• stats are for idiots.

Posted: **Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:34 pm**

does anyone enjoy the use of statistics in modern football ? just watching MOTD 2, and they are using graphics to highlight the dominance down one side of the pitch by man city with percentages. I think the golf loving, american football puppet mark chappers chapman will be in his element with the dullards on computers producing tidy mathematical picture shows for every single aspect of a game, but it is tiresome. surely it is a game of flair and passion, these number crunching bores are obsessed with turning everything into a graph . same with the computerised analysis, isolating flaws of defenders with cutsey red lines and dragging players about to where "they should have been " is nonsense. it was bad enough having to see heat maps and how far each player runs during a match, this is just becoming like the crass and dimwitted american football.The turf has witnessed thousands of games for over a century without any of this pigswill, but its like some advertising company has taken over the sport.
as a FOOTNOTE, this programme was inevitaby centred on why spurs lost, and why arsenal lost. ZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Posted: **Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:47 pm**

The type of in depth analysis has informed new approaches to coaching and elevated the standard of the game.

Posted: **Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:52 pm**

what_no_pies wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:47 pm
The type of in depth analysis has informed new approaches to coaching and elevated the standard of the game.

and doubtless that statement is based on more statistics. its meaningless gibberish for sports boffins stealing a living.
[

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:38 am**

Even the BBC’s line scores include “assists”! Why? Who really cares?

: D0824E3B-5D3C-44B9-8DF5-0DC69C863D32.jpeg (1.12 MiB) Viewed 4791 times

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:16 am**

RammyClaret61 wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:38 am
Even the BBC’s line scores include “assists”! Why? Who really cares?

D0824E3B-5D3C-44B9-8DF5-0DC69C863D32.jpeg

It's so people can work out their fantasy league scores!

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:21 am**

Wile E Coyote wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:34 pm
does anyone enjoy the use of statistics in modern football ? just watching MOTD 2, and they are using graphics to highlight the dominance down one side of the pitch by man city with percentages. I think the golf loving, american football puppet mark chappers chapman will be in his element with the dullards on computers producing tidy mathematical picture shows for every single aspect of a game, but it is tiresome. surely it is a game of flair and passion, these number crunching bores are obsessed with turning everything into a graph . same with the computerised analysis, isolating flaws of defenders with cutsey red lines and dragging players about to where "they should have been " is nonsense. it was bad enough having to see heat maps and how far each player runs during a match, this is just becoming like the crass and dimwitted american football.The turf has witnessed thousands of games for over a century without any of this pigswill, but its like some advertising company has taken over the sport.
as a FOOTNOTE, this programme was inevitaby centred on why spurs lost, and why arsenal lost. ZZZZZZZZZZZ.

Yet he still watches every week.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:47 am**

It is indeed a game of flair and passion but that is absolutely no reason why the statistics or trends that lie behind what goes on during a game shouldn't be studied and commented upon. It depends how far you go, I suppose, your ordinary fan might not be too affected or fussed by the apparent "minor" details but coaches, players and support staff will be. Success depends on it.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:52 am**

I love stats, 50% of my friends do as well, the other one doesn't like stats at least 75% of the time.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:38 am**

RammyClaret61 wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:38 am
Even the BBC’s line scores include “assists”! Why? Who really cares?

D0824E3B-5D3C-44B9-8DF5-0DC69C863D32.jpeg

Bookmakers and Punters.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:43 am**

bfcjg wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:52 am
I love stats, 50% of my friends do as well, the other one doesn't like stats at least 75% of the time.

You have two whole friends? Well done

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:56 am**

what_no_pies wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:47 pm
The type of in depth analysis has informed new approaches to coaching and elevated the standard of the game.

If so why don’t they use the same principle to highlight the number of times a player falls over claiming he’s been shot or decapitated? The standard of the game has not been elevated by showing this shite to the general public, it is simply there to justify the existence of pundits, to make them appear knowledgable. After all they have to justify their ridiculous salaries don’t they? Without them MOTD would move seamlessly between games and either show more actual game time or make it mercifully shorter.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:57 am**

Does that mean we've been taken over by idiots?

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:59 am**

RammyClaret61 wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:38 am
Even the BBC’s line scores include “assists”! Why? Who really cares?

D0824E3B-5D3C-44B9-8DF5-0DC69C863D32.jpeg

Apparently there's grown men who play a fantasy football type game, where stats, assists and goals are important to their points.

It might be for their benefit so they dont need to be on their phone at the pub, or cheer a Vardy goal as he is tripple magical boosted captain that game.

My son used to play, but as he said this summer "dad I'm 14 now" so didnt join a league some of my mates set up.
Just to add my mates are 35-40... beggars belief

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:00 am**

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:21 am
Yet he still watches every week.

Not really a very clever response mate. Presumably he watches it for the relatively small amount of football that’s on. I think you are kind of proving his point. Personally if I watch the programme I skip through all the games and the intervening crap straight to Burnley’s games, which we all know is on last.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:05 am**

I always think the possession stat is misleading if you haven’t seen the game. I like seeing the assists and don’t think enough credit or recording of it is done. Someone who gets a 5 yard tap in gets all the credit but but all the skill and creativity could have been in making that goal.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:07 am**

houseboy wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:56 am
If so why don’t they use the same principle to highlight the number of times a player falls over claiming he’s been shot or decapitated? The standard of the game has not been elevated by showing this shite to the general public, it is simply there to justify the existence of pundits, to make them appear knowledgable. After all they have to justify their ridiculous salaries don’t they? Without them MOTD would move seamlessly between games and either show more actual game time or make it mercifully shorter.

Got to agree about the pundits...The critical analysis of Someone making a mistake really p!sses me off.by former player in particular....Like who's never made a mistake? No mistakes no 3..1 1..4 results for example. The OP is bang on.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:12 am**

dibraidio wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:57 am
Does that mean we've been taken over by idiots?

This country is famous for Idiots.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:18 am**

MACCA wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:59 am
Apparently there's grown men who play a fantasy football type game, where stats, assists and goals are important to their points.

It might be for their benefit so they dont need to be on their phone at the pub, or cheer a Vardy goal as he is tripple magical boosted captain that game.

My son used to play, but as he said this summer "dad I'm 14 now" so didnt join a league some of my mates set up.
Just to add my mates are 35-40... beggars belief

Hard to believe isn't it. By the time people get to adult age they should show their maturity by spending x hours per day bickering on an online forum from behind their keyboard

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:28 am**

Belial wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:18 am
Hard to believe isn't it. By the time people get to adult age they should show their maturity by spending x hours per day bickering on an online forum from behind their keyboard

Yep, those people are called losers.
That's why they choose to do it hidden behind a keyboard in total anonymity.

Spoils it for the rest of us who have no life.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:34 am**

Stats are a huge part of the game now. Why wouldn’t fans be shown some? People whinge pundits etc say nothing and when they do offer some insight into the game, still whinge.

But the OP does it just for kicks. Every week there’s a new MOTD thread for some bizarre reason.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:46 am**

Hibsclaret wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:43 am
You have two whole friends? Well done

One now, they fell out over who was the idiotic one.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:06 am**

So is the op just saying they don't understand the stats?

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:06 am**

Don’t watch & don’t listen to the stats, simples!

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am**

Wile E Coyote wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:34 pm
surely it is a game of flair and passion

I think this has been a problem in football for a long time. I am reading a book about the progression of football tactics and even arsenal/Huddersfield's great Herbert Chapman who changed the whole game for a period was very apologetic in how he had changed the game from passionate amateurs being creative to a machine designed to win win win.

As for stats, sometimes football just feels like a giant spreadsheet you can use to gamble. When I was a kid I could spend ours looking at the tables to see who was where and what points they needed. Now I seem to only care about if someone is likely to score over 2.5 goals in a game or get "booking points". When my bet comes in I don't care any more.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:08 am**

For me, watching football is about the spontaneous theatre of the event, the unpredictable outcomes, and the contrasting emotions that bring excitement. Stats on possession or other stuff do nothing at all to add to my enjoyment of the spectacle.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:10 am**

MACCA wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:28 am
Yep, those people are called losers.
That's why they choose to do it hidden behind a keyboard in total anonymity.

Spoils it for the rest of us who have no life.

That is too deep for a Monday morning

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:17 am**

Stats are not for idiots.

But idiots have equal access to stats as intelligent people.

Stats are only as good as how we interpret them.

This works perfectly football. For politics, susbtitute "stats" for "facts".

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:25 am**

One of the best was Traore getting an assist for Wolves' goal on Friday which goes down as an OG

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:34 am**

Firstly please keep on ranting Wile E Coyote. You are one of my favourite posters on here !
I agree with the basic point that many of these stats are pretty meaningless. Has anyone ever said to a mate "It's great that our expected goals figures have been so strong lately". That particular stat is meaningless as far as I'm concerned. The other week on Radio 5's Monday night club the journalist fells, Rory someone , was trying to justify using a stat that measured the quality of assists provided by a team. Sheer gobbledegook.
I see the BBC website report has credited Maguire with an assist for Rashford's goal v Newcastle yesterday. Maguire, from just in advance of the centre circle passed the ball to Rashford who was out on the left hand touchline, marked by the right back. Rashford had to beat the full back twice whilst cutting inside before eventually shooting low and hard past Darlow....I doubt Maguire was boasting about setting Rashford up or that he should be lauded as being a superbly creative player because of his pass. I wonder if the bloke who played a 5-yard pass to Maradona before the latter dribbled through the entire England defence in 1986 was credited with an assist ?

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:18 am**

Someones even written a book about it

: 51n7b3nIY0L._AC_SY580_.jpg (25.4 KiB) Viewed 3997 times

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:36 am**

I wonder if Brian Clough or Bob Paisley or Alex Ferguson would have used so many detailed stats if they had been managing today?

I certainly doubt whether they would have followed the modern trend, when making a substitution, of showing the player a picture of a football pitch and explaining what he is supposed to do there. What are the managers telling players with those photos?

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:39 am**

Stalbansclaret wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:34 am
I see the BBC website report has credited Maguire with an assist for Rashford's goal v Newcastle yesterday. Maguire, from just in advance of the centre circle passed the ball to Rashford who was out on the left hand touchline, marked by the right back. Rashford had to beat the full back twice whilst cutting inside before eventually shooting low and hard past Darlow....I doubt Maguire was boasting about setting Rashford up or that he should be lauded as being a superbly creative player because of his pass.

To be fair, it's the same with goals. Rashford gets credited with just 1 goal for that, as does Aina of Fulham who happened to be in the right place and allowed the ball to bounce in off his chest. Never mind the quality, feel the width, as they say.

I agree that assists are an uninteresting stat.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:41 am**

Stats, generally, can be badly chosen and explained by people presenting them (sometimes on purpose, sometimes not) and people can misinterpret them. (I did a degree in Stats many, many years ago and the first recommended book on the reading list was "How to Lie With Statistics" - a publication that is still in print I believe).

The current pandemic has been an ongoing exemplar of badly chosen/explained/interpreted stats.

In terms of footy, you can take them or leave them as you wish. I think some offer a decent insight into the game, some seem to be pundits just looking for something to say that looks intelligent/interesting.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:47 am**

houseboy wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:00 am
Not really a very clever response mate. Presumably he watches it for the relatively small amount of football that’s on. I think you are kind of proving his point. Personally if I watch the programme I skip through all the games and the intervening crap straight to Burnley’s games, which we all know is on last.

You must have missed his other many posts complaining about MOTD (plus those about Talksport).

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:52 am**

Never was there a truer phrase than...

There are Lies
There are damned Lies
And then there are Statistics...

At the end of the day statistics have never won football matches ... Goals win football matches ... not "expected goals" proper actual "ball in the back of the net" Goals....

I remember we beat Liverpool a few seasons ago with less than 20% possession and 2 shots

: Screenshot_20210222-115057_Chrome.jpg (649.52 KiB) Viewed 3934 times

Funnily enough 11 v 11 who compiled these stats couldn't get the managers right

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:54 am**

They’re missing a trick not having a screamometer

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:56 am**

Bosscat wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:52 am
Never was there a truer phrase than...

There are Lies
There are damned Lies
And then there are Statistics...

At the end of the day statistics have never won football matches ... Goals win football matches ... not "expected goals" proper actual "ball in the back of the net" Goals....

I remember we beat Liverpool a few seasons ago with less than 20% possession and 2 shots

Screenshot_20210222-115057_Chrome.jpg

Funnily enough 11 v 11 who compiled these stats couldn't get the managers right

Goals scored is a statistic, so statistics do win football matches.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:59 am**

dsr wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:36 am
I wonder if Brian Clough or Bob Paisley or Alex Ferguson would have used so many detailed stats if they had been managing today?

I certainly doubt whether they would have followed the modern trend, when making a substitution, of showing the player a picture of a football pitch and explaining what he is supposed to do there. What are the managers telling players with those photos?

Explaining to the player what role he has to play in attacking and defending set pieces.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:01 pm**

Tall Paul wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:56 am
Goals scored is a statistic, so statistics do win football matches.

I think the point you may be missing is goals are the ONLY stat that really matters. I believe that’s what he was getting at.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:03 pm**

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:47 am
You must have missed his other many posts complaining about MOTD (plus those about Talksport).

Very probably, but then I don’t really read everything posted on here (which is just as well methinks).

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:05 pm**

64.7% of people would agree with you .....

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:09 pm**

houseboy wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:03 pm
Very probably, but then I don’t really read everything posted on here (which is just as well methinks).

Yes, that is probably a good thing. Wile's hatred of various media output (and inability to find the off button) is fairly well known though.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:13 pm**

houseboy wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:01 pm
I think the point you may be missing is goals are the ONLY stat that really matters. I believe that’s what he was getting at.

What about wins, losses, league points?

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:19 pm**

Stats tell a story, is without them its easy to forget the details, like the time when Jurgen Klopp was our manager the last time we beat Liverpool at Turf Moor.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:24 pm**

Stats are stats and can be used effectively in all areas of life inc football

In normal working environments stats are used as a major consideration in appraisals

Football is no different

Teams usually play to their individual strengths, and opposing teams will want to study stats on how they play the game to try and nullify such formations

Stats can be used to study any individual performance - Yards run, tackles made, shots attempted etc

They are certainly used when identifying potential new signings

It's the future - Sean loves to talk about such things and I still chuckle when remembering his explanation of a particular performance using the notion of "pitch geography"

Regarding something like MOTD I just record it, then watch any highlights and manager's comments fast forwarding through "expert's opinions"

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:51 pm**

Surely the phrase is Stats are for prats..... Stats are for idiots doesn't have the same ring to it.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm**

Tall Paul wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:13 pm
What about wins, losses, league points?

No because all those follow the basic tangible stat of goals. Wins, losses and therefore league position are a result of the one basic stat of goals for and against. Expected goals, player positioning and possession for instance are simply theoretical and do not have any direct effect, only indirectly or not at all.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:25 pm**

That news has come a bit too late for Alan Pace who has placed great faith in player analytics and algorithms with ALK having invested in 2 London based football technology firms AiScout and Player LENS.

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:32 pm**

houseboy wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
No because all those follow the basic tangible stat of goals. Wins, losses and therefore league position are a result of the one basic stat of goals for and against. Expected goals, player positioning and possession for instance are simply theoretical and do not have any direct effect, only indirectly or not at all.

And goals follow from shots, possession, positioning and quality of chances created (which is what expected goals is assigning a number to).

Also, Brighton have scored more goals than us and conceded the same number yet we're above them in the table. How can that be if goals is the only statistic that matters?

Posted: **Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:49 pm**

houseboy wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
No because all those follow the basic tangible stat of goals. Wins, losses and therefore league position are a result of the one basic stat of goals for and against. Expected goals, player positioning and possession for instance are simply theoretical and do not have any direct effect, only indirectly or not at all.

That really isn’t the case whatsoever.

Football fans in general have very little understanding of how the game works and how the game is played and managed.

On the face of it that possession stat Burnley vs Liverpool looks a pretty pointless stat. But leading up to the game we would have looked at the trends in how Liverpool base their attacks and how they use the ball, where and how the effect play. If we’ve taken all that on board and then allowed them possession of the ball in areas they don’t cause problems then it shows as a useless stat of course. But the true sense of that stat is far more in depth than it actually appears. If stats were useless football clubs around the world wouldn't employ people to pick through them each and every day and report back to the manager so he can adjust his tactics based on what he’s told.

Football is far more complex than it actually appears to be. Even routine corner kicks could have had hours of work put into because of weaknesses picked up of the opposition due to stats.

Fans are given access to lots of stuff these days to educate them but they just pass it off as nonsense.

stats are for idiots.

stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.

Re: stats are for idiots.