Last season, EDIT: as in our 20th EPL winning season.
Last edited:
Wayne Rooney | 2012-14 Performances
- Thread starter gooDevil
- Start date
- Status
Last season, EDIT: as in our 20th EPL winning season.
No he didn't. He had a decent season in a struggling team. He was far from bad.
I'm talking about the season when we won the league. Season after last then since the current season is officially over.
EDIT: Rooney also admitted he had an indifferent season, that season btw.
That's exactly what Scholes said. It upset Wayne deeply it seems.
Personally I'm hoping he has a great World Cup because he will come back fired up and full of confidence which is when he is at his best, if he has a mare we are in for two or three months of crap form while he dwells on the criticism he will get.
An article in the Telegraph about Rooney, this para made me think of you @markhrad, following discussions about whether Rooney is responsible for Nani's issues:
Handling criticism goes with the territory of being England’s most-scrutinised, most high-profile player. “I’ve always responded well in the dressing room if I’m not doing well and if someone is shouting at me. I have no problem with that. You can see some players it really affects them. It’s not something I get concerned with.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ses-with-England-squad-at-World-Cup-2014.html
Handling criticism goes with the territory of being England’s most-scrutinised, most high-profile player. “I’ve always responded well in the dressing room if I’m not doing well and if someone is shouting at me. I have no problem with that. You can see some players it really affects them. It’s not something I get concerned with.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ses-with-England-squad-at-World-Cup-2014.html
Oh look, it's the annual off-season Wayne Rooney Caf Mongsplosion.
I read it too and I agree it sounds like its applicable to Nani. However, if Rooney know it adversely affects someone then why do it? By the way he said in the dressing room. I am not sure if he would be so blasé if someone consistently shouted at him on the field in front of the fans.
If that is true, then he shouldn't be captain.
I think you have to have thick skin to play football professionally. If someone lets something like that undermine their game so completely, you really have to see it as a flaw in their game, like being slow or having poor technique. Some people are just very vocal on the football field, if Rooney intimidates Nani just think how he would have been alongside Keane.
Keane would not be shouting at nani for not passing him the ball. Keane's abuse was never personal it was always done in a team context.
You take my other point though? If you cant just shut that stuff out and get on with your game, that is like a glass ceiling on how good you will ever be as a player. Football doesnt get played in a vacuum, there is always going to be that kind of pressure, there are always going to be players who get frustrated when they perceive someone else has played the wrong ball or not seen the run they were making. Passions run high during games. I dont believe this is a question of spite, Rooney isnt trying to belittle Nani (and as someone pointed out in the Nani thread just now, the two have had demonstrably good chemistry on the pitch in the past).
Yeah, clear differences in abuses. 
Rooney's 'abuse' (what a horrendous term to use) is not personal. It's what you see plenty of players do on the field none more so than Keane. Berbatov was another one prone to it. And of course, as blind eyed as you are, you completely ignored all the times the two combined very well and celebrated. No offense, but when you talk about Rooney you talks shite.
12 goals and 10 assists in 2000 minutes PL, sub 100
1 goal and 5 assists in 461 minutes CL, sub 100
3 goals in 270 minutes, FAC, sub 100
16 goals and 15 assists total in 2800 minutes, sub 100
You don't have a "bad" season if you are sub 100.
A bad season is where you have something like 3000 minutes played 3 goals and 2 assists. THAT is a bad season.
Any season where Rooney doesn't score 45 goals is a bad season as far as Rooney is concerned. Even then his "performances" might be subject to criticism.
He provided almost a goal per game in that season. Silly calling it bad.
I am clearly on the wrong thread. Will pop back on to a Rooney thread after the World Cup.
Pete knows his shit tbf. Just not when it comes to Arsenal.
For me Rooney is a perfect example of why stats shouldn't always be used to judge a footballer.
I really don't like him in the #10. I don't think he offers enough in that position at the elite level. I'm sure stats will refute that opinion though as he's always capable of popping up with a goal or assist because he's a quality player. In the days/weeks/months/years after a game everyone will forget that he had his usual 6/10 in a big game but the goal/assist he got will live in the history books forever.
Play him in the #9 or not all all if you ask me. Well, I still fancy that he'd make a good CM but that's just me
I really don't like him in the #10. I don't think he offers enough in that position at the elite level. I'm sure stats will refute that opinion though as he's always capable of popping up with a goal or assist because he's a quality player. In the days/weeks/months/years after a game everyone will forget that he had his usual 6/10 in a big game but the goal/assist he got will live in the history books forever.
Play him in the #9 or not all all if you ask me. Well, I still fancy that he'd make a good CM but that's just me
True that. Always came across so well in the podcasts.
Like all players, sometimes Rooney will have a 6/10 game, score a goal and his score is boosted to a 7/10. What about the games where he gets a 7/10 or 8/10 and doesn't score any goals?
He even said himself he didn't have a good season, and he was dropped by the manager for our biggest game of the season for being out of form. For a player who was our top earner yes I count that as a bad season.
He even said himself he didn't have a good season, and he was dropped by the manager for our biggest game of the season for being out of form. For a player who was our top earner yes I count that as a bad season.
What about them?
Or are you just highlighting further examples of why players shouldn't be judged by statistics?Stats don't have opinions. If 100 people judge a player and they all have a different opinion, who is right? You?What about them?
He isn't, but due to his build and stature, he is dependent on maintaining in peak condition. Due to that, he might rapidly decline as he enters his thirties.
Ask Galileo for his opinion.
How can I even answer that?
Of course opinions are subjective and opinions will differ. However, if you had a group of 100 people that knew what they were talking about judging a performance then they're obviously not all going to differ. The odd one or two, sure. But the majority would reach a similar verdict.
Stats have their uses and in some cases can be used as an absolute way of judging something/someone (penalty conversion for instance) but a 90 minute performance is about so much more. A goal or an assist doesn't necessarily mean that player had a good game. The goal or assist is great though, obviously.
Exactly. A goal or assist can constitute as poking in from a goal-mouth scramble or a five-yard pass to a teammate who subsequently scores also. Basing a players performance solely off of stats is silly, as it doesn't take everything into consideration.How can I even answer that?
Of course opinions are subjective and opinions will differ. However, if you had a group of 100 people that knew what they were talking about judging a performance then they're obviously not all going to differ. The odd one or two, sure. But the majority would reach a similar verdict.
Stats have their uses and in some cases can be used as an absolute way of judging something/someone (penalty conversion for instance) but a 90 minute performance is about so much more. A goal or an assist doesn't necessarily mean that player had a good game. The goal or assist is great though, obviously.
Who are the 100 people and who determines whether they know what they are talking about?How can I even answer that?
Of course opinions are subjective and opinions will differ. However, if you had a group of 100 people that knew what they were talking about judging a performance then they're obviously not all going to differ. The odd one or two, sure. But the majority would reach a similar verdict.
Stats have their uses and in some cases can be used as an absolute way of judging something/someone (penalty conversion for instance) but a 90 minute performance is about so much more. A goal or an assist doesn't necessarily mean that player had a good game. The goal or assist is great though, obviously.
I'm done.
Stats take much more into consideration than a person watching does. Stats record positive and negative contributions of all 22 players simultaneously. Maybe Rain Man could have a go at doing it, but Fred sat in the pub drinking his pint can't. He will have trouble keeping focus on one player and might end up thinking there are 44 players on the pitch by the end.
I wonder why clubs even bother with scouts then
Those games haven't existed for quite a while on Rooney's behalf. That's why lots of people on here criticise him. They also criticise him when he does score or assist - or both - because his overall performances aren't what you expect from him. Stats can be used so easily to manipulate and distort reality. Why do clubs have scouts? There is no notifier of overall performance level. The WhoScored stats are based entirely on aspects such as goal, assist, tackle, interception, etc. So if a player has a poor game and scores a goal, then their rating will increment. It's a flawed concept, though I tend to credit the work they put in.
Think of how many football clubs there are in the world. Think of how many managers, coaches and scouts each of those clubs has. Now think of what % of all those managers, coaches and scouts know what they are doing. 95%? 35% 64%? 12%? 78%? 3%?. Ask David Moyes the question and see what his answer is.
Statistics do not provide a fair reflection on a players overall contribution in a certain game though. Yes, it'll factor in how they've faired with goals, assists, tackles and a few more, but that doesn't offer a fair interpretation of how a player performs during the ninety minutes. Yes, they are very useful, but you cannot base your whole argument on that alone, as it's far too flawed.
You mean the guy who spent £27m on Fellaini and also is the great manager who took us to 7th?
He didn't want to listen to our scouts last summer, fair enough. Maybe stats told him Fellaini would be a better buy than Thiago/Turan who knows.
Stats play a part, but at the end of the day they don't tell you everything, you have to watch players.
In fact lets go back to grassroots where there are no stats, how do these kids get identified as players with potential and immense untapped talent, is it not by scouts who watch the game?
I take stats with a pinch of salt as they can more or less be twisted to support any argument, also it depends on how the stats are recorded in the first place as to their relevance and use.
I.E someone like Scholes didn't have a particularly high assist rate, however if you watched him you would know he was the most creative player in our midfield in his prime. Stats would tell you Beckham was probably the better more creative player in that respect.
- Status