Some interesting stats in particular in the article from thefreekick.
http://www.thefreekick.com/board/ind...irish-players/
Printable View
Some interesting stats in particular in the article from thefreekick.
http://www.thefreekick.com/board/ind...irish-players/
Interesting. Stephen Hunt, as a winger, can hardly be expected to have a high pass completion rate though - assuming crosses are counted as passes. Hunt is not even expected to "control a game" either.
A totally underwhelming half-season all round though and the injuries have been frightening. Some bright spots though: Clark, Cunningham (pre-injury), Long, Meyler's return...
Andy Keogh is on a season long loan with Cardiff. Understandable that he hasn't had a shot on goal this season in the EPL.
Anyways, with the exception of minutes played, I don't really see the value of statistics like these as there're too many variables unaccounted for. For example, is every completed/ uncompleted pass made on the field of play comparable?
Disclaimer: that's my post on thefreekickQuote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
I know some people don't like stats in soccer, I just happen to believe they're not utilised enough and certainly not widely available enough. I know you can only read a certain amount into passing statistics for example and variables like positions come into play as Stuttgart88 has pointed out but by comparing players in similar roles you can begin to form views about their influence and their passing ability.
e.g. McCarthy passes the ball more often and more successfully than Wilson. That's not to say he is a better player but he's likely a more natural passer of the ball. The styles of play of their respective teams probably influences those statistics but you can similarly see that Whelan is more involved than Wilson etc. You can't draw outright conclusions but you can see trends and make some use of that.
On the Keogh point, that wasn't supposed to ignore the fact he's on loan at Cardiff but to just point out (badly) that we don't have many strikers getting game time in the EPL which is where 90% of our players are based.
Stats aren't for everyone but I find them useful.
Original article is at http://thefreekick.com/blog/2011/01/...irish-players/ by the way which has the links to the database and the various supporting diagrams etc.
Interesting, albeit bleak reading.
McCarthy's passing success is pleasingly not of surprise. Hopefully he'll be back in business soon and I'll have an excuse to watch Wigan again. Hunt and Whelan being hit and miss is symptomatic of the average quality of player we currently 'enjoy'.
I'd add Coleman to that list and hope they can collectively push on and give us that infusion of quality we need.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Of what use football statistics have, they can not be viewed in isolation - ie you need to see the game to form an opinion on the statistics. Team styles of play, individual player instructions, team strength, opposition team strength, playing at home/ away, individual personal circumstances (injury/ tireness/ new to the team/ little game time etc etc all have a massive bearing on those statistics - variables that are not adequately taken into consideration. Take for example the game between ManU and Stoke last night and compare the performances of Wilson and Gibson. If we take for example Gibson's passing chart - note the high number of short passes that go sideways or backwards. Wilson's chart differs considerably from Gibson (despite playing in a similar position). There's a greater depth to his range of passing, a lot more of his passes go forward than Gibson's. Can we form an opinion that Gibson is a better passer of the ball than Wilson because of his higher success rate? I don't think so. Why? - Gibson played in a team that dominated possession - a lot of passes that go sideways or backwards are unchallenged by the opposition - especially an opposition that is intent on sitting deep, hence an explanation for his high success rate. Wilson's Stoke were primarily interested in keeping it tight, creating on the break. Wilson's passes cover a longer distance that Gibson suggesting Stoke's style of play - namely quick breaks and balls into space, and hence an explanation for his lower pass success rate. The statistics do not offer explanations as to why Gibson was much more successful than Wilson in his passing or as to why Wilson played more ball forward and at a longer distance than Gibson. Watching the actual game reveals why.Quote:
Originally Posted by therock67
We've never had many strikers operating in the top division of English football (not in recent memory anyways). :DQuote:
Originally Posted by therock67
Indeed. USA '94 springs to mind. Tommy Coyne, John Aldridge, David Kelly and Tony Cascarino were our strikers - plus Quinn before he got injured. Coyne was playing in Scotland, Aldridge and Kelly in the second tier, and Cascarino was in the reserves for Chelsea. Only Quinn could claim to be a regular top-flght starter. Same for 2002 - Keane and Quinn didn't start too many games the season beforehand, while Connolly and Morrison were in the second tier. The current trend is nothing new.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
BUt we have had Robbie Keane and Doyle over the last few years playing top flight football, so you get used to having them. And when you see people like Marcus Bent getting a squad place in the EPL every year it's disheartening when someone like Keogh isn't there.
Although we've had a few bright sparks, I've a feeling the overall picture is very bleak. We've got a glut of midfielders coming through that fit into the combatitive mould (and Darron Gibson) and we've a few full backs that are getting people excited, but that's it.
As has been indicated stats can be misleading, a sideways pass going nowhere counts the same a defence splitting game wining pass,
I think those with the best pass rates tend to be defensive mid-fielders as they do more of the former.
It is much harder to make passes in the opponents half so attackers will have poor rates, also defenders clearances are largely pot luck
as to where they go.
I think passes could be qualified by the number of yards gained perhaps.
Things like fouls won would also be helpful.
Agreed completely at needing to see games to make proper judgements. Statistics aren't supposed to replace analysis of games but they can add to it or give clues on performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
I think they can be discounted too much though. e.g. I watched that ManU v Stoke game last night and Wilson was ok in a protecting midfield but he didn't pass the ball as well as Gibson did. Now there are obvious reasons for this such as the quality of his teammates and the more direct style of Stoke but I think it's going too far to say that Gibson isn't a better passer of the ball. I haven't been Gibson's biggest fan (because I don't think he's always been influential enough) but he's a more accurate passer of the ball than Wilson.
It's all about opinions anyway but if stats are used to compare players in similar positions or to compare players on the same team then they can at least support opinions. Last night Wilson gave the ball away more than anyone else for Stoke other than Etherington. I don't think he played all that badly, and I'd rate him higher than Delap who contributed very little, but he didn't shine among his teammates in terms of accuracy. What he did do well was get more involved than many others.
Gibson, on the other hand, was as accurate as usual last night. He's played alongside Fletcher a few times and usually falls way behind him in terms of touches of the ball because Fletcher is a more dynamic, and at this stage anyway a more influential, player. There wasn't that much between them last night though, particularly given Gibson's substitution, so I think that's an encouraging comparison from an Irish perspective. Gibson had the third most passes in the 90 minutes (behind Fletcher and Rafael) which is a decent output for a guy who only played 78 mins. He played in a role that gets on the ball more obviously but he was statistically more involved than he was against Birmingham last week. That was obvious to people watching it but it's also reflected in the stats.
Anyway this is all just opinion. Stats can be misleading and are only as useful as how careful the interpretation is.
Here's a link to a review of those Irish performances in that game for anyone interested.