Cheltenham Town v Wycombe Wanderers

Talk about anything to do with Cheltenham Town, CTFC 500 Club, League 1, ex players & Managers

Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin

User avatar
Sprout Picker
Posts: 1150
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 11:20
It's good to see confused back posting again.
Si Robin
Posts: 5351
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 10:29
So if you are not 12th you're not mid table? Who knew when referring to mid table you were only referring to one position. You'd think people would just say 12th instead. It's shorter both in written and spoken word.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29758
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Ihearye wrote:So now middle means middle third. But why third? Why don't you divide by 4, by 2? Since when did thirds become the correct way of dividing? In your theory then if we drop one more place we are a bottom table team? Nonsense, mid is exactly what it is, the middle. You can't change that to suit your argument. Yes 12 is middle of table, just as noon is the middle of the day. Or do you describe midday as anywhere between 8 and 4 in the afternoon?
If you divide by two or four there is no middle is there. To have a middle there needs to be an odd number. You can’t have a middle half in a two half football match or a middle quarter in a four quarter basketball match, but you can have a middle third in a three third ice hockey game. Understand?

Yes the specific time midday is 12:00 but that is not the midpoint out of 24. But if I was talking about the period of the middle of the day it would go from later morning to early afternoon.

By your own logic, the mid position in the league would be 12 and half which is impossible. So are you claiming 12th or 13th and the mid point? Or both? And if both do you class both 12noon and 1pm as the middle of the day using your irrelevant analogy?

We are mid table. Might be lower mid table but mid table nonetheless.
Del Boy
Posts: 327
Joined: 03 Dec 2016, 19:33
What a pointless argument. We're in 16th - that's our position and that's all that matters.

It just shows how bad it's got if people are clutching the straw of mid-table to try to manufacture a positive. One thing is for sure if we were in 9th position no one would be saying we were in mid-table.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29758
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Del Boy wrote:What a pointless argument. We're in 16th - that's our position and that's all that matters.

It just shows how bad it's got if people are clutching the straw of mid-table to try to manufacture a positive. One thing is for sure if we were in 9th position no one would be saying we were in mid-table.
I already said in this thread that 9th would be mid table.

As for pointless argument, I agree completely. Not trying to manufacture a positive; I mentioned mid table in a throwaway off hand remark, and those who manufacture negatives laid into it, hence my subsequent defence. I am not at all happy with 16th. In previous threads in recent weeks I have said less than 60 points is unacceptable and anything below 14th, given where we got to in December is failure. So currently we are on course for an unacceptable failure in my opinion - not my fault if you think that is me being positive!
Del Boy
Posts: 327
Joined: 03 Dec 2016, 19:33
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Del Boy wrote:What a pointless argument. We're in 16th - that's our position and that's all that matters.

It just shows how bad it's got if people are clutching the straw of mid-table to try to manufacture a positive. One thing is for sure if we were in 9th position no one would be saying we were in mid-table.
I already said in this thread that 9th would be mid table.

As for pointless argument, I agree completely. Not trying to manufacture a positive; I mentioned mid table in a throwaway off hand remark, and those who manufacture negatives laid into it, hence my subsequent defence. I am not at all happy with 16th. In previous threads in recent weeks I have said less than 60 points is unacceptable and anything below 14th, given where we got to in December is failure. So currently we are on course for an unacceptable failure in my opinion - not my fault if you think that is me being positive!
Interesting points benchmark. That would leave us needing 21 points from 12 games.

Given the next few matches I would think that's very unlikely. I would guess we'll end up with 52 - 54 points so lower expectations.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29758
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Del Boy wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Del Boy wrote:What a pointless argument. We're in 16th - that's our position and that's all that matters.

It just shows how bad it's got if people are clutching the straw of mid-table to try to manufacture a positive. One thing is for sure if we were in 9th position no one would be saying we were in mid-table.
I already said in this thread that 9th would be mid table.

As for pointless argument, I agree completely. Not trying to manufacture a positive; I mentioned mid table in a throwaway off hand remark, and those who manufacture negatives laid into it, hence my subsequent defence. I am not at all happy with 16th. In previous threads in recent weeks I have said less than 60 points is unacceptable and anything below 14th, given where we got to in December is failure. So currently we are on course for an unacceptable failure in my opinion - not my fault if you think that is me being positive!
Interesting points benchmark. That would leave us needing 21 points from 12 games.

Given the next few matches I would think that's very unlikely. I would guess we'll end up with 52 - 54 points so lower expectations.
I am not one for lowering expectations. 52-54 points would be disappointing.
User avatar
longmover
Posts: 2822
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 18:55
Alf wrote:So many other teams just look better organized than us..
Because other teams managers know who their best starting eleven are by this time of the season and aren't still fighting petty disputes with their players.
King giraffe iii
Posts: 232
Joined: 02 Feb 2016, 17:47
longmover wrote:
Alf wrote:So many other teams just look better organized than us..
Because other teams managers know who their best starting eleven are by this time of the season and aren't still fighting petty disputes with their players.
What, like Mark Cooper is still having with Drissa Traore and Keanu Marsh-Brown?
Alf
Posts: 2166
Joined: 17 Apr 2011, 08:24
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Alf wrote:I don’t think it’s just the results that upsets fans. If we were a decent side playing some attractive football but just not getting the rub of the green, I think fans would be reasonably happy. It’s when money is being spent on bringing players in but there appears to be no game plan, or if there is the players don’t appear to be able to follow it resulting in mediocre performances, that is when fans get a bit restless. This time last year we were writing off last season with promises of big changes in the summer etc; and here we are with no real evidence improvement and already we’re talking about improvements next season. I actually think our fans are some of the most patient in the league!
As Baker said, hardly any money has been spent bringing players in. Gary had money to spend in January but didn’t and the loans are barely costing us anything. Unless you are accusing Baker of lying in his interview?
I said ‘when money is being spent’ I didn’t qualify the amount. You quote Baker as saying hardly any money was spent. This means money was spent, although not very much.
So we are both saying money was spent. What’s the problem?
darreno
Posts: 369
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 13:47
It feels to me like Buckle/ Allen all over again. Lots of loans and no idea what is the best line up. Clearly the manager and coaching staff have not had long enough to work with this 'group'. I'm not surprised it's falling apart or had minimal impact at best.

Just so glad Chesterfield and Morecambe and Crewe are even worse than us, though that's no consolation.
Ralph
Posts: 4830
Joined: 23 Dec 2009, 01:56
Sprout Picker wrote:It's good to see confused back posting again.
:lol:
everyman
Posts: 2034
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 09:11
Ihearye wrote:So now middle means middle third. But why third? Why don't you divide by 4, by 2? Since when did thirds become the correct way of dividing? In your theory then if we drop one more place we are a bottom table team? Nonsense, mid is exactly what it is, the middle. You can't change that to suit your argument. Yes 12 is middle of table, just as noon is the middle of the day. Or do you describe midday as anywhere between 8 and 4 in the afternoon?
At the moment points wise,Newport,Carlisle & Cambridge are mid-table between Luton/Barnet !
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29758
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
everyman wrote:
Ihearye wrote:So now middle means middle third. But why third? Why don't you divide by 4, by 2? Since when did thirds become the correct way of dividing? In your theory then if we drop one more place we are a bottom table team? Nonsense, mid is exactly what it is, the middle. You can't change that to suit your argument. Yes 12 is middle of table, just as noon is the middle of the day. Or do you describe midday as anywhere between 8 and 4 in the afternoon?
At the moment points wise,Newport,Carlisle & Cambridge are mid-table between Luton/Barnet !
Points wise, Arsenal are mid table in the Prem, in 6th place, 25 points off bottom and 27 points off top.
Post Reply