Rather than stats, I see what Army is saying. He will be seeing a critical pass that has gone a miss. Sure those 5 yard side way balls all add up into a statisticians wet dream but I am pretty sure without putting words in his mouth he will have seen the critical balls going a miss. In other words the ones that count. He's probably played the game
Well, you would be right if the empty house ignored my point. What does the answer "You cannot argue with a 94% passing accuracy and the most successful passes in the final 3rd in the whole of the Championship."
prove my original point of
"Rather than stats, I see what Army is saying. He will be seeing a critical pass that has gone a miss. Sure those 5 yard side way balls all add up into a statisticians wet dream but I am pretty sure without putting words in his mouth he will have seen the critical balls going a miss. In other words the ones that count. He's probably played the game"
So if some one doesn't get what I am saying I will reply. Like the guy wasn't pushed if you keep arguing HE WAS when he wasn't , then yes I will reply. If you think that is arguing then I suggest you read through the threads again.
It's not pedantic It's just saying it how it is. If some one is going to say something against my post at least make a decent effort.
Right listen.... If I played Saturday and passed 95 sideways passes 5 yards away successfully but then when I had a chance of an easy through ball and 5x gave the ball away/misplaced the pass.
The stats would say I had a %95 pass completion so I must be great, the guy sat at home would think this going off stats
The guy who has played the game and has watched with hiswn eyes knows that the stats mean f all, so marks him down the scoring.
Again how does this reply have any relevance against my point?
"You cannot argue with a 94% passing accuracy and the most successful passes in the final 3rd in the whole of the Championship"
It doesn't, so I will say so