Shane Long

[Ian Royal]

You fail to say anything about my post though which, nicking your bit about Lita, means:

Lita 6 starts 0 goals
Long 4(7 with cups) 1 goals

YOU may not think cups are relevant, a hell of a lot of us do. Considering we have a manager who doesn't care about cups we've done pretty well in them. It's been a seasons since we've gone out to lesser teams. Generally they've been Prem or 2nd tier competitors.

[Snowball]

Out of interest how many times has Long scored when he's started this season?

Actually I looked myself so I could trust my figures.
08/09
7 starts 0 goals.
23 sub appearances 4 goals

Good to see you talking out of your arse again Ian. dumb AND blind, eh



This season: LEAGUE

Long started against Southampton, SCORED (and won us the point)

And though he didn't actually START versus Burnley, he did come on in the 25th minute (hardly a late sub) and he scored then too.

The cup is Mickey Mouse... not 7 starts, it's 4 LEAGUE starts (but only one 90 minutes)

[Snowball]

You fail to say anything about my post though which, nicking your bit about Lita, means:

Lita 6 starts 0 goals
Long 4(7 with cups) 0 goals WRONG!

.

Long, 4 starts, 1 goal. Get it right, Corporal

[Ian Royal]

Out of interest how many times has Long scored when he's started this season?

Actually I looked myself so I could trust my figures.
08/09
7 starts 0 goals.
23 sub appearances 4 goals

Good to see you talking out of your arse again Ian. dumb AND blind, eh



This season: LEAGUE

Long started against Southampton, SCORED (and won us the point)

And though he didn't actually START versus Burnley, he did come on in the 25th minute (hardly a late sub) and he scored then too.

The cup is Mickey Mouse... not 7 starts, it's 4 LEAGUE starts (but only one 90 minutes)

You're the one who insists on only using league. You can't enforce your rules on me. I consider cup matches relevant so I've included them. Fine Saints I called wrong. 1 goal in 7 starts.

Who said anything about late subs.

(Post above edited)

[Snowball]

Goals per minutes is pretty meaningless as a stat goes I'm afraid. Particularly in comparing quality of players. Stats are useful to inform a decision, but football has far too many variables to actually base your opinion on them. You need to base it on performances, which, though it may upset some people, are subjective.

Don't care what you are "afraid" of.

If you don't like goals per minute, how about THE READING MANAGER'S OPINION?

And on Shane Long's thrilling impact from the bench..."He is a good player, and in many ways, for a couple of years now, we have wanted to give him a real run in the team.

"But we're blessed with some good forwards and Shane is the best impact substitute I've got.

"He wouldn't be happy to hear me say that, bur we know that when he comes on something is going to happen.

"He contributed largely today even though he wasn't on the pitch for any length ot time."

[Ian Royal]

Easily countered by (I paraphrase) "Shane needs to produce this season or move on"

1 in 7 starts is hardly producing. He is a decent sub. But he is not a starter by any stretch of the imagination. He arrived with bags of promise and in 4 years has failed to significantly step up to the plate. Had he had a season or even half a season on loan somewhere a year or two ago it might have been another story.

His one goal from a starting position is massively outweighed by his frankly atrocious performance at Ipswich where he spent half the game "controlling" the ball into touch or a defender, whenever he got it. Not even under a great deal of pressure a lot of the time.

[Snowball]

Easily countered by (I paraphrase) "Shane needs to produce this season or move on"

1 in THREE starts is hardly producing. He is a decent sub. But he is not a starter by any stretch of the imagination. He arrived with bags of promise and in THREE years has failed to significantly step up to the plate.

That was then and this is now: Easily countered by "Shane HAS produced, well done Shane, you're a good player" (Steve Coppell)

Funny ent it, how all those people were praising Lita even when NOT scoring?

You don't count the penalty won that got us 2-2 at Watford?
You don't count the penalty won the broke the deadlock on 84 minutes versus Norwich?





PS YOU HAVEN'T ADMITTED YOU WERE WRONG.

[Ian Royal]

Easily countered by (I paraphrase) "Shane needs to produce this season or move on"

1 in THREE starts is hardly producing. He is a decent sub. But he is not a starter by any stretch of the imagination. He arrived with bags of promise and in THREE years has failed to significantly step up to the plate.

That was then and this is now: Easily countered by "Shane HAS produced, well done Shane, you're a good player" (Steve Coppell)

Funny ent it, how all those people were praising Lita even when NOT scoring?

You don't count the penalty won that got us 2-2 at Watford?
You don't count the penalty won the broke the deadlock on 84 minutes versus Norwich?





PS YOU HAVEN'T ADMITTED YOU WERE WRONG.

And why are we now changing it to 3 starts? You said 4 earlier. Were you wrong is it 3 in the league? Either way it's 7 starts total. You can't deny that.

I don't know what I'm supposed to have not admitted that I've got wrong, please enlighten me. Also, when exactly has Coppell said that? It sounds nothing like something Coppell would say in an interview. Come on, admit it, you've made it up.

And no I don't count those penalties because you see (and this is crucial) they aren't goals he has scored.

[floyd__streete]

Snowball, you really do come across as a sanctimonious @rsehole.

That said, In theory I do agree that Long is something of a much maligned player; his finishing is as good as anyone else at the club - as soon as that chance fell to him last night I was up and ready to celebrate and he buried it with aplomb - but his all round game is mediocre at best and needs an awful lot of work before he can be considered fit to be a regular starter in a top six Championship side.

[Snowball]

And why are we now changing it to 3 starts? You said 4 earlier.

3 starts, 4 goals total. One 65 minute game was not a start

Were you wrong is it 3 in the league? Either way it's 7 starts total. You can't deny that.

You know I don't count the cup. Starts = 3

I do not give a flying monkey's f-ck about the cup. I am discussing the league, the league, that is the league, that is not the cup, as in league

Shane Long starts IN THE LEAGUE (Cup is not the league, the league is not the cup, I am interested in the league, I am not interested in the cup, the cup is Mickey-Mouse and not the league (are we getting there yet?)

Shane Long in the LEAGUE started versus Crystal Palace, versus Southampton (scored), and Ipswich (played 60 minutes)

He also had longer stunts (coming on as an early, first-half sub) against Birmingham (25) and Burnley (29) (scored)

Here is the Reading FC official web-site URL for you http://www.readingfc.co.uk/page/Profile ... 69,00.html

I don't know what I'm supposed to have not admitted that I've got wrong, please enlighten me.

Gwath-hoppa, you say Shane Long, no goals flom his starts this season. You silly boy foregt Sout-am-ton

Also, when exactly has Coppell said that? It sounds nothing like something Coppell would say in an interview. Come on, admit it, you've made it up.

http://www.readingfc.co.uk/page/NewsDet ... 95,00.html


And on Shane Long's thrilling impact from the bench..."He is a good player, and in many ways, for a couple of years now, we have wanted to give him a real run in the team.

"But we're blessed with some good forwards and Shane is the best impact substitute I've got.

"He wouldn't be happy to hear me say that, bur we know that when he comes on something is going to happen.

"He contributed largely today even though he wasn't on the pitch for any length ot time."

[Snowball]

I do agree that Long is something of a much maligned player; his finishing is as good as anyone else at the club - as soon as that chance fell to him last night I was up and ready to celebrate and he buried it with aplomb - but his all round game is mediocre at best and needs an awful lot of work before he can be considered fit to be a regular starter in a top six Championship side.

I haven't been discussing his all-round game or his collar-size.

I have been discussing his finishing, which is very very good for a youngster feeding on scraps

[cmonurz]

Why do you refuse to address my point that the stat '3 starts, 4 goals' is misleading and irrelevant?

[Royal Rother]

Over the years I have found myself agreeing with cmonurz and Ian Royal on more occasions than most posters - I am therefore rather surprised at their inability to accept the relevance of Snowball's stats. Open your minds gents...

It is frankly beyond my own mental stamina to read anything more than about 20% of Snowball's posts in any detail but I see no outrageous conclusions drawn from the stats produced, no stupid manipulation of the numbers, just simple straightforward and unbiased analyses of published material with interesting commentary on what they might mean.

Football is subjective, but everyone knows that managers are using stats more and more to assess players' contributions - the fact that we have a poster who is giving us a flavour (however unpalatable it might be to the more old-fashioned supporter) of how the game is moving, is to be welcomed.

[Hoop Blah]

None of that actually shows that he's improved though, it just shows he's got more games and scored more goals per shots.

2007-08 07 (22) 03 goals from 14 shots, 3 assists
2008-09 03 (22) 04 goals from 12 shots, 1 assists, 2 penalties won


So let me see, last season he started four more games (equal subs) and he scored less
but of course he's not improved. Cue, "Ah, but that was the Prem..."

Jesus christ man!!!!!

Can you not tell the difference between a stat and how he actually plays?

I've asked if you think he has improved. All you've done is quote a stat back, which is all well and good, but you've not really offered any opinion alongside that stat apart from 'of course he has he's scored more goals!'

That doesn't mean he's improved. It just means he's scored more goals. There is a big difference.

[cmonurz]

When Long first joined us I was genuinely excited that we had a player who was potentially better than Doyle. Irrespective of his minutes, or goals, that excitement has waned because his biggest problem (imho), his first touch, has not improved one iota in four years.

[Skyline]

I haven't been discussing his all-round game

Most significant comment on this thread so far.

[Snowball]

Why do you refuse to address my point that the stat '3 starts, 4 goals' is misleading and irrelevant?

No it isn't.

How many starts has he had? Answer: 3

How many goals has he scored? Answer: 4



I have NEVER tried to suggest he has scored those goals from the starts and I have posted time and again when and where he got his goals, what his hit-rate is, what his accuracy is.

But apparently he only scores goals because Doyle and Hunt have tired the defence out!

[cmonurz]

Why do you refuse to address my point that the stat '3 starts, 4 goals' is misleading and irrelevant?

No it isn't.

How many starts has he had? Answer: 3

How many goals has he scored? Answer: 4

But what does it mean?

[Snowball]

Why do you refuse to address my point that the stat '3 starts, 4 goals' is misleading and irrelevant?

BTW it's not irrelevant.

To date Long has almost never been given a league run in the team. His detractors say that's because he has been crap. Some of those detractors say he should have gone out on loan and that might well have improved him.

The simple fact is he has not had the run it requires to bed in

First Season One start

Second Season


One 3-game run (including a cup game)

22/10/06 Arsenal Team Outplayed 0-4 63 Little
25/10/06 Liverpool (Lg Cup) SCORED 3-4 90 Minutes
28/10/06 Portsmouth Team Outplayed 1-3 53 Little

==========================================================================

One 5 Game run (rested? for the two intervening cup games)

This was our best 5/6-game run in the Premiership and he scored twice in 312 minutes (3.5 games)

20/1/07 Won 3-1 Sheff Utd SCORED subbed on 73 for Seol
30/1/07 Won 3-2 Wigan SCORED subbed on 80 for Kitson
03/2/07 Won 2-0 Man City subbed on 75 for Kitson
10/2/07 Won 2-0 Villa subbed on 62 for Kitson
24/2/07 Lost 1-2 Boro Poor Game subbed on 62 (again) for Kitson

===================================================================================
9/4/07 Charlton 0-0 Played 90 Minutes

13/5/07 Blackburn 3-3 subbed on 65 for Lita

[Hoop Blah]

BTW it's not irrelevant.

To date Long has almost never been given a league run in the team. His detractors say that's because he has been crap. Some of those detractors say he should have gone out on loan and that might well have improved him.

The simple fact is he has not had the run it requires to bed in

This is a great case of you giving out stats/facts without any opinion or analysis of what they actually show or how they've influenced your opinion.

You say Longs detractors say blah blah blah, what DO YOU THINK?