Sorry Mark but this is bollox. We were outfought, outplayed and outclassed. 3-0 was about right maybe 4-0 would have been fairer.
Get a reality check. --- Mark Humphries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Absolutely.. but just because luck evens itself out, > doesn't mean that > Watford weren't lucky on a few crucial occasions on > Sunday.. that's all. > > I know 'luck' is a totally irrational human concept, > an attempt to have some > kind of meaning or control over what is essentially > a random life. > > The alternative to seeing things as lucky is to see > things in a chaos theory > and cause and effect way. If leeds had won the > toss, had kick off, they > wouldn't have lumped the ball into our corner right > from the start and set > the pattern of play up for those first 20mins. > Maybe. Therefore you could > argue that what actually happened came down to a > fraction of a second's spin > on the coin, or the split second decision to go > heads or tails by whoever > called the toss etc etc. > > Bearing that in mind, is it so ridiculous to think > that actually KB's > tactics might have worked a treat, or that if either > of Derry's shots had > gone in, then the scores at 1-0 to Leeds or 2-1 to > Watford might have led to > a totally different game after those goals? > > Look at it this way, you remember Ali's rope-a-dope > fight with Frasier. How > would have history seen Ali had he been caught with > a KO by Frasier in those > early rounds? People would have said he was a total > idiot, had no idea what > he was doing, deserved to lose etc etc etc. We all > know what actually > happened and Ali's genius is history. > > Some times there is a very thin line between winning > and losing, regardless > of the actual magnitude of the win/defeat. > > Standing back and looking at the game as a whole, > Watford got some crucial > breaks at crucial times in the match. I don't think > that they deserved to > win 3-0, or Boothroyd deserves the mantle of > tactical or motivational genius > that has been heaped on him since, or Blackwell > should be labelled > 'clueless' or that his team selection, despite being > different to what I > would have done, was necessarily that bad. > > I would argue that this was a game that could so > easily have been very very > different, without any change in Leeds team > selection or tactics. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: J Moran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 24 May 2006 11:07 > > To: Mark Humphries; 'Richard Naef'; > [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [LU] Report from Morely > > > > Agree about the throw in, was easy to see on the > replay when I got home. > > Dunno about the shot going wide or not though. > > > > All I'm saying is "luck" evens out usually. > Probably a few matches we've > > won > > this season as well as lost that could be put down > to "luck" but it's just > > the way football is. The ball isn't perfectly > round, the grass isn't flat, > > and humans make mistakes. That's football. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mark Humphries" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > That's football, yes, but how can you say that's > not good luck?! At > > that > > > stage in the game did they even deserve to > score? They shouldn't even > > > have > > > had the bloody throw-in which led to the goal. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and > the list administrators accept no liability for the > personal views and opinions of contributors. > Leedslist mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
