Irish Wolves and Opposition Irish

**tricky_colour** · 10/03/2011, 1:30 AM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Not so sure 40 points will be enough.plus last year bottom was always well off third bottom.these will all take points off eachother

There is a predicted table here
http://www.soccerbot.com/frames.htm
Unfortunately you can't link directly to it however if predicts Wolves will get 41 points...and get relegated!!

Predicted Final Table Pld Pts
1 Manchester United 38 78
2 Arsenal 38 74
3 Chelsea 38 72
4 Manchester City 38 68
5 Tottenham Hotspur 38 67
6 Liverpool 38 56
7 Sunderland 38 53
8 Bolton Wanderers 38 51
9 Everton 38 49
10 Newcastle United 38 47
11 Aston Villa 38 46
12 Fulham 38 45
13 Stoke City 38 45
14 Blackburn Rovers 38 41
15 Birmingham City 38 41
16 West Ham United 38 41
17 Blackpool 38 41
18 West Bromwich Albion 38 41
19 Wolverhampton 38 41
20 Wigan Athletic 38 35

It predicts 6 teams on 41 point so it's very tight.
One thing you can be sure of, the teams relegated will begin with either B or a W. (probably).

**Junior** · 10/03/2011, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by geysir

That's a dream run in for Wolves, should be hot game at home to WBA.

Playing Devils Advocate, haven't most of Wolves points (wins at any case) come against the top 5 this season?

**geysir** · 10/03/2011, 1:58 PM

The devil's advocate is quoting stats as an argument?

Wolves have proven that they can be a talented team, therefore consistency of performance is the most likely issue.
A live relegation threat has a way of focussing minds on the task ahead.

You can make a judgement call on who is likely to survive, based on who is the most capable. I haven�t seen the other teams play, so I can�t say. All the teams down there except Wigan are climbing up.
Wolves have got O'Hara and Hunt should be back soon. If not the stats, at least the omens are good for Wolves.

**geysir** · 19/03/2011, 3:56 PM

Wolves playing ol� type possession football to close out a relatively relaxed last 5 minutes against Villa.

**paul_oshea** · 19/03/2011, 4:10 PM

well that's a change.

**paul_oshea** · 19/03/2011, 4:24 PM

still in the bottom 3 too.

**Noelys Guitar** · 19/03/2011, 5:02 PM

It was a very poor game. Wolves deserved to win but Villa were awful. Foley played OK at right back. Some nice football at times but then gives it way when under no pressure and gets booked for kicking tha ball away right near the end of the game. Never like to see that. Doyle put in another excellent shift when you considering some ot the players around him. Wolves have a few of real dead weights in their team. The amount of off-sides and free kicks into row Z. Doyle continually having to hold up his passes hoping Wolves players would get back onside. Spurs could have done with him today.

**SkStu** · 19/03/2011, 9:51 PM

can we please get Hammill signed up?! The lads a bit special and was singled out for special praise on some Wolves messageboards.

**EastTerracer** · 02/04/2011, 12:20 PM

Mick McCarthy issues UK census instructions (..on behalf of the FAI, perhaps)

**paul_oshea** · 02/04/2011, 3:35 PM

This inconsistency with wolves makes me believe they will go down, i said it about 5-10 games ago too and i still feel thats the case.

**Noelys Guitar** · 09/04/2011, 12:38 PM

Look goners on their first half display today. Could be 5-0. O'Hara getting muscled out of it by Neville everytime. Woeful at CB. Badly missing Kevin Doyle as anytime the ball goes forward it comes straight back.

**paul_oshea** · 09/04/2011, 1:33 PM

they have lost that intensity that is the common theme of any mick mccarthy managed team. that was the one thing that got them wins. They look championship level the last few games.

Kevin Doyle or no Kevin Doyle, you wont win conceding 3 and 5 goals. I said last summer that mccarthy had to spend on a decent central defender, he never did it. I just don't understand how so called good managers cannot see what the average punter can see.

**seanfhear** · 09/04/2011, 4:43 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

they have lost that intensity that is the common theme of any mick mccarthy managed team. that was the one thing that got them wins. They look championship level the last few games.

Kevin Doyle or no Kevin Doyle, you wont win conceding 3 and 5 goals. I said last summer that mccarthy had to spend on a decent central defender, he never did it. I just don't understand how so called good managers cannot see what the average punter can see.

I thought he needed 1 if not 2 central defenders but maybe there was nobody willing to put up the money for transfers and wages !

**paul_oshea** · 09/04/2011, 4:52 PM

He got other players though, he spent a lot on doyle and hunt. He needed defenders more than he needed hunt, or possibly even doyle.

**seanfhear** · 09/04/2011, 5:00 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

He got other players though, he spent a lot on doyle and hunt. He needed defenders more than he needed hunt, or possibly even doyle.

Hunt getting injured has been unfortunate and will be be fit in time to try to keep them up. They certainly need him now that Doyle is out. I would agree though that the priority for Wolves was centre backs but for whatever reason they did not deal with this.

**Stuttgart88** · 09/04/2011, 5:12 PM

I don't think Mick is that dumb. I expect he knows he needs a CB. Morgan is very tight with the cash at Wolves. One of the most profitable clubs in the UK is WBA. Being a yo-yo club is much better business than being an EPL regular. If Wolves stay up he'll release a bit more, then a bit more again. I think that's how Stoke has done it.

**paul_oshea** · 09/04/2011, 5:22 PM

Ya stoke didnt go up and down they came up and stayed up, that negates your first point by example.

**Charlie Darwin** · 09/04/2011, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

they have lost that intensity that is the common theme of any mick mccarthy managed team. that was the one thing that got them wins. They look championship level the last few games.

Kevin Doyle or no Kevin Doyle, you wont win conceding 3 and 5 goals. I said last summer that mccarthy had to spend on a decent central defender, he never did it. I just don't understand how so called good managers cannot see what the average punter can see.

What centre halves were available though? It's not like Wenger where he could sign most defenders in the world and refuses to. Realistically, Mick would be signing old players or attracting good defenders from the Championship, and that's pretty much what he's already got.