|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 21, 2019 14:18:27 GMT
From Jones' presser today, in response to a journo bringing up the figure of 22%: "I think it was more than that - if you look at the actual statistics it was more like 41%"
All the main media outlets give us 22-24. How are these stats arrived at? Can there really be a 20% discrepancy depending on the approach or is this Trump-esque bluster from our Dear Leader?
I must admit 22 seemed ridiculously low to me.
|
|
|
Post by medwaypotter on Oct 21, 2019 14:21:38 GMT
From Jones' presser today, in response to a journo bringing up the figure of 22%: "I think it was more than that - if you look at the actual statistics it was more like 41%" All the main media outlets give us 22-24. How are these stats arrived at? Can there really be a 20% discrepancy depending on the approach or is this Trump-esque bluster from our Dear Leader? I must admit 22 seemed ridiculously low to me. We had 3% after the first 10 mins
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Oct 21, 2019 14:37:08 GMT
I don't know why he's getting so defensive about it.
I mentioned in another thread that we have had more possession in the vast majority of our games this season and we've lost most of those games.
Swansea and Fulham had more possession than us and we beat them both.
And Fulham dominate possession in most of the games they play anyway. They had 70% against West Brom (drew), 77% against Forest (lost) 69% at Cardiff (drew) 70% against Charlton (drew) and 77% against us (lost).
|
|
|
Post by louis11 on Oct 21, 2019 14:45:32 GMT
I don't know why he's getting so defensive about it. I mentioned in another thread that we have had more possession in the vast majority of our games this season and we've lost most of those games. Swansea and Fulham had more possession than us and we beat them both. And Fulham dominate possession in most of the games they play anyway. They had 70% against West Brom (drew), 77% against Forest (lost) 69% at Cardiff (drew) 70% against Charlton (drew) and 77% against us (lost). Yes, but Fulham were like the latterday Hughes teams under which Shawcross had the most successful number of passes, albeit square passes 20 times a game
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Oct 21, 2019 14:52:34 GMT
Any team managed by 'Pass back Parker' is going to have plenty of possession.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Oct 21, 2019 15:01:06 GMT
Tim Ream completed double the passes that our entire midfield managed, so I can believe the ~20% figure but when you look at passes in and around our penalty area, only around 18 passes of 600+ actually end up inside the area, and nearly all of them are close to the byline.
We fashioned way more than they did, having possession is all well and good but they weren't positive with it at all. In such circumstances there's no shame in having that low a percentage of possession.
(I get my stats from Statzone and they're normally pretty accurate)
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Oct 21, 2019 15:07:53 GMT
So is he just pulling 41% out of his arse?
|
|
|
Post by tcdobinghoff on Oct 21, 2019 15:13:26 GMT
I am not an advocate of “possession “ football for its own sake but there are times when I wish we could keep possession if it suited the circumstances. I have to say I was impressed at times with some of Fulham’s movement and passing and the way players made themselves available for a pass. Having said that we deserved the win and were the most dangerous of the two sides.
|
|
|
Post by dreamtheater on Oct 21, 2019 15:13:33 GMT
I happen to think possession stats are as misleading as the attendance ones
in this case 22% a joke 42% (ish) a perhaps more balanced algorithm or view
try looking at your local house prices on zoopla
statistics based upon computer programmed algorithms yield occasional daft results
they dont have a bloke doing this you know
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Oct 21, 2019 15:16:34 GMT
We made what possession we had count.
Evident in the first half that we had 23% odd possession and 6 shots, they had 0 shots. We've capitalised on chances now against both Swansea and Fulham, and could easily have beat Fulham 3 or 4-0 if Allen scores his and Tyrese does better with his second opportunity.
We're looking infinitely better than the beginning of the season.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2019 15:18:33 GMT
From Jones' presser today, in response to a journo bringing up the figure of 22%: "I think it was more than that - if you look at the actual statistics it was more like 41%" All the main media outlets give us 22-24. How are these stats arrived at? Can there really be a 20% discrepancy depending on the approach or is this Trump-esque bluster from our Dear Leader? I must admit 22 seemed ridiculously low to me. We had 3% after the first 10 mins That was an astonishing stat,we just couldn't get the ball but they did nothing with it. At HT Fulham had had 77% and not made a single chance ! We'd had about 4 or 5 good chances. It's not how long you have the ball it's what you do with it that ultimately counts
|
|
|
Post by milky on Oct 21, 2019 15:19:59 GMT
Who gives a flying fuck really ?
Here's a useful stat.
We scored 2 goals , Fulham scored zilch.
|
|
|
Post by mamasgloves on Oct 21, 2019 15:21:44 GMT
We had 3% after the first 10 mins That was an astonishing stat,we just couldn't get the ball but they did nothing with it. At HT Fulham had had 77% and not made a single chance ! We'd had about 4 or 5 good chances. It's not how long you have the ball it's what you do with it that ultimately counts Absolutely true. Just interesting that we were told it would be US dominating games with fast attacking football and playing through the thirds but he seems to have ditched that in favour of lumping up to Gregory or kicking into the channel for Campbell to chase. Needs must I guess.
|
|
|
Post by mattador78 on Oct 21, 2019 15:28:40 GMT
Who gives a flying fuck really ? Here's a useful stat. We scored 2 goals , Fulham scored zilch. That’s the one that’s unbelievable 😲
|
|
|
Post by milky on Oct 21, 2019 15:31:54 GMT
Who gives a flying fuck really ? Here's a useful stat. We scored 2 goals , Fulham scored zilch. That’s the one that’s unbelievable 😲 I know.Yet the only one that matters 😄
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Oct 21, 2019 15:37:08 GMT
I don't know why he's getting so defensive about it. I mentioned in another thread that we have had more possession in the vast majority of our games this season and we've lost most of those games. Swansea and Fulham had more possession than us and we beat them both. And Fulham dominate possession in most of the games they play anyway. They had 70% against West Brom (drew), 77% against Forest (lost) 69% at Cardiff (drew) 70% against Charlton (drew) and 77% against us (lost).
To be fair, i think it's probably because when we were bottom (all that time ago ) Nath kept banging on about how we were top of all the other stats.
It's one of those where he can't use the standard excuse (which is actually correct and perfectly acceptable) of "stats don't tell the whole story and they don't matter if we score more goals anyway", when he's been specifically using stats to try to make out like we weren't as shit as we actually were for all those months, as it was the only thing he could hang onto.
He's basically made a cross for his own back by spending months in press conferences trying to get us all to believe how important other stats (as in, other than the scoreline) really are. He can't really now just suddenly start dismissing them or he'll come across as even more unhinged than he normally seems!
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Oct 21, 2019 15:39:29 GMT
If true it shows how well we defended. There were a couple of moments when they should have scored (2 headers from memory) but other than that, to restrict an opponent who has so much of the ball to a couple of good chances shows great discipline.
|
|
|
Post by AlbertTatlock on Oct 21, 2019 15:42:16 GMT
The only stat that matters is the one that says Stoke 2 Fulham 0. Much sooner we give up some possession and win than pass it across the back and get nowhere with it, Fulham had a rediculous amount of possession in the first 20 minutes but dind't even muster a single shot on target. In fact they didn't muster a shot on target in the first half. Gouranga.
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Oct 21, 2019 15:50:01 GMT
That was an astonishing stat,we just couldn't get the ball but they did nothing with it. At HT Fulham had had 77% and not made a single chance ! We'd had about 4 or 5 good chances. It's not how long you have the ball it's what you do with it that ultimately counts Absolutely true. Just interesting that we were told it would be US dominating games with fast attacking football and playing through the thirds but he seems to have ditched that in favour of lumping up to Gregory or kicking into the channel for Campbell to chase. Needs must I guess. Or Fulham had a team much more comfortable in possession than ours and he adapted accordingly? Similar to the Leeds game last year where we let them play in the first 2/3s of the pitch and put the foot in when they crossed into our own third. When we broke on the counter we broke with speed and power, everything we've lacked in recent times. Their midfield is built for patient possession play, I'd say ours is a lot more destructive in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by mattador78 on Oct 21, 2019 16:25:55 GMT
The only stat that matters is the one that says Stoke 2 Fulham 0. Much sooner we give up some possession and win than pass it across the back and get nowhere with it, Fulham had a rediculous amount of possession in the first 20 minutes but dind't even muster a single shot on target. In fact they didn't muster a shot on target in the first half. Gouranga. Didn’t muster a shot at all let alone on target I believe
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Oct 21, 2019 16:35:55 GMT
How are possession stats calculated in the round?
Is it a measure of time on the ball?
I think it must be, number of kicks say would make no sense.
If it's time then is it all time or only time when the ball is in play?
What if you are lining up a goal kick for example? You're notionally in possession but the ball is not in play.
It's one of the stats I pay attention to.
|
|
|
Post by heworksardtho on Oct 21, 2019 16:39:57 GMT
Goals win games not stats , may be VAR now and again though 😂
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Oct 21, 2019 17:06:31 GMT
How are possession stats calculated in the round? Is it a measure of time on the ball? I think it must be, number of kicks say would make no sense. If it's time then is it all time or only time when the ball us in play? What if you are lining up a goal kick for example? You're notionally in possession but the ball is not in play. It's one of the stats I pay attention to. I can’t remember the exact details but I have a mate who works doing stats graphics for sports tv and he told me it isn’t done with a timer. Apparently there is some formula for calculating it based on number of passes completed, number of stoppages in the game etc.
|
|
chinapotter
Academy Starlet
"Looking jolly from Stoke" -Mark E. Smith
Posts: 219
|
Post by chinapotter on Oct 21, 2019 17:09:39 GMT
Possession, assists, goal attempts, goal attempts on target, miles run by players (FFS!), they’re all pointless b*ll*cks intended to give us something to talk about, especially when a game is dull. This isn’t cricket and there’s only one stat that counts 😁
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Oct 21, 2019 17:14:03 GMT
How are possession stats calculated in the round? Is it a measure of time on the ball? I think it must be, number of kicks say would make no sense. If it's time then is it all time or only time when the ball us in play? What if you are lining up a goal kick for example? You're notionally in possession but the ball is not in play. It's one of the stats I pay attention to. I can’t remember the exact details but I have a mate who works doing stats graphics for sports tv and he told me it isn’t done with a timer. Apparently there is some formula for calculating it based on number of passes completed, number of stoppages in the game etc. That sounds highly plausible to me, I mean they even have this stat for League 2 games, there can't really be a bloke with a stop watch and a computer can thete paid to do only that?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Oct 21, 2019 17:34:00 GMT
That was an astonishing stat,we just couldn't get the ball but they did nothing with it. At HT Fulham had had 77% and not made a single chance ! We'd had about 4 or 5 good chances. It's not how long you have the ball it's what you do with it that ultimately counts Absolutely true. Just interesting that we were told it would be US dominating games with fast attacking football and playing through the thirds but he seems to have ditched that in favour of lumping up to Gregory or kicking into the channel for Campbell to chase. Needs must I guess. Fast attacking football is not possession based it is getting the ball forward quickly either with long passes, pressing in the opposition half or running directly at defenders. Saturday was exactly that, just not enough of it but I'm convinced we'll get better.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Oct 21, 2019 17:52:01 GMT
I have to say I was impressed at times with some of Fulham’s movement and passing and the way players made themselves available for a pass. And I was bored stiff with their tip-tap sideways going nowhere football. Like someone else said when Hughes first took over and was trying to prove a point to the Pulis fans ....
|
|
|
Post by tcdobinghoff on Oct 21, 2019 20:41:35 GMT
I have to say I was impressed at times with some of Fulham’s movement and passing and the way players made themselves available for a pass. And I was bored stiff with their tip-tap sideways going nowhere football. Like someone else said when Hughes first took over and was trying to prove a point to the Pulis fans .... My comment was not defending “tip-tap sideways going nowhere football “ it was acknowledging the merits of accurate passing and intelligent movement which can be exciting to watch. I wasn’t advocating that we play like Fulham just that our ability to keep possession and control the game could be improved. I wasn’t bored, I enjoyed the game, we were the better team and won.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Oct 22, 2019 18:26:16 GMT
How are possession stats calculated in the round? Is it a measure of time on the ball? I think it must be, number of kicks say would make no sense. If it's time then is it all time or only time when the ball is in play? What if you are lining up a goal kick for example? You're notionally in possession but the ball is not in play. It's one of the stats I pay attention to. Always wondered that as well Gods.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Oct 22, 2019 18:26:29 GMT
How are possession stats calculated in the round? Is it a measure of time on the ball? I think it must be, number of kicks say would make no sense. If it's time then is it all time or only time when the ball is in play? What if you are lining up a goal kick for example? You're notionally in possession but the ball is not in play. It's one of the stats I pay attention to. Different data suppliers have different ways of measuring possession. The 22% comes from the number of passes in the game. Stoke 198 total passes, Fulham 684 total passes. Stoke "possession" = 198/(198+684) =22% Whether you think that's a sensible approach, I'll let you decide. Infogol had Stoke's possession as 38%
|
|