I think there’s some confusion on data. I don’t think anyone is saying you have to look at the data to enjoy watching a game as a fan. But obviously you do need to look at the data if you are the manager, if you are responsible for recruiting players, etc.

As has been pointed out the clubs that do look very closely at the data, Brighton, Brentford, Luton, have massively overachieved. It doesn’t mean all their fans have to watch games with a spreadsheet open.

This.

I don't think anyone is suggesting fans go to games with calculators and note pads out. No one on this forum has ever suggested they didn't enjoy a game because Mark Wilson's performance rated a 5.9 rather than a 6.2 on whatever ratings metric they use. But when it comes to player ID it's crucial, you can't just sign players based on gut feelings and passing observations anymore.

As it's part of the club's operation then it's only natural to talk about it the same way we talk about the formation we play or the state of the pitch.

Not a bad watch that NP. Have it on dvd along with about 25/30 others. Rovers games from Cconference to Championship.  Regards Ray

Quote from: Bristol Red Rover on May 21, 2024, 05:56:03 pm

Ooops! Wrong graphic.

No its not.

No candidate

Agree Pigeonhole, and also being clear what you are measuring. Different attributed individuals make a good team - pace, delivery and shot accuracy good for Hurst, but Keegan as case in point is a much blunter tool - interceptions made, tackles won, strength, athleticism, ball turnover etc - and I also thought he had that hard-man persona that gives the oppo a little bit extra doubt. As they say in the Blind Side, the first cheque you cash is for the mortgage, but the second cheque is for the insurance. Horses for courses, and all that.

Quote from: Iberian Red on May 05, 2024, 12:19:00 am

This thread is like a meeting of The Flat Earth Society.

"F#£kin,science, stats,load of shite"

I believe the analytical stats are ideal for the coaching side to use, if they help them work out how to improve performances.  I get that they are useful in the betting industry, but I don’t bet so I don’t really care.

As for the “average” football fan, I don’t see stats being important.  How do you measure the feeling when Trotta hit the bar, when Sharp scored vs Boro, Jones’ winner at Stevenage etc.

Spectating enjoyment can be ruined by abysmal officiating or opposition shithousery (Cotteril’s Portsmouth for example) regardless if our team stats were actually good?

Like someone else said, I get a feeling for how well a player has performed by observation.  That will always be subjective and lead to debate - for example lots of folks thought Paul Keegan was crap, but I thought he was very effective in his role.  What were his stats?  I couldn’t give a toss.!

Stats are fine, but for me the stats that count are goals for and against.

You see, I would be interested to see Paul Keegan's stats because there must have been something I was missing.  To the casual observer he couldn't trap a bag of cement, had no discernible vision, skill or pace.  People say he fulfilled a destructive role but was often the wrong side of the ball chasing shadows. 

His stats might point out that he ran 20km a game, was like lightning over the first 2 yards and did, in fact, stifle several opposition attacks per game. 

I think you sometimes you need more information to override innate biases.  Stats will help.