Raul Watch

[iansthailand]

Wolves play like we did last season, lots of passing about and some shots but not a lot of penetration

I watched the whole game and agree 100% with 'd'
One thing i noticed about the Blackburn right back is he didn't have much urgency in getting back into position after one of his forays forward also, his crossing was Jedi standard.
Overall it was a good, entertaining game.

[alfie]

We're really going to miss his reliability from the spot

One of the newbies maybe just as good and we won't miss him.

[hovewhite]

The man is and has Class

[alfie]

Not that it matters but why is there a "Raul watch".

[Andy S]

Because it is pre season and not much going on

[St Eve]

Scores another penalty

[KJS]

Scores another penalty

Exactly a penalty not a goal from open play

[St Eve]

Scores another penalty

Exactly a penalty not a goal from open play

That's what I said. Scores another penalty

[SP]

Good, low risk signing for Wolves. Interesting that the other two relegated teams are near the bottom of the table.

[Twig]

Scores another penalty

Exactly a penalty not a goal from open play

And your point is what?

[St Eve]

Scores a last minute winner today at Sheffield United

[Angus Telford]

Scores another penalty

Exactly a penalty not a goal from open play

And your point is what?

There's a weird tendency on here to devalue penalty goals. Which is especially weird considering the trouble we've had with them in recent years.

[alfie]

Scores another penalty

Exactly a penalty not a goal from open play

And your point is what?

There's a weird tendency on here to devalue penalty goals. Which is especially weird considering the trouble we've had with them in recent years.

I'm not sure penalties are being devalued, Raul is one of the best at them, but strikers are judged for goals in open play, and to be honest without his pens his goal tally would be quite low.

[Sting of the North]

Scores another penalty

Exactly a penalty not a goal from open play

And your point is what?

There's a weird tendency on here to devalue penalty goals. Which is especially weird considering the trouble we've had with them in recent years.

Nothing weird about it in my opinion Penalty goals are comparatively easily replaced, since even mediocre penalty takers score most of them. Even a terrible penalty taker like Mitro scored more than he missed. Realistically, 3-4 of Raul's penalty goals would be replaced without replacing the player and just having another squad member take them. That would leave us 1-2 goals worse off. Since he rarely scored from open play, replacing him is still quite likely to yield a bigger goal return in total even if the replacement is not a huge success.

Doesn't mean that he is not great at penalties, only that it (the penalty goals) is not a very big loss in the grand scheme of things.

In my opinion. 

[Chi_FFC]

Nothing weird about it in my opinion Penalty goals are comparatively easily replaced, since even mediocre penalty takers score most of them. Even a terrible penalty taker like Mitro scored more than he missed. Realistically, 3-4 of Raul's penalty goals would be replaced without replacing the player and just having another squad member take them. That would leave us 1-2 goals worse off. Since he rarely scored from open play, replacing him is still quite likely to yield a bigger goal return in total even if the replacement is not a huge success.

Doesn't mean that he is not great at penalties, only that it (the penalty goals) is not a very big loss in the grand scheme of things.

In my opinion. 

Well said. And to your point, since promotion in 22/23, we've converted 15 of 20 PL penalties. Mitro was 4 of 8, Raul was 7 of 7 and a combination of Robinson/Pereira/Willian went 4 for 5.

[Angus Telford]

I'd wager that a significant proportion of open play goals are tap-ins and such like that had a >60% (our penalty conversion rate minus Raul) probability of being scored. Continuing the logic for excluding penalties, they should be excluded too.

[Sting of the North]

I'd wager that a significant proportion of open play goals are tap-ins and such like that had a >60% (our penalty conversion rate minus Raul) probability of being scored. Continuing the logic for excluding penalties, they should be excluded too.

Assuming that players are just presented with the opportunity without having to do anything to get there, sure. Since that is not the case however, your comparison is beyond ridiculous.

In my opinion.

[Angus Telford]

I'd wager that a significant proportion of open play goals are tap-ins and such like that had a >60% (our penalty conversion rate minus Raul) probability of being scored. Continuing the logic for excluding penalties, they should be excluded too.

Assuming that players are just presented with the opportunity without having to do anything to get there, sure. Since that is not the case however, your comparison is beyond ridiculous.

In my opinion.

I'm sure they often have to do something to get there, indees. But I'm equally sure Raul, as our number 9, likely had a significant role in the build up to us winning most of the penalties he scored.
You've let yourself down with the "beyond ridiculous" comment. The reality is simply that discounting penalty goals is arbitrary and doesn't stand up to logical scrutiny.

[Sting of the North]

I'd wager that a significant proportion of open play goals are tap-ins and such like that had a >60% (our penalty conversion rate minus Raul) probability of being scored. Continuing the logic for excluding penalties, they should be excluded too.

Assuming that players are just presented with the opportunity without having to do anything to get there, sure. Since that is not the case however, your comparison is beyond ridiculous.

In my opinion.

I'm sure they often have to do something to get there, indees. But I'm equally sure Raul, as our number 9, likely had a significant role in the build up to us winning most of the penalties he scored.
You've let yourself down with the "beyond ridiculous" comment. The reality is simply that discounting penalty goals is arbitrary and doesn't stand up to logical scrutiny.

It stands up very well to scrutiny, for anyone that at least try listen to the argument. It is not really arbitrary, since it is a very distinct category of goals that is not impacted by anything else, contrary to most categories of goals. And there is a clear argument as to why those goals are a lesser loss than open play goals (you would always have players available with a high chance of scoring a penalty). So no one is claiming that penalty goals don't count, just that they are more easily replaceable than open play goals.

I fully stand by my comment about the ridiculousness of your prior comment. The comparison was apples to oranges, to be very kind. But of course you know this, and you don't care.

Whether Raul was good at being involved in winning us penalties in the first place I don't know. Don't remember him being directly involved much, but maybe he was. I am not convinced that he was above average in that category, but if that is your argument then so be it. What I do know is that for a PL striker starting most games, he was really not scoring much last season, and I think that losing him is no big deal at all.