If you were one of the seven on the bench today, I suggest on Monday morning you consider if your are truly worthy of a career as a professional footballer, or try really hard at school, because given the frightfully lacklustre performance of the 11 players that started today you must be really, really an utter rotter of a footballer to have not been chosen ahead of them. Tally Ho Chaps!!

Edited August 25, 20187 yr by Guest

But will Robertson leave out his under achievers ? Will he **** 

Guys like Calder will still be kicking their heels  on the bench while others play out of position ahead of them.

 

Can't always be subjective or objective I'm afraid.  But putting it into perspective it is relative. Today had no positive, only negative. Time for some amber nectarive ?

I hate to say it but I also think we are lacking leadership on the park. As captain Carlos isn't rallying the team. We had much more bite from Gary Warren in that respect and when he wasn't playing Ian Vigurs could whip up the rest of the team. The only one that looks like he can do this is Coll Donaldson.

The team did look rudderless today, on and off the park. We used to be a team full of leaders, but we are now sorely lacking in someone to take the team by the scruff of the neck of drag them through to a victory.

Robertson has been critical of his players, and rightly so, but he must also shoulder some of the blame. Surely the buck stops with the manager, it's his coaching and tactics. Is it not the case as, win as a team, lose as a team?

I would make Polworth captain. He has the passion and fire in him to do the job! 

Not that Tremarco doesn't. I just think it would do Liam the world of good?

At least our supporters aren't over reacting to yesterdays result.

Spot on RIG. We may well have NOT got as many points if Robbo had gone down the "chop and change" route - as we have tried in previous seasons. You pick your starting first eleven in your head - you have to stick with them for the first 3-4 games (a bit like Fantasy Football) - you then give some playing time to the potentials on the bench - that should put pressure on everybody - those playing to play well enuff to keep their places and those coming on to impress. Then after a few games - which is probably NOW - you start looking at 1-2 maximum changes per game.

16 minutes ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Spot on RIG. We may well have NOT got as many points if Robbo had gone down the "chop and change" route - as we have tried in previous seasons. You pick your starting first eleven in your head - you have to stick with them for the first 3-4 games (a bit like Fantasy Football) - you then give some playing time to the potentials on the bench - that should put pressure on everybody - those playing to play well enuff to keep their places and those coming on to impress. Then after a few games - which is probably NOW - you start looking at 1-2 maximum changes per game.

Agree with most of above however next week I would make 3 to the team that started yesterday 

Drop Rooney,Polworth and Austin

Starting positions for McCart ,Calder and White

McCart into centre back and move Brad to right back 

Calder wide on left and Walsh wide on right with White and Oakley up top

This gives the team more balance and I’m sure we will get a result at Dunfermline

It’s not really as bad a start as some of us are saying, just a bit frustrating knowing it could have been better . However we are one of only 3 teams unbeaten in the league so far which is an improvement on last seasons start.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 26, 20187 yr by Gregor

Just for comparison:

season 2009-10, first 3 games.

Dunfermline 0 ICT 1

ICT 0 Ayr 0

Dundee 2 ICT 2

5 points.

This season, first 3 games.

Falkirk 0 ICT 1

ICT 0 Ayr 0

ICT 2 Alloa 2.

5 points.

Why do so many fans always look back. Stats from previous seasons are irrelevant. 2 points dropped from a home game we should have won.

Interesting that Ayr sit top as a team with a goalscorer who is on firm- said it before that's the difference in this league.

When I was (actively) working in financial services we had to include the statutory line "Past Performance Is Not Indicative Of Future Results" in all investment reports/recommendations...and it very much applies when talking about football as well.  Maybe clubs should start printing it on tickets!

Even if we accept that there is some merit in looking back (for the purposes of analysis) then echoing last seasons league performance isn't going to return the desired improvement in end result this season.

I think that Mantis was making the comparison with the 2009-2010 becos of what happened by the end. ?

In 09/10 we had Hayes and Rooney. 

36 minutes ago, TopSix said:

In 09/10 we had Hayes and Rooney. 

...and Foran, Munro, Golabeck, Duncan, Sanchez, Odhiambo, Eagle, Cox....and how could you fail to mention LDZ!!!

1 hour ago, TopSix said:

In 09/10 we had Hayes and Rooney. 

We have Rooney this year too.

24 minutes ago, CaleyD said:

...and Foran, Munro, Golabeck, Duncan, Sanchez, Odhiambo, Eagle, Cox....and how could you fail to mention LDZ!!!

And we still only managed 5 points in the first three games.

1 hour ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

I think that Mantis was making the comparison with the 2009-2010 becos of what happened by the end. ?

Presactly. Glad somebody got it.

 

25 minutes ago, CaleyD said:

...and Foran, Munro, Golabeck, Duncan, Sanchez, Odhiambo, Eagle, Cox....and how could you fail to mention LDZ!!!

Stratford.

We've played three games in the league so far - beating Falkirk 1-0 and drawing 0-0 with Ayr Utd and 2-2 with Alloa.  Beating Falkirk maybe isn't the good result it seemed at the time as they look to be a bit of a shambles.  Similarly, maybe drawing with Ayr Utd is a better result that it seems, with their recent wins over Dunfermline and Dundee.

In the three league games so far we've had 40 shots on goal, with 12 of those shots being on target, 30% of the total.  Historically a Shots on Target percentage of 30% is associated with being relegated but it's early days.  One of the observations that Charles Reep made when he was initially analysing football statistics was that the more shots you have, the more goals you score.  You can boil that down to the more shots on target you have the more goals you score - not all shots are equal of course, and a shot that's on target is a better guideline to how dangerous your strikers are than a ballooned 40 yarder that nearly hits the corner flag.  Generally,though  if you have more shots on target, you score more goals, you win more games.

So far in this seasons Scottish Championship, here's the shots on target per game for each team, in the current table order.

Ayr Utd	3.33 shots on target per game	6=
Morton	3.67	5
Dundee Utd	4.67	3
Ross County	5.3	2
ICT	4	4
Queen of the South	6	1
Partick thistle	3.33	6=
Dunfermline	3.33	6=
Alloa	2	9
Falkirk	1.67	10

 

It's worth pointing out that it's very early days and that there are statisitical outliers - most obviously the game on Saturday when Queen of the South had 27 shots on goal against Falkirk, more in one game than most sides in the division have had all season.

You also have to consider how good your strikers are - how many shots on target does it take for you to score a goal?  So here is the shots on target per GOAL for each team, again in order of the current league table.

Ayr Utd	1.67 shots on target per goal	1
Morton	1.83	2
Dundee Utd	2	3=
Ross County	2.67	5
ICT	4	9
Queen of the South	3	6=
Partick thistle	3.33	8
Dunfermline	2	3=
Alloa	3	6=
Falkirk	5	10

 

This table shows that when it comes to efficiency, we are very poor.  Only the abject Falkirk take more shots on target to score a goal.  If we were as effecient in terms of converting chances as Ayr Utd have been this season we'd have scored seven goals, and would most likely have won all three of our games.  Do we have the strikers to make a promotion challange?  Do we have the players capable of creating chances for them, are they making the best of a bad situation? 

 

20 hours ago, CaleyD said:

...and Foran, Munro, Golabeck, Duncan, Sanchez, Odhiambo, Eagle, Cox....and how could you fail to mention LDZ!!!

Lionel Jimmy-Xavi made all the difference that season. 

Interesting stats  but as with so much of this kind of stuff, interpretation is difficult.  For example, a high proportion of shots on target may simply reflect a tendency to hit the ball to the centre of the target where the keeper is likely to save it.  Aim the ball just inside the post and you will miss the target more often but you will also probably score more. Having a low number of shots on target  per goal would therefore seem to be the key.

You won't score if you don't shoot so the number of shots at goal would also appear to be an important stat in principle.  There are times when people take speculative shots when they would better off just working the ball or passing to someone in a far better shooting position, but more often it is a case of someone in a shooting position who doesn't shoot but who passes the ball and the move breaks up before anyone else can get a shot away.

2 hours ago, ictchris said:

We've played three games in the league so far - beating Falkirk 1-0 and drawing 0-0 with Ayr Utd and 2-2 with Alloa.  Beating Falkirk maybe isn't the good result it seemed at the time as they look to be a bit of a shambles.  Similarly, maybe drawing with Ayr Utd is a better result that it seems, with their recent wins over Dunfermline and Dundee.

In the three league games so far we've had 40 shots on goal, with 12 of those shots being on target, 30% of the total.  Historically a Shots on Target percentage of 30% is associated with being relegated but it's early days.  One of the observations that Charles Reep made when he was initially analysing football statistics was that the more shots you have, the more goals you score.  You can boil that down to the more shots on target you have the more goals you score - not all shots are equal of course, and a shot that's on target is a better guideline to how dangerous your strikers are than a ballooned 40 yarder that nearly hits the corner flag.  Generally,though  if you have more shots on target, you score more goals, you win more games.

So far in this seasons Scottish Championship, here's the shots on target per game for each team, in the current table order.

Ayr Utd	3.33 shots on target per game	6=
Morton	3.67	5
Dundee Utd	4.67	3
Ross County	5.3	2
ICT	4	4
Queen of the South	6	1
Partick thistle	3.33	6=
Dunfermline	3.33	6=
Alloa	2	9
Falkirk	1.67	10

 

It's worth pointing out that it's very early days and that there are statisitical outliers - most obviously the game on Saturday when Queen of the South had 27 shots on goal against Falkirk, more in one game than most sides in the division have had all season.

You also have to consider how good your strikers are - how many shots on target does it take for you to score a goal?  So here is the shots on target per GOAL for each team, again in order of the current league table.

Ayr Utd	1.67 shots on target per goal	1
Morton	1.83	2
Dundee Utd	2	3=
Ross County	2.67	5
ICT	4	9
Queen of the South	3	6=
Partick thistle	3.33	8
Dunfermline	2	3=
Alloa	3	6=
Falkirk	5	10

 

This table shows that when it comes to efficiency, we are very poor.  Only the abject Falkirk take more shots on target to score a goal.  If we were as effecient in terms of converting chances as Ayr Utd have been this season we'd have scored seven goals, and would most likely have won all three of our games.  Do we have the strikers to make a promotion challange?  Do we have the players capable of creating chances for them, are they making the best of a bad situation? 

 

love the stats mate

where do you find all these ?

would love to have a look at them.

38 minutes ago, Gregor said:

love the stats mate

where do you find all these ?

would love to have a look at them.

I just made them all up.

jk lol, they are from the BBC site.

Our very own Moneyball ICTChris!

you could get paid for this type of stuff