We only stayed up because...

Our Younguns Dad · **Joined:** Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:22 am **Posts:** 224

Don't forget John that the only reason Burton won the title last season was because there were 23 teams that were worse than them.

Dalton'sHaircut · **Joined:** Sun Oct 05, 2014 9:26 pm **Posts:** 1013

I wish you would stop using facts and reasoned debates to blow away some of our emotional anecdotal statements MadJohn.

Very good post which also highlights I think what an inconsistent and balanced league it is (arguably lots of poor team I suppose where consistency a massive problem).

I am guilty of some bias in my assessment of last season as I had an indirect affinity to Paul Murray and in my opinion he was treated appallingly and in honesty people calling him a disaster etc at the time were I believe also unfair as I was aware of the players he wanted (eg Tish and Mirfin were being lined up when he was there).

However that shouldn't cloud my judgement in what Ronnie Moore achieved either so thanks for the reality check.

As you say let's hope he doesn't screw it up big time this season!!!!

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22671

All of that is true John but you also have to factor in a collapse by both Tranmere and Cheltenham, the likes of which I don't remember seeing before. In both cases they took five points from the last ten games and both seemed determined to go down. I can think of isolated cases where a single team has been adrift and finished up with very few points but I can't remember two teams doing it in unison.

Nevertheless, we did stay up and they didn't and the importance of that four win run cannot be overstated.

Willis · **Joined:** Mon Nov 25, 2013 11:45 am **Posts:** 601

Is Collins the safest man at the club?

ed-t-ball · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:17 pm

MadJohn wrote:

OK, can we end this?

Of course we only stayed up because two sides were worse than us. That's how league tables work isn't it? By extension, Burton only won the title because 23 teams were worse than them.

Its not that you are making more sense than a lot of people John.
Its the fact that a lot of people are making less sense than you.

ed-t-ball · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:18 pm

Or visa versa!

The Colonel · **Joined:** Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:49 am **Posts:** 4891

11th best eh?

So does that suggest Moore has done an even worse job this season then?

Sackably bad?

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22671

MadJohn wrote:

Mr Irrelevant wrote:

All of that is true John but you also have to factor in a collapse by both Tranmere and Cheltenham, the likes of which I don't remember seeing before. In both cases they took five points from the last ten games and both seemed determined to go down. I can think of isolated cases where a single team has been adrift and finished up with very few points but I can't remember two teams doing it in unison.

Nevertheless, we did stay up and they didn't and the importance of that four win run cannot be overstated.

I'm not overstating the importance of the wins, though I think it's fair to point out the redundancy of an argument that's essentially stating that winning some games and accumulating some points were important survival factors. It makes no difference if those four games had been consecutive or widespread.

But that wasn't my point. It is perfectly fair to cite the failings of Tranmere and Cheltenham as hugely significant factors in our survival last season, but it is unfair to use those failings to belittle the work done by Pools under Ronnie Moore last season (as some have done). We got loads more points than both of those clubs while Moore was in charge, double figures more points. The fact that we only just stayed up, and that we relied on the collapse of two teams to do so, is a fact based on the whole season. Our record under Moore far surpassed our record for the season. From 16th December onwards our points haul was the equal 11th best in the division.

I actually think that the general publicity overdoes the achievement. I am not understating either the challenge or the success but nor did he solve world hunger. He did a good job in achieving success and no one can realistically argue otherwise however there was fortune in the low number of points that were needed to survive. 45 points and -31 GD would have seen us relegated in 9 seasons out of 15 since 2000/01.

That does not mean to detract from the job that Moore did. He took over a team that had given up and somehow turned in that crucial winning streak but you cannot ignore either their (Chelts / Tran) fortuitous implosion or the unusually low safety bar.

Again though, that reflects more on the season as a whole rather than the 'Ronnie Moore Great Escape'.

We only stayed up because...

Gadgies online