Are all clean sheets the same?

There is an argument to say that although all clean sheets are the same in terms of goals conceded not all clean sheets are equally good in the bigger picture.

As was alluded to on (I think) on the match thread whilst we didn't concede last night and thus earned a clean sheet we didn't really merit one. And I completely agree.

For me there are at least two types of clean sheet. A good clean sheet and a lucky one.

A good clean sheet would be where you defended so solidly that you limited the opposition to very few chances and you effectively countered and broke down all of their attacking options and intentions through sheer good defending and hard work. You come away from the game knowing that no matter how long the game played for the opposition would never be able to break down your defence, create a clear cut chance or even get close to scoring.
This is the best kind of clean sheet and one which says that your tactics are spot on and you have got it right. If your intention is to not concede and make it difficult for the opposition then you are justified in selecting a defensive line up and formation because you have proved it works and works well.

A lucky clean sheet is different (and we saw one last night v Leicester City). This is where your team suffer numerous defensive lapses and the opposition create many many chances. They hit the bar. They hit the target and the keeper makes saves. They put you under immense pressure and launch wave after wave of attack against you. And although they don't score on this occasion due to your goalkeepers inspired performance and some unsure finishing from their strikers you know that their failure to score was not related in anyway to your superior tactics or your resilient defending. It's just that this time you got away with it.
This is the kind of clean sheet where the opposition were unlucky not to score and the clean sheet is just a by-product of this fact. The truth is that your defence was carved open on numerous occasions and were simply not able to cope with keeping the attacking players quiet.
You know from this outcome that this time you got lucky and your tactics, formation and team selection were not suitably deployed to come out with the required result. Yes we didn't concede but does that incidental fact point to that sort of set up being the desired set up for future games? No!

***addded on***

Obviously the above description of a good clean sheet is perhaps the perfect clean sheet. There are, of course, several intermediate levels between "the perfect clean sheet" and a "lucky clean sheet". Of course many superior defensive displays will have the odd lapse or the odd attack that is just too good to break down. It is more less inevitable that the opposition will have at least a couple of attempts. But, you know from the general pattern of the game that it was all about the defence being on top and that by limiting them to as few opportunities as possible you gained a clean sheet by merit. You know that the way the team was set up to keep a clean sheet is a sustainable and reliable way to continue to play in the future with the intention of conceding very goals.

This is just utter utter nonsense of the highest order.

If you want really clean sheets then I can recommend Persil.

basically what we're suggesting here is that for a clean sheet to "count" (even though it obviously counts in the points, and thats all that matters) is that.

the opposition can't have a single chance.

If they do have a chance it has to cleanly tackled away, a save by the keeper won't do.

so basically no shots on target for the opposition in 90 minutes, no blocks and certainly no saves.

You do realise Barca, Utd, Chelsea, Real, Milan etc etc never achieve this. And yet we should somehow expect it.

Not entirely sure where this negativity is coming from.

We were not battered last night, to be honest it was pretty even and they might have just about had the better chances, they got a great chance within the first 2 mins but I wouldn't call any of their others clear chances.

We had a few chances ourself but unfortunately didn't finish at all well enough, its not as if Kasper Schmeichel is a wally, he actually did make a fantastic diving save, i forgot now whos shot it was... might have been Chungy.


Personal opinions aside and just looking at the facts:

57% possession and 9 shots on target to their 10, I don't feel it was just luck to get a clean sheet.

Lofty_Love wrote:Not entirely sure where this negativity is coming from.

We were not battered last night, to be honest it was pretty even and they might have just about had the better chances, they got a great chance within the first 2 mins but I wouldn't call any of their other clear chances.

We had a few ourself but unfortunately didn't finish well enough, its not as if Kasper Schmeichel is a wally, he actually did make a fantastic diving save, i forgot now whos shot it was... might have been Chungy.


Personal opinions aside and just looking at the facts:

57% possession and one 9 shots on target to their 10, I don't feel it was just luck to get a clean sheet.

Ditto.

Lofty_Love wrote:Not entirely sure where this negativity is coming from.

We were not battered last night, to be honest it was pretty even and they might have just about had the better chances, they got a great chance within the first 2 mins but I wouldn't call any of their others clear chances.

We had a few chances ourself but unfortunately didn't finish at all well enough, its not as if Kasper Schmeichel is a wally, he actually did make a fantastic diving save, i forgot now whos shot it was... might have been Chungy.


Personal opinions aside and just looking at the facts:

57% possession and one 9 shots on target to their 10, I don't feel it was just luck to get a clean sheet.

but on the proper logic Leicester got a "lucky" clean sheet because Kasper made a save.

Doh! Their fans will be gutted today.

Ok. So are you really saying you cannot comprehend the difference between the two?

I will amend the OP by adding the following paragraph for those who cannot reason it out in their own minds.

****
Obviously the above description of a good clean sheet is perhaps the perfect clean sheet. There are, of course, several intermediate levels between "the perfect clean sheet" and a "lucky clean sheet". Of course many superior defensive displays will have the odd lapse or the odd attack that is just too good to break down. It is more less inevitable that the opposition will have at least a couple of attempts. But, you know from the general pattern of the game that it was all about the defence being on top and that by limiting them to as few opportunities as possible you gained a clean sheet by merit. You know that the way the team was set up to keep a clean sheet is a sustainable and reliable way to continue to play in the future with the intention of conceding very goals.

I comprehend what you mean jayjay.

my point would be to adjust your expectations.

you support Bolton, not Barca, not Chelsea, hell not even Everton or Fulham.

If you're going to complain about a point because the opo got in behind and we had to make a few blocks i do worry.

the fact of the matter is we were spoilt in the prem, we overachieved massively under sam and now we're in the champ, we have fans expecting us to win every game 5-0.

I'm not fussy, a clean sheet is a clean sheet and a much overdue one at that. More please, Dougie. 4 points taken from the two teams that started the month at 1st & 2nd in the league. If offered that last month you would have taken it in a heartbeat. Onwards & upwards!

Clean sheets are over rated unless you win 1-0. Would rather win 2-1 than draw 0-0.

I get what you mean, Jay Jay - but I really wouldn't worry too much about the quality of the clean sheet considering we haven't had one in how long, and Leicester City is regarded as one of the better teams in this league.

"Adjust expectations, don't worry too much, we got an over due clean sheet."

Thank you all. I appreciate where you are coming from but I would reflect that back at you to some degree. I am not worrying too much about the performance but more so about peoples over enthusiastic reaction to us getting a clean sheet. People are reacting as though the clean sheet reflects an improvement in our performance and points toward a brighter future.

I disagree with this. The clean sheet, whilst over due, did not come about from positive changes to our team. But the thing that worries me most is that DF and co may see the clean sheet as a "success" and use this a as a reason to approach games in a similar manner with a similar set up. In m opinion this would be a sorry mistake. I live in fear of us moving back towards negative Megson-esque football.

I predicted a clean sheet when I saw the way we were set up, but I don't particularly like it. I think it was a case of "needs must" and bugger the "quality" of the clean sheet.

Fact is DF set the stall out (and presumably the training) to get one. Why? Because the confidence of our back four must be appalling and that causes them to make bad decisions which in turn crank up the pressure on them even more. Plus we were playing Leicester and he hadn't had much time to work with the lads.

Maybe, just maybe he'll play this way for a few games to build confidence before addressing the fact that he's effectively sacrificed the 6 man attack that OC favoured or was at least trying to achieve. I think we can expect a touch of Megson to stabilise things at the back before we move on to other issues.

It will be interesting to see how he goes about finding the right balance with this squad. Will he try a more positive approach aginst teams that don't look as strong as Leicester and Cardiff on paper or change slowly? Maybe it's a good thing in the long term. Under OC we plenty of forward thinking players but this led to some overelaborate passing from time to time and a very exposed back 4. What a pleasure it was to see Ngog playing directly for once - if he can develop forward play with less players but who are prepared to have dip more often we might just be on to something. Too early to tell. But I won't be complaining about the 2 games (and 4 points) so far. Although I'm still not sure what Sordell has done wrong as I thought he might have done a job for us last night if he had his shooting boots on.

God forbid people shine a positive light on something...

zzzzzzzzzz

Thought my post was positive. DF did what he had to and it's too early to see where he takes it from here. Seems fair enough to me.

not talking to you wanderlust, i agree with your assessment from the other thread totally.

How paranoid am I?

Time for a drink methinks. I'm offski.

jayjay23 wrote:

I disagree with this. The clean sheet, whilst over due, did not come about from positive changes to our team. But the thing that worries me most is that DF and co may see the clean sheet as a "success" and use this a as a reason to approach games in a similar manner with a similar set up. In m opinion this would be a sorry mistake. I live in fear of us moving back towards negative Megson-esque football.

I think this is pretty much fair enough. I would also be pretty down heartened if we continued in this style of play for the next month.

I do however believe this won't be the case. I think its a reaction to having to sort out the defense and play two of the best teams at the same time.

Im looking at it this way - at least when he does set the team up to be defensive it works, under Coyle we were never strong defensively. And I do think he will start building the attack, especially against weaker team, in fact he eluded to it in his post match interview :

'With respect to other teams in this division, we'll win games with less workrate and defending than we had to show there'