Alan Pardew

[TRon]

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?

 

 

[Jack Flash]

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"

[manosdepiedra]

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?...

[Mick]

 

 

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?

[TRon]

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.

[Happy Face]

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.

[Jack Flash]

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.

[Happy Face]

 

 

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

[Jack Flash]

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.

[Happy Face]

 

 

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.

[Guest Haris Vuckic]

Tron has blatantly just read 'Inverting the Pyramid'.

[manosdepiedra]

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...

[Mick]

 

 

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.

[TRon]

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.

[jdckelly]

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

[Mick]

 

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.

[Wullie]

Makes me cringe whenever I see Moneyball talked about in relation to football. You might as well pop anybody who does on the ignore list tbh.

[Segun Oluwaniyi]

Makes me cringe whenever I see Moneyball talked about in relation to football. You might as well pop anybody who does on the ignore list tbh.

I don't understand how someone can say statistics are not useful in football. They have been fairly effective in basketball, which is also a very fluid game.

 

 

If you look at managers in the Premiership like Mourinho, Pochettino, Pellegrini, and Lambert, they've all been at their clubs a shorter time than Pardew (in the case of the first two less than six months) and have already given their sides a distinct style and way of playing that is different to what was present before. Even Hughes seems to have imposed himself on Stoke to some degree. The players may not fit their style exactly, but these managers have adjusted and generally made the best out of what they were given.

 

Pardew has managed this team for nearly three years now without an usually high amount of player turnover and still has no idea of how he wants to play, what the best system for the team is, or how to fit players who have been here for quite some time into his systems. What is Pardew's preferred style of play? Listening to his words in the media it seems to be, "fluid attacking football, until something goes wrong and we have to start pumping long ball and sitting back on the 18 yard box because this is the only way to react in such situations". It is thing I dislike most about his tenure here.

[Wullie]

Makes me cringe whenever I see Moneyball talked about in relation to football. You might as well pop anybody who does on the ignore list tbh.

I don't understand how someone can say statistics are not useful in football. They have been fairly effective in basketball, which is also a very fluid game.

 

I never said they're not useful, but simply not in the way they are for baseball, not even close.

 

The initial point made was that "stats are useless without context" which was disagreed with "because Moneyball" - but that's exactly the point. There is almost no context in a batter facing a pitcher, in that moment alone it's essentially an individual sport, certainly from the batter's point of view. In comparison, there are very few points in a football match where a player's contribution isn't directly influenced by what his teammates are doing. It's chalk and cheese.

 

Very much agree with your subsequent point.

[merlin]

Amusing seeing people saying "they only won because of a wonder strike" when attempts from distance were the only chances we were interested in having ourselves.

 

Agree, Wullie - I've mostly given up trying to reason with some of the posters on here....almost certain that some of them are Ashley/Pardew trolls because they will do and say anything to justify keeping the status quo...even when its blatantly obvious that the manager and owner/officials are just not up to the job at a club with the support of NUFC. Despite all the possession we had, the ball was mostly played sideways or backwards and the lack of forward running has been a feature of Pardew's sides ever since he arrived and started 'coaching' the team. Build ups are painfully slow and meat and drink to defenders in opposition sides..we rely mostly on long range specials to get results.

[merlin]

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"

 

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.

 

This was only when his budget was restricted...he also bought Hamman, Nobby, Given and Tomasson(who was used badly at NUFC because of Shearer's injury but went on to star for AC Milan)....

[merlin]

Makes me cringe whenever I see Moneyball talked about in relation to football. You might as well pop anybody who does on the ignore list tbh.

I don't understand how someone can say statistics are not useful in football. They have been fairly effective in basketball, which is also a very fluid game.

 

 

If you look at managers in the Premiership like Mourinho, Pochettino, Pellegrini, and Lambert, they've all been at their clubs a shorter time than Pardew (in the case of the first two less than six months) and have already given their sides a distinct style and way of playing that is different to what was present before. Even Hughes seems to have imposed himself on Stoke to some degree. The players may not fit their style exactly, but these managers have adjusted and generally made the best out of what they were given.

 

Pardew has managed this team for nearly three years now without an usually high amount of player turnover and still has no idea of how he wants to play, what the best system for the team is, or how to fit players who have been here for quite some time into his systems. What is Pardew's preferred style of play? Listening to his words in the media it seems to be, "fluid attacking football, until something goes wrong and we have to start pumping long ball and sitting back on the 18 yard box because this is the only way to react in such situations". It is thing I dislike most about his tenure here.

 

There is a famous saying, attributed by some to Disraeli, that there are 3 kinds of lies..'Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics'....Politicians of all kinds LOVE the latter most of all because you can prove anything by manipulating the facts in stats..

 

The only stat I am interested in - apart from the fact we were one game from relegation on the last day of last season - is that Pardew has been sacked by almost every other club he managed....and usually after a similar time span in the job....

[Decky]

Amusing seeing people saying "they only won because of a wonder strike" when attempts from distance were the only chances we were interested in having ourselves.

 

Agree, Wullie - I've mostly given up trying to reason with some of the posters on here....almost certain that some of them are Ashley/Pardew trolls because they will do and say anything to justify keeping the status quo...even when its blatantly obvious that the manager and owner/officials are just not up to the job at a club with the support of NUFC. Despite all the possession we had, the ball was mostly played sideways or backwards and the lack of forward running has been a feature of Pardew's sides ever since he arrived and started 'coaching' the team. Build ups are painfully slow and meat and drink to defenders in opposition sides..we rely mostly on long range specials to get results.

 

Was it the West Ham game when we had something ridiculous like 18 shots and none on target? It was painfully obvious then that our game plan relied solely on hit and hopes.

[nufcjb]

f***ing hell..had a dream reading the BBC Football website and seeing the words 'Alan Pardew has parted company with Newcastle United with mutual consent'..

 

Woke up and checked the website to check whether it was true or not..meh

[Segun Oluwaniyi]

Makes me cringe whenever I see Moneyball talked about in relation to football. You might as well pop anybody who does on the ignore list tbh.

I don't understand how someone can say statistics are not useful in football. They have been fairly effective in basketball, which is also a very fluid game.

 

I never said they're not useful, but simply not in the way they are for baseball, not even close.

 

The initial point made was that "stats are useless without context" which was disagreed with "because Moneyball" - but that's exactly the point. There is almost no context in a batter facing a pitcher, in that moment alone it's essentially an individual sport, certainly from the batter's point of view. In comparison, there are very few points in a football match where a player's contribution isn't directly influenced by what his teammates are doing. It's chalk and cheese.

 

Very much agree with your subsequent point.

Fair enough, I didn't read the whole discussion, your post just stuck out. In a sport like football, that is so dependent on "team" and other intangible things, statistics will never tell the full story, but in 2013 we are able to do many things with numbers that provide deeper information about players and teams. It is just simple things. As I mentioned, they've introduced some simple things in basketball (percentage of time of player is sprinting, shot charts to see where someone is most effective/ineffective, etc) that have been really useful and similar things would work in football.

 

You are right, though, signing someone because they "put in the most crosses" and other such nonsense is a fairly foolish way of using the numbers.