Matt Ritchie (now playing for Portsmouth)

[Kanji]

Fact that assists is very loosely used in years past in the sport cracks me the hell up considering how heavily it's used in other sports like hockey, basketball, etc.

[Astroblack]

Fact that assists is very loosely used in years past in the sport cracks me the hell up considering how heavily it's used in other sports like hockey, basketball, etc.

 

That's true. It's still not talked about to the level it maybe should be.

[Guest firetotheworks]

I don't ever remember it not being taken seriously tbh. I dunno where that's come from.

[Minhosa]

I don't ever remember it not being taken seriously tbh. I dunno where that's come from.

 

Nah - that's definetely right. Back in the early premiership days, they were hardly given any real kudos. Top scorers were where it was at.

 

Hardly anywhere near the level of statistical analysis that is done now and we're still miles behind many American sports for it.

[joeyt]

Presume the increase in people doing fantasy football means they get taken more seriously too

[Minhosa]

Presume the increase in people doing fantasy football means they get taken more seriously too

 

.

[Guest firetotheworks]

I don't ever remember it not being taken seriously tbh. I dunno where that's come from.

 

Nah - that's definetely right. Back in the early premiership days, they were hardly given any real kudos. Top scorers were where it was at.

 

Hardly anywhere near the level of statistical analysis that is done now and we're still miles behind many American sports for it.

 

:shrug: I remember it completely differently tbh. Or at least creativity and chance creation was massively lauded. Just off the top of my head I remember Cantona, Giggs, Beardsley, Ripley, McManaman, Le Tissier being singled out as being big deals because of their creativity, chance creation, assists, whatever you want to call it.

 

There's a possibility that it really started to become a bigger deal when Beckham was putting it on a plate and became much more a part of goals than the actual goalscorer, but I don't think it was ever ignored.

[Minhosa]

I don't ever remember it not being taken seriously tbh. I dunno where that's come from.

 

Nah - that's definetely right. Back in the early premiership days, they were hardly given any real kudos. Top scorers were where it was at.

 

Hardly anywhere near the level of statistical analysis that is done now and we're still miles behind many American sports for it.

 

:shrug: I remember it completely differently tbh. Or at least creativity and chance creation was massively lauded. Just off the top of my head I remember Cantona, Giggs, Beardsley, Ripley, McManaman, Le Tissier being singled out as being big deals because of their creativity, chance creation, assists, whatever you want to call it.

 

There's a possibility that it really started to become a bigger deal when Beckham was putting it on a plate and became much more a part of goals than the actual goalscorer, but I don't think it was ever ignored.

 

Aye - lauded for being good players/providers or whatever but never in the form of '10 goals and 18 assists last season, Stuart Ripley is amongst the most productive in Europe, whose return was only bettered by xxx at Barcelona'.

 

It may not have been ignored but it was never really presented in a statistical form or even talked about in that way imho.

[Pons Alias]

Sold him in FIFA. He's dead to me now.

[DJ_NUFC]

Sold him in FIFA. He's dead to me now.

 

Who plays FIFA. He's bossing it for me in PES2018. Already leading in assists, and last game I scored a carbon-copy Ritchie-to-Atsu goal

[Guest]

It was about 98/99 when it became pretty big. Remember one of the Sunday papers used to regularly have all the Opta Stats. The season Hamann was here his Opta Index score was the highest in the league for midfielders.

[Kanji]

Hell in hockey you even break down unnassisted and assisted goals and they'll put it in (<Name>) on the stat line if assisted or not

 

Obviously probably tracked by scouts, etc back in the day - it's just so massively important to note - glad its getting the rightful attention now.

[Figures 1-0 Football]

Do you still get credited with an assist if you win a penalty that is scored?

[morla84]

I remember trying to find out how many assists Beardsley got for us a while back n couldn't find a dicky bird

[Guest firetotheworks]

Not as many as you'd think if that premier league page is right. 93/94 he got 8, Cole got the most with 13. 94/95 he got 5, Fox got the most with 11.

 

No accounting for the goals he was involved in or scored himself though.

[Minhosa]

Do you still get credited with an assist if you win a penalty that is scored?

 

Yeah - Pretty sure you do.

[Disco]

Opta only started in 2001 hence why it's improved massively since then. I do miss the days of having to use your eyes to determine if someone was good though.

[Foluwashola]

Opta only started in 2001 hence why it's improved massively since then. I do miss the days of having to use your eyes to determine if someone was good though.

 

Said it before but the use of stats in football, bar goals (and assists to a degree), is a clear sign that someone knows absolutely nothing about the sport. Sky are attempting to force us to adopt the American model of relying on nothing other than meaningless statistics.

[Jimburst]

Opta only started in 2001 hence why it's improved massively since then. I do miss the days of having to use your eyes to determine if someone was good though.

 

Said it before but the use of stats in football, bar goals (and assists to a degree), is a clear sign that someone knows absolutely nothing about the sport. Sky are attempting to force us to adopt the American model of relying on nothing other than meaningless statistics.

 

That's just not true. There might be too much importance placed on them, but statistics in context are a very strong method of analysis, and can give insights into less glamorous aspects of the game that are just as important. Distance covered, passing accuracy, key chances created, tackles. All important descriptive statistics if used properly and in context.

[Mole_Toonfan]

No one uses them properly or in context though.

 

That's the problem.

[Disco]

No one uses them properly or in context though.

 

That's the problem.

 

For me they should supplement your opinions/arguments not be your opinions/arguments.

[Guest firetotheworks]

It's all about balance like Jim says. Over-reliance on gut instinct and over-reliance on stats are both daft. I'm more in favour of gut instinct and using your eyes over stats, but that doesn't mean that stats are without worth. Stats will often show you that your gut instincts were wrong. There's no stat out there that's going to account for certain things though, it's why it used to do my head in when raw facts were presented about Ben Arfa without taking into account any of immeasurable factors in play.

[Foluwashola]

Opta only started in 2001 hence why it's improved massively since then. I do miss the days of having to use your eyes to determine if someone was good though.

 

Said it before but the use of stats in football, bar goals (and assists to a degree), is a clear sign that someone knows absolutely nothing about the sport. Sky are attempting to force us to adopt the American model of relying on nothing other than meaningless statistics.

 

That's just not true. There might be too much importance placed on them, but statistics in context are a very strong method of analysis, and can give insights into less glamorous aspects of the game that are just as important. Distance covered, passing accuracy, key chances created, tackles. All important descriptive statistics if used properly and in context.

 

Key chances created is probably the main one used that gets on me tits. Utter bobbins.

[Jimburst]

Opta only started in 2001 hence why it's improved massively since then. I do miss the days of having to use your eyes to determine if someone was good though.

 

Said it before but the use of stats in football, bar goals (and assists to a degree), is a clear sign that someone knows absolutely nothing about the sport. Sky are attempting to force us to adopt the American model of relying on nothing other than meaningless statistics.

 

That's just not true. There might be too much importance placed on them, but statistics in context are a very strong method of analysis, and can give insights into less glamorous aspects of the game that are just as important. Distance covered, passing accuracy, key chances created, tackles. All important descriptive statistics if used properly and in context.

 

Key chances created is probably the main one used that gets on me tits. Utter bobbins.

 

What's up with it? If you've put it on a plate for your striker and he fluffs his chance, you've still done your job.

[Jimburst]

It's all about balance like Jim says. Over-reliance on gut instinct and over-reliance on stats are both daft. I'm more in favour of gut instinct and using your eyes over stats, but that doesn't mean that stats are without worth. Stats will often show you that your gut instincts were wrong. There's no stat out there that's going to account for certain things though, it's why it used to do my head in when raw facts were presented about Ben Arfa without taking into account any of immeasurable factors in play.

 

Aye, of course. Football is about entertainment, and you can't measure that with (particularly well) statistics. If we're talking about arguments over player efficacy, accuracy or other discrete data, then obviously statistics are important.

 

A: "player x always gives the ball away"

B: "Not true, he has x% pass accuracy, above league average"