You know who
- Aug 7, 2008
Penalties and sitters are missed. We are just not very good at penalties. Might have something to do with not training them, might have to do with not having a designated taker. I'd rather concentrate on fixing that then putting it on chance, luck or ifs and buts.I'm not using ifs and buts. I was given a scenario where Chelsea score first, they sit deeper and win. There's plenty ifs and buts there.
I'm saying we had 2 (should have been 3 penalties). If converted, we'd be sitting at 9 points and people would be saying that we were comfortable winners, despite some shaky moments, and breaking opposition down can be worked on as we progress.
Instead were on 4 points and everyone is losing their minds.
So the mood shift has been determined by, essentially, 3 failed penalties.
Penalty is a penalty, not a goal. We didn't convert it because the taker wasn't good enough in the situation to beat the keeper. That's no excuse. We continue to suck at corners, free kicks and other set pieces.
What does that mean again? Luck? Or that we just don't improve them enough on the training field.
Luck is weak excuse. Chelsea were unlucky not to be 2-0 up. Lose our first game, morale is low against Wolves, lose that one and we might have been sitting at 0 out of 9?
It is what it is. Whereas we have been lucky not to fall behind Chelsea, we were unlucky not to convert our chances in the next two games.
Luck at the end evens out in the course of a full season.
What is a fact though is that we still look poor on set pieces and we haven't improved one bit. You can't put that on luck.