

[Blackadder]

I was prepared to give TW the benefit of the doubt, but after the lack of any resemblance of a game plan against a weakened Victory side, the day he is no longer Manager can't come soon enough.
Understandable they don't have the talent across the park to compete, but at least have the players putting in for 90mins, if there were signs of improvement then yes give him the extension , but there have been no tangible signs imo.

 

[soccer mad]

Totally agree no tactical nous what so ever .We need a coach with good tactical knowledge and expertise. Thats where I'd put the money .

 

[Gratis]

I'm sorry to say I'm starting to agree. Say what you like about Arnie but we always improved in the second half, we always had a plan, the players always knew their job and if they didn't Arnie was there on the sideline yelling it at them and most importantly they always played their hearts out.
In fairness our boys usually play their hearts out but it wasn't in evidence last night or in every game this season

 

[FFC Mariner]

To be fair to Walmsley (which I rarely am) He didn't instruct Rosey to gift the scum a goal or set up the red card challenge yesterday with his wild hack out of defence.

I'm also not sure he had a lot to do with signing a crocked 37yo number 10 on big money who has masterminded 1 shot on target in 2 games.

The rest? That's you mate

 

[Gratis]

I still stand by my previous comments though in that I think TW should have at least half a dozen games next season to show us what he can do with a more experienced and stable set up

 

[Wombat]

I don't know what to say.

We don't suck balls like we did under Moss but we are kissing the same region.

The fact that TW doesn't talk shit after we get humiliated gives him some credit but.......

 

[Blackadder]

Would say we are worse now, than under Moss.

 

[dibo]

Finishing bottom is not necessarily an indication of the coach's failure (just as making finals or even winning the league *taken alone* would not necessarily be an indication of success).

I'm sure there'll be a football data analytics expert who can work out whether we've over/underperformed on expected goals for, goals against and points accrued on each game for the available players, and for the total squad spend.

It's not impossible that we've actually outperformed what the data would have predicted, it's just that the money spent on the actual players in the squad is simply too small to be competitive.

If we've overperformed, then the manager's done alright. If we've underperformed, then the manager's obviously not done well enough.

If we're moneyballing, that's the sort of analysis we'd be undertaking.

Then given that there's a fair whack more money available for the squad next season (and there are some reasonable arguments and indications that there will be), you'd expect that the expected performance should rise too.

 

[dibo]

^^^
Oh, and we appear to have spent *shitloads* less than last year.

Whilst we expect to finish about 5 points behind last year, we'll have scored 10 more goals and conceded 20 more goals, thanks largely to singing more attackers mixed with the (somewhat forced) ditching of a starting keeper and CB, to be replaced with kids with handfuls of games between them.

There's actually an argument to say we've basically got what we've paid for, so if we pay more (as expected) next year then we can expect to get more too.

 

[Forum Phoenix]

Well put Dibo. That's how I see it and is what I wonder about. Which is why I'm so much less sure than others seem to be.

 

[Blackadder]

^^^
Oh, and we appear to have spent *shitloads* less than last year.

Whilst we expect to finish about 5 points behind last year, we'll have scored 10 more goals and conceded 20 more goals, thanks largely to singing more attackers mixed with the (somewhat forced) ditching of a starting keeper and CB, to be replaced with kids with handfuls of games between them.

There's actually an argument to say we've basically got what we've paid for, so if we pay more (as expected) next year then we can expect to get more too.

Expected by who?
Time will tell , but nothing to date in any transfer window fills me with confidence.

 

[dibo]

Expected by who?
Time will tell , but nothing to date in any transfer window fills me with confidence.

For a given standard of players, you can expect a certain standard of results. There is a whole field of data analytics that studies this, and one of the things that has arisen from this is the idea of 'moneyball'.

Regardless of the specifics of our case, *every* club that has two red cents to rub together and a few braincells does *some* analytical work to analyse whether they're recruiting the right way to meet their targets and optimise their results for an available sum of cash. You can analyse any given contest to see who's likely to come out on top for the given inputs.

Football *is* played on a field, rather than a computer, so there's obviously more to it than a kid with a pocket protector and a laptop, so whilst in in any given game the result is somewhat unpredictable, nevertheless across a season this stuff is actually pretty useful.

So I'm just saying that from the data there'll be an expected number of goals scored, an expected number of goals conceded and an expected number of points accrued. Missing on the upside or downside can tell you whether the whole is more or less than the sum of its parts.

We've spent much less than anyone and we're bottom by plenty. That's entirely predictable.

It doesn't make moneyball a useless theory, it just means that if we want to do better we're going to need to invest more and ensure that that investment is smart; addressing our areas of weakness. There's nothing revolutionary in that either, and I'm sure your grandmother could've come up with the same conclusion, but a smart combination of analytics and scouting will guide the club on who to sign, whereas you, me or your grandmother would be working on hunches.

I'd be a lot more concerned if I were Melbourne City; spending vastly more than us (and more than anyone else) for results that are obviously better but still not winning the league. And that's with the backing of the entire City Football Group. That's where you'd be concerned that the whole is less than the sum of its parts.

 

[Wombat]

I'd be alot happier with MC's ROI than ours.
They may well win it.....we have come stone motherless last.....bringing comparisions to NZ Knights.
Someone miscalculated what was needed to be competative.