gaudy wrote:but he came from barcelona dont you know so he must be excellent!
we got done here,simple as
Green & Blue wrote:gaudy wrote:but he came from barcelona dont you know so he must be excellent!
we got done here,simple as
We did not get done he's had some great games for us but simply he's playing in the wrong position.
Were you not slightly surprised that Mancini started utilizing him as an advanced midfield player?
I know i was
Green & Blue wrote:gaudy wrote:but he came from barcelona dont you know so he must be excellent!
we got done here,simple as
We did not get done he's had some great games for us but simply he's playing in the wrong position.
Were you not slightly surprised that Mancini started utilizing him as an advanced midfield player?
I know i was
Londonblue1 wrote:yaya came from barca with the skills for playing in a team that always makes options for a player with the ball,city do not play that way so he more than often ends up running into a cul de sac or passing backwards and I think with time yaya,silva,aj and tevez will get used to playing together if we ever play with that many attacking options.
gaudy wrote:Londonblue1 wrote:yaya came from barca with the skills for playing in a team that always makes options for a player with the ball,city do not play that way so he more than often ends up running into a cul de sac or passing backwards and I think with time yaya,silva,aj and tevez will get used to playing together if we ever play with that many attacking options.
i wouldnt hold your breath mate!
Rag_hater wrote:
Are you still upset I called you a hippy?:)
I didn't know that the criteria on here was that you had to have played sport in the real world before you could comment.(does the school team count?)
Utterly clueless?I know what I see and if my interpretation is different to yours does that make me clueless?Well I should have realised if a clued up banker like yourself or the other experts on here tell me something it has to be right and unquestionable.I'll be more compliant to anything you say in future but I'm sure a tolerant guy like you seem to be(only going of what you said in the Mario thread)able to understand my foibles.
For me today I saw Yaya closing down Essin a few time and some other Chelski players.He didn't get any tackles in but he run around most of the time he was on the pitch from what I saw of him.
All this stuff about him standing around huffing and puffing is rubbish.
ant london wrote:Rag_hater wrote:
Are you still upset I called you a hippy?:)
I didn't know that the criteria on here was that you had to have played sport in the real world before you could comment.(does the school team count?)
Utterly clueless?I know what I see and if my interpretation is different to yours does that make me clueless?Well I should have realised if a clued up banker like yourself or the other experts on here tell me something it has to be right and unquestionable.I'll be more compliant to anything you say in future but I'm sure a tolerant guy like you seem to be(only going of what you said in the Mario thread)able to understand my foibles.
For me today I saw Yaya closing down Essin a few time and some other Chelski players.He didn't get any tackles in but he run around most of the time he was on the pitch from what I saw of him.
All this stuff about him standing around huffing and puffing is rubbish.
First off. No. It was the type of reply I would fully expect from you, lacking in insight and basic intelligence and added little.
The point re your analysis is just that it smacks of someone who has watched an awful lot of sport but played very little as it is precisely the type of play (or lack thereof) that statistics do not show that you are (seemingly) fundamentally incapable of seeing and analysing.
You might not be utterly clueless but you're well on your way there
ant london wrote:Rag_hater wrote:
Are you still upset I called you a hippy?:)
I didn't know that the criteria on here was that you had to have played sport in the real world before you could comment.(does the school team count?)
Utterly clueless?I know what I see and if my interpretation is different to yours does that make me clueless?Well I should have realised if a clued up banker like yourself or the other experts on here tell me something it has to be right and unquestionable.I'll be more compliant to anything you say in future but I'm sure a tolerant guy like you seem to be(only going of what you said in the Mario thread)able to understand my foibles.
For me today I saw Yaya closing down Essin a few time and some other Chelski players.He didn't get any tackles in but he run around most of the time he was on the pitch from what I saw of him.
All this stuff about him standing around huffing and puffing is rubbish.
First off. No. It was the type of reply I would fully expect from you, lacking in insight and basic intelligence and added little.
The point re your analysis is just that it smacks of someone who has watched an awful lot of sport but played very little as it is precisely the type of play (or lack thereof) that statistics do not show that you are (seemingly) fundamentally incapable of seeing and analysing.
You might not be utterly clueless but you're well on your way there
Rag_hater wrote:ant london wrote:Rag_hater wrote:
Are you still upset I called you a hippy?:)
I didn't know that the criteria on here was that you had to have played sport in the real world before you could comment.(does the school team count?)
Utterly clueless?I know what I see and if my interpretation is different to yours does that make me clueless?Well I should have realised if a clued up banker like yourself or the other experts on here tell me something it has to be right and unquestionable.I'll be more compliant to anything you say in future but I'm sure a tolerant guy like you seem to be(only going of what you said in the Mario thread)able to understand my foibles.
For me today I saw Yaya closing down Essin a few time and some other Chelski players.He didn't get any tackles in but he run around most of the time he was on the pitch from what I saw of him.
All this stuff about him standing around huffing and puffing is rubbish.
First off. No. It was the type of reply I would fully expect from you, lacking in insight and basic intelligence and added little.
The point re your analysis is just that it smacks of someone who has watched an awful lot of sport but played very little as it is precisely the type of play (or lack thereof) that statistics do not show that you are (seemingly) fundamentally incapable of seeing and analysing.
You might not be utterly clueless but you're well on your way there
Ok Mr super intelligent (I assume your IQ is of the scale)as I'm so clueless can you point out to me please (cos I'm to clueless)where I have used stats to analyse incidents I am not trying to illustrate.
I wonder why it is though that when the facts(stats) are brought up to validate an argument a reason for those facts being questioned is needed.Is it to argue a point that has no truth to back it up.Its just opinion.Therefore anybody who justifies their argument with stats is clueless.I see.
Today, all Premier League clubs have cameras to track match data and roughly 95 percent of Championship clubs do as well. At Manchester City, Fleig has a team of seven analysts with him working with the first team all the way through to the u-9 boy’s squad. Without Fleig and Allardyce, Bolton also continues to develop their data modeling and other top of the table clubs like Liverpool and Arsenal are catching up behind the leadership of analytical minds like John Henry and Arsene Wenger.
aaron bond wrote:Rag_hater wrote:ant london wrote:Rag_hater wrote:
Are you still upset I called you a hippy?:)
I didn't know that the criteria on here was that you had to have played sport in the real world before you could comment.(does the school team count?)
Utterly clueless?I know what I see and if my interpretation is different to yours does that make me clueless?Well I should have realised if a clued up banker like yourself or the other experts on here tell me something it has to be right and unquestionable.I'll be more compliant to anything you say in future but I'm sure a tolerant guy like you seem to be(only going of what you said in the Mario thread)able to understand my foibles.
For me today I saw Yaya closing down Essin a few time and some other Chelski players.He didn't get any tackles in but he run around most of the time he was on the pitch from what I saw of him.
All this stuff about him standing around huffing and puffing is rubbish.
First off. No. It was the type of reply I would fully expect from you, lacking in insight and basic intelligence and added little.
The point re your analysis is just that it smacks of someone who has watched an awful lot of sport but played very little as it is precisely the type of play (or lack thereof) that statistics do not show that you are (seemingly) fundamentally incapable of seeing and analysing.
You might not be utterly clueless but you're well on your way there
Ok Mr super intelligent (I assume your IQ is of the scale)as I'm so clueless can you point out to me please (cos I'm to clueless)where I have used stats to analyse incidents I am not trying to illustrate.
I wonder why it is though that when the facts(stats) are brought up to validate an argument a reason for those facts being questioned is needed.Is it to argue a point that has no truth to back it up.Its just opinion.Therefore anybody who justifies their argument with stats is clueless.I see.
Today, all Premier League clubs have cameras to track match data and roughly 95 percent of Championship clubs do as well. At Manchester City, Fleig has a team of seven analysts with him working with the first team all the way through to the u-9 boy’s squad. Without Fleig and Allardyce, Bolton also continues to develop their data modeling and other top of the table clubs like Liverpool and Arsenal are catching up behind the leadership of analytical minds like John Henry and Arsene Wenger.
No one is saying stats aren't useful, but you put your points across like they're the only thing that's important. Whether you mean that or not is another thing, but that's how it appears.
Ok...so Yaya may have made 28 passes or whatever, but if they're all to a player 5 yards behind him, then who cares? Can you provide a stat for each time he backed out of a 50/50 challenge? Or when he slowly jogs/walks back when the other team are on the attack.
All people are trying to say is that you can't just take some stats and use only them as the reason for your argument. Anyone can use stats and be selective with them to support their points. There's just a bit more to consider, that's all.
Rag_hater wrote:aaron bond wrote:Rag_hater wrote:ant london wrote:Rag_hater wrote:
Are you still upset I called you a hippy?:)
I didn't know that the criteria on here was that you had to have played sport in the real world before you could comment.(does the school team count?)
Utterly clueless?I know what I see and if my interpretation is different to yours does that make me clueless?Well I should have realised if a clued up banker like yourself or the other experts on here tell me something it has to be right and unquestionable.I'll be more compliant to anything you say in future but I'm sure a tolerant guy like you seem to be(only going of what you said in the Mario thread)able to understand my foibles.
For me today I saw Yaya closing down Essin a few time and some other Chelski players.He didn't get any tackles in but he run around most of the time he was on the pitch from what I saw of him.
All this stuff about him standing around huffing and puffing is rubbish.
First off. No. It was the type of reply I would fully expect from you, lacking in insight and basic intelligence and added little.
The point re your analysis is just that it smacks of someone who has watched an awful lot of sport but played very little as it is precisely the type of play (or lack thereof) that statistics do not show that you are (seemingly) fundamentally incapable of seeing and analysing.
You might not be utterly clueless but you're well on your way there
Ok Mr super intelligent (I assume your IQ is of the scale)as I'm so clueless can you point out to me please (cos I'm to clueless)where I have used stats to analyse incidents I am not trying to illustrate.
I wonder why it is though that when the facts(stats) are brought up to validate an argument a reason for those facts being questioned is needed.Is it to argue a point that has no truth to back it up.Its just opinion.Therefore anybody who justifies their argument with stats is clueless.I see.
Today, all Premier League clubs have cameras to track match data and roughly 95 percent of Championship clubs do as well. At Manchester City, Fleig has a team of seven analysts with him working with the first team all the way through to the u-9 boy’s squad. Without Fleig and Allardyce, Bolton also continues to develop their data modeling and other top of the table clubs like Liverpool and Arsenal are catching up behind the leadership of analytical minds like John Henry and Arsene Wenger.
No one is saying stats aren't useful, but you put your points across like they're the only thing that's important. Whether you mean that or not is another thing, but that's how it appears.
Ok...so Yaya may have made 28 passes or whatever, but if they're all to a player 5 yards behind him, then who cares? Can you provide a stat for each time he backed out of a 50/50 challenge? Or when he slowly jogs/walks back when the other team are on the attack.
All people are trying to say is that you can't just take some stats and use only them as the reason for your argument. Anyone can use stats and be selective with them to support their points. There's just a bit more to consider, that's all.
When Terry(quite a tough guy) was rolling around on the floor having to have treatment I think that would have been a good time to ask him if he thinks Yaya backed out of a challenge.I think him hurting Terry suggests that Yaya went for the ball with the thought he might get hurt.And if he had done many more like that don't you think he would have got booked or even sent of.The ref warned him that was his last chance.
He passed sideways?That's his job.Along with passing a few forward his job is to keep the ball.NDJ passes the ball mainly sideways and gets lauded for it.Our creative player David plays it sideways plenty of times aswell so that critisim seems a bit unwarrented
IMO.
He jog/walks back when the other team are on the attack.Were the goals Chelski scored because of Yaya?
He walks around midfield.Which player doesn't when the ball is other side of pitch.For me he is staying in position but if you consider that as being lazy then that is not what I think.
Rag_hater wrote:Woah...you clearly are a big Yaya fan.
It's a shame you're not in charge of the team. I'd love to see the type of football you would produce if you believe our most forward/attacking centre midfielder's job is to pass the ball sideways and keep the ball.
I'm sure you'll dig out a stat somewhere though to support that ;-)
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: carl_feedthegoat, CTID Hants, Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], nottsblue, Sparklehorse, Stan and 168 guests