Happy Face Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean fuck all without proper context. When Kinnear was at Wimbledon? Do you think Ashley might aspire to the uninspiringly effective style you refer to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Aye, post them when you can, would be interested to see the difference between that and win percentage. The Roeder example's a good example though (and this will apply to both win % and points gained %) - he had half a season where he led us to Champions League form and a surge up the table to 7th, then the next season was absolutely dreadful and he certainly deserved the sack. Yet you wouldn't think it if you looked at these stats alone. Premier League games only.... http://i39.tinypic.com/15nwqcg.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Can't believe he's been here nearly twice as long as souness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Aye, post them when you can, would be interested to see the difference between that and win percentage. The Roeder example's a good example though (and this will apply to both win % and points gained %) - he had half a season where he led us to Champions League form and a surge up the table to 7th, then the next season was absolutely dreadful and he certainly deserved the sack. Yet you wouldn't think it if you looked at these stats alone. Premier League games only.... http://i39.tinypic.com/15nwqcg.jpg Reassuring to see our next manager "performing" so well in the relegation zone - where we are headed before Christmas with the fixtures we have coming up! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belfast Mags Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 More stats Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Aye, post them when you can, would be interested to see the difference between that and win percentage. The Roeder example's a good example though (and this will apply to both win % and points gained %) - he had half a season where he led us to Champions League form and a surge up the table to 7th, then the next season was absolutely dreadful and he certainly deserved the sack. Yet you wouldn't think it if you looked at these stats alone. Premier League games only.... http://i39.tinypic.com/15nwqcg.jpg Hmm, not that brilliant either really. He's been here almost twice as long as anyone else excluding KK/SBR and his record looks remarkably mediocre. Would have been sacked by now if we had a proper owner, not that I'm saying you're likely to disagree with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manosdepiedra Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean fuck all without proper context. When Kinnear was at Wimbledon? Do you think Ashley might aspire to the uninspiringly effective style you refer to? The long ball game was in vogue back then, Kinnear probably brought more sophistication to Wimbledon believe it or not. Ashley doesn't seem to know much about football in general. He just picks random names that he recognises who were previously rated and are out of work. Pardew, Kinnear and even Keegan fit into this mold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manosdepiedra Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Hmm, not that brilliant either really. He's been here almost twice as long as anyone else excluding KK/SBR and his record looks remarkably mediocre. Would have been sacked by now if we had a proper owner, not that I'm saying you're likely to disagree with that. I think the way we ended last season was very close to Pardews sacking being entirely justified. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute shit that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manosdepiedra Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute s*** that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Would you prefer the side Daniel Commoli left behind at Spurs then?... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 The more games played the less skewed you can claim results were. You can only be so spakey so long. I do have the points won stats... But people lose their s*** whenever I mention a number. On my phone but I'll post it later. Will you be allowing 3 points for a win when you only got 2 instead of 3 or is this another attempt to prove a shit manager isn't as shit as people can see? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute shit that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Really? I always attributed those signings to Dalglish. When he was at Newcastle he had a tendency to buy similar physically imposing, workhorse types with a massive distrust of mavericks like Ginola and Tino. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Aye, post them when you can, would be interested to see the difference between that and win percentage. The Roeder example's a good example though (and this will apply to both win % and points gained %) - he had half a season where he led us to Champions League form and a surge up the table to 7th, then the next season was absolutely dreadful and he certainly deserved the sack. Yet you wouldn't think it if you looked at these stats alone. Premier League games only.... http://i39.tinypic.com/15nwqcg.jpg Hmm, not that brilliant either really. He's been here almost twice as long as anyone else excluding KK/SBR and his record looks remarkably mediocre. Would have been sacked by now if we had a proper owner, not that I'm saying you're likely to disagree with that. Stand out difference with the previous list posted for me is Souness. Take away the cup games against lowly opposition and his rate plummets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute s*** that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Would you prefer the side Daniel Commoli left behind at Spurs then?... No idea. Bale, Modric and Berbatov would have been nice to have around though, if only because they were sold for huge amounts after being brilliant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 The more games played the less skewed you can claim results were. You can only be so spakey so long. I do have the points won stats... But people lose their s*** whenever I mention a number. On my phone but I'll post it later. Will you be allowing 3 points for a win when you only got 2 instead of 3 or is this another attempt to prove a shit manager isn't as shit as people can see? The one I responded to was premier league managers. Always been 3 points in the premier league. Here's an interesting article on 3 points versus 2 points though... http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2009/feb/05/question-jonathan-wilson-three-points Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute shit that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Really? I always attributed those signings to Dalglish. When he was at Newcastle he had a tendency to buy similar physically imposing, workhorse types with a massive distrust of mavericks like Ginola and Tino. http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/10/13/2709048/moneyball-guru-billy-beane-hails-approach-of-liverpool Have a google around if you're intrigued. There's been plenty written about it before, during and after the fad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 The more games played the less skewed you can claim results were. You can only be so spakey so long. I do have the points won stats... But people lose their s*** whenever I mention a number. On my phone but I'll post it later. Will you be allowing 3 points for a win when you only got 2 instead of 3 or is this another attempt to prove a shit manager isn't as shit as people can see? And Pardews premier league win % is better than Dalglish so my preference for points % damns him rather than pushes a pro-Pardew agenda. I had no idea where he stood when I made the original point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Haris Vuckic Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Tron has blatantly just read 'Inverting the Pyramid'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manosdepiedra Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute s*** that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Would you prefer the side Daniel Commoli left behind at Spurs then?... No idea. Bale, Modric and Berbatov would have been nice to have around though, if only because they were sold for huge amounts after being brilliant. Thats the thing, and thats what Spurs have done brilliantly. We should have shifted Cabaye or Tiote when their currency was high...if the proceeds weren't headed into fatty's back pocket to cover the cost of the relegation he caused himself that is... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 The one I responded to was premier league managers. Always been 3 points in the premier league. Here's an interesting article on 3 points versus 2 points though... http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2009/feb/05/question-jonathan-wilson-three-points Thanks for the link, I'll not bother reading it as I already know the difference between 2 and 3 without having to read up on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I don't know how many of you were around during the 90's when boffin Charles Hughes introduced the idea that the long ball game was the most effective method of football and used stats to conclusively prove it. The FA took that on board and England produced some of the most dire football teams in recent history with disciples like Graham Taylor leading the way. Stats mean f*** all without proper context. Fair enough, Billy Beene of Moneyball fame would say not mind. What he came up with has been hugely influential. Squadron Leader Charles Reep came up with the stats that influenced Hughes and in turn Taylor during the 50s & 60s. I don't know who any of those people are. Did any of them play for Brazil or Barcelona? Moneyball resulted in Liverpool wasting about £100million on absolute shit that nearly ruined them. "Downing put the 7th most crosses in last year...£20million sounds about right" Really? I always attributed those signings to Dalglish. When he was at Newcastle he had a tendency to buy similar physically imposing, workhorse types with a massive distrust of mavericks like Ginola and Tino. http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/10/13/2709048/moneyball-guru-billy-beane-hails-approach-of-liverpool Have a google around if you're intrigued. There's been plenty written about it before, during and after the fad. Interestingly though, Dalglish was also appointed as Newcastle manager after we became a PLC. Some bean counter in the investment department probably looked up a few stats and decided he was a good bet to get the balance sheets looking healthy over a certain time period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Aye, post them when you can, would be interested to see the difference between that and win percentage. The Roeder example's a good example though (and this will apply to both win % and points gained %) - he had half a season where he led us to Champions League form and a surge up the table to 7th, then the next season was absolutely dreadful and he certainly deserved the sack. Yet you wouldn't think it if you looked at these stats alone. Premier League games only.... http://i39.tinypic.com/15nwqcg.jpg Hmm, not that brilliant either really. He's been here almost twice as long as anyone else excluding KK/SBR and his record looks remarkably mediocre. Would have been sacked by now if we had a proper owner, not that I'm saying you're likely to disagree with that. got bored so quickly converted it to points per game assuming all that wins and draws are accurate for prem (and no reason not to think so) and this is it and for pig iron translated over a 38 game season (points per game is rounded up to 2 decimal places) Keegan (1) 1.84 70 points SBR 1.6 61 points Roeder 1.42 54 points Dalglish 1.36 52 points Pardew 1.35 51 points Allerdyce 1.23 47 points Hughton 1.19 45 points Souness 1.18 45 points Keegan (2) 1.11 42 points Gullit 1.09 41 points Kinnear 1.04 40 points Shearer (almost unfair to include him but why not) 0.38 14 points Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 got bored so quickly converted it to points per game assuming all that wins and draws are accurate for prem (and no reason not to think so) and this is it and for pig iron translated over a 38 game season (points per game is rounded up to 2 decimal places) Keegan (1) 1.84 70 points SBR 1.6 61 points Roeder 1.42 54 points Dalglish 1.36 52 points Pardew 1.35 51 points Allerdyce 1.23 47 points Hughton 1.19 45 points Souness 1.18 45 points Keegan (2) 1.11 42 points Gullit 1.09 41 points Kinnear 1.04 40 points Shearer (almost unfair to include him but why not) 0.38 14 points Pardew is shite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts