| Table since Marti came in on 14:05 - Feb 6 with 2578 views | QPROslo |
| Table since Marti came in on 13:12 - Feb 6 by PhilmyRs |
Where were we in the table - i.e. how close to the drop zone - when he took over? and how close to the drop zone did we finish? I could be wrong, but pretty sure we ended up closer to the relegation zone by the end of the season. So I'd dispute that he kept us up, and would instead say he made it much more probable that we would be relegated. |
I think the target he was given when he came in was to keep us up. He did so he was no "failure" last season. He did what he was asked to do. He'll be getting more than enough grief for his 14 games was it this season. |  | |  |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:08 - Feb 6 with 2562 views | W7Ranger |
| Table since Marti came in on 10:15 - Feb 6 by Spaceman_P |
This is all well and good and all.... but sorry to burst the bubble, but we're still third from bottom. |
Oooh... I bet you're fun at parties!
 |  | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:08 - Feb 6 with 2561 views | EastR |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:04 - Feb 6 by stainrods_elbow |
If that's his form table, I'm amazed we're still in the bottom three. What was the points gap from 21st when he arrived? |
8 I believe | |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:22 - Feb 6 with 2471 views | JamesB1979 |
5 points behind Ipswich. That’s some turnaround. | | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:27 - Feb 6 with 2433 views | Northernr |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:04 - Feb 6 by stainrods_elbow |
If that's his form table, I'm amazed we're still in the bottom three. What was the points gap from 21st when he arrived? |
I mean we all knew it, but it does show how catastrophically bad we were before he got here.
And this has been my worry that I've said on here a few times. To survive we're going to have to go at something approaching play-off standard results. |  | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 15:26 - Feb 6 with 2213 views | kensalriser |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:27 - Feb 6 by Northernr |
I mean we all knew it, but it does show how catastrophically bad we were before he got here.
And this has been my worry that I've said on here a few times. To survive we're going to have to go at something approaching play-off standard results. |
Not quite. If the target is 50 points, that's 1.375 ppg (Marti's current return is 1.25). Current position for that level is 12-13th. So really bang on mid table form. |  |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 15:37 - Feb 6 with 2176 views | ThGrimRanger |
| Table since Marti came in on 15:26 - Feb 6 by kensalriser |
Not quite. If the target is 50 points, that's 1.375 ppg (Marti's current return is 1.25). Current position for that level is 12-13th. So really bang on mid table form. |
45 points would be enough to stay up most seasons and judging by how things are going at the moment then it should be more than enough for survival this season.
If we can avoid injuries to our key players (ie. the current defence + chair) then I'm sure this will be achieved. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Table since Marti came in on 15:40 - Feb 6 with 2162 views | PhilmyRs |
| Table since Marti came in on 14:05 - Feb 6 by QPROslo |
I think the target he was given when he came in was to keep us up. He did so he was no "failure" last season. He did what he was asked to do. He'll be getting more than enough grief for his 14 games was it this season. |
So I agree avoiding relegation was definitely the number one priority, but I don't think he took the job with just that in his remit. I think the expectation was also that he would lift the mood around the place, the football would be more exciting, more passion from the players, we'd fill the ground up and he'd motivate an apparently talented bunch of players, but which lacked direction, and we'd see a notable improvement in performance. I think he failed on every count, other than the number one priority of not going down.
So I suppose you can see it as the number 1 non negotiable as being achieved, but I see it as just an overriding failure because he didn't meet any of the other objectives and I think was fortunate rather than deserving, in keeping us up. But appreciate its about opinions so you may disagree. | | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 16:01 - Feb 6 with 2071 views | kensalriser |
| Table since Marti came in on 15:37 - Feb 6 by ThGrimRanger |
45 points would be enough to stay up most seasons and judging by how things are going at the moment then it should be more than enough for survival this season.
If we can avoid injuries to our key players (ie. the current defence + chair) then I'm sure this will be achieved. |
H'field are over a point per game at the moment and 45 at season end is obviously under that, so it's very doubtful it would be enough.
Worth remembering that in recent seasons quite a few final tallies have had deductions and once you adjust for that the points needed for survival are higher than they seem (since you can't rely on another team getting a deduction). | |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 16:04 - Feb 6 with 2050 views | TheChef |
| Table since Marti came in on 16:01 - Feb 6 by kensalriser |
H'field are over a point per game at the moment and 45 at season end is obviously under that, so it's very doubtful it would be enough.
Worth remembering that in recent seasons quite a few final tallies have had deductions and once you adjust for that the points needed for survival are higher than they seem (since you can't rely on another team getting a deduction). |
OK so who will be this season's Reading?
Birmingham always seem to be a candidate for a points deduction.
You'd think Stoke would be on the edge but through their Bet365 links always seem to find loopholes. |  |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 16:17 - Feb 6 with 2019 views | eastside_r |
| Table since Marti came in on 15:37 - Feb 6 by ThGrimRanger |
45 points would be enough to stay up most seasons and judging by how things are going at the moment then it should be more than enough for survival this season.
If we can avoid injuries to our key players (ie. the current defence + chair) then I'm sure this will be achieved. |
I have you right.
Given how well the top teams are doing (e.g. Leicester looking at a possible record points tally) surely this means the thresholds at the bottom will be lower, if that makes sense.
I am sure someone will have done some statistical analysis on this.  |  | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:21 - Feb 6 with 1865 views | ThGrimRanger |
| Table since Marti came in on 16:01 - Feb 6 by kensalriser |
H'field are over a point per game at the moment and 45 at season end is obviously under that, so it's very doubtful it would be enough.
Worth remembering that in recent seasons quite a few final tallies have had deductions and once you adjust for that the points needed for survival are higher than they seem (since you can't rely on another team getting a deduction). |
only 2 seasons in the last 10 would 45 points have not been enough to stay up.
also this year's top 4 teams are well on course course for breaking the record tally for their accumulated points so i'd be very surprised if 45 is not enough.
btw. millwall are 14-1 to be relegated and that looks like value to me | |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:33 - Feb 6 with 1845 views | 1JD |
| Table since Marti came in on 12:49 - Feb 6 by QPROslo |
"He was a failure" ? Gareth would have the good arguement that he kept us up last season, and how he did was hardly relevant. He got the result. This season the results so far under him and since, with the same players until Blackburn away, make "failure" difficult to dispute. |
“This season the results so far under him and since, with the same players until Blackburn away, make "failure" difficult to dispute”
Surely, the fact that this seasons results under him, and since, also make “failure” difficult to dispute for LAST season also. It’s the same logic.
The very fact that Cifuentes is proving he can get mid-table form, with the same group of players, is evidence GA did not “save us” from relegation last year, but actually directly contributed to putting us there in the first place.
I am amazed there are still some Ainsworth stragglers left! Ainsworth may say he saved the club, but frankly it’s little more than a heavy dose of PR and self-promotion. Ainsworth took over a team 8 points clear of relegation, and would have ended it 1 point clear without the Reading 6 points deduction.
Fast forward, and it remains to be seen if we are going to escape Ainsworth’s disastrous reign this season. | | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:51 - Feb 6 with 1800 views | kensalriser |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:21 - Feb 6 by ThGrimRanger |
only 2 seasons in the last 10 would 45 points have not been enough to stay up.
also this year's top 4 teams are well on course course for breaking the record tally for their accumulated points so i'd be very surprised if 45 is not enough.
btw. millwall are 14-1 to be relegated and that looks like value to me |
Last six seasons min points to stay up, assuming superior GD and adjusted for deductions
22/23 49
21/22 47
20/21 44
19/20 49
18/19 40
17/18 41
Hudderfield are doing just enough to stay out of the bottom three and we're improving, so it's not unlikely that neither will go down, meaning the tally required will be at the high end of the range.
A tenner to the Tiger Cub if anyone stays up on 45 this year (with no deductions). | |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:09 - Feb 6 with 1736 views | NorthantsHoop |
The big question is can we kick on and now is the time to do it as the games fall away. My only worry is when we have had the chance to break out of the bottom 3, we have fallen short, but a new optimism with the signings a moral boosting victory at a ground we have not won in 25 years things maybe on the way up. We just have to cut out our regular runs in recent seasons of losing 3 or 4 games on the bounce as that will see us down. [Post edited 6 Feb 18:10]
|  | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:11 - Feb 6 with 1729 views | ThGrimRanger |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:51 - Feb 6 by kensalriser |
Last six seasons min points to stay up, assuming superior GD and adjusted for deductions
22/23 49
21/22 47
20/21 44
19/20 49
18/19 40
17/18 41
Hudderfield are doing just enough to stay out of the bottom three and we're improving, so it's not unlikely that neither will go down, meaning the tally required will be at the high end of the range.
A tenner to the Tiger Cub if anyone stays up on 45 this year (with no deductions). |
You're doing it differently to me :-)
45 points was enough to stay up last season and 38 points the season before that. | |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:14 - Feb 6 with 1722 views | E15Hoop |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:33 - Feb 6 by 1JD |
“This season the results so far under him and since, with the same players until Blackburn away, make "failure" difficult to dispute”
Surely, the fact that this seasons results under him, and since, also make “failure” difficult to dispute for LAST season also. It’s the same logic.
The very fact that Cifuentes is proving he can get mid-table form, with the same group of players, is evidence GA did not “save us” from relegation last year, but actually directly contributed to putting us there in the first place.
I am amazed there are still some Ainsworth stragglers left! Ainsworth may say he saved the club, but frankly it’s little more than a heavy dose of PR and self-promotion. Ainsworth took over a team 8 points clear of relegation, and would have ended it 1 point clear without the Reading 6 points deduction.
Fast forward, and it remains to be seen if we are going to escape Ainsworth’s disastrous reign this season. |
That said, JD, you surely have to put all this in its historical context don't you?
Granted, we're all saying we should have got Cifuentes in last year and avoided this circling round the drain we've done instead, and having been the largely self-appointed Ainsworth pallbearer for most of the back end of last season, you will, I am sure, be relieved to hear that I am not going to disagree.
However, we all know that wasn't/couldn't be done at the time, and given that the Board in their wisdom decided to make the end of last season a straight crapshoot between appointing Ainsworth and retaining Critchley, you have to say that they made the right call at the time.
My personal view is that the pre-season smashing at Oxford, and more significantly the fans' reaction to it, panicked them, but don't forget I think I'm right in saying we were won 2 drawn 2 lost 4 after 8 games under Ainsworth until that absolute cratering of 6 defeats on the spin (not the first boss here that's happened under btw) that got him the boot after the Leicester game (which was, ironically, a much improved display).
Given the language of Christian Nourry's piece on the Offish this pm, I don't think he's under any illusion that this still might not go the way we want it to, but equally, we now stand a half-decent chance (if not more) of actually coming out of this OK.
I don't think anyone disputes that we're in a much healthier position than we might be if Ainsworth were still here - I personally think he might have quit anyway through emotional exhaustion given how beaten up he was looking by the end - but let's at least desist from trashing him anymore than has already been done on here and elsewhere.
History is history, and needs to be set in its correct context. | | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:30 - Feb 6 with 1673 views | numptydumpty |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:14 - Feb 6 by E15Hoop |
That said, JD, you surely have to put all this in its historical context don't you?
Granted, we're all saying we should have got Cifuentes in last year and avoided this circling round the drain we've done instead, and having been the largely self-appointed Ainsworth pallbearer for most of the back end of last season, you will, I am sure, be relieved to hear that I am not going to disagree.
However, we all know that wasn't/couldn't be done at the time, and given that the Board in their wisdom decided to make the end of last season a straight crapshoot between appointing Ainsworth and retaining Critchley, you have to say that they made the right call at the time.
My personal view is that the pre-season smashing at Oxford, and more significantly the fans' reaction to it, panicked them, but don't forget I think I'm right in saying we were won 2 drawn 2 lost 4 after 8 games under Ainsworth until that absolute cratering of 6 defeats on the spin (not the first boss here that's happened under btw) that got him the boot after the Leicester game (which was, ironically, a much improved display).
Given the language of Christian Nourry's piece on the Offish this pm, I don't think he's under any illusion that this still might not go the way we want it to, but equally, we now stand a half-decent chance (if not more) of actually coming out of this OK.
I don't think anyone disputes that we're in a much healthier position than we might be if Ainsworth were still here - I personally think he might have quit anyway through emotional exhaustion given how beaten up he was looking by the end - but let's at least desist from trashing him anymore than has already been done on here and elsewhere.
History is history, and needs to be set in its correct context. |
I personally thought we should have got rid of Ainsworth after the end of last season
The last game at home to Bristol City where he still employed Chris Martin as the big man up front and no younger players were even in the squad for that match.
We were already mathematically safe and he persisted with long ball low possession strategy which was pointless and also incredibly depressing.
He was absolutely fortunate to remain employed but I assumed we just could not afford to get rid and this season I thought we would be stuck with him and the same squad for the entirety of this season.
The renaming rights and clever accounting and with Les ramsay Hoos Bhatia leaving their roles and Dozzell off the wage bill meant changes could be made.
Clever but you would have thought this potentially could have been considered earlier as a way forward as I cannot see that however we have done we are putting ourselves knowingly in breach of Ffp so it's likely the figures have been manipulated accordingly or postponed till next season when we have more spending scope... [Post edited 6 Feb 18:34]
|  |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:40 - Feb 6 with 1641 views | QPROslo |
| Table since Marti came in on 17:33 - Feb 6 by 1JD |
“This season the results so far under him and since, with the same players until Blackburn away, make "failure" difficult to dispute”
Surely, the fact that this seasons results under him, and since, also make “failure” difficult to dispute for LAST season also. It’s the same logic.
The very fact that Cifuentes is proving he can get mid-table form, with the same group of players, is evidence GA did not “save us” from relegation last year, but actually directly contributed to putting us there in the first place.
I am amazed there are still some Ainsworth stragglers left! Ainsworth may say he saved the club, but frankly it’s little more than a heavy dose of PR and self-promotion. Ainsworth took over a team 8 points clear of relegation, and would have ended it 1 point clear without the Reading 6 points deduction.
Fast forward, and it remains to be seen if we are going to escape Ainsworth’s disastrous reign this season. |
Already posted this - I'm pretty sure his target / remit last season when he was brought in was to keep us up, and that was the narrative as we struggled to achieve it. At the end he did achieve it so he was hardly a failure last season, however lucky we were or how poor we continued to play. Doesn't mean he was the right appointment or that he should have been kept on for this season. | | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:41 - Feb 6 with 1635 views | derbyhoop |
| Table since Marti came in on 11:07 - Feb 6 by numptydumpty |
Can't follow your logic on that one Bazz.
We got rid of Ainsworth anyhow. And seems way we did it was sponsorship of stands etc...
We all know about FFP and the rules.
We somehow got four new players in also after offloading Dozzell. Again, can't believe we risking FFP breach by doing so. [Post edited 6 Feb 11:07]
|
We brought in 4 players after offloading Dozzell. And 3 others!
SDM went on loan and, like Dozzell, probably won't be coming back.
Kelman and Woodman also went out on loan.
It's not so long ago that Ramsey left and we also released 2 players from the Dev Squad.
Rumours of Dozzell's salary make me think that the arrival of Frey, Hayden, Hodge and Andersen, considering the outgoings were broadly neutral. It depends on how much of the salaries of the 2 loanees we are expected to meet.
I think all 4 represent an upgrade. So, a repeat of the form since Marti took over should see us stay up; By a small margin. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:43 - Feb 6 with 1622 views | kensalriser |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:11 - Feb 6 by ThGrimRanger |
You're doing it differently to me :-)
45 points was enough to stay up last season and 38 points the season before that. |
Because you're not allowing for points deductions, which can't be relied on.
Wanna take the bet? | |
| |
| Table since Marti came in on 19:08 - Feb 6 with 1572 views | 1JD |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:40 - Feb 6 by QPROslo |
Already posted this - I'm pretty sure his target / remit last season when he was brought in was to keep us up, and that was the narrative as we struggled to achieve it. At the end he did achieve it so he was hardly a failure last season, however lucky we were or how poor we continued to play. Doesn't mean he was the right appointment or that he should have been kept on for this season. |
Upon joining he actually said the aim was still to get into the play offs and they were looking up not down. That quickly changed after such a poor start and expectations were managed down so much that in the end “surviving relegation was a fantastic personal achievement”. GA loved to play the PR game, and some bought it quite literally. | | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 19:15 - Feb 6 with 1553 views | BostonR |
The Championship is mental. Every season a couple of teams (like us last season) absolutely bomb. At the moment you’d have to say Swansea, Stoke, Blackburn and Millwall are finding life difficult. |  | | |
| Table since Marti came in on 19:28 - Feb 6 with 1528 views | 1JD |
| Table since Marti came in on 18:14 - Feb 6 by E15Hoop |
That said, JD, you surely have to put all this in its historical context don't you?
Granted, we're all saying we should have got Cifuentes in last year and avoided this circling round the drain we've done instead, and having been the largely self-appointed Ainsworth pallbearer for most of the back end of last season, you will, I am sure, be relieved to hear that I am not going to disagree.
However, we all know that wasn't/couldn't be done at the time, and given that the Board in their wisdom decided to make the end of last season a straight crapshoot between appointing Ainsworth and retaining Critchley, you have to say that they made the right call at the time.
My personal view is that the pre-season smashing at Oxford, and more significantly the fans' reaction to it, panicked them, but don't forget I think I'm right in saying we were won 2 drawn 2 lost 4 after 8 games under Ainsworth until that absolute cratering of 6 defeats on the spin (not the first boss here that's happened under btw) that got him the boot after the Leicester game (which was, ironically, a much improved display).
Given the language of Christian Nourry's piece on the Offish this pm, I don't think he's under any illusion that this still might not go the way we want it to, but equally, we now stand a half-decent chance (if not more) of actually coming out of this OK.
I don't think anyone disputes that we're in a much healthier position than we might be if Ainsworth were still here - I personally think he might have quit anyway through emotional exhaustion given how beaten up he was looking by the end - but let's at least desist from trashing him anymore than has already been done on here and elsewhere.
History is history, and needs to be set in its correct context. |
“However, we all know that wasn't/couldn't be done at the time, and given that the Board in their wisdom decided to make the end of last season a straight crapshoot between appointing Ainsworth and retaining Critchley, you have to say that they made the right call at the time.”
No, I don’t believe they made the right call at all. Along with GAs belittling mentality, the squad-manager mismatch was the biggest problem. A problem that wouldn’t have arisen had we employed a manager in the same style of a Warburton and Beale to play to the squads strengths (rather than minimise them) and thus, got more out of them, much like Cifuentes has done so far. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
