Matt Ritchie (now playing for Portsmouth)

[themanupstairs]

Key chances created is arguably the best one. Far more indicative of a good player than assists imo.

 

Players get assists if they happened to pass to a guy before he hit a 30 yard goal. If someone is always creating chances they are generally going to be decent.

 

Yup. Joe fucking Allen got an assist for Shaqiri's goal the other day. He did fuck all but pass sideways and Shaqiri did everything else.

[Foluwashola]

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"

 

Which completely ignores the type of situations in which the player gives the ball away. Huge difference between giving the ball away under pressure to giving the ball away from a hoof forward.

 

With 'key chance' it's also completely arbitrary. Some nerd in a box determining what a key chance. I'd much rather talk about genuine football than numbers.

[Happinesstan]

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"

 

Maybe he's easily tackled.

[Mole_Toonfan]

No one is determining anything tbf, all it is is a pass which leads to a goalscoring opportunity. A pass to an assist so to speak, something that Xavi was king of.

 

Doon is right in the sense that doing that type of play consistently is more indicative of good player than assists are. Although like all stats it's all relative and should be taken under the proper context.

 

[Happinesstan]

Allen got an assist, and Mbemba didn't.

[Guest firetotheworks]

My favourite stat for showing that they're often meaningless is Messi's (I think) passing accuracy, which at one point was the worst in the league because he was always attempting through balls. I'm not sure that's entirely accurate but it's along those lines. V.I posted it with a link but I can't seem to find it.

[triggs]

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.

Well that's just because Sissoko used to get really high chances created numbers and it didn't tie in with your views

[Guest firetotheworks]

Now you've gone and done it.

[triggs]

My favourite stat for showing that they're often meaningless is Messi's (I think) passing accuracy, which at one point was the worst in the league because he was always attempting through balls. I'm not sure that's entirely accurate but it's along those lines. V.I posted it with a link but I can't seem to find it.

Same with most dispossessed players. Neymar is number 1 in Europe this season and think Messi is up there too

[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.

Well that's just because Sissoko used to get really high chances created numbers and it didn't tie in with your views

 

Not at all, I've been fairly consistent in my hatred of shite stats. They certainly weren't needed to confirm Sissoko was shite, despite your protestations.

[triggs]

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.

Well that's just because Sissoko used to get really high chances created numbers and it didn't tie in with your views

 

Not at all, I've been fairly consistent in my hatred of shite stats. They certainly weren't needed to confirm Sissoko was shite, despite your protestations.

This is about the chances created stat. You dismissed it because Sissoko was good at it. By the way you didn't think Sissoko was shit. You thought that if only he tried he'd be the best player of all time

[HawK]

Yeah i mean it's all about how you use it really and not all stat are equal. I just think chances created is actually a really good one. That and interceptions are worth looking at.  Pass Accuracy if you weigh it against forward/backwards passes.

 

I like chances created because you can see good players in bad teams. Of course some players will get more assists when Aguero is finishing for instance, but if someone is creating a s*** load of chances for a gash striker you can pretty much safely predict they'll get more assists in a better team.

 

Ceteris parabus, but arguably such a player wouldn't be as much the fulcrum of the teams' creativity as he would have been, and therefore have less opportunities to create chances.

[Figures 1-0 Football]

triggs cant talk about anything without bringing Sissoko into it

[LRD]

triggs cant talk about anything without bringing Sissoko into it

 

Atsu - gallows

Sissoko - triggs

Neymar - Felipao

 

Amirite?

[triggs]

I don't even think Sissoko is good. My argument has always been that he tried his best for us and he just isn't that good

[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"

 

Which completely ignores the type of situations in which the player gives the ball away. Huge difference between giving the ball away under pressure to giving the ball away from a hoof forward.

 

With 'key chance' it's also completely arbitrary. Some nerd in a box determining what a key chance. I'd much rather talk about genuine football than numbers.

 

Aye, so you use them in context. You don't say "Ben Arfa loses the ball all the time, look at his stats" when he's trying to beat people 10 times a game, then compare him to sideways pass Jack Colback and say Colback is the better player. You might, however, use stats to back up an opinion you already hold from actually watching football.

 

I just think they're useful indicators of particular quality, but can obviously never describe a whole player or a whole match.

[Kasper]

I can see why people dislike the stats. They are often used in a very dumbed down way to keep idiots thinking they understand something.

[Hanshithispantz]

"to the naked eye"

[Guest firetotheworks]

Lest we forget.

 

Fuck my life, why would anyone want to be the Phil Neville of a football club?

 

I would like to formally apologise for all the time I gave Pardew. I always said that if it turned out to be wrong I would make a full and frank apology and I do that today. I am extremely sorry. It was the wrong decision and I am clear about that.

[Guest chicken little]

you can't beat getting into town early on a saturday, couple of pints with your mates before all heading to the ground to analyse the match.

[Hanshithispantz]

Lest we forget.

 

Fuck my life, why would anyone want to be the Phil Neville of a football club?

 

I would like to formally apologise for all the time I gave Pardew. I always said that if it turned out to be wrong I would make a full and frank apology and I do that today. I am extremely sorry. It was the wrong decision and I am clear about that.

class, cannot remember that.

[Hanshithispantz]

Had to look back at the original quote:

 

“The important thing is that Davide Santon has got a long-term future at this club because he’s still only young and is gaining such experience.

 

“He can play right-back, left-back and now he has shown can play central midfield, so you’re looking at one very important player.

 

“When I look at someone like Phil Neville, Santon could in my opinion be the Phil Neville of this football club, a kind of unsung hero like Phil was at Man U.

 

“You look at when they won trophies and he was very important.”

 

that's probably not even in his top 5 either.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Ritchie is arguably our key player, he drives the team on, leads by example and creates problems for the opposition. Now that his fitness is back up, I can only see him growing as a player and becoming a top player for us in the PL. My kind of player.

[Bimpy474]

Had to look back at the original quote:

 

“The important thing is that Davide Santon has got a long-term future at this club because he’s still only young and is gaining such experience.

 

“He can play right-back, left-back and now he has shown can play central midfield, so you’re looking at one very important player.

 

“When I look at someone like Phil Neville, Santon could in my opinion be the Phil Neville of this football club, a kind of unsung hero like Phil was at Man U.

 

“You look at when they won trophies and he was very important.”

 

that's probably not even in his top 5 either.

 

I said it at the time, what a thing to aim at, to be as good as Phil Neville  :lol:

[Mole_Toonfan]

Funniest thing is Phil Neville quote is what triggered Ian

 

Of all the things.