Savory Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 taken from http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252/Tournaments/2/Seasons/2935/Stages/5476/TeamStatistics/England-Premier-League-2011-2012
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Stuart Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Ok. I'll say it first. I'd love to know our position in that league under Allardyce. Backs up my thoughts about Kean's so called "better football" anyway.
Majiball Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Ok. I'll say it first. I'd love to know our position in that league under Allardyce. Backs up my thoughts about Kean's so called "better football" anyway. It's not about the quantity but the quality.
Stuart Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 It's not about the quantity but the quality. Whoosh. The stats are literally that, the quantity of quality. There's no cliched-stick-beat-Sam-with "hoofball" stat! Our poor level of quality is only "bettered" by Stoke. Says its all really!
arbitro Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Ok. I'll say it first. I'd love to know our position in that league under Allardyce. Backs up my thoughts about Kean's so called "better football" anyway. Absolutely right. What happened to the brave new total footballing world we were promised under Kean. Another example of how the shyster is completely out of his depth. Compare our stats to that of Swansea. Two managers with similar backgrounds but so polarized in ability, technically and tactically.
Majiball Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Whoosh. The stats are literally that, the quantity of quality. There's no cliched-stick-beat-Sam-with "hoofball" stat! Our poor level of quality is only "bettered" by Stoke. Says its all really! It's the number of passes, how you define quality from that is beyond me. Quality is a subjective aspect not considered in the total numbers as defined by the chart. Whoosh indeed, .
Stuart Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 It's the number of passes, how you define quality from that is beyond me. Quality is a subjective aspect not considered in the total numbers as defined by the chart. Whoosh indeed, . Crosses, through-balls and short passes. Notwithstanding a certain Mr. Beckham, that's the quality element to passing, isn't it? And the type of thing Rovers "wer all about" these days, allegedly? It's certainly the element that Sam was supposedly berated for lacking. Here we go again. Sorry everyone!
Mattyblue Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 What a complete conman Kean is. And to think, I still read posts saying we 'play a better brand of football now than under the last manager'. Do me a favour! Still, sure we are all happy with what 'we are trying to do here'.
budha Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Absolutely right. What happened to the brave new total footballing world we were promised under Kean. Another example of how the shyster is completely out of his depth. Compare our stats to that of Swansea. Two managers with similar backgrounds but so polarized in ability, technically and tactically. Well, according to those stats Swansea is at attacking zone 22% of the game - we're there 26%. Not saying our style of play is something to aspire for, but neither are sideways passes in the middle of the park.
donnermeat Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Long balls or short passes it doesn't matter what about the Aston Villa game at Villa Park? We got into their box 37 times in the second half. He said so. There's your quality.
Majiball Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Crosses, through-balls and short passes. Notwithstanding a certain Mr. Beckham, that's the quality element to passing, isn't it? And the type of thing Rovers "wer all about" these days, allegedly? It's certainly the element that Sam was supposedly berated for lacking. Here we go again. Sorry everyone! no disputing The quality element, but how do u derive the quality from purely the total number? you can't. you have seen the passes so add that to the numbers. ergo I'm right. sticks tongue out
Moderation Lead K-Hod Posted March 8, 2012 Moderation Lead Posted March 8, 2012 Thought Bolton played 'good football' under Coyle? They're only averaging a few more passes per game than us! So easy for the media to sway influence against certain managers/styles of play.
Backroom DE. Posted March 8, 2012 Backroom Posted March 8, 2012 Thought Bolton played 'good football' under Coyle? They're only averaging a few more passes per game than us! So easy for the media to sway influence against certain managers/styles of play. To be fair Hodders, it's been a while since anybody claimed Bolton were playing good football I said back in December we'd quite obviously reverted back to long-ball tactics - vaguely similar to how we played under Allardyce but without any direction or tactical nous. Allardyce did utilise the long-ball game often but there was a method to the way he used that style which yielded success. Under Kean I don't think there really is much of a plan, just hoof it up the pitch and hope we get the knock down - then rely on Junior, Dunn or Yak to stick it in somehow. Or win a free kick and hope Pedersen strikes a good one.
Mattyblue Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Or Robbo punts it in the box in hope he finds the head of someone that's not Samba.
Gally Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 In fairness to Kean (never thought I'd say that) those stats are nowhere near enough to come to any conclusion about how we play compared to how we did when Sam was in charge. It doesn't take into account how many men we commit forward or the speed of play for a start. Neither does it take into account chance creation, under Sam we did well in games with low chance creation, under kean we're doing not so well in games in which far more chances are created.
Stuart Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 no disputing The quality element, but how do u derive the quality from purely the total number? you can't. you have seen the passes so add that to the numbers. ergo I'm right. sticks tongue out I'm not deriving quality from the numbers, I'm deriving quality from the criteria. The fact you aren't disputing the quality element means you agree I'm right. I'm saying it's like not having 100 Ferraris. You are saying if we have 50 cars, 3 of them might be Ferraris. But if everyone else has 50 (or more) Ferraris then that doesn't matter. It's moot. See, it's simple when you think of it in like Ferraris. Sticks thumbs in ears and wiggles fingers. Spots jelly and ice-cream on nurse's trolley. Loses interest in Ferraris. Swats imaginary fly not buzzing near face. Gazes upwards out of barred window at cloud shaped like Ferrari...
eire3382 Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 In fairness to Kean (never thought I'd say that) those stats are nowhere near enough to come to any conclusion about how we play compared to how we did when Sam was in charge. It doesn't take into account how many men we commit forward or the speed of play for a start. Neither does it take into account chance creation, under Sam we did well in games with low chance creation, under kean we're doing not so well in games in which far more chances are created. The only stat that matters when talking about the bald one is the league table and there he is always shocking!
grizfoot Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Come as no surprise really we are woeful at retaining possession hence why we are so low down on all the passing stats. Most of our goals come from set-pieces or some piece of individual inspiration (usually the Yak or Holiett).
LeChuck Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Come as no surprise really we are woeful at retaining possession hence why we are so low down on all the passing stats. Most of our goals come from set-pieces or some piece of individual inspiration (usually the Yak or Holiett). It's been ages since Hoilett produced a moment of individual inspiration.
Majiball Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 I'm not deriving quality from the numbers, I'm deriving quality from the criteria. The fact you aren't disputing the quality element means you agree I'm right. I'm saying it's like not having 100 Ferraris. You are saying if we have 50 cars, 3 of them might be Ferraris. But if everyone else has 50 (or more) Ferraris then that doesn't matter. It's moot. See, it's simple when you think of it in like Ferraris. Sticks thumbs in ears and wiggles fingers. Spots jelly and ice-cream on nurse's trolley. Loses interest in Ferraris. Swats imaginary fly not buzzing near face. Gazes upwards out of barred window at cloud shaped like Ferrari... Bizarre, do you smoke drugs?
SharrockDownSouth Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Well, according to those stats Swansea is at attacking zone 22% of the game - we're there 26%. Not saying our style of play is something to aspire for, but neither are sideways passes in the middle of the park. That's 26% is the 2nd worst in the league (behind Swansea) though... According to that stats page (which is very interesting btw), we have the least proportion of touches in the central half, 2nd least in the attacking half and the largest percentage of touches in our own half... i.e. we can't pass or keep hold of the ball higher up the pitch and are relying on dribbling skills of Hoilett / Olsson / whomever to advance up the pitch or a big punt. Interesting to see the goal types stat as well: Team Open Play Fastbreak Set Piece Penalty Own Goal Blackburn 16 1 14 3 4
Stuart Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Bizarre, do you smoke drugs? Surrealist comedy is dead. Long live surrealist comedy. Hey ho. Back to iPhone skins...
Majiball Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Surrealist comedy is dead. Long live surrealist comedy. Hey ho. Back to iPhone skins...
grizfoot Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 It's been ages since Hoilett produced a moment of individual inspiration. Junior must have been reading.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.