The mancityfans.net football forum

So, this week City have decided to highlight the statistic that is passes completed:

http://www.mcfc.co.uk/News/Team-news/2013/February/The-List-top-five-completed-passes

I don't get this stat. Ok, in one way it shows which of our players touch the ball the most amount of times. But that on the other hand says little without any other stat, like where on the field the passes take place or how many passes went missing and where those passes went missing. Last season it was repeated on several occassions that Leon Britton passed the ball more times than Xavi and I always though to myself "so what?". What does that mean? What is anyone trying to imply with that? It's about as informative as a single fact as revealing someone's shoesize. No, scratch that, I would probably find shoesizes more interesting. Moreover, I think stats should be used to reveal something that's hard so see with the naked eye. In this instance, I don't think anyone's surprised by what names are in the top ten list.

Am I missing something? If so, what? Can you tell me with a gif?

All of those points are true & it doesn't mean so much when the stats are listed in that context but it does give an indication that a player has a reasonable amount of possession I suppose.

It could also tempt one or two people to take an interest & download their stats pack & become involved; keeping it in the public eye as it were.

Ted Hughes wrote:All of those points are true & it doesn't mean so much when the stats are listed in that context but it does give an indication that a player has a reasonable amount of possession I suppose.

It could also tempt one or two people to take an interest & download their stats pack & become involved; keeping it in the public eye as it were.

We're both too lazy. It's never gonna happen. But you have a point.

Cocacolajojo wrote:So, this week City have decided to highlight the statistic that is passes completed:

http://www.mcfc.co.uk/News/Team-news/2013/February/The-List-top-five-completed-passes

I don't get this stat. Ok, in one way it shows which of our players touch the ball the most amount of times. But that on the other hand says little without any other stat, like where on the field the passes take place or how many passes went missing and where those passes went missing. Last season it was repeated on several occassions that Leon Britton passed the ball more times than Xavi and I always though to myself "so what?". What does that mean? What is anyone trying to imply with that? It's about as informative as a single fact as revealing someone's shoesize. No, scratch that, I would probably find shoesizes more interesting. Moreover, I think stats should be used to reveal something that's hard so see with the naked eye. In this instance, I don't think anyone's surprised by what names are in the top ten list.

Am I missing something? If so, what? Can you tell me with a gif?

I think the info you want to know is what most people think is important.However IMO I think if one was to study the facts a bit more closely that info becomes apparent.There is available the kind of info you want methinks if one looks for it.

http://www.squawka.com/players/yaya-toure

Ted Hughes wrote:All of those points are true & it doesn't mean so much when the stats are listed in that context but it does give an indication that a player has a reasonable amount of possession I suppose.

It could also tempt one or two people to take an interest & download their stats pack & become involved; keeping it in the public eye as it were.

I did that when the City Analytics stats were 1st issued Ted, opened a thread on here but the uptake of interest was a bit underwhelming...so I stopped. I reckoned nobody was that bothered by them.

john68 wrote:
I did that when the City Analytics stats were 1st issued Ted, opened a thread on here but the uptake of interest was a bit underwhelming...so I stopped. I reckoned nobody was that bothered by them.

All the stats in the world can't explain why that git of a ref gave a free kick against Carlos and how the lucky git rip van arse got a deflected goal

the stat about who is the biggest girly coward in the league covers that one,arise sir nasri!

zuricity wrote:

john68 wrote:
I did that when the City Analytics stats were 1st issued Ted, opened a thread on here but the uptake of interest was a bit underwhelming...so I stopped. I reckoned nobody was that bothered by them.

All the stats in the world can't explain why that git of a ref gave a free kick against Carlos and how the lucky git rip van arse got a deflected goal

Never expected them to Zurich.
I do agree with the thoughts of the City stats team that there is certain detailed info in those stats that can bring particular weaknesses of a player to light that can be sorted.
My 1st thoughts on Joe Hart was the overwhelming number of times his longer clearances simply gave up possession to the other team.
I was also surprised by times the team was set up differently against different teams at home and away. Far more complex that we usually see discussed on here.

john68 wrote:
Never expected them to Zurich.
I do agree with the thoughts of the City stats team that there is certain detailed info in those stats that can bring particular weaknesses of a player to light that can be sorted.
My 1st thoughts on Joe Hart was the overwhelming number of times his longer clearances simply gave up possession to the other team.
I was also surprised by times the team was set up differently against different teams at home and away. Far more complex that we usually see discussed on here.

yeah , see what you mean. stats don't really express the pure joy and enthusiasm Nasti showed when Joe saved the penalty against Chelsea , nor Nasti's sublime play, perception , anticipation of the ebbs and flows of the game and the oppositions attacks.

zuricity wrote:
yeah , see what you mean. stats don't really express the pure joy and enthusiasm Nasti showed when Joe saved the penalty against Chelsea , nor Nasti's sublime play, perception , anticipation of the ebbs and flows of the game and the oppositions attacks.

I think that with the right calculations most of that will be somewhat quantifiable. I mean sure football is complex but if you have computer programs out there, taking in and calculating the world of finance and them deciding what stocks or securities to buy, it should be possible to measure some of that stuff. Not all but more than the basic stuff they're doing now.

Think it means we can pass the ball .

Might be wrong though.

City64 wrote:Think it means we can pass the ball .

Might be wrong though.

I actually think you are wrong.

Cocacolajojo wrote:

City64 wrote:Think it means we can pass the ball .

Might be wrong though.

I actually think you are wrong.

Cant we pass then ?

Cocacolajojo wrote:
I think that with the right calculations most of that will be somewhat quantifiable. I mean sure football is complex but if you have computer programs out there, taking in and calculating the world of finance and them deciding what stocks or securities to buy, it should be possible to measure some of that stuff. Not all but more than the basic stuff they're doing now.

You mean those programs that see your business deal in real time and nick a dime off you either way ( buy or sell) to the benefit of the trader ? :-) . Libor rate adjustments weren't computer generated , were they? Don't trust any finance house code, i've seen lots of it and it's pretty dodgy code indeed.

john68 wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:All of those points are true & it doesn't mean so much when the stats are listed in that context but it does give an indication that a player has a reasonable amount of possession I suppose.

It could also tempt one or two people to take an interest & download their stats pack & become involved; keeping it in the public eye as it were.

I did that when the City Analytics stats were 1st issued Ted, opened a thread on here but the uptake of interest was a bit underwhelming...so I stopped. I reckoned nobody was that bothered by them.

I'm very interested indeed but wheras I can have ten arguments at once on here & still get loads of productive stuff done, sifting through all that info would probably ruin me.

zuricity wrote:

Cocacolajojo wrote:
I think that with the right calculations most of that will be somewhat quantifiable. I mean sure football is complex but if you have computer programs out there, taking in and calculating the world of finance and them deciding what stocks or securities to buy, it should be possible to measure some of that stuff. Not all but more than the basic stuff they're doing now.

You mean those programs that see your business deal in real time and nick a dime off you either way ( buy or sell) to the benefit of the trader ? :-) . Libor rate adjustments weren't computer generated , were they? Don't trust any finance house code, i've seen lots of it and it's pretty dodgy code indeed.

Touché... Actually I met a person once who worked with these types of codes and he said that it was very common (what that meant I asked but have forgot now) for the programs of different brokers to "congregate" and fuck up the share value of a random company without no obvious explanation than faulty coding.... but I know for a fact that the Oakland A's started using a lot of those codes for the analyze of defensive performances in Baseball, I.E. the part of the game that's fluid, and they've been doing pretty well the last season or two defensively. Whether that's just luck or indeed that there might be sufficient ways do analyze the analyze of data is anyone's guess I guess.

john68 wrote:

zuricity wrote:

john68 wrote:
I did that when the City Analytics stats were 1st issued Ted, opened a thread on here but the uptake of interest was a bit underwhelming...so I stopped. I reckoned nobody was that bothered by them.

All the stats in the world can't explain why that git of a ref gave a free kick against Carlos and how the lucky git rip van arse got a deflected goal

Never expected them to Zurich.
I do agree with the thoughts of the City stats team that there is certain detailed info in those stats that can bring particular weaknesses of a player to light that can be sorted.
My 1st thoughts on Joe Hart was the overwhelming number of times his longer clearances simply gave up possession to the other team.
I was also surprised by times the team was set up differently against different teams at home and away. Far more complex that we usually see discussed on here.

I'd be willing to team up and share the work load if you feel you're up for a another stab at it.

Cocacolajojo wrote:
Touché... Actually I met a person once who worked with these types of codes and he said that it was very common (what that meant I asked but have forgot now) for the programs of different brokers to "congregate" and fuck up the share value of a random company without no obvious explanation than faulty coding.... but I know for a fact that the Oakland A's started using a lot of those codes for the analyze of defensive performances in Baseball, I.E. the part of the game that's fluid, and they've been doing pretty well the last season or two defensively. Whether that's just luck or indeed that there might be sufficient ways do analyze the analyze of data is anyone's guess I guess.

Have a read of "Soccernomics".

Very interesting stuff about the mathematical and logical analysis of football, and there is a lot of reference to the situation at Oakland and Moneyball. Book has been around 5 or so years, originally titles "why England always lose" or somethin similar, but has recently been updated and retitled.

There are some really good points in the book about things like transfers, tactics, etc and how those who have embraced the statistical side of the game have generally prospered.

But whilst reading it, all I could think of was Charlie Hughes' early interpretation of statistics and analysis and how it set the british game back a generation

Sparty,

The problem with the Hughes stuff wasn't the stats but the way they were used. For Hughes and his disciples, they became all important and ended up defining how the game should be played.
Though stats may play an important role, as Zurich quite rightly pointed out, they can never tell the whole story. They can only ever be a tool used when added to the other factors they miss.

YoYo...(pronounced correctly?)

I'm not sure if you have seen the raw data issued by the City Analytics dept. It contains just about every action of every player in every game of last year's Prem season. The sheer weight of it is overwhelming. I managed to extract the City squad stuff from it and then started to compile and total the info of each individual player. Very time consuming.
I posted the Joe Hart stuff but considering the time, work and effort involved, the interest showed was minimal. At present, I am a bit stuck for free time but if there was sufficient demand, given a bit more time, I would certainly give it another go....and would be grateful for any help, input or ideas that may speed it up.

john68 wrote:YoYo...(pronounced correctly?)

I'm not sure if you have seen the raw data issued by the City Analytics dept. It contains just about every action of every player in every game of last year's Prem season. The sheer weight of it is overwhelming. I managed to extract the City squad stuff from it and then started to compile and total the info of each individual player. Very time consuming.
I posted the Joe Hart stuff but considering the time, work and effort involved, the interest showed was minimal. At present, I am a bit stuck for free time but if there was sufficient demand, given a bit more time, I would certainly give it another go....and would be grateful for any help, input or ideas that may speed it up.

I think it's more like Cheo Cheo, but the e is silent.

Fuck interest. What about mutual admiration society? Have you ever thought about that?

Seriously, if you're up for it in the future and you get the time, I'd be more than happy to team up.