Darron Gibson

[Irwin3]

He had played reasonably well when he joined. I agree it's neither here nor there with regards to Gibson, I wasn't being overly serious with my little timeline thing.

I just find your stats ridiculous. United were a poorer side with Gibson in the team, of that I have no doubt. So then to use stats about PL games without defeat etc to build him up is naive to put it in a nice way. I remember one week in particular last season where United were trailing 2-0 to Blackpool in a midweek game. They took Gibson off at half time and went on to win 3-2. A few days later he started again against Southampton in the FA Cup. They were losing 1-0 after about an hour, substituted Gibson and went on to win 2-1. These two games, off the top of my head, would have contributed nicely to the number of United wins where Gibson started, but hardly indicates anything positive about his contribution when it's broken down. That's what I'm on about.

Do you remember that United started both of these games with one winger (Nani v. Blackpool, Obertan v. Southampton)? Do you remember that Gibson was basically playing LM v. Blackpool? Do you remember that both Blackpool goals were from corners? Do you remember that Gibson had Uniteds only shot on target in the 1st half v. Blackpool? Do you remember that Rooney was also subbed off?

Gibson was a squad player at United. A few minutes here and there to give other players a rest. He never lost a game in 10/11 and has a nice shiny medal for his efforts however spectacular or not they were.

The stat is PL games without defeat. It's a fun stat. It's at 27. Have fun counting.

[DeLorean]

I remember that Gibson was non existant in both games, clearly one shot on target aside! I wasn't blaming him for the goals conceded and I do indeed remember that they were from corners, something that has stuck with me because Alex Ferguson claimed that Charlie Adam was worth £10m for his corners alone, when Liverpool were trying to sign him. I don't care if Rooney was also subbed off, I don't think Rooney's progress is being monitored on here and is slightly more proven than Gibson even if he did have a bad night. I don't think he was playing as far wide as you suggest either, as Rooney/Berbatov were probably dropping deep left to make it more of a 4-5-1. I certainly don't remember him hogging the left touchline or anything like it.

Anyway, my point was that the stats are misleading as they will go down as United victories when Gibson started, even though they were in dire straits until he went off. I didn't mean to bore people with analysis of a game from a year and a half ago.

A fun stat is exactly what it is, I'm glad we can agree on something.

[paul_oshea]

Its a pity Ferguson didnt pay attention to those great stats provided earlier, if he had Gibson would still be there and have got them to a CL final.

[SkStu]

save us Tetsujin!

[paul_oshea]

Where did you get that picture of Joe in his Pyjamas?

[SkStu]

my phone...

[Irwin3]

I remember that Gibson was non existant in both games, clearly one shot on target aside! I wasn't blaming him for the goals conceded and I do indeed remember that they were from corners, something that has stuck with me because Alex Ferguson claimed that Charlie Adam was worth £10m for his corners alone, when Liverpool were trying to sign him. I don't care if Rooney was also subbed off, I don't think Rooney's progress is being monitored on here and is slightly more proven than Gibson even if he did have a bad night. I don't think he was playing as far wide as you suggest either, as Rooney/Berbatov were probably dropping deep left to make it more of a 4-5-1. I certainly don't remember him hogging the left touchline or anything like it.

Anyway, my point was that the stats are misleading as they will go down as United victories when Gibson started, even though they were in dire straits until he went off. I didn't mean to bore people with analysis of a game from a year and a half ago.

A fun stat is exactly what it is, I'm glad we can agree on something.

How can stats be misleading. They are what they are. No-one has put up Gibson's United victory stats or his FA Cup stats so why have you even brought that up.

You don't like Gibson. You haven't seen him play well in 3 years. You didn't think he'd even make it at a PL club. Great. Thankfully there are managers who do like him and are willing to play him.

Barring Evans and Fletcher, Gibson is the only United youth player to play 50+ games for United since the "class of '92". I wonder why SAF kept him at the club for so long.

David Moyes signed him for the 7th best team in the country. Obviously he's been fooled as Gibson has never played well in the last 3/4 years. You should get on the phone to Moyes and tell him he's made a mistake.

Stats aren't the be all and end all. They are largely fun but they objective and you can take them or leave them. Gibson is playing great. For me he is the best midfielder in the squad. Not because of his unbeaten stat, but because he is the best passer, shooter, set piece taker out of the current four by a distance. He also has the best football brain and education and probably has the best physical attributes as well.

All the snide comments from yourself and others just because you don't like a stat are baffling. No-one has said that a team should be picked on stats. The fact that he has been playing great obviously doesn't matter to some of you.

[Charlie Darwin]

I don't think anyone was claiming Gibson's unbeaten streak was solely down to his own form - clearly, if he had been playing that well he'd have played in more games for United and ironically would have lost the unblemished record. But he has been vital in Everton's post-Christmas recovery this year, and the stats clearly show that the team performs better when he is in the side.

[tricky_colour]

He had played reasonably well when he joined. I agree it's neither here nor there with regards to Gibson, I wasn't being overly serious with my little timeline thing.

I just find your stats ridiculous. United were a poorer side with Gibson in the team, of that I have no doubt. So then to use stats about PL games without defeat etc to build him up is naive to put it in a nice way. I remember one week in particular last season where United were trailing 2-0 to Blackpool in a midweek game. They took Gibson off at half time and went on to win 3-2. A few days later he started again against Southampton in the FA Cup. They were losing 1-0 after about an hour, substituted Gibson and went on to win 2-1. These two games, off the top of my head, would have contributed nicely to the number of United wins where Gibson started, but hardly indicates anything positive about his contribution when it's broken down. That's what I'm on about.

I would not say stats are ridiculous, granted they can be a bit misleading at times.
Anyhow, 'just for fun' I am going to look back at some of his Man U stats and see how man u faired "with or with out him" to miss-quote U2.

We should see that Man U did better without him. ( might take me a while!!)

[tricky_colour]

2010/2011 P12 W10 D1 L1 season P38 W23 D11 L4

Bit of maths
P38 W23 D11 L4 over all
P12 W10 D01 L1 with darren
----------------
P26 W13 D10 L3 without darren

P38 W31.6 D3.6 L3.6 If darren had played all games.


So they would have won 8.6 more games drew 7.4 less games and lost 0.4 less games.

I may have made the odd error but they did massively better with darren.

However that assumes games were of equal difficulty, which they were not, he didn't play any of the
other top 4 clubs, but did play 2 of the next 2 which he won.

Even so I would still say the stats who Man U were a better team with Darren!!!!

I mean the top four only account for 8 games and it seem they pretty much
drew the lot

[Charlie Darwin]

2010/2011 P12 W10 D1 L1 season P38 W23 D11 L4

Bit of maths
P38 W23 D11 L4 over all
P12 W10 D01 L1 with darren
----------------
P26 W13 D10 L3 without darren

P38 W31.6 D3.6 L3.6 If darren had played all games.


So they would have won 8.6 more games drew 7.4 less games and lost 0.4 less games.

I may have made the odd error but they did massively better with darren.

I think using decimals was your first error.

[tricky_colour]

season 09/10

P15 W11 D2 L2 with darren

P38 W27 D4 L7 overall
--------------
P23 W16 D2 L5 without darren
--------------

P38 W28 D5 L5 Had darren played all games, that's slightly better.
The games again may have been easier but not so much as he played man city and chelsea.

Just think if Man U had kept Darren Man U would be champoins!!!

[tricky_colour]

I think using decimals was your first error.

Ha ha I think my first error was logging in!!

Yes unfortunately the numbers do not round easily, I could have made a better job of rounding them
but I don't have forever.

However his stats for the last two season do look pretty good.
stats are not everything but the more you have of them the harder they are to ignore, can you just be lucky in getting results?

Finally, leagues are decided on stats, not opinions!!

[Irwin3]

2010/2011 P12 W10 D1 L1 season P38 W23 D11 L4

Bit of maths
P38 W23 D11 L4 over all
P12 W10 D01 L1 with darren
----------------
P26 W13 D10 L3 without darren

P38 W31.6 D3.6 L3.6 If darren had played all games.


So they would have won 8.6 more games drew 7.4 less games and lost 0.4 less games.

I may have made the odd error but they did massively better with darren.

However that assumes games were of equal difficulty, which they were not, he didn't play any of the
other top 4 clubs, but did play 2 of the next 2 which he won.

Even so I would still say the stats who Man U were a better team with Darren!!!!

I mean the top four only account for 8 games and it seem they pretty much
drew the lot

Darron in 10/11 PL for Man UTD:

P12 W10 D2 L0

[Irwin3]

season 09/10

P15 W11 D2 L2 with darren

P38 W27 D4 L7 overall
--------------
P23 W16 D2 L5 without darren
--------------

P38 W28 D5 L5 Had darren played all games, that's slightly better.
The games again may have been easier but not so much as he played man city and chelsea.

Just think if Man U had kept Darren Man U would be champoins!!!

Darron in 09/10 PL for Man UTD:

P15 W11 D1 L3

[Irwin3]

Sorry tricky. Had to do it. Doesn't change too much so the sentiment of your posts remains the same.

[liamoo11]

Gibson and Mccarthy have the ability to control midfield for us for the next 3 or 4 campaigns. Think poor gibson has been treated awful badly by utd and ireland fans. There are very few better defensive midfielders in england.

[tricky_colour]

Sorry tricky. Had to do it. Doesn't change too much so the sentiment of your posts remains the same.

No problem at all!! As I said "may have made the odd error" and indeed I did, or seem to have done!! (gonna check!! ) so it is good that someone checks because I am having to count up the games myself and counting is not my strong point!!

(checked) indeed you are right, however the overall effect cancels out some what as I put a loss for and draw and then a draw for a loss, but it makes his last season with Man U even better.

[tricky_colour]

So correcting his last season

2010/2011 P12 W10 D1 L1 season P38 W23 D11 L4

Bit of maths
P38 W23 D11 L4 over all
P12 W10 D02 L0 with darren
----------------
P26 W13 D9 L4 without darren
P12 W10 D02 L0 with darren

Now if I add in your Everton stats
P15 W9 D5 L1

we get

p27 W19 D7 L1

That's gives a points average of 2.37 per game against 2.34 for Man CIty the champions, that is pretty impressive when most of his games were with Everton!!

It is even more surprising when you consider he played against mainly top teams
with Everton or certainly tougher than average.

I think we can safely conclude he is indeed the best player in the world!!!!!

(again I could have made some errors!! )

[tricky_colour]

On another stats site it shows he is our second best player after James McClean

http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252...ague-2011-2012

However he is not on the overall list due to an error but he is on the Everton team list with a score of 6.77

http://www.whoscored.com/Teams/31