The Accuracy of Match Statistics

[Akinfenwa]

I don't mean to restart probably the most tired argument of all time but please let me tell of a problem that I've only recently encountered.

Just out of interest I was looking at todays match statistics earlier and found something quite shocking when I decided to compare statistics from two sources. It's definitely shocking enough to change the way I'll look at football for the forseeable future that's for sure.

Below are the possession stats from a few of today's Premier League games, all from two supposedly 'good' sources.

BBC's possession stats:
Man Utd - 48%
Tottenham - 52%

Stoke - 26%
Swansea - 74%

Fulham - 50%
Man City - 50%

Norwich - 50%
Liverpool - 50%


Sky Sports' possession stats:
Man Utd - 74%
Tottenham - 26%

Stoke - 39%
Swansea - 61%

Fulham - 29%
Man City - 71%

Norwich - 33%
Liverpool - 67%


Now that's quite a big variation in just a few high profile Premier League games from both sources. Either they had problems today with the PA thing or whoever 'calculates' possession must just be plucking numbers out of thin air that 'sound about right'. God only knows how accurate the League One stats are if the Premier League stats are this inaccurate.

I don't think I'll be able to sleep tonight knowing that any future conclusions drawn from possession statistics on this forum will be a complete waste of time. Any advice?

[Viking Don]

Sominex work OK, but melatonin is best if you can get it.

I don't agree with locking the threads though, at least they get people posting, and noone forces anyone to read them. They usually end up being quite funny.

[silent majority]

Sominex work OK, but melatonin is best if you can get it.

I don't agree with locking the threads though, at least they get people posting, and noone forces anyone to read them. They usually end up being quite funny.

I'm sure you don't. But I also guarantee you don't suffer the endless pm's that we get asking us to lock threads either.

[glosterred]

Lie, Damn Lies and statistics.

COYR

[BillyStubbsTears]

I don't mean to restart probably the most tired argument of all time but please let me tell of a problem that I've only recently encountered.

Just out of interest I was looking at todays match statistics earlier and found something quite shocking when I decided to compare statistics from two sources. It's definitely shocking enough to change the way I'll look at football for the forseeable future that's for sure.

Below are the possession stats from a few of today's Premier League games, all from two supposedly 'good' sources.

BBC's possession stats:
Man Utd - 48%
Tottenham - 52%

Stoke - 26%
Swansea - 74%

Fulham - 50%
Man City - 50%

Norwich - 50%
Liverpool - 50%


Sky Sports' possession stats:
Man Utd - 74%
Tottenham - 26%

Stoke - 39%
Swansea - 61%

Fulham - 29%
Man City - 71%

Norwich - 33%
Liverpool - 67%


Now that's quite a big variation in just a few high profile Premier League games from both sources. Either they had problems today with the PA thing or whoever 'calculates' possession must just be plucking numbers out of thin air that 'sound about right'. God only knows how accurate the League One stats are if the Premier League stats are this inaccurate.

I don't think I'll be able to sleep tonight knowing that any future conclusions drawn from possession statistics on this forum will be a complete waste of time. Any advice?

Interesting.

We already know that the PA figures are bullshit. But the Sky ones are fascinating.


Here's a conspiracy theory.

There is a trend that appears from that (admittedly small) sample. The Sky figures all big-up the clubs that the armchair fan would be likely to support.

It is clearly in Sky's interest for there to be 4 or 5 permanent giants in the English game. If the majority of couch potatoes chuck their lot in with one of those, all Sky has to do is make sure that they give due deference and coverage to those clubs to make sure that the bell-ends keep renewing their subscription. Thta is one reason why the march of Sky and the domination of the English game by a handful of giants has gone hand-in-hand.

So, the last thing Sky would want to do is to suggest that the bunch of mercenary prima donnas that Joe Fat-bas**rd supports are actually shit. Even when they have struggled or lost, Joe F-B could still be hit with figures showing that they dominated possession and were just unlucky (and we already know how susceptible some armchair fans are to possession stats, right kids?)

I wonder if those ridiculous figures from Sky are a common occurrence? It's be fascinating to follow them for a few weeks.

[Viking Don]

Sominex work OK, but melatonin is best if you can get it.

I don't agree with locking the threads though, at least they get people posting, and noone forces anyone to read them. They usually end up being quite funny.

I'm sure you don't. But I also guarantee you don't suffer the endless pm's that we get asking us to lock threads either.


Yeah sorry I think I might have taken that the wrong way, I see it two ways now so I'm taking it the way I think you meant it!

[silent majority]

Sominex work OK, but melatonin is best if you can get it.

I don't agree with locking the threads though, at least they get people posting, and noone forces anyone to read them. They usually end up being quite funny.

I'm sure you don't. But I also guarantee you don't suffer the endless pm's that we get asking us to lock threads either.


Yeah sorry I think I might have taken that the wrong way, I see it two ways now so I'm taking it the way I think you meant it!

I hope so, I think!

[Viking Don]

Still don't think the threads should be locked though, no matter what grief the mods get to lock them. Just makes me think of this nonsense going on in the world about religious stuff at the moment when people just get their way because they demand it, or else.

It's not the way forward and certainly won't stop the problems. Banning/locking/preventing free speech in public just annoys people in this country, it's what our parents/grandparents died for and I for one aint about to forget it. I may not agree with what is said but I agree that they have a right to say it.

[mjdgreg]

I wonder if those ridiculous figures from Sky are a common occurrence? It's be fascinating to follow them for a few weeks.

Call yourself a scientologist! How are you going to follow the Sky stats? Are you going to see what they come up with and then decide they were wrong on no empirical evidence whatsoever just because it suits your anti stats argument?

Or you could take the scientific approach and record the Sky games and do the stats yourself. Then you could have something meaningful to compare. How you ever became a scientologist I'll never know!

[mjdgreg]

Still don't think the threads should be locked though, no matter what grief the mods get to lock them. Just makes me think of this nonsense going on in the world about religious stuff at the moment when people just get their way because they demand it, or else.

It's not the way forward and certainly won't stop the problems. Banning/locking/preventing free speech in public just annoys people in this country, it's what our parents/grandparents died for and I for one aint about to forget it. I may not agree with what is said but I agree that they have a right to say it.

As someone who never exaggerates, I agree with you one million per cent. I bet it's mostly the older members of the forum that are the moaning minnies. You'd think they'd be the ones that would want to keep free speech alive as they are the ones who can remember better than the younger generation the sacrifices made in the world wars so people like me could have my say. 

[wilts rover]

Don, I would like to say I agree with you, but particuarly now in the interweb world certain people try to hide some strange purile intent of gaining their own personal pleasure under this 'free speech' banner. Or put another way, they just come out with a statement for the sake of it, purely designed to annoy. Otherwise known as WUM or 'trolling'.

I rest my case with the evidence of the poster above.

[IDM]

Yesterday there was a problem with the source of the stats to BBC, Sky etc breaking down.

That said, the only stat that counts, in an individual game, is goals for and against.  For example, possession % aint important because it's more important what you do with the posession, not how much you have.

[mjdgreg]

Yesterday there was a problem with the source of the stats to BBC, Sky etc breaking down.

That said, the only stat that counts, in an individual game, is goals for and against.  For example, possession % aint important because it's more important what you do with the possession, not how much you have.

You are right to a point. The best teams have a possession efficiency of around 3%. The ones that usually get relegated have a possession efficiency of 5% or more. We are currently over 5%. That said, it's early days and on yesterday's evidence the penny may have finally dropped with Saunders.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick

I sit at your feet oh Master, awaiting enlightenment.

Either the PA or the Sky possession stats we're grossly erroneous in yesterday's Man Utd-Spurs match.

You, oh wise one, rested your case on the PA/BBC stats. How, oh Master, we're you able to deduce the veracity of those figures and the error in the Sky stats?

And while we're at it, what do you make of yesterday's figures from the Rovers match?
Orient posession figures first
39 mins
47-53

43 mins
39-61

Implied possession duration in the 4 minute spell.
Orient: minus 1 minute, 34 seconds

Rovers: 5 minutes 34 seconds.

Have a think about it Mick. Have a think about what those numbers (and the similar ones that we have seen in each of the Rovers' last 5 league games) mean about the process of possession stat collation.

If we were being generous and assumed that there was some rigour and logic to the process, we'd assume that some statto was sat there in the stand with two stopwatches, starting and stopping each one when Team A or Team B came into possession. That would be a logical way to do it. Full time job though. And bloody expensive mind, if you have to pay someone to sit at every match and do nothing but that.

And if there was someone accurately doing that, how do they get a period of the match when a team has possession time in minus figures?

What do you reckon Mick?

Could it just possibly, just possibly be that they don't record possession like that? That, perhaps, they have someone guessing a number, because they know they have to publish something to satisfy the imbeciles out there who think that possession stats are meaningful?

Surely not, eh?

[mjdgreg]

mjdgreg

I sit at your feet oh Master, awaiting enlightenment.

Either the PA or the Sky possession stats we're grossly erroneous in yesterday's Man Utd-Spurs match.

You, oh wise one, rested your case on the PA/BBC stats. How, oh Master, we're you able to deduce the veracity of those figures and the error in the Sky stats?

It's very simple. I do my research. The Sky box I have is a very useful piece of kit that allows me to record games and pause and rewind where necessary. I've studied many games on TV and I've sat there with my stopwatch and notepad and have verified the accuracy of the BBC stats. They're not quite as good as mine but they are near enough to draw some meaningful conclusions.

I suggest you do some research so we can have a meaningful discussion. Simply stating that stats are meaningless is not good enough.

[Filo]

Mick

I sit at your feet oh Master, awaiting enlightenment.

Either the PA or the Sky possession stats we're grossly erroneous in yesterday's Man Utd-Spurs match.

You, oh wise one, rested your case on the PA/BBC stats. How, oh Master, we're you able to deduce the veracity of those figures and the error in the Sky stats?

And while we're at it, what do you make of yesterday's figures from the Rovers match?
Orient posession figures first
39 mins
47-53

43 mins
39-61

Implied possession duration in the 4 minute spell.
Orient: minus 1 minute, 34 seconds

Rovers: 5 minutes 34 seconds.

Have a think about it Mick. Have a think about what those numbers (and the similar ones that we have seen in each of the Rovers' last 5 league games) mean about the process of possession stat collation.

If we were being generous and assumed that there was some rigour and logic to the process, we'd assume that some statto was sat there in the stand with two stopwatches, starting and stopping each one when Team A or Team B came into possession. That would be a logical way to do it. Full time job though. And bloody expensive mind, if you have to pay someone to sit at every match and do nothing but that.

And if there was someone accurately doing that, how do they get a period of the match when a team has possession time in minus figures?

What do you reckon Mick?

Could it just possibly, just possibly be that they don't record possession like that? That, perhaps, they have someone guessing a number, because they know they have to publish something to satisfy the imbeciles out there who think that possession stats are meaningful?

Surely not, eh?

I actually watched that swing happen on the BBC website, astounding!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Right Mick

So you are telling me that if I get a video of the Orient match and two stopwatches, I'll see a spell just before half time in which Orient have minus one and a half minutes possession?

I'm on it.

Just a minute.

Which stop watch do you use Mick. Apparently mine won't record minus time.

[IDM]

Quote

Yesterday there was a problem with the source of the stats to BBC, Sky etc breaking down.

That said, the only stat that counts, in an individual game, is goals for and against.  For example, possession % aint important because it's more important what you do with the possession, not how much you have.



You are right to a point. The best teams have a possession efficiency of around 3%. The ones that usually get relegated have a possession efficiency of 5% or more. We are currently over 5%. That said, it's early days and on yesterday's evidence the penny may have finally dropped with Saunders.

Sorry but I have no idea what "possession efficiency" is or means or how it is calculated.  Nor do I care - when I go the the game I hope to be entertained by the way both teams play, preferably Rovers, but ultimately I hope for more goals than the opposition.  The last thing I think of when driving home is "oh bugger, we almost lost that one because our possession efficiency was poor".. When I miss a game, entertainment doesn't come into it, it's all about the result.

How do you measure excitement, quality of play etc?  Numbers of passes completed may be high in any one game, but they could be meaningless passes across the defence, whereas incomplete passes could be a dangerous cross that is just cleared by the opposition. 

Some things you just can't measure.  Football is a simple pleasure and there's no need for over-analysis.  Leave that to the manager and coaches who can use the data to help improve the next performance.

[FuzzyDuck]

Well if we're saying 3% possession efficiency is better than 5% possession efficiency, the measure must be an inefficiency measure, otherwise it doesn't work.

I do know the stats systems had issues yesterday.  I was looking at our game on ESPN and there were no updates from 44th to about the 70th minute.  I also heard Final Score mention difficulties.

[mjdgreg]

Sorry but I have no idea what "possession efficiency" is or means or how it is calculated.  Nor do I care - when I go the the game I hope to be entertained by the way both teams play, preferably Rovers, but ultimately I hope for more goals than the opposition.  The last thing I think of when driving home is "oh bugger, we almost lost that one because our possession efficiency was poor".. When I miss a game, entertainment doesn't come into it, it's all about the result.

How do you measure excitement, quality of play etc?  Numbers of passes completed may be high in any one game, but they could be meaningless passes across the defence, whereas incomplete passes could be a dangerous cross that is just cleared by the opposition. 

Some things you just can't measure.  Football is a simple pleasure and there's no need for over-analysis.  Leave that to the manager and coaches who can use the data to help improve the next performance.

Allow me to enlighten you. Possession efficiency is calculated by dividing the number of attempts into your total amount of possession. It's very easy to do and provides a wonderful insight into how a team is performing. Here is the current state of play for Rovers.

396% possession divided by 71 attempts = 5.58% possession efficiency.

Therefore this tells us that we are currently heading for relegation unless we get it below 5%. Luckily Saunders seems to be heeding my advice and we have improved a lot in the last 2 games with a possession efficiency of 4.78%.

[wilts rover]

Sorry but do you have proof - say the full possession efficency stats from League 1 for the past 3 years - to prove that this is true? Or do we just have to trust you because you are a genius ...... and basing your 'facts' on Barcelona?

[mjdgreg]

Sorry but do you have proof - say the full possession efficency stats from League 1 for the past 3 years - to prove that this is true? Or do we just have to trust you because you are a genius ...... and basing your 'facts' on Barcelona?

You should know by now that I only ever deal in facts. The 5 teams that had the best possession efficiency in the top European leagues last season were:

Real Madrid (not Barcelona) - Champions
Juventus - Champions
Man City - Champions
Chelsea - Champions League Winners
Spurs - Excellent season considering all the upheaval regarding the manager.

This is empirical evidence provided in a very scientific way. People would be very foolish to dismiss it out of hand. Relying on gut feeling is the traditional fan's way of looking at things. Luckily for all you I am around to scratch beneath the surface and let everyone know what is really going on.

I'm convinced Saunders has been reading my posts, hence the turnaround in the last 2 games. Between us, hopefully we'll avoid another relegation. It would be nice if once in a while he gave me the credit that is due. I live in hope but even if he doesn't, I'll sleep easier in my bed knowing I've done my bit for the cause.

[mattco]

It suggests a very sad life for Johnny-No-Mates if sitting down with your Sky Box and a stop watch and calculating possesion statistics of football matches is your idea of a good night in.  Get a life, man, get a life.

[mjdgreg]

It suggests a very sad life for Johnny-No-Mates if sitting down with your Sky Box and a stop watch and calculating possesion statistics of football matches is your idea of a good night in.  Get a life, man, get a life.

As regular readers of this forum will know I am a very active serial entrepreneur with my fingers in many pies. I have a very interesting enjoyable life. I take the time and trouble to produce accurate stats to educate the readers of this forum and to help out Mr Saunders. If he follows my advice and we avoid relegation then I will consider my work to have been well worth it.

[IDM]

Allow me to enlighten you. Possession efficiency is calculated by dividing the number of attempts into your total amount of possession. It's very easy to do and provides a wonderful insight into how a team is performing. Here is the current state of play for Rovers.

396% possession divided by 71 attempts = 5.58% possession efficiency.

Therefore this tells us that we are currently heading for relegation unless we get it below 5%. Luckily Saunders seems to be heeding my advice and we have improved a lot in the last 2 games with a possession efficiency of 4.78%.

WTF?  Absolute meaningless drivel - using numbers to make up some stats to prove or disprove some agenda.

You don't win matches or championships on possession or attempts, just goals scored/conceded and points.  You can argue the validity or not of all kinds of stats all day long, but you can't agrue with the match score or the league tables....

[mjdgreg]

WTF?  Absolute meaningless drivel - using numbers to make up some stats to prove or disprove some agenda.

You don't win matches or championships on possession or attempts, just goals scored/conceded and points.  You can argue the validity or not of all kinds of stats all day long, but you can't agrue with the match score or the league tables....

What is it you don't understand about 'possession efficiency'? I thought I'd explained it in a very easy to understand manner with a simple relevant example of how to work it out. I even gave the example of the 5 teams in Europe that had the best possession efficiency to back up my point. What more can I do to convince you? I sometimes get the impression that folk around here like to argue just for the sake of it.

[IDM]

I can understand where you got your stat from, I just don't agree it has any significant meaning.  You can have all the possession in the world, and create hundreds of chances, but if you don't score more than your opponent you don't win!  What don't you understand about that?

The best teams in Europe win their titles because they either score a lot of goals or concede few.  How do your stats work for the CL semi final Barca vs Chelsea?

Also, doesn't over analysing things spoil the enjoyment of the game?  I can admire a solid defensive performance earning a draw or snatching a win with very little possession or chances, as much as a one sided demolition with 20+ chances and a 3-0 win.  Can't you?

[wilts rover]

WTF?  Absolute meaningless drivel - using numbers to make up some stats to prove or disprove some agenda.

You don't win matches or championships on possession or attempts, just goals scored/conceded and points.  You can argue the validity or not of all kinds of stats all day long, but you can't agrue with the match score or the league tables....

What is it you don't understand about 'possession efficiency'? I thought I'd explained it in a very easy to understand manner with a simple relevant example of how to work it out. I even gave the example of the 5 teams in Europe that had the best possession efficiency to back up my point. What more can I do to convince you? I sometimes get the impression that folk around here like to argue just for the sake of it.

Because unless you are comparing like for like - its pointless. If we were competing with the best teams in Europe we would require a 'possession efficency' to compare with those teams. But we are not. We are playing in the English League 1. What 'possesion efficenc'y is required to do well in League 1 - and badly in League 1? Those stats for the past 3 seasons please mjdgreg - or you will just confirm my suspicions that you are making it up just to create an argument.

[MachoMadness]

Why hasn't this clown been banned yet? As I said, it's easy to ignore his usual stats threads when they get locked, but then he just goes and pulls the same crap in hijacking other threads to get attention. I never want to hear this forum referred to as a police state ever again - believe me, this shit would not fly on any other forum you care to mention and Mick would've been banned months ago.

Also, the 'free speech' argument annoys me. It's nothing to do with free speech, and certainly nothing to do with soldiers fighting and dying in two world wars. Why invoke that image? It doesn't add anything to your argument, but people do it because they think invoking the name of soldiers is a catch-all line that no-one can go against. It doesn't apply here. My grandad didn't fight in WW2 so some prick could act the fool on the internet, that's for sure. This isn't the real world, it's the internet, and you're on a forum run and owned by someone else. Being allowed to post on it isn't your right, it's a privilege, and one which should be taken away if you want to abuse it. Honestly, there are still people all over the world who are being legitimately oppressed and having their free speech taken away, and some folk on here are whining about being banned on a forum as if it's the first step on the road to fascism.

[mjdgreg]

Why hasn't this clown been banned yet? As I said, it's easy to ignore his usual stats threads when they get locked, but then he just goes and pulls the same crap in hijacking other threads to get attention. I never want to hear this forum referred to as a police state ever again - believe me, this shit would not fly on any other forum you care to mention and Mick would've been banned months ago.

Also, the 'free speech' argument annoys me. It's nothing to do with free speech, and certainly nothing to do with soldiers fighting and dying in two world wars. Why invoke that image? It doesn't add anything to your argument, but people do it because they think invoking the name of soldiers is a catch-all line that no-one can go against. It doesn't apply here. My grandad didn't fight in WW2 so some prick could act the fool on the internet, that's for sure. This isn't the real world, it's the internet, and you're on a forum run and owned by someone else. Being allowed to post on it isn't your right, it's a privilege, and one which should be taken away if you want to abuse it. Honestly, there are still people all over the world who are being legitimately oppressed and having their free speech taken away, and some folk on here are whining about being banned on a forum as if it's the first step on the road to fascism.

Would I be right in thinking you are quite old?