Could Ramsey's absence be beneficial?

Could Aaron Ramsey’s absence actually be a benefit for the rest of the season? I know that won’t be a popular idea with some, but I believe it might be.

Ramsey has started six Championship games this season and also made two lengthy sub appearances. The team’s record with him in it is appalling:

P 8, W 0, D 3, L5, GF 5, GA 16, Pts 3

Ramsey’s absence will give Omer Riza and his coaching staff fewer options in the centre of midfield and, as odd as this might sound, I reckon that may prove a plus-point. Riza seemingly can’t resist tinkering with the starting line-up on a regular basis and there’s no doubt in my mind that’s a significant part of the problem.

Ramsey has shown the occasional touch of class during his eight league appearances, but generally he’s looked well off the pace. He hasn’t had anything like the sort of positive influence everyone hoped he would and his habit of regularly conceding possession has been an accident waiting to happen. I reckon that, on balance, the team will probably be better off without him.

I definitely agree about the tinkering - I think that's been a big part of our problems since bulut left. And if Ramsey isn't available then that should hopefully reduce that, as we know that Ramsey hasn't been able to play 2 games a week.

I think since his recent return he wasn't looking bad individually, but his inclusion naturally creates a lot of changes in the midfield.

In his defence, the form without him in the team is equally bad.

It's a hard one to answer because I don't think it helps having a player who can't play every game, but at the same time he's been marginally less shit than others if you ask me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfeathers

In his defence, the form without him in the team is equally bad.

---

Not so. But before I provide these stats, I should say that I'm fully aware the team's form is never down to one player alone, no matter who is. Nevertheless, the following is the situation this season in league matches:

Win percentage with Ramsey in the side - 0%
Draw percentage with Ramsey in the side - 37%
Loss percentage with Ramsey in the side - 63%

Win percentage without Ramsey in the side - 28%
Draw percentage without Ramsey in the side - 31%
Loss percentage without Ramsey in the side - 41%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Not so. But before I provide these stats, I should say that I'm fully aware the team's form is never down to one player alone, no matter who is. Nevertheless, the following is the situation this season in league matches:

Win percentage with Ramsey in the side - 0%
Draw percentage with Ramsey in the side - 37%
Loss percentage with Ramsey in the side - 63%

Win percentage without Ramsey in the side - 28%
Draw percentage without Ramsey in the side - 31%
Loss percentage without Ramsey in the side - 41%

---

I’m no mathematician so no doubt whatsoever what im saying is flawed but surely if we’ve played a lot more games without him, there’s bound to be a bigger chance of getting the odd win?

No.

We have such a lack of quality all over the pitch and I'd rather have him available as an option even if it's a 20-25 minute appearance at the end of a game which is probably what he should have been used for anyway.

I get Rizas tinkering and one less option but he's going to screw up with whoever he's got anyway.

He turned the game against Hull. Less of an influence again Luton. In my opinion it's a crying shame.

When we signed him I thought he'd be carrying us.
Sadly we've been carrying him when he's been fit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Not so. But before I provide these stats, I should say that I'm fully aware the team's form is never down to one player alone, no matter who is. Nevertheless, the following is the situation this season in league matches:

Win percentage with Ramsey in the side - 0%
Draw percentage with Ramsey in the side - 37%
Loss percentage with Ramsey in the side - 63%

Win percentage without Ramsey in the side - 28%
Draw percentage without Ramsey in the side - 31%
Loss percentage without Ramsey in the side - 41%

---

Its a pretty reductive way to look at it though isn't it? Most of his games came in that shocking spell under Bulut, if we're discounting players based on our start then we'd struggle to field an 11. More recently he was a pivotal part of getting the equaliser against Bristol City and important in keeping control after we went down to 10 at Plymouth. Without those 2 points we're in the bottom 3

He's a good player, we're in a bad situation in the league and with other injuries/players only just coming back. I don't think losing anyone is particularly beneficial considering the situation we're in

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfeathers

I’m no mathematician so no doubt whatsoever what im saying is flawed but surely if we’ve played a lot more games without him, there’s bound to be a bigger chance of getting the odd win?

---

8 games with him - zero wins.
29 games without him - eight wins.

Ramsey's record this season reads zero goals, zero assists.

He was instrumental in the equaliser against Bristol City last month with his through ball to Ashford, but apart from that I can't recall anything positive Ramsey has done in the final third this season (but there may be some involvement I've forgotten or didn't see).

I’d say we played our best football this season with David Turnbull in our midfield and he’s going to be back soon apparently - it’ll be asking a lot for him to turn things around, but I’d say he’s been more influential for us than Ramsey in the few games they’ve both managed to play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

More recently he was a pivotal part of getting the equaliser against Bristol City and important in keeping control after we went down to 10 at Plymouth.

---

Bristol City I agree with, but I think Plymouth's pushing it. It was only the fact that they were hopeless that got us out of that mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dandywarhol

He turned the game against Hull.

---

He didn't play against Hull.

I thought his signing was sentimental from the off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

Its a pretty reductive way to look at it though isn't it?

---

OK, so I'll be even more reductive: I believe Ramsey has been picked this season on reputation rather than form and fitness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

8 games with him - zero wins.
29 games without him - eight wins.

Ramsey's record this season reads zero goals, zero assists.

He was instrumental in the equaliser against Bristol City last month with his through ball to Ashford, but apart from that I can't recall anything positive Ramsey has done in the final third this season (but there may be some involvement I've forgotten or didn't see).

---

Of the 8 games, 50% of them have been against teams currently sitting in the top 8. One of those was a narrow loss against Burnley away. The other 50% of games we drew three.
I don't think it's a fair comparison to be fair.
But given how injury prone he is now, I'd rather get a side together that can fight in every game than keep tinkering. I said in a previous post that I hope he retires.

I wouldn't disagree with you, only lingering doubt i'd have is whether the last few weeks he was getting back to being fully match fit and then maybe he could have had a positive impact.

He just needs to retire now. He's 34, lost a yard, suffers from muscle tears. I don't think that it was ever a good idea for him to play at this level, certainly at a club struggling the way we have been over the past few years. It's best he stops now. Maybe he should have gone further back, played in between the defence and midfield, with the option to step in and be that extra man when we're in possession, but it's all academic, he's done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

8 games with him - zero wins.
29 games without him - eight wins.

Ramsey's record this season reads zero goals, zero assists.

He was instrumental in the equaliser against Bristol City last month with his through ball to Ashford, but apart from that I can't recall anything positive Ramsey has done in the final third this season (but there may be some involvement I've forgotten or didn't see).

---

comparing data with different sample sizes is usually more complicate than just looking at the overall success rate.

for example, if you took a random selection of 8 the 29 games we've played without him there's a reasonable chance you would come up with 0 wins as well.

Or to give another example - if someone has scored their first 10 penalties they have a 100% success rate, however, someone who has scored 49/50 penalties can be argued to be statistically the better penalty taker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfeathers

Of the 8 games, 50% of them have been against teams currently sitting in the top 8. One of those was a narrow loss against Burnley away. The other 50% of games we drew three.
I don't think it's a fair comparison to be fair.
But given how injury prone he is now, I'd rather get a side together that can fight in every game than keep tinkering. I said in a previous post that I hope he retires.

---

The narrow Burnley defeat was at home - Ramsey played the full 90 minutes in the 5-0 collapse away at Burnley in August and was responsible for surrendering possession for their fourth and fifth goals.

I agree it may not be an entirely fair comparison, but nevertheless I firmly believe Ramsey has contributed little of note regardless of who he's played against this season. I'm hoping his absence will mean less tinkering by Riza to accommodate him, and perhaps a bit more from Colwill if he's moved back to a central midfield position.

Equally, it may make no difference at all. But, like you, I hope Ramsey retires now. The situation has become silly and a bit embarrassing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

The narrow Burnley defeat was at home - Ramsey played the full 90 minutes in the 5-0 collapse away at Burnley in August and was responsible for surrendering possession for their fourth and fifth goals.

I agree it may not be an entirely fair comparison, but nevertheless I firmly believe Ramsey has contributed little of note regardless of who he's played against this season. I'm hoping his absence will mean less tinkering by Riza to accommodate him, and perhaps a bit more from Colwill if he's moved back to a central midfield position.

Equally, it may make no difference at all. But, like you, I hope Ramsey retires now. The situation has become silly and a bit embarrassing.

---

Yes Burnley at home sorry. They blur into one when you're losing every game :facepalm:
With regards the 0-5 collapse at Burnley away, he equally played no minutes in the 0-7 disaster at Leeds.
I'm not sure that any player has contributed much of note, including Colwill. I'd say he's a player that is playing well below his previous ability among a shower of shit. Albeit an expensive one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

OK, so I'll be even more reductive: I believe Ramsey has been picked this season on reputation rather than form and fitness.

---

If that were the case he'd have played every game since his return from injury

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

If that were the case he'd have played every game since his return from injury

---

He can't play two games a week according to his manager.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

He can't play two games a week according to his manager.

---

Which would suggest fitness is a consideration, not just his reputation

For what its worth I think he's done, but I do think he was a big part of us hanging on at Plymouth, he was the only one communicating, pulling players into position, putting his foot on the ball etc, that kind of leadership has been severely lacking this season and can be overlooked

Ramsey's absence will mean, if Riza stays, that he won't be able to use his tactic of "give it to Ramsey and hope something happens."

It will probably now be "give it to El Ghazi and watch the move peter out."

:ayatollah:

I know he did his hamstring attempting a back heel but the real reason he got injured was the amount of running he was doing because his lazy arse teammates weren't putting the requisite effort in. You could see him getting frustrated.

Losing someone of his ability and application is going to be a set back, he's also a very vocal player but I think we've missed Ralls leadership and tenacity more.

Who played in midfield during those wins? Were those wins down to them winning midfield?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Could Aaron Ramsey’s absence actually be a benefit for the rest of the season? I know that won’t be a popular idea with some, but I believe it might be.

Ramsey has started six Championship games this season and also made two lengthy sub appearances. The team’s record with him in it is appalling:

P 8, W 0, D 3, L5, GF 5, GA 16, Pts 3

Ramsey’s absence will give Omer Riza and his coaching staff fewer options in the centre of midfield and, as odd as this might sound, I reckon that may prove a plus-point. Riza seemingly can’t resist tinkering with the starting line-up on a regular basis and there’s no doubt in my mind that’s a significant part of the problem.

Ramsey has shown the occasional touch of class during his eight league appearances, but generally he’s looked well off the pace. He hasn’t had anything like the sort of positive influence everyone hoped he would and his habit of regularly conceding possession has been an accident waiting to happen. I reckon that, on balance, the team will probably be better off without him.

---

If riza does go in the international break then it's a shame the new manager won't have the option of ramsey.

Ramsey best game of the season by a million miles was for wales in bellamys first game. He was bloody outstanding. His finishing did let him down but he could have scored a hatful the positions he was getting into. His movement and touch was a joy to watch. In fact hard to believe it was this season feels such a long time ago.

However based on his city performances it's hard to disagree but that game with bellamy suggested it's as much to do with the management and coaching (of other players) than it is him. Must be extremely frustrating for him.

As an aside Bellamy always says how often he speaks to rambo. Personally I think a contributing reason why no City players are in the wales squad is because of what rambo will have said to bellamy about them and more the awful coaching they receive at the club. I maybe totally wrong but no way bellamy and rambo haven't discussed the likes of colwill in depth.

It may be beneficial due to the fact that he’s head & shoulders above the rest of the abysmal lot. Without him at least the team will be on the same ‘football brain’ level. You could place Messi alongside any 10 of our squad and he’d look completely out of touch. I know they were a lot younger, although Ramsey was recovering from a serious injury, but the few games they played together him & Bellamy complemented each other due to their different ability to the others.

It’s horses for courses, Ramsey is Ascot, the others are Ely Racecourse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

Its a pretty reductive way to look at it though isn't it? Most of his games came in that shocking spell under Bulut, if we're discounting players based on our start then we'd struggle to field an 11. More recently he was a pivotal part of getting the equaliser against Bristol City and important in keeping control after we went down to 10 at Plymouth. Without those 2 points we're in the bottom 3

He's a good player, we're in a bad situation in the league and with other injuries/players only just coming back. I don't think losing anyone is particularly beneficial considering the situation we're in

---

If Luton was included, did we finish in a worse position than we were when he was playing?

Were the games against top teams like Burnley, Leeds, Sunderland?

Also due to injuries he doesn't get a sustained run of games to play at his best, but that might be one reason why we may benefit from him not being availble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

It may be beneficial due to the fact that he’s head & shoulders above the rest of the abysmal lot. Without him at least the team will be on the same ‘football brain’ level. You could place Messi alongside any 10 of our squad and he’d look completely out of touch. I know they were a lot younger, although Ramsey was recovering from a serious injury, but the few games they played together him & Bellamy complemented each other due to their different ability to the others.

It’s horses for courses, Ramsey is Ascot, the others are Ely Racecourse.

---

Undoubtedly he used to be and his brain may well still be, he isn't a cut above physically though, not anymore sadly. Time waits for no man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfeathers

Of the 8 games, 50% of them have been against teams currently sitting in the top 8. One of those was a narrow loss against Burnley away. The other 50% of games we drew three.
I don't think it's a fair comparison to be fair.
But given how injury prone he is now, I'd rather get a side together that can fight in every game than keep tinkering. I said in a previous post that I hope he retires.

---

I hadn't read right through, but thought this might be the case :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

The narrow Burnley defeat was at home - Ramsey played the full 90 minutes in the 5-0 collapse away at Burnley in August and was responsible for surrendering possession for their fourth and fifth goals.

I agree it may not be an entirely fair comparison, but nevertheless I firmly believe Ramsey has contributed little of note regardless of who he's played against this season. I'm hoping his absence will mean less tinkering by Riza to accommodate him, and perhaps a bit more from Colwill if he's moved back to a central midfield position.

Equally, it may make no difference at all. But, like you, I hope Ramsey retires now. The situation has become silly and a bit embarrassing.

---

What you say makes sense, and although hard to prove, I think you could have something there, especially with less options and complications for Riza in the run in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trigger

Undoubtedly he used to be and his brain may well still be, he isn't a cut above physically though, not anymore sadly. Time waits for no man.

---

It doesn’t but the few times he’s played, he’s found space without over exerting himself, received the ball from a usually harassed team mate, but invariably has to hang on to it a touch too long due to the lack of intelligent movement by others. Over the last few games he’s made himself available, not by sprinting into space. He just finds room calmly while the others plod around seemingly sticking like glue to their opponents.

As I stated, his absence may be beneficial due to the ‘wavelength’ differences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

It doesn’t but the few times he’s played, he’s found space without over exerting himself, received the ball from a usually harassed team mate, but invariably has to hang on to it a touch too long due to the lack of intelligent movement by others. Over the last few games he’s made himself available, not by sprinting into space. He just finds room calmly while the others plod around seemingly sticking like glue to their opponents.

As I stated, his absence may be beneficial due to the ‘wavelength’ differences.

---

Maybe you're right. I'm just thinking he has been caught in possession quite a few times but that's likely me just noticing it more because it's him and I expect him to be better than our other players technically.
Our movement is terrible, has been for a long time. I've been surprised we don't give away more goals than we have by trying to play out as with our movement it just feels there is very little benefit from it for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PontBlue

Who played in midfield during those wins?

---

Based on the staring line-ups in the BBC reports, the central midfielders were as follows:

Millwall (1-0): Ralls, Colwill, Robertson

Plymouth (5-0): Robertson, Colwill, Turnbull

Portsmouth (2-0): Robertson, Colwill, Turnbull

Norwich (2-1): Siopis, Colwill, Turnbull

Watford (2-1): Chambers, Robertson, Siopis

Swansea (3-0): Chambers, Robertson, Ralls

Derby (2-1): Chambers, Robertson, Ralls

Hull (1-0): Chambers, Robinson, Mannsverk

I don't think the BBC reports are entirely accurate in terms of positions. For instance, they reckon that for the Norwich game Riza was fielding a bizarre 4-2-2-2 formation. But the above are my best guesses based on the graphics in the reports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

It’s horses for courses, Ramsey is Ascot, the others are Ely Racecourse.

---

It's a pity he spends most of the season in the stables.

Thanks, so Robertson must start along with any two from Chambers, Turnbull, Ralls and Colwill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

It's a pity he spends most of the season in the stables.

---

While the others should be residing in the knacker’s yard!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trigger

Maybe you're right. I'm just thinking he has been caught in possession quite a few times but that's likely me just noticing it more because it's him and I expect him to be better than our other players technically.
Our movement is terrible, has been for a long time. I've been surprised we don't give away more goals than we have by trying to play out as with our movement it just feels there is very little benefit from it for us.

---

You’re quite correct about the movement of our lot. Throw ins are a prime example, just as well chuck it to one of theirs, quicken the process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

While the others should be residing in the knacker’s yard!

---

In fairness to Ramsey, he always looks well-groomed.

:thumbup: