Huddersfield v Luton tonight.

[Maccarone]

We still have a decent chance lads, 3 points from the next two games and we will be in good shape, keep the faith, don't desert the boys now, they need us more than ever.
C'mon Boro

 

[Cuthbert]

They were both poor goals for Luton to concede last night. Direct from a throw the Town player should never get that much time in the box. The second was unmarked at the back post from a corner.

Not too many other clear cut chances really.

 

[Teesside87]

How have the loans had a negative effect?

I think the issue of that the clubs towards the top of the table have just performed better

Huddersfield hadn't been beaten unril recently since they lost to us, Forest obvious are massively improved, Luton have been on a great run, as have a few others.

I'd be interested to see how many PPG we've picked up since January, but I think we've more options now with the new players, all of whom have contributed.

In terms of not having the required affect. We were 5th on 31st of december. We had won 5 in a row at that point. Since the turn of the year our longest win streak is 2 and it has only happened once. I’m not saying that thats all down to our loan signings but our form since they have arrived has been poor

 

[Soutra]

View attachment 37179

That's the table over the last 15 matches, which takes us back to the 29th of December, so there's one pre-January result in there.

In 11th, 4 points off the top 6.

But just blaming it on January signing is incredibly simplistic.

That's a deeply depressing table. With the exception of Stoke, every team we are yet to play are above us in the 15 game table. They are all lined up - 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th.

So 11th in the 15 game table, but 8th in the 40 (ish) game table - Boro were doing better before the loan signings than since.

Maybe the games in the 15 game table have been against better teams, but it's 33% of a season, so a pretty good sample.

I'm not sure it is simplistic to say that loan signings have been poor. Any impartial observer would conclude that, at best, they have made no difference. At worst, we've gone backwards.

 

[TeaCider]

That's a deeply depressing table. With the exception of Stoke, every team we are yet to play are above us in the 15 game table. They are all lined up - 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th.

So 11th in the 15 game table, but 8th in the 40 (ish) game table - Boro were doing better before the loan signings than since.

Maybe the games in the 15 game table have been against better teams, but it's 33% of a season, so a pretty good sample.

I'm not sure it is simplistic to say that loan signings have been poor. Any impartial observer would conclude that, at best, they have made no difference. At worst, we've gone backwards.

That's just how form tables work.

We've lost 2 in a row, so we're bound to plummet down the table.
Before the Fulham match, we were 7th in the table if it started in January, having played a game less.

Wilder was only in charge for 8 games before the January window.

3 of our defeats this year have been against teams in rubbish form whilst we've been in decent form, so I'd not read too much in to it.

 

[Jonny Ingbar]

View attachment 37179

That's the table over the last 15 matches, which takes us back to the 29th of December, so there's one pre-January result in there.

In 11th, 4 points off the top 6.

But just blaming it on January signing is incredibly simplistic.

One of our worst performances of this calender year was Barnsley away, an awful first half, and neither January striker even started.
We were 2-0 down before either came on the pitch.

I think a more meaningful analysis would be PPG, rather than where we were in the table?

 

[Jonny Ingbar]

In terms of not having the required affect. We were 5th on 31st of december. We had won 5 in a row at that point. Since the turn of the year our longest win streak is 2 and it has only happened once. I’m not saying that thats all down to our loan signings but our form since they have arrived has been poor

I dont see that as being down to the strikers, assuming of course that our PPG is actually worse?

We look a tired team in some areas, although not with the top two positions, given we can rotate.

I think we'd be in a worse position with Sporar, Watmore and Uche if I'm honest.

 

[r00fie1]

If we do miss out, it will be the second year in a row where loan signings in January have had a negative effect on the club. Even under Warnock, we were only 3 points off the playoffs come the turn of the year and ended up being 10 points off ,with the loan signings not having much impact. Lesson: dont get january loans, they almost always turn out to be crap

What was Wilder expected to do?
Soldier on with the previous Managers failed experiments?
£2,750,000 for Ackpom who couldnt hit a cows arz with a banjo - still our player - out on loan!
We needed a left back, so the previous Manager farmed out Djed Spence to a Championship rival - and has since ripped Forest a new lease of life with brilliant performances!
The previous Management regime left us with two third-division goalkeepers!
They left us a 37 year old and a 35 year old defender [no matter how many good performances] - who cant sustain the full 90 mins regularly in a gruelling Championship fight.
Previous Management left us Ameobi - picking up a salary for an "injury" - never made an appearance for our club since June 2021.
Much of that mess needs to be sorted as soon as possible.
Chris Wilder is the only Manager, I believe, who can make a successful stab at the play-offs - even with so much baggage hanging around the club.

 

[TeaCider]

I think a more meaningful analysis would be PPG, rather than where we were in the table?

17 points in 8 Wilder games before January, or 2.13 points per game.

23 points in 15 games from January onwards, or 1.53 points per game.

It's undoubtedly worse on a points per game basis, but it's bound to be given there was 1 loss in the first 8 compared to 6 in the next 15.

But that initial run was automatic promotion form.

 

[Redwurzel]

I thought it would happen and I think it has - Our cup run has affected our league form, to some degree. Our league form dip occurred after the big FAC games. It has meant we are are playing more games in total. In means more injuries, more cards, more physical and mental tiredness, all with a relatively small effective squad. No matter what you say to player having the chance to play MU/Spurs and Chelsea will distract, they are only human and it takes a while to recover and forget. If Mansfield had beaten us we would be in a higher league position.

I also agree the loan signings have not boosted our results as much as I thought they would, to date, but something inside me thinks it will change to some degree.

 

[Redwurzel]

I agree with Roofie's points - however Akpom could have been a club signing not manager signing, Ameobi surely we should have known more about his knees before signing which points to medical staff, Spence I think has shocked the vast majority of the board and probably Forest too with how he has come on. This board was very much split whether he should start games for Boro. I did say he was a quality player, often winning 50/50s and quick and strong going forward, but sometimes switched off and his passing could be erratic.

 

[Soutra]

I thought it would happen and I think it has - Our cup run has affected our league form, to some degree. Our league form dip occurred after the big FAC games. It has meant we are are playing more games in total. In means more injuries, more cards, more physical and mental tiredness, all with a relatively small effective squad.

In the matches after the FA Cup games, Boro beat Reading, Luton and Peterborough and drew with QPR. There was a two week gap after the Chelsea game. You couldn't really say it affected the performances at all. Maybe improved them.

On the other hand those Cup games brought in desperately needed revenue.

 

[Diego]

In the matches after the FA Cup games, Boro beat Reading, Luton and Peterborough and drew with QPR. There was a two week gap after the Chelsea game. You couldn't really say it affected the performances at all. Maybe improved them.

On the other hand those Cup games brought in desperately needed revenue.

Not often I agree with you but you are spot on here!

 

[Redwurzel]

In the matches after the FA Cup games, Boro beat Reading, Luton and Peterborough and drew with QPR. There was a two week gap after the Chelsea game. You couldn't really say it affected the performances at all. Maybe improved them.

On the other hand those Cup games brought in desperately needed revenue.

Its a longer/delayed term affect

For example - We only played Fulham mid week because of MU game, that meant we played Hull after they had all week to rest.

Crooks picking up booking in cup games meant he missed Barnsley away and we had to play JLS and we saw what happened in that first half.

Fry picked up a knock against Chelsea that could affect now or certainly could have contributed to his withdrawl on Saturday.

We can't spend the FAC money yet and some was kindly donated to Ukraine. Although it does help with fairplay.

A general feeling on Saturday was that we lacked a bit of spark and looked a bit tired. It might have been a bit different if we had rested mid week and Hull had played mid week?

 

[Diego]

Its a longer/delayed term affect

For example - We only played Fulham mid week because of MU game, that meant we played Hull after they had all week to rest.

Crooks picking up booking in cup games meant he missed Barnsley away and we had to play JLS and we saw what happened in that first half.

Fry picked up a knock against Chelsea that could affect now or certainly could have contributed to his withdrawl on Saturday.

We can't spend the FAC money yet and some was kindly donated to Ukraine. Although it does help with fairplay.

A general feeling on Saturday was that we lacked a bit of spark and looked a bit tired. It might have been a bit different if we had rested mid week and Hull had played mid week?

League yellow cards and fa cup yellow cards are separate. Crooks picking up yellow cards in the league is the reason for his suspensions.

 

[TeaCider]

Crooks picking up booking in cup games meant he missed Barnsley away and we had to play JLS and we saw what happened in that first half.

Crooks wasn't booked in any of the cup matches, his suspension was because of the booking against Bristol City.

The FA Cup is separate from the league when it comes to bookings anyway.

 

[Diego]

Its a longer/delayed term affect

For example - We only played Fulham mid week because of MU game, that meant we played Hull after they had all week to rest.

Crooks picking up booking in cup games meant he missed Barnsley away and we had to play JLS and we saw what happened in that first half.

Fry picked up a knock against Chelsea that could affect now or certainly could have contributed to his withdrawl on Saturday.

We can't spend the FAC money yet and some was kindly donated to Ukraine. Although it does help with fairplay.

A general feeling on Saturday was that we lacked a bit of spark and looked a bit tired. It might have been a bit different if we had rested mid week and Hull had played mid week?

Also, what about this?

We beat Manchester United at old Trafford giving lots of our younger fans the night of their lives. We then beat Tottenham at home and creating more revenue for the club setting up another glamour game against Chelsea. We were one game away from Wembley. Coburn coming on in that spurs game and banging a goal in has been a positive for him too as it’s got him more in Wilders thoughts. There is more positives than negatives.

 

[Soutra]

Its a longer/delayed term affect

For example - We only played Fulham mid week because of MU game, that meant we played Hull after they had all week to rest.


A general feeling on Saturday was that we lacked a bit of spark and looked a bit tired. It might have been a bit different if we had rested mid week and Hull had played mid week?

I think you are clutching at straws here. There was a two week break leading up to saturday April 2. Boro beat Peterborough and Fulham beat QPR on that day. Then Boro played Fulham on April 6. So both teams played two games in 18 days. Then Boro played Hull and lost, and Fulham played Coventry and lost. Coventry also played on April 2 and April 6 before beating Fulham so it can be done.

 

[TeaCider]

I think you are clutching at straws here. There was a two week break leading up to saturday April 2. Boro beat Peterborough and Fulham beat QPR on that day. Then Boro played Fulham on April 6. So both teams played two games in 18 days. Then Boro played Hull and lost, and Fulham played Coventry and lost. Coventry also played on April 2 and April 6 before beating Fulham so it can be done.

That's not disproving what he said.

Coventry and Fulham had both played multiple matches after the international break when they faced each other, so there's obviously not going to be any disparity in fatigue.

Hull only played the one match, and then had another 8 days rest before facing us.

Not that I think fatigue is actually why we lost, it was rank bad goalkeeping and hanging on to the ball for too long around their box.

 

[Redwurzel]

Accept the bookings on Crooks, but the cup games to me have affected his league form to some extent. In January he seemed to every where on the pitch and was a big goal threat. Less so now.

I am not saying the cup games were not worthwhile for the fans, but what I am saying is that cup games of that magnitude (and length - two went to ET) have affected our league form, in my humble opinion. Do other posters think the cup run has had no negative effect on our league form?

Our squad is effectively 2 players down (the 2 that have never played this season) if we had 2 fit senior players it would have given us a better chance to rotate. Hopefully we will not be 2 players down in the future and better placed to rotate.