Why we want Ferdinand

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
124,411
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Some interesting OPTA stats...

Tackles won:
Rio 66
Wes Brown 52
Silvestre 51
P Neville 51

% of tackles won
Rio 80%
G Neville 76%
Wes Brown 75%
Blanc 74%

Defensive Clearances
Rio 402
Silvestre 235
G Neville 213
Blanc 193

Shots Blocked
Rio 42
Silvestre 36
P Neville 18
Blanc 15

Top defender.Wonder how he measures up to other defenders in the league. AEBM?
 
Gallas comparably better stats than Rio. That said, apparently stats aren't very highly thought of here. ;)
 
Originally posted by redfanatic:
<strong>IMO stats dont lie</strong><hr></blockquote>

Tell that to other forum members who prefer using 'The Force' or a Crystal Ball to evaluate footballers.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Tell that to other forum members who prefer using 'The Force' or a Crystal Ball to evaluate footballers.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by redfanatic:
<strong>IMO stats dont lie</strong><hr></blockquote>

Of course they do, as whilst totally objective, they are inherently flawed by their simplicity. ;)
Click to expand...
 
I think they show the amount of effort and work rate of players. Everyone notices the great goals or brilliant passes, but just as valuable are those who work hard for the 90 minutes. That is why players like Keano, Bex, etc... always top the stats.

Think about that when you consider the purchase.
 
Originally posted by giggzy:
<strong>

agreed.. iam not a big fan of stats.</strong><hr></blockquote>

What about those clubs who win their leagues all the time, or the strikers like RVN who score 36 goals etc. Those are stats too. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

What about those clubs who win their leagues all the time, or the strikers like RVN who score 36 goals etc. Those are stats too. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

It's also a stat that Real Madrid won the European Cup last season, yet were they the best club in Europe last season? Of course not, because another stat shows that they came third in the Spanish league and so are not a good a team as Valencia.

Statistically, I'm also sure that they were outplayed by Leverkusen in the final yet still managed to win it.

The problem with stats is that you can swap and change them about to show just about anything you want. A bit like spreadsheets at large American companies. ;)
Click to expand...
 
You don't think Real were the best club in Europe last year ? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>You don't think Real were the best club in Europe last year ? :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>

How can they be when they were not as good as Valencia or Deportivo? They are both European clubs too.

And a full season league is by far a better measure of the state of a club than two mini leagues and a few knockout games.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by WeasteDevil:
<strong>

How can they be when they were not as good as Valencia or Deportivo? They are both European clubs too.

And a full season league is by far a better measure of the state of a club than two mini leagues and a few knockout games.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Then why hold a Champions League, if not to decide who is the European champion ? It shouldn't be an overstatement to say that the team that wins the Champions League is the best in Europe that year.
Click to expand...
 
Do you think that Arsenal were a better team than us last year? I do.

If we had won the European Cup, would that have made us better than Arsenal? I don't.

If Germany had won the World Cup, do you think people would really say that they are the best international team in the world? I certainly wouldn't.

Whoever wins the European Cup is usually (not always) the best team in that particular tournament, but not the best in Europe IMO.

Strange isn't it?
 
hmm funny that, never thought of it, but i guess the cl is really about who is the best team of LAST year.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Tell that to other forum members who prefer using 'The Force' or a Crystal Ball to evaluate footballers.</strong><hr></blockquote>

oi jedi Raoul :mad: .....the force, hmmmm not something you make fun of eh....do well to remember your roots, jedi.....and btw which idiot uses a crystal ball, the fool.....does he not know they're crap?! ;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Tell that to other forum members who prefer using 'The Force' or a Crystal Ball to evaluate footballers.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think we all like the stat's that help support our argument. Otherwise, they are shite and are inaccurate.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by WeasteDevil:
<strong>Do you think that Arsenal were a better team than us last year? I do.

If we had won the European Cup, would that have made us better than Arsenal? I don't.

If Germany had won the World Cup, do you think people would really say that they are the best international team in the world? I certainly wouldn't.

Whoever wins the European Cup is usually (not always) the best team in that particular tournament, but not the best in Europe IMO.

Strange isn't it?</strong><hr></blockquote>


Then why hold any of the these competitions if the winners are going to be 2nd guessed. IMO, the team that wins the Champions League is the best in Europe (usually the world).
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>


Then why hold any of the these competitions if the winners are going to be 2nd guessed. IMO, the team that wins the Champions League is the best in Europe (usually the world).</strong><hr></blockquote>

I thought the winner of the supercup suppose to be the best!??
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Then why hold any of the these competitions if the winners are going to be 2nd guessed. IMO, the team that wins the Champions League is the best in Europe (usually the world).</strong><hr></blockquote>

What is the FA Cup for then? What does winning that prove?

IMO, the only way we could ever find out who is the best in Europe is to have a 20 team European Super League.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by pjaya:
<strong>

I thought the winner of the supercup suppose to be the best!??</strong><hr></blockquote>

Intercontinental (Toyota thingy)! ;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by WeasteDevil:
<strong>

Intercontinental (Toyota thingy)! ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

aha..thanks. How the feck I let that slip of! :)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by WeasteDevil:
<strong>
IMO, the only way we could ever find out who is the best in Europe is to have a 20 team European Super League.</strong><hr></blockquote>

i'd agree with that, and i bet the italians would win it!
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by mr. destro:
<strong>

i'd agree with that, and i bet the italians would win it!</strong><hr></blockquote>

why? :confused:
They are not doing well at this moment
Click to expand...
 
Thing is though its not a Champions League. A super league is the only way to really say whos best overall. :p
 
Originally posted by WeasteDevil:
<strong>

What is the FA Cup for then? What does winning that prove?

IMO, the only way we could ever find out who is the best in Europe is to have a 20 team European Super League.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Your analogy is limited in that Europe doesn't have a Super League at the moment, and hence the competition that decides the best is the Champions League. Which competition would decide the best team in England if the Premiership didn't exist ? The FA Cup.
Click to expand...
 
Stats never lie imo. Rio has better stats than any we have. But it still dosen't mean better plyers are not out there for cheaper prices. :)
 
How the hell did we cope without stats before the feckin Sky Broadcating Corporation?They didnt bloody exist in football before then,so how the hell did managers evaluate players before then?They must of had an awful time,in fact we all must of had an awful time of it.A fella couldnt tell the difference between a Norman Whiteside and a sack of spuds before those marvellous feckin shtats!!!Shtats Shmats!!
 
Originally posted by benny:
<strong>How the hell did we cope without stats before the feckin Sky Broadcating Corporation?They didnt bloody exist in football before then,so how the hell did managers evaluate players before then?They must of had an awful time,in fact we all must of had an awful time of it.A fella couldnt tell the difference between a Norman Whiteside and a sack of spuds before those marvellous feckin shtats!!!Shtats Shmats!!</strong><hr></blockquote>

True, though how many on this site can claim to be world class managers or professional scouts.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

True, though how many on this site can claim to be world class managers or professional scouts.</strong><hr></blockquote>AhmedDimwotsisname can!

:p

I follow individual stats to a certain degree but I think footy is one of those games were stats, however meaningful, don't necessarily tell the real story about a player.

For instance, there is no stat for positioning. By that I mean Larry and maybe someone like Hamann are adept at being in the right place most of the time; they don't need to make a tackle but their positioning usually dictates how the attacking player makes a decision, which, imo, is almost as good as a successful tackle.

One thing I really liked about Andy Cole was his running off the ball, he'd create wide open spaces for his teammates simply by running wide or whatever. That aspect of the game never makes it onto a stat sheet.

As far as a team is concerned, stats mean more I think. If you are leading the league in goals scored and least goals conceded etc. more often than not, you'll be in the mix at the top, conversely, you could be leading the league in defensive clearances and blocked shots but what does that mean? Basically, imo, it means that your defense is constantly under pressure, or, in other words, you're team is shit!

;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>


Then why hold a Champions League, if not to decide who is the European champion ? It shouldn't be an overstatement to say that the team that wins the Champions League is the best in Europe that year.</strong><hr></blockquote>

the best teams don't necessarily win 'cup' competitions.. and the FA Cup, World Cup and even the CL are cup competitions ie anyone can win in the knockout stages...on any given day.. hence i would never regard a FA Cup winner as one of the 'best' sides in England, without consulting the league table...


weastey's right.. are Germany the second best team in the world?? are they feck... same goes for all tournaments that have been played in the past... Espana 82's a prime example..of the best team not winning.. Brazil82 were head and shoulders above the rest..and easily the best national team i've ever seen..but they'll always have the tag 'the greatest side never to have won the World Cup' infact most pundits would say that the 82 side is second only to the great 1970 team....


The 'best' team's should be decided by a league format.. yes, Arsenal were better than us last season, and even if we would've got to the final, they still would've been better than us over the course of the season...
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by giggzy:
<strong>

the best teams don't necessarily win 'cup' competitions.. and the FA Cup, World Cup and even the CL are cup competitions ie anyone can win in the knockout stages...on any given day.. hence i would never regard a FA Cup winner as one of the 'best' sides in England, without consulting the league table...


weastey's right.. are Germany the second best team in the world?? are they feck... same goes for all tournaments that have been played in the past... Espana 82's a prime example..of the best team not winning.. Brazil82 were head and shoulders above the rest..and easily the best national team i've ever seen..but they'll always have the tag 'the greatest side never to have won the World Cup' infact most pundits would say that the 82 side is second only to the great 1970 team....


The 'best' team's should be decided by a league format.. yes, Arsenal were better than us last season, and even if we would've got to the final, they still would've been better than us over the course of the season...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I find your and Weaste's logic quite bizarre. Of course Germany are the 2nd best team in the world. They proved so during the World Cup - the tournament that decides which team is best.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>I find your and Weaste's logic quite bizarre. Of course Germany are the 2nd best team in the world.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/houllier.gif" border="0" alt="[Houllier]" />

Who did Germany play to get into that final Raoul?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by WeasteDevil:
<strong>

<img src="graemlins/houllier.gif" border="0" alt="[Houllier]" />

Who did Germany play to get into that final Raoul?</strong><hr></blockquote>


They played the hand they were dealt, and beat everyone. Same with Brazil. They're the two best teams in the world.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>They played the hand they were dealt</strong><hr></blockquote>

So, it's like a card game then? Luck?

Germany, second best International selection? Please Raoul!
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Your analogy is limited in that Europe doesn't have a Super League at the moment, and hence the competition that decides the best is the Champions League. Which competition would decide the best team in England if the Premiership didn't exist ? The FA Cup.</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's not limited at all.

At the moment, a cup competition like the CL cannot produce an answer to who is the best club in Europe. Why? Because in the last 8 it is nothing but that - a cup competition. ie. The team who plays better on the day (although even that sometimes doesn't work does it, becase Real were not the better team on the day but still won. Look at our triumph in 99 to see something similar).

You seem to like stats, look at this:

--------------P W D L F A GD PTS
1 Valencia 38 21 12 5 51 27 24 75
2 D Coruna 38 20 8 10 65 41 24 68
3 Real Madrid 38 19 9 10 69 44 25 66
4 Barcelona 38 18 10 10 65 37 28 64

Statistically, those away losses are quite shocking for the best team in Europe are they not? All 10 away from home (in the last 11 away games too <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> )! And they don't exactly score a bucket full do they?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.