Steve Bruce

[Thug]

1 hour ago, tomav84 said:

they all knew in advance the team that was going to be put out and had a preview of how they were likely to play vs yeovil...i, like you, am neither surprised nor bothered about last night's result

i am astounded at the reaction from last night's game...had he played the 1st team and consequently lost saturday he would have been slated for not resting players. burton have been a championship side last 2 seasons, they're not some non league outfit. we had no divine right to turn up and turn them over with our 2nd string. do you think many leeds fans could give a monkeys about being beaten comfortably at home by a 10 man preston? teams in the championship simply cannot sustain a promotion push and a cup run in the same season...the big guns arrive in the next round, and bruce would have had to play more first teamers if we went up against a chelsea, city, or liverpool as it would do the kids no good whatsoever to get done 5/6/7-0. then what if we lose kodjia, mcginn or jack through injury? it's a cup we have next to zero chance of winning, and given the choice i wouldnt enter it in the first place

 

 

Irrelevant 

 

no one is suggesting that he should have played a strong team.  The problem is that with the team he put out, we should have won. THATs what’s annoying.

 

its like getting battered by a kid 2 years below you in school, then claiming it’s all good because you could have brought a baseball bat to the fight if you had wanted to.

Is it a worthless competition that no one cares about? Yes it is.

Are we better off for being out the competition? Yes we are

Should the team we put out have lost to Burton Albion, ever? Hell bloody no.

Have a little shame and stop defending this result.

This cup was an opportunity to give our fringe players some valuable game time, and we no longer have this. 

The players we put out in the league matches are better than the results suggest.  The players we fielded in the cup game should have done better. There’s a common denominator here.

And you say ‘no divine right’ to turn them over?

I’d hedge a bet that ONE of our starting eleven probably cost more than that entire Burton team.

[Keyblade]

22 minutes ago, HeyAnty said:

Just out of interest how should/could we have had 2-4 extra points? 

We scored a goal against Wigan late in stoppage time to gain an extra 2pts and a goal against Brentford late in stoppage time to gain 1pt.  If you ask me we are lucky to be on the points we currently are on.  

Also dont mention that the 5 teams we played already most likely wont be in the top half of the league come the end, with perhaps Brentford being the exception. 

We also conceded a stoppage time equalizer last week, so it all evens out really. If you really want to be nitpicky, you can say we are on +1 points net from luck which isn't really saying much.

[bobzy]

Just now, Thug said:

Irrelevant 

 

no one is suggesting that he should have played a strong team.  The problem is that with the team he put out, we should have won. THATs what’s annoying.

 

its like getting battered by a kid 2 years below you in school, then claiming it’s all good because you could have brought a baseball bat to the fight if you had wanted to.

Is it a worthless competition that no one cares about? Yes it is.

Are we better off for being out the competition? Yes we are

Should the team we put out have lost to Burton Albion, ever? Hell bloody no.

Have a little shame and stop defending this result.

This cup was an opportunity to give our fringe players some valuable game time, and we no longer have this. 

The players we put out in the league matches are better than the results suggest.  The players we fielded in the cup game should have done better. There’s a common denominator here.

And you say ‘no divine right’ to turn them over?

I’d hedge a bet that ONE of our starting eleven probably cost more than that entire Burton team.

So.... the problem is more with the players then?  Because the team that our manager fielded, should have won?

 

[bannedfromHandV]

4 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Weellllll...........

I agree I don’t think defeat is inevitable ....the rest though........

Nah only joking.......we play ok quite a lot in my view. I get why lovers of the passing game might dislike it but we generally play watchable enough stuff, and we Win a lot, which is always fun !

Ssshhhh!

Apparently being unbeaten is shit and the games we win aren't worth anything cos they're against shit teams.

#vtlogic

[HeyAnty]

10 minutes ago, terrytini said:

He has been averaging close to 2 points per game for more than a seasons worth of games. That gets us up around top 2. That’s what we must achieve.

 

Thats just wrong.  We got 83 pts out of 46 games last season which didnt get us anywhere near the top 2.  It was 7 pts from promotion which in relative terms is massive in the promotion race.

[Keyblade]

1 minute ago, HeyAnty said:

Thats just wrong.  We got 83 pts out of 46 games last season which didnt get us anywhere near the top 2.  It was 7 pts from promotion which in relative terms is massive in the promotion race.

No but if you shift the goalposts to a specific point in last season and count til now, you'll get 2 points per game. You'll also find that we're still in the Championship, but that's okay.

[wilko154]

27 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

But we are! We dominated both games against Reading and Brentford, that we didn't win is another matter but there was little wrong with the performances, generally speaking.

It's not 'another matter' though. The point is we dominated the game for large periods and didn't take advantage.

Due to the defensive frailities of Bruce's side's we buckled at times conceding goals that meant we took away 1 point instead of 3. 

The fact that we dominated games is largely due to the fact we have a superior starting 11 to most oppositions in this leage. The fact that we aren't taking advantage of this is due to the manager, the tactics and the team selections.

[Taxahunter]

6 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Ssshhhh!

Apparently being unbeaten is shit and the games we win aren't worth anything cos they're against shit teams.

#vtlogic

You can go unbeaten for a whole season and end up with 46 points, would you say that is a good thing or bad thing? "Unbeaten" doesnt tell you a thing, its just a way to keep the "flack" away...

[bannedfromHandV]

Just now, wilko154 said:

It's not 'another matter' though. The point is we dominated the game for large periods and didn't take advantage.

Due to the defensive frailities of Bruce's side's we buckled at times conceding goals that meant we took away 1 point instead of 3. 

The fact that we dominated games is largely due to the fact we have a superior starting 11 to most oppositions in this leage. The fact that we aren't taking advantage of this is due to the manager, the tactics and the team selections.

Holy shit, the zenith hath been reached folks. 

So we dominate games not to do with tactics or coaching of any kind but then in those spells of 1-2 minutes where we concede a daft goal, that's the bit where the mangers tactics come in right? 

Brilliant, honestly mate, fair play you just made me lol in the office, thanks for that I needed a laugh. 

[fifamad]

Steve Bruce ain’t going anywhere unless we go on a 5-6 game losing streak which won’t happen as the squad quality will dig out some results.

I see him staying this season at least.

[terrytini]

13 minutes ago, HeyAnty said:

Thats just wrong.  We got 83 pts out of 46 games last season which didnt get us anywhere near the top 2.  It was 7 pts from promotion which in relative terms is massive in the promotion race.

If you are going to correct me get your quotes and facts straight.

” Averaging close to 2 points per game for more than a seasons worth of games” is what I said.

The last 47 games have produced 89 points at 1.89 points per game.

And that would get us up around top 2.

Which is exactly what I said.

It might not fit what you want to say, but in that case just say what you want, rather than incorrectk6 telling me I’m wrong.

 

Edited August 29, 2018 by terrytini

[Skruff]

@terrytini why would you look across seasons though? Seems like a pointless(hoho) exercise. 

[terrytini]

Just now, Skruff said:

@terrytini why would you look across seasons though? Seems like a pointless(hoho) exercise. 

Well if you read my post it’s pretty self explanatory I thought. If you genuinely don’t understand it tell what you don’t get and I’ll try to clarify.

[Pimlico_Villa]

For those that emphasise that we are currently unbeaten, do you not realise that, Brentford aside, the games we have drawn have been bread and butter games that were must-wins given the Nov and Dec fixtures?

Whichever way you look at last season, drawing too many winnable games cost us. The games we have drawn, we drew in the exact same fashion we would have done in Bruce's first season - they epitomise perfectly how Bruce has not progressed or learned a single lesson since then. 

Once we do lose a game, which is inevitable, I wonder what Bruce sympathisers will fall back on? Surely they must be clutching at straws now. 

BTW: I might send a copy of this book to Bruce:

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

20 minutes ago, Taxahunter said:

"Unbeaten" doesnt tell you a thing, its just a way to keep the "flack" away...

I disagree,  I would take an unbeaten start to the season up to this point, we have no major injuries or multiple suspension's,  this could be viewed by some as the perfect foundation for the fight for promotion ahead.   Compared to last years start this is quite good imo.

[StefanAVFC]

Undefeated sounds great without context.

[Stevo985]

**** hell guys. Why does everything on VT have to be so black and white?

Surely we all know that being unbeaten is not a bad thing.
But simultaneously it isn't necessarily a good thing depending on results and context.

It's good to be unbeaten. It's not necessarily great.
We literally all know this.

 

Why does everything have to be grabbed and twisted into a stick for either side of the argument.

[Skruff]

7 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Well if you read my post it’s pretty self explanatory I thought. If you genuinely don’t understand it tell what you don’t get and I’ll try to clarify.

I just read the ongoing discussion. But I 've had a read now. I get what you are saying, and believe its a good argument. It gives us an insight in how he thinks and what a does.  However bunching two seasons together does that actually give us statistics that can tell us anything usefull? Does john terry and snodgrass tell us anything about our current seasons or its trajectory? I'd rather look at how we're doing in our current seasons. 

[Pimlico_Villa]

16 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

I disagree,  I would take an unbeaten start to the season up to this point, we have no major injuries or multiple suspension's,  this could be viewed by some as the perfect foundation for the fight for promotion ahead.   Compared to last years start this is quite good imo.

Even against that opposition? 

[wilko154]

36 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Holy shit, the zenith hath been reached folks. 

So we dominate games not to do with tactics or coaching of any kind but then in those spells of 1-2 minutes where we concede a daft goal, that's the bit where the mangers tactics come in right? 

Brilliant, honestly mate, fair play you just made me lol in the office, thanks for that I needed a laugh. 

Do you honestly think we are dominating games due to the tactical genius of Steve Bruce? Or do you not think that we happen to have superior players, i.e. McGinn, Grealish, Kodjia who at times perform well leading to dominating the opposition, however due to the poor tactics and selections this does not lead to us winning games.

Are you honestly happy with the recent performances and our 3 points against Ipswich, Brentford and Reading. If you are then you need to give your head a wobble.