Stats from today

[mjdgreg]

Rovers first:

Goals 2     1
Possession 52%     48%
Attempts 7     10
Corners 3     7
Throw-ins - (I refuse to put up this information, no matter how much Dickos wants me to).

Surprise, surprise. We have more possession and we win!  Well done. Saunders is finally starting to take my advice. Just need to get the attempts on goal and number of corners stats moving in the right direction now. However lets not get too carried away. Colchester are bottom of League 1 after all.

[dickos1]

Not biting.. Not even reading it, We won. End of

[wilts rover]

Interesting how having less possesion leads to a team having more shots, I believe that is the third time this has happened in Rovers games so far this season - as your photographic memory will no doubt confirm eh mjdgreg?

Also intersting how stats swing during a game, at one point in the second half possesion was something like 68% to 32% for Col U, so they musn't habe touched the ball for the last 20 minutes.

Well whatever Dean is doing it seems to be working,

[MachoMadness]

Rovers first:

Goals 2     1

Stopped reading there. Although I'm not sure why I opened this thread to begin with.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I'll bite. Just because we might be able to put this crock of shite to bed finally.

At half time, the PA possession stats that Mick thraps off over were 52-48 in favour of Colchester. There were 2:30 mins of injury time in the first half.
That means Colchester had 24:42 mins of first half possession and we had 22:48.

On 54 minutes, the PA figures were 62:38 in favour of Colchester. That means that Colchester had, by that time, had 35:02 mins possession, whilst we had had 21:28.

On 59 minutes, the PA figures were 53:47 in favour of Colchester. So, at that time, Colchester had had 32:36 mins possession and we had 28:54.

So. In the first nine minutes of the 2nd half, Colchester, we are led to believe, had 10:20 mins of possession, and we had minus 1:20.

Then, in the next five minutes, we had 7:26 mins possession, and Colchester had minus 2:26 mins.

As I pointed out a couple of weeks ago, in lower league matches, possession stats are not worth a bucket of warm piss. Doesn't stop some bell ends trotting them out week after turgid week.

[dickos1]

The first 9 mins of the 2nd half we were also all over them, and scored. Probably our most dominant spells of the match were the first 15 mins of each half.

[mjdgreg]

Interesting how having less possesion leads to a team having more shots, I believe that is the third time this has happened in Rovers games so far this season - as your photographic memory will no doubt confirm eh mjdgreg?

Also intersting how stats swing during a game, at one point in the second half possesion was something like 68% to 32% for Col U, so they musn't habe touched the ball for the last 20 minutes.

If you believe that having less possession leads to more shots then you are sadly mistaken. Take my advice. 3 games is far too small a sample for you to come up with such an outlandish claim.

At the end of the season, when all the stats are added up, I'll guarantee you that the teams that had the most possession will have had the most attempts on goal and will also have the most points.

I'd be interested to know how you work out your possession stats. They seem to be all over the place. If you're going to do them then make sure you've not been drinking before you compile them.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Interesting how having less possesion leads to a team having more shots, I believe that is the third time this has happened in Rovers games so far this season - as your photographic memory will no doubt confirm eh mjdgreg?

Also intersting how stats swing during a game, at one point in the second half possesion was something like 68% to 32% for Col U, so they musn't habe touched the ball for the last 20 minutes.

If you believe that having less possession leads to more shots then you are sadly mistaken. Take my advice. 3 games is far too small a sample for you to come up with such an outlandish claim.

At the end of the season, when all the stats are added up, I'll guarantee you that the teams that had the most possession will have had the most attempts on goal and will also have the most points.

I'd be interested to know how you work out your possession stats. They seem to be all over the place. If you're going to do them then make sure you've not been drinking before you compile them.

I didn't work out possession stats. I made a note of the PA figures at various times. Those same PA figures that you quote every f**king week.

They are worthless. This discussion, and your theorising is worthless.

[mjdgreg]

I'll bite. Just because we might be able to put this crock of shite to bed finally.

At half time, the PA possession stats that mjdgreg thraps off over were 52-48 in favour of Colchester. There were 2:30 mins of injury time in the first half.
That means Colchester had 24:42 mins of first half possession and we had 22:48.

On 54 minutes, the PA figures were 62:38 in favour of Colchester. That means that Colchester had, by that time, had 35:02 mins possession, whilst we had had 21:28.

On 59 minutes, the PA figures were 53:47 in favour of Colchester. So, at that time, Colchester had had 32:36 mins possession and we had 28:54.

So. In the first nine minutes of the 2nd half, Colchester, we are led to believe, had 10:20 mins of possession, and we had minus 1:20.

Then, in the next five minutes, we had 7:26 mins possession, and Colchester had minus 2:26 mins.

As I pointed out a couple of weeks ago, in lower league matches, possession stats are not worth a bucket of warm piss. Doesn't stop some bell ends trotting them out week after turgid week.

I appreciate you are trying to bring your scientologist background to bear on this issue and accept your point that the stats are not going to be as accurate in the lower leagues. But as I'm sure you are aware, any good scientologist will tell you that it is the trend that is the important thing. The slight variances and contradictions will even themselves out over time and the true picture will emerge.

At the moment I am worried that we still haven't learnt the lessons from last season. The good news is that I will continue to monitor the situation and hopefully at some point before it is too late, remedial action will be taken. As always, I will be on hand to offer expert advice when needed.

[mjdgreg]

I didn't work out possession stats. I made a note of the PA figures at various times. Those same PA figures that you quote every f***ing week.

They are worthless. This discussion, and your theorising is worthless.

I know its late, but I was referring to wilts rover's post not yours. You'll be pleased to know that I have done you the courtesy of also replying to your post (as usual).

[wilts rover]

Interesting how having less possesion leads to a team having more shots, I believe that is the third time this has happened in Rovers games so far this season - as your photographic memory will no doubt confirm eh mjdgreg?

Also intersting how stats swing during a game, at one point in the second half possesion was something like 68% to 32% for Col U, so they musn't habe touched the ball for the last 20 minutes.

If you believe that having less possession leads to more shots then you are sadly mistaken. Take my advice. 3 games is far too small a sample for you to come up with such an outlandish claim.

At the end of the season, when all the stats are added up, I'll guarantee you that the teams that had the most possession will have had the most attempts on goal and will also have the most points.

I'd be interested to know how you work out your possession stats. They seem to be all over the place. If you're going to do them then make sure you've not been drinking before you compile them.

As BST pointed out the possesion stats WERE all over the place, apologies to him it must have been 62% - 38% rather than 68% - 32%, I misremembered, should have written it down. No I dont work them out, I wasn't at the game so how could I have done so? I got them from the same place you did.

If you dont believe that 3 games is adequate to draw any sort of conclusion from the statistics thereof - why do you keep trotting them out on a single game basis - which must therefore by your own reasoning be even more pointless?

No I wasn;t drinking, I was working on an article on the suffragette pilgrimage of 1913 if you are interested.

[BillyStubbsTears]

First rule of any serious analysis Mick. Check your source.

If your source data is unreliable, your conclusions will be unreliable to that same extent, plus any errors that you make in analysing the data. You, week on week, on week, bore us to death with you infantile analysis of grossly simplistic data.

You quote data in every other thread that a cursory check can show to be incorrect. You do it in these utterly stupid stats threads every week. You did it in your eulogising of Thatcher earlier this week. It never seems to enter your head to even begin to do a check on whether the numbers you quote are in any way accurate. You just swallow them and vomit them back up at us.

If you want to get serious, go and find out how the PA work out the possession stats for lower league games. Then reflect on the concept of how accurate those figures are.

But you won't do will you? It's far easier to post your witless dribblings on here every week instead.

It's boring Mick. Thoroughly tedious and mind-numbingly puerile.

[mjdgreg]

As BST pointed out the possesion stats WERE all over the place, apologies to him it must have been 62% - 38% rather than 68% - 32%, I misremembered, should have written it down. No I dont work them out, I wasn't at the game so how could I have done so? I got them from the same place you did.

If you dont believe that 3 games is adequate to draw any sort of conclusion from the statistics thereof - why do you keep trotting them out on a single game basis - which must therefore by your own reasoning be even more pointless?

No I wasn;t drinking, I was working on an article on the suffragette pilgrimage of 1913 if you are interested.

The way you were talking it seemed like you were at the game with your stopwatch, notepad and booze. Thank you for clarifying where you actually got your stats from.

Trust me , 3 games is not enough to form any sort of judgement. I show the stats from individual games to indicate a trend. The good news is that once we've played 10 games I will produce 'Stats from the first 10 games' and then we'll have a far better idea of what is going on.

[mjdgreg]

First rule of any serious analysis mjdgreg. Check your source.

If your source data is unreliable, your conclusions will be unreliable to that same extent, plus any errors that you make in analysing the data. You, week on week, on week, bore us to death with you infantile analysis of grossly simplistic data.

You quote data in every other thread that a cursory check can show to be incorrect. You do it in these utterly stupid stats threads every week. You did it in your eulogising of Thatcher earlier this week. It never seems to enter your head to even begin to do a check on whether the numbers you quote are in any way accurate. You just swallow them and vomit them back up at us.

If you want to get serious, go and find out how the PA work out the possession stats for lower league games. Then reflect on the concept of how accurate those figures are.

But you won't do will you? It's far easier to post your witless dribblings on here every week instead.

It's boring mjdgreg. Thoroughly tedious and mind-numbingly puerile.

Look, I'm trying to be positive here. You on the other hand want to ignore the fact that we had more possession and by implication want us to focus on the other far more easily checked 'attempts' and 'corners' stats. These  particular stats don't paint us in a good light.

However I will reserve my judgement until after 10 games have passed, then we can start having a meaningful conversation. I suggest you get off Saunder's back and at least let him get 10 games under his belt.

[RoversAlias]

So we're doing this after every game then? Terrific. Next time I may start a sweepstake for how long it lasts before the mods (rightly) lock it.

[Glyn_Wigley]

However I will reserve my judgement until after 10 games have passed, then we can start having a meaningful conversation. I suggest you get off Saunder's back and at least let him get 10 games under his belt.

So you finally agree. These threads are meaningless because they are about individual games instead of covering at least ten games. I look forward to not seeing this crap again.

[mjdgreg]

So we're doing this after every game then? Terrific.

Thank you for your kind words. I'm pleased you appreciate my efforts. Not everyone does you know. By the way, where have you been? I've been providing this excellent service for quite a while now. You've missed out on some excellent analysis and debate.

[Sticky-Rover]

I fail to see how 4% more possession means we're more likely to win.

[mjdgreg]

So you finally agree. These threads are meaningless because they are about individual games instead of covering at least ten games. I look forward to not seeing this crap again.

No I don't finally agree. This thread is meaningful as are all the previous ones. I'm like an artist trying to paint a picture. It takes time. I'm building to my greatest work so far this season 'Stats after 10 games'. I'm building up the anticipation for my loyal readers by giving them a glimpse of what is to come after every game.

Rather than providing a load of subjective drivel I only deal in facts. It is far too easy for football fans to just look at the result and not analyse what is really going on. Thank goodness I am around to provide hard facts and objective analysis.

[mjdgreg]

I fail to see how 4% more possession means we're more likely to win.

It works like this. If you have more possession than the opposition this means you will have more attempts on goal and therefore score more goals and therefore win more matches. I think you'll also find that it is very difficult for the opposition to score if they haven't got the ball.

There are other benefits to having more possession as well. You are far more likely to be less fatigued than the opposition. The team with less possession tends to have to do more running which usually leads to them conceding late on in games due to tiredness. This then can have a knock-on effect into following games particularly if you have a small squad and some injuries. How many times have we heard Saunders trotting out that excuse?

The clincher is this. Who are the best two teams in recent years? Barcelona and Spain. Ask yourself this question. Do you think they would have been as successful if they'd had less possession than the opposition? I think you know the answer. I hope this clarifies things for you, but if you have any more football related questions then just ask. Indeed if you have any questions on anything you'll find I will always have an answer.

[Sticky-Rover]

More possession doesn't at all mean more shots and more goals, how many times under SOD did we have all the possession yet have no goals to show for it and ended up losing? Even when we did shoot alot they didn't always go in. How many teams did we walk over under his passing/possession football? Then again, you could blame it on the players failure to score when presented chances. The fact we are scoring with minimal chances and a nearly even possession percentage perhaps shows the quality of the players we have compared to the rest of the division. OR not, its early days.

[mjdgreg]

More possession doesn't at all mean more shots and more goals,

I don't think Barcelona, Spain, Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal etc. would agree with you on that one. Ask yourself another question. Did Rovers stay in the Championship when they had more possession than the opposition? I'll give you the answer. Yes we did. What happened when Saunders decided to let the opposition have the bulk of possession? We got relegated.

[silent majority]

No apologies.