Happy Face Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 T'was shots taken, not scored. I did say 'sommat'. Ah right. I did explain that at the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Yeap, like we didn't have useless graphs before you arrived Happy Face? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 T'was shots taken, not scored. I did say 'sommat'. Ah right. I did explain that at the time. Put down the shovel, man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 But you can shove the stats up your marmite motorway, they are bollocks compared the good people of this place and their own eyes and judgement. Expect Brett, he's mental but lovable. You do know I never started this stat chat? That's like trying to deny the Holocaust, you are the reason. For the stats not the Holocaust like. I'm the reason stats exist? You're building me up here like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 http://i.imgur.com/gPik4k9.png Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Actually, eyewitness testimony is one of the poorest and least reliable forms of evidence we have, prone to all kinds of cognitive biases and errors of perception. This doesn't mean stats aren't/can't be used in a misleading fashion, but "I done seen it with my own eyes" is almost always a poorer substitute tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Actually, eyewitness testimony is one of the poorest and least reliable forms of evidence we have, prone to all kinds of cognitive biases and errors of perception. This doesn't mean stats aren't/can't be used in a misleading fashion, but "I done seen it with my own eyes" is almost always a poorer substitute tbh. <a href="http://reactiongifs.com/?p=6021"><img src="http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/interesting.gif"></a> Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 If I was to go on a murderous rampage it would probably be in the Squawka/Whoscored offices. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 As most have said, yesterday's performance is an illustration of what many of us know - there are some quality players in our squad and, with a better manager, we would have a good chance of being top 6 challengers. The problems are that 1) There is no way Ashley would recruit a top manager and no way one would join us under Ashley's terms of employment although Di Matteo is reputedly interested. 2) We lack depth of quality - and numbers - in the squad which would allow a realistic challenge for honours because even a top manager would struggle when we got crucial injuries and Ashley wouldn't spend the necessary money required in order to strengthen the squad sufficiently. Having said all that, I still think that a decent manager could get us into top 8 and, given a run of luck with injuries, challenging for 5th place - we are ridiculously inconsistent and shouldn't be with the quality of players available when most are fit. All of the established top 6 sides have at least one forward who cost £20m+ while we have spent about that amount on strikers in the entire time Ashley has been here. We do not currently have a competant centre forward at the club and Ameobi started again yesterday. Aside from Remy and Ben Arfa our attacking players look rank average to poor, and at the back the likes of Williamson and Dummett get a game. I cannot believe anyone thinks we would be a top 6 side if it wasn't for the manager. You cannot dismiss Remy and HBA as if they weren't part of the squad - they are and therefore my point stands. Remy would be capable of 15-20 goals a season IF given the right service and if you read my post properly, you will see that I mention Ashley's lack of investment as a reason why we wouldn't be a major force. Nevertheless, I stand by what I said - GIVEN A RUN FREE OF INJURIES, we could, under a better manager, be Top 8 and poss Top 6.....we are unlikely to see either of those scenarios achieved so the theory may not be put to the test. Surely, you are not saying that Pardew is doing as well as any manager could do...are you 1?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 Heard a guy on talksport say 'alan pardew, what a manager' commentator like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 Actually, eyewitness testimony is one of the poorest and least reliable forms of evidence we have, prone to all kinds of cognitive biases and errors of perception. This doesn't mean stats aren't/can't be used in a misleading fashion, but "I done seen it with my own eyes" is almost always a poorer substitute tbh. I reckon that's true over a short period of time, or a specific incident. Watching a team for an entire season though, year on year, allows for a more accurate perception and less cognitive bias as the evidence is spread out. Provided of course that you witness the events with close enough attention to whatever it is you're looking at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 The balls this cunt has. "For Mike Ashley..." Unbelievable. "This is for me boss, like, it's his birthday..." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 70 long balls per game? What an absolute load of shite that statistic is, because no team plays 70 long balls a game. Remember the time HappyFace's homemade statistics/source had a non-integer for goals scored or sommat That's nowt, he posted a set of stats that 'explained' why Pardew kept playing Jonas on the wing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 Actually, eyewitness testimony is one of the poorest and least reliable forms of evidence we have, prone to all kinds of cognitive biases and errors of perception. This doesn't mean stats aren't/can't be used in a misleading fashion, but "I done seen it with my own eyes" is almost always a poorer substitute tbh. I reckon that's true over a short period of time, or a specific incident. Watching a team for an entire season though, year on year, allows for a more accurate perception and less cognitive bias as the evidence is spread out. Provided of course that you witness the events with close enough attention to whatever it is you're looking at. Add in the fact that there's LOADS of eyewitnesses as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 70 long balls per game? What an absolute load of shite that statistic is, because no team plays 70 long balls a game. Remember the time HappyFace's homemade statistics/source had a non-integer for goals scored or sommat That's nowt, he posted a set of stats that 'explained' why Pardew kept playing Jonas on the wing I never like. I posted a set of stats that showed which players were playing when we conceded most or least. Whatever inferences were taken from that were opinion. Stats prove nothing, they only support an argument. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 70 long balls per game? What an absolute load of shite that statistic is, because no team plays 70 long balls a game. Remember the time HappyFace's homemade statistics/source had a non-integer for goals scored or sommat That's nowt, he posted a set of stats that 'explained' why Pardew kept playing Jonas on the wing I never like. I posted a set of stats that showed which players were playing when we conceded most or least. Whatever inferences were taken from that were opinion. Stats prove nothing, they only support an argument. You posted a set of numbers that made it 'clear to see the value he places in Jonas'. Every single person on this forum (and most at the match) could have told you that without a list of numbers, months before you made that post. He always will too. We've conceded less goals in the games Jonas plays. I hate to go back to the stats but I do like to back up what I say, so here goes.... If you look at how long each player has spent on the pitch, and how many goals were conceded when that player was on, then it's clear the value Pardew places in Jonas... Top 5 Gutierez - 58.9 minutes per goal conceded Cabaye - 57.9 Williamson - 55.9 S Taylor - 53.9 Ben Arfa - 53.6 When he got injured we immediately conceded 4 at Man U then 7 at Arsenal in the next 2 games The next time he missed any football was when he got dragged off against Liverpool. we were 2 nil down then....but we conceded 4 in the second half alone without him. Most would prefer our attacking players to be attacking of course, and Jonas has done nothing for us there. But it's clear where Pardew sees his value to the team, defensively. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 "I do like to back up what I say" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 "I do like to back up what I say" Yeah, when I go to buy some cans I take a picture of an empty fridge with me, just in case the lad serving me doubts that I need any. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 "I do like to back up what I say" Yeah, when I go to buy some cans I take a picture of an empty fridge with me, just in case the lad serving me doubts that I need any. Incognito didn't seem to understand why Pardew would choose him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 "I do like to back up what I say" Yeah, when I go to buy some cans I take a picture of an empty fridge with me, just in case the lad serving me doubts that I need any. Incognito didn't seem to understand why Pardew would choose him. Eh what? *wakesfromslumbertoseemyname Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 "I do like to back up what I say" Yeah, when I go to buy some cans I take a picture of an empty fridge with me, just in case the lad serving me doubts that I need any. Incognito didn't seem to understand why Pardew would choose him. Eh what? *wakesfromslumbertoseemyname I say "didn't seem to" because your post said "it seems he'll always find a spot for Jonas." In truth, you did totally know why. Because after I posted what was quoted above you said "This is exactly what I was getting at. In the same way Taggart selects Welbeck in the "harder" games. It is because he is the best defensive forward they have." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 He knows we played well at Sunderland does he? Knowledgeable fella then, knows his football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 I wonder how you measure in stat form how a manager shits his pants before a derby game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 “I think [the owner] Mike Ashley understands the fine lines we are working in. He texted me this week and he knows we played well at Sunderland and we could have won there. The breaks in the game can make all the difference and we got the breaks today whereas at Sunderland we didn’t.” http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/toothless-not-ruthless--jose-mourinho-ready-to-wield-axe-at-chelsea-following-20-defeat-to-newcastle-8920014.html Pards must still be burning after successive derby failures. He's trying to use the Chelsea win to wipe out the Sunderland defeat the week before. It doesn't work like that Pards, the FA aren't going to award you an extra three points in retrospect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slippery Sam Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 “I think [the owner] Mike Ashley understands the fine lines we are working in. He texted me this week and he knows we played well at Sunderland and we could have won there. The breaks in the game can make all the difference and we got the breaks today whereas at Sunderland we didn’t.” http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/toothless-not-ruthless--jose-mourinho-ready-to-wield-axe-at-chelsea-following-20-defeat-to-newcastle-8920014.html It's all about luck, then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts