The one true problem of the side today

[ArthurQPR_NYC]

Arthur mentioned gladwin, he wears our shirt so will support him but needs another season on loan at league 1.looks terrified when I've seen him,hope he proves me wrong.

thats what i meant. i saw him at barnet when we played dundee, but not seen enough of the fella. im raising the question though if hes better than tozser. (surely has to be)

[ArthurQPR_NYC]

Would go one of 2 ways wouldn't it; either he has a stormer and scores, or he gets a red in the first half for a karate kick to Huddlestone's chest before giving the ref a nipple cripple on his way down the tunnel.

lol. made laugh, that one

[Wegerle's barnet]

should be starting with Faurlin and Luongo with Chery advanced in the middle of the pitch. All 3 can play under pressure unlike Honree and Tozser.

[nasser95]

I wanted to bring this thread back up top because I was doing a bit of research into the stats again and saw something quite interesting with regards to Henry (and Toszer).

To me, the sign of a good midfield duo is a lot of tackles and interceptions with one player having a high forward pass success rate. This limits the amount of work the defence has to do meaning they can get their positioning right when the ball does break through.

I took a look at all the players who started at CM for us this season playing the 4231 we have been going with. Going through each match individually, you can see that the players who have played at CM/CDM are: Luongo, Henry, Faurlin, Doughty, Tozser. So I took a look at 4 key statistics for these guys in all these matches. Tackle success and frequency; Forward Pass as a proportion of total passes and frequency; Interception frequency; Aerial Duel success and Frequency. I looked at aerial duels because we have a tendency to let the ball bounce in midfield and make it much more difficult to defend. Going through these stats, you can make a decent judgement as to who is going to be the best midfield choice. There is one stat missing which I don't get access to but I'm going to try to which is distance covered.

What I found was the following tables of data:





What this suggests to me is that we should definitely start Faurlin whenever he is 100% fit as he is key to holding the opposition off. The player alongside him though should be either Luongo or Doughty. To be making 5 and 8 tackles per game respectively is a crazy amount and what that does for us is give us some suggestion to further highlight their energy and closing down of the ball.

[ArthurQPR_NYC]

extremely troubling that Henry's numbers in 7 appearances, are just about double Doughty's in 1 appearance. Am I reading that right nass!?? Henry made 13 successful tackles total in 7 appearance, while Doughty made 8 in 1 appearance!??

[bakes8]

Stats don't look good for our Karl.

[nasser95]

extremely troubling that Henry's numbers in 7 appearances, are just about double Doughty's in 1 appearance. Am I reading that right nass!?? Henry made 13 successful tackles total in 7 appearance, while Doughty made 8 in 1 appearance!??

Note that these are appearances where the player started at CM or CDM (as one of the two behind the attacking midfield trio), hence why Luongo only has 2 appearances in this list.

As for the stats, they are indeed correct with this regard but also look at the number of interceptions made as they ought to balance with tackles for the slower, more experienced players. Hence why only faurlin has more interceptions per game than Henry.

[nasser95]

Stats don't look good for our Karl.

Indeed they don't. He does look beyond it this season for some odd reason.

[Hertford Hoop]

Do you live and breathe stats Nass?

[nasser95]

Do you live and breathe stats Nass?

Stats in sports have the potential to be huge. It's been proven in american football, basketball and baseball but people say football is too fluid to be statistically analysed. That's where people like myself come in, we want to show that stats are a huge element of the game to the point where so much can be based on stats decisions-wise. The issue is that people are stuck in their ways and refuse to accept the fact that the stats are facts. So I have a lot more work convincing people that stats are important than someone who says they saw something when in fact they didn't. It may come across as a result that all I do is talk about stats and care about stats, but in truth, I just have to hold my own against eyes.

[Romford Hoop]

Don't need any stats to tell me that Henry has been rubbish this season, stats can mean everything or nothing depending on how you look at them.

Would hate to pick a team based on tackles made etc, you can make 1 tackle and save a certain goal, or 15 tackles on the half way line that do very little to affect play.

[nasser95]

Don't need any stats to tell me that Henry has been rubbish this season, stats can mean everything or nothing depending on how you look at them.

Would hate to pick a team based on tackles made etc, you can make 1 tackle and save a certain goal, or 15 tackles on the half way line that do very little to affect play.

Great understanding, apparently a tackle on the half way line does very little. You realise that means that 1) the defenders have less to do, 2) you can start a quick counter attack from the half way line.

For your understanding, of course you don't pick a player on just tackles made, but you interpret numerous stats and see a very common trend that a player is better than many give him credit for Based purely on what they see such as Claude Makelele or Mathieu Flamini who do a lot of unseen work. Just because your eyes interpret things one way, doesn't make that right. Stats can give you everything if you want them to.

[Romford Hoop]

Your biggest problem is you try to belittle people and insult their opinions, I can make up my own mind just watching a game as to how badly/well we played. No stat in the world can change how you personally view a game.

However you smartly tell everyone how wrong their opinion is.

I have been going to Rangers since 1965, over 1000 home games, I think I can make a decision on a game without useless stats and numbers.

The great Stan Bowles was only interested in 1 stat, what weight was the horse carrying in the 3.10, one of the greatest Rangers players ever, do you think tackles made and headers won bothered him.

[nasser95]

Your biggest problem is you try to belittle people and insult their opinions, I can make up my own mind just watching a game as to how badly/well we played. No stat in the world can change how you personally view a game.

However you smartly tell everyone how wrong their opinion is.

I have been going to Rangers since 1965, over 1000 home games, I think I can make a decision on a game without useless stats and numbers.

The great Stan Bowles was only interested in 1 stat, what weight was the horse carrying in the 3.10, one of the greatest Rangers players ever, do you think tackles made and headers won bothered him.

Of course not but going back decades to a time when stats weren't usable (A time before Billy Beane's Oakland A's) won't make your point any more valid. As the game ages, so too does the way we interpret it. Just because you've gone to more games than me because of your ability to do so, doesn't make your point any more valid than mine.

My statement is very simple. The ability to interpret the game with your eyes is a very simple one and something that many people can do as a result. This isn't a bad thing but it means it is open to interpretation. This interpretation leads to errors (naturally) because everyone sees things differently. Some people miss things because their eyes don't see them. Stats are different. Stats are quantifiable. I can safely say that a statistic is 100 percent fact, because it is. There are no ifs and buts about statistics, they are proven. The interpretation of them is what matters but the raw data, that shows everything your eyes see and more. It is up to analysts to then decipher it into information the manager wants to use, or information that suggests a particular change to gamestyle is needed.

[Stanley]

Great understanding, apparently a tackle on the half way line does very little. You realise that means that 1) the defenders have less to do, 2) you can start a quick counter attack from the half way line.

For your understanding, of course you don't pick a player on just tackles made, but you interpret numerous stats and see a very common trend that a player is better than many give him credit for Based purely on what they see such as Claude Makelele or Mathieu Flamini who do a lot of unseen work. Just because your eyes interpret things one way, doesn't make that right. Stats can give you everything if you want them to.

Then of course there's all the hard work that goes on OFF the ball that mostly goes unnoticed (because people are watching the actual play) but is very important.