A couple of days ago Geoff Hopkins wrote an excellent article with five observations in respect of robbing Hull of three points at the weekend. It is hard to disagree with anything that he said. During the game tweeted that he believed the post was our man of the match, and his idea was followed up on some post-match polls with thousands of respondents who agreed with his selection.
Whenever a player is known by one name you know he is a star. Pele, Maradonna, and now Post. Post, whose real name is Woody Woodwork, is related to a number of famous people such as Rod Laver, Rod Marsh, Postman Pat, Woody (of Toy Story fame) and Roy Wood, whose Christmas song is played throughout December. He is also closely related to Barry Bar of Crossbar Challenge fame.
Reports that Post was seen staggering out of an East End nightclub at 4am on Sunday morning were way off the mark according to his agent, Posty McPost Face. Posty confirmed that Post is an upright character who spent the evening at home with his wife, Wendy Woodwork, after a meal at a Chigwell restaurant with close friends.
Post has always been known as a hard man at the back, and his agent has lined him up with several lucrative endorsement opportunities, the biggest one being the front for a new Viagra campaign. Sales of West Ham home shirts with “POST” on the back have been the biggest seller in the club shop in the lead up to Christmas.
Despite Post coming to our rescue three times, and the general agreement that Hull deserved to win the game, or most certainly didn’t deserve to lose, it is interesting to note some of the statistics for the game. Now as Geoff and I have written on some occasions in the past, football statistics can be interesting but in many respects are meaningless when considering the outcome of a game.
Nevertheless I will set out below some of the key statistics that are always collected at games. Those people who believe in the statistics will find it hard to believe that Hull were unlucky losers.
Possession – West Ham 56%, Hull 44%
Shots – West Ham 19, Hull 16
Shots on Target – West Ham 6, Hull 5
Corners – West Ham 10, Hull 6
None of this really means anything except that we had the ball more than they did, we shot at goal more than they did, we had more shots on target than they did, and forced more corners than they did. I know that the general view is that we were fortunate (very fortunate!), but the fact of the matter is we scored a goal and they didn’t. And when it comes down to allocation of points that means we got three and they got zero.
Of course if we keep playing like this, then as Geoff pointed out, we are unlikely to win many more games. But, just for the moment I will take our seven points from three distinctly average performances in the past week. Things will need to improve drastically, but I can remember many occasions in our history when we have deserved to win games but haven’t. It’s good for the boot to be on the other foot for a change.