You can tell which posters didn't do well at maths at school.
@Kamaro011 took longer than I thought…In before the cool kids call you a dinosaur.
Press resistant is a classic.High press.
Beating the press.
Press resistant.
Between the lines.
@Kamaro011 took longer than I thought…
Gotten = got or become......Always found the crusade against xG really strange (but maybe I shouldn’t knowing the average football fan’s resistance to anything that sounds new). Nearly every team in the football league uses it. I wouldn’t be surprised if you asked Pep and he thought it was the second most important stat after actual goals. Why? Because it’s the best predictor of success, that’s literally what it was designed for. If you’re getting points but your xG is shite then it should be ringing alarm bells because it means you’re getting lucky and eventually your luck is going to run out (look at United this year who based on performances should be 12th).
Expected values have been around for literally hundreds of years and have been used in everything from sport to the stock market to computer science. It’s not new. It’s just that we’ve gotten better at measuring it in football thanks to computers.
If you are given the ability to see if your results are down to luck or actual performances, why would you not use it? Why give your opponents the competitive advantage? What’s people’s problem with it exactly?
Subtle....Offense
I find that offensive
only just but both hugely overrated by football peopleAllardyce was far more successful than Hughes.
Very true, but like a lot of things in life it's become over complicated and in many cases unnecessarily.All joking aside, in a multibillion pound industry it shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise that every team will look at every detail, however minuscule it may be to gain an advantage.
Sports science has dragged the game into the modern era and benefited it overall.
If you’re not a fan of it all it’s easy enough to ignore. I’d be surprised if it was aimed at the demographic we have on here tbh.I include myself in that as a mid 40 year old.
Yeah I don’t tend to study stats myself and ignore them mostly but can see how a younger generation brought up on them would feel differently.Very true, but like a lot of things in life it's become over complicated and in many cases unnecessarily.
Sports science is an incredible addition to football and all sports and specialised coaching has vastly improved players technic.
But a vast majority of stats are crazy and not for me a true indication of a game or a players ability.
It’s crazy that they can’t use iPads for that too!And coaches when.a sub comes on, showing players miniature flip charts full of what to do....
They had one for a sub keeper the other week.... what did they say to him?
"OK when they shoot you save it..... then roll the ball out to one.pf the players wearing the white shirts......"
If it was the predicted distance run.That's totally reductionist. In that case why bother with any stats at all? Why bother with tactics? Just stick 22 blokes on the pitch and tell them to go at it. Then you can enjoy your true randomness. People don't love the game because it's totally random, they love it because it's a perfect mixture of random chance and skill.
Nobody can or is trying to take the unpredictability out of the game - in fact, if that unpredictability didn't exist then there'd be no need for xG, it exists purely to measure the unpredictability.
Never seen people get so upset over the existence of a bloody number. Totally strange. Why are people not like this about possession %? Shots on target? Distance run? They're all just numbers.
People have differing views on which stats they think are bollocks. That doesn’t mean that they all are bollocks as they are all metrics giving some insight into the game.If it was the predicted distance run.
Or xg of possession then everyone would think that was bollocks aswell
It's a well known own fact that 63% of all statistics are made upPeople have differing views on which stats they think are bollocks. That doesn’t mean that they all are bollocks as they are all metrics giving some insight into the game.
Of course stats can be skewed to fit a narrative, but most football technical stats from OPTA aren’t until whoever uses them to prove whatever point they want to make.It's a well known own fact that 63% of all statistics are made up
The "Assist" stat can be totally misleading. A pass bounces of someone arse and a player scores =Assist.People have differing views on which stats they think are bollocks. That doesn’t mean that they all are bollocks as they are all metrics giving some insight into the game.
People have differing views on which stats they think are bollocks. That doesn’t mean that they all are bollocks as they are all metrics giving some insight into the game.
Please stop being sensibly analytical.