Bamaga man wrote:The stats are conclusive of that S@int, but no doubt you'll get some jelly bean come along and say that stats can be twisted or turned to suit the arguement,
bigmick wrote:It's no surprise to me that teams by and large pick up the same number of points in the second half of the season as they did in the first, I can't really see why it should be any other way. I supose if Torres and Gerrard were long-term injured in the first half of the season and came back in the second half you might get a marked difference, but in the main it's always going to be a couple of points either way at most I would have thought.
To be honest though whether the stats in themselves are a proof of anything against rotation I'm not so sure. They appear to disprove the "delayed gazelle" theory (you know the one which says you sit a bloke on his erse for a few games in September and like a car with less miles on the clock, he starts jumping out of his skin in March) but I'm not sure that many people believed in that anyway really. My suspicion is that the rotationers are probably of the belief that one of the reasons that Torres has played so fantastically in the first half is precisly because he was given a couple of rests earlier on. It may even be true, who can say for sure?
To some extent, you would almost hope it is the case that our star striker has done so well because of rotation. I say that of course because if he hasn't, then it is becoming increasingly difficult to find any sort of positives out of the policy. The "well it helps us avoid injuries" one is probably dead in the water now (well at least you would think so as some are using the injuries as the reason the policy didn't work), the "delayed gazelle" if it ever was a sensible theory appears to be disproven, while it's hard to argue that selections and formations which change from week to week make a team MORE likely to find consistent performances (well I think it's hard to argue that anyway). Like I said yesterday before I was asked to "leave it", probably the last refuge of the pro is to claim that the rotation has had little or no effect either way.
Another quite sobering thought is that this season we have had an easier first half of the season than second half, and based on the points totals of the top teams so far divided by the games played and then multiplied by 38, we are goin gto do very well indeed to keep the deficit to the team that wins it in single figures. Remember that first game Away to Villa, where we nicked a win and the next gamw where we kept the exact same starting eleven? I wonder where we'd be if we'd kept up with that policy. Nobody knows of course, but I am convinced we'd have been a lot closer.
Quick note in addition. I have taken heed of the advice to "leave it", but felt as I was mentioned in both of the earlier posts it was OK to come back with a reply. I hope it is
kazza wrote:Bamaga man wrote:I guess I am the jelly bean
I stopped reading right there.
Which is why your opinion has no credibility.
Bamaga man wrote:Leonmc0708 wrote:Lets throw the towel in now then hey ?
Why ?
Leonmc0708 wrote:Bamaga man wrote:Leonmc0708 wrote:Lets throw the towel in now then hey ?
Why ?
Cus we dont play well in the second half of the season, rotation is no good, Rafa is a clown, Klinsmanns coming in, G&H are skint, Crouch is off, Kuyt is cr.ap, Voronin is awful, KEwell is a joke and all the other things people moan about.
Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 53 guests
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.