Hall Of Fame
Us ridiculous oldies constantly fail to understand how meaningless possession is more important than actual results. Surely the one and only metric that really matters is did we win or not. Or isn't winning actually important? Can anyone of you young guys explain why results don't matter in your understanding of football?
Hall Of Fame
Is anyone actually saying results don't matter?Originally Posted by Woodypie
I've heard people say statistics don't matter, which is also ridiculous. After all goals are a statistic, as are wins and points...
I think the closest anyone's come to saying "results don't matter" is the owners' recent post about results not reflecting performances due to bad luck, which IMO is an extremely high risk piece of analysis. If you're 100% right, great, if you're even a little bit wrong it can lead to going into next season with a fatally flawed team, a possibility I'm honestly very concerned about.
Hall Of Fame
I think that message from the owners was rather worrying. They've always been so measured with their communications, but this showed a real inability to read the room. I think it was their way of saying "we're giving Maynard more time, and he'll be the coach next season" but it showed them to be a bit blinkered to say the least.
Possession alone is a completely worthless statistic. It's what you do with the ball that counts. And as we've seen countless times this season, most of our possession is in our own half and tends to be more damaging to us than the opposition.
First Team
Good post
The comments regarding stats suggesting it was largely bad luck that was to blame for our predicament were worrying. It looks like whoever is making recruitment decisions is protecting their position
Everyone in football knows how to play against Notts
We can score 2,3,4 and even 5 goals and fail to win
The players who are making and scoring all those goals have had enough
They know the truth and so do we
Hall Of Fame
The comment the board made regarding luck being the only thing that had changed
was only made to Support their decision to appoint Maynard
Hall Of Fame
If you listened to Richard Montague on the magpie circle, he explained this. He said that the league table shows exactly where you are based on results but the statistics can help show where you will be in the future.
He stated that the performance metrics we had at the start of the year showed we should have had less points than we got and that recently our performance metrics showed we should have got more points than we got later in the season, this explained the lucky start of the season and unlucky mid to end of the season. He pointed out that under Maynard, the performance stats showed we stayed pretty much level so it probably would have happened under Williams also.
From what was implied, once we realised the budget wasn't as competitive as we had thought, we were hoping for the playoffs but missed out so we actually underperformed the budget. Next year the budget will be bumped a bit as we have the headroom to do so but we still want to out perform it with regards to points and performance.
Hall Of Fame
Well based on that the only logical statistic I can draw from the performance metrics is that they are never correct! So if the performance stats say one thing then the other is happening.....consistently!
Ultimately you can look at whatever stats you want but we let in too many goals on a consistent basis so we either need new defenders a new formation or both. Stick that in your charts chaps.
Hall Of Fame
I thought Montague spoke pretty well, although I thought Joe was probably better in getting to the point and saying things of substance, but I suppose he deals in numbers rather than humans, so it's easier for him to be direct.
The plan is pretty much what we thought it was from previous interviews. They are not going to splurge next year to get promoted at all costs. It sounds like the bros are very much here for the long term and are investing heavily behind the scenes, but don't want to 'do a Wrexham' and buy loads of players too good for the league. There is no satisfaction in that for them. In fact it sounds like they would regard that as failure as it becomes unsustainable.
I am generally in favour of what they are doing. We are experiencing a blip, but they won't panic and throw away the long term plan because of that. I didn't get the feeling that they are as stubborn as some make out, just that they want to do things the right way even if it takes time.
One thing I did find slightly worrying about the stats based approach is when Montague spoke at length about how we had a good defence last year and this year something has changed which they can't quite put their finger on to find an explanation from the data.
That seemed to be to be the verbal version of when to avoid kicking it long we pass the ball 25 times in our own half, narrowly avoiding a couple of catastrophes, before hurriedly passing to the keeper to kick it long anyway. Sometimes you can get so bogged down in a system that you can't see the wood for the trees.
The reason our defence is so bad is that we fall over, forget to mark people, give the ball away in dangerous areas, dont stop crosses and don't win enough headers. All this against teams who are much better than last year, with players who have never really proved themselves consistently at this level. No data required IMO.
It sounded very much like the defence will be the focus of the next transfer market though, which was reassuring.
Hall Of Fame
Interesting, thanks. The most notable difference between the NL and L2 is that we are now incapable of controlling games. Whereas in the NL we would enjoy the bulk of possession and the bulk of efforts on goal, in L2 we rarely have more efforts on goal than the other team. Instead, we retain possession in our own half but don’t tire the opposition out because it’s all so slow, sideways and backwards, and then lose the ball in bad areas.
It shouldn’t be difficult for the club to identify the problem once they do a compilation of goals and big chances conceded.
Hall Of Fame
I get where he/the club are going with this, but all this 'should have' talk is meaningless and seems to deflect away from the fact that results are the only thing that ultimately matters.
I have no idea if other clubs look at these metrics to decide whether they are 'lucky' or 'unlucky', but assuming that most don't, having access to this knowledge hasn't even given us an edge, seeing as we underperformed compared to our budget. So what's the point?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote