Fecking hell, lads. Less pontificating, more stats! Are we or are we not covering more ground than we did when this thread was started? Because if we’re not, then that’s the most damning indictment of the new regime yet.
Workrate
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Thought I would bump this thread.
Seriously, does anyone have assess to workrate/sprint stats?
PS Sorry to anyone who came here to see workrate stats.
Seriously, does anyone have assess to workrate/sprint stats?
PS Sorry to anyone who came here to see workrate stats.
I would like to believe, the main point of our pre season was to dramatically improve fitness and I think we can all agree, he succeeded here. Give him this season to get his tactics together and maybe the 'rebuild' he is talking about will come to vision.
When the opposition has 68% of possession and have significantly more passes and higher passing accuracy), it is only logical that we covered more ground, as we spent most of the game pursuing the ball all over the pitch. By the latter stages of the game, we were too tired to hold on to our lead.
That is not the kind of performance a manager should be pleased with.
Just shows how useless that stat is.
Barca when they were averaging 70% possession used to cover more ground than opponents, as everyone will move off the ball. When Jose was last in the league in distance covered, people came up with the excuse that we play defensive, so don't cover much distance. Now it's the reason why we covered more distance.
Stat is not useless, it just how you interpret it.
In fairness, you can twist that argument whichever way.
Had we won, you could very well say that our running and effort made us match up to their superior quality. Such an argument depends on the results and your viewpoint.
Exactly. Everything is result based and narrative is built on that.
City tend to have 70 % possession in the league and were 12th last season re: distance covered. Having more possession is not correlated with covering more distance, but allows for more sprints. The important stat is about sprints. Still, it's a positive to be able to cover more distance than under Jose, of course, especially if it doesn't lead to more injuries and tiredness in the second half of the season.
Yeah agree with that, shame we don’t get all the stats.
You have the logic backwards.
If you dominate possession and cover more ground then it reflects positively on your style of play and attitude.
But if you have less than 1/3rd of possession, then it can only be interpreted that most of the running around you did was without the ball which is not good. Worse still, if you have covered significantly more ground, it shows your effort did not yield the desired fruit of winning back possession quickly and instead you would likely have been better served staying compact and conserving your energy (not running around like headless chickens).
I dont see how it can be 'twisted' positively even if we had won. How can running around significantly more than the opposition while losing possession lopsidedly be seen in a positive light? It is bad irrespective of the final score line imo.
The better team can lose while the poorer team wins (it is what makes the game 'beautiful') but a poor performance is still a poor performance!
Not really. You are just posting randomly and doesn't make any sense.
and you are just trying to defend the indefensible.
Running around with nothing to show for it is not something to be proud of!
If you are blind or simpleton then maybe yes.
What is the distance covered by a team like Atheltico Madrid, especially a couple of years ago when they won the league or made it to the CL finals?
So, 10 games into the season already, are there now available stats on distance covered by each team in the games so far?
No info? The Bundesliga offers this on their site, for both teams and players. Why is this not available for the most watched league in the world?
ManUtd covered 111.55 kms vs Spurs, they covered 107.18 kms.
Fred covered the highest, 11.62 kms.
Fred covered the highest, 11.62 kms.
Last edited:
It’s great to have a great attitude to the game. I’d still like to see us grow into a more technical and passing unit as opposed to just trying to outwork opposition, especially the good opposition. For too many years when we face the better teams we seem set up to stop them playing more than the other way around.
Of course, balance is key, as we cannot give less effort than opponents, but that is just the start. Currently, if we wanted to field a midfield of ‘ball players’, our offerings in that department would probably include Mata and Pereira. That is laughably far from being good enough. Over the next year or two I’d like us to bridge the gap in the middle from ball winners to ball users.
Of course, balance is key, as we cannot give less effort than opponents, but that is just the start. Currently, if we wanted to field a midfield of ‘ball players’, our offerings in that department would probably include Mata and Pereira. That is laughably far from being good enough. Over the next year or two I’d like us to bridge the gap in the middle from ball winners to ball users.
Not that i can find which is just fecking weird. They have stats for almost everything else, but not distance covered which is a pretty big part of football. Maybe its taboo?
ManUtd covered 111.55 kms vs Spurs, they covered 107.18 kms.
Fred covered the highest, 11.62 kms.
Thanks for posting, i was really interested in seeing this.
Another question is- how does this compare to our average running stats? I'm not being negative (before i'm burned at the stake here) but i wonder if the reason we do so well against the big teams at OT is the fact that we run ourselves into the ground and it just isn't sustainable to do that every game. I think we outran Liverpool at OT too. The technical level of our team is very questionable but I don't think the desire is.
Lingard and Mctominay in particular looked shattered in the last few minutes which is understandable all things considered.
You can check the distance covered stats for previous seasons in official site but you have to check for each individual player
https://www.premierleague.com/stats/player-comparison
Don't know, usually these stats are not available, these are premium stats.
Statistics are 100% anything but meaningless. But that is what statistics are, they do not define a moment but rather regress towards a median. Just because we lose a game against x opponent, you can't look at the metric for that game and go "Well well well, stats are meaningless". Even if it tempting to do so, but to go that route is factually incorrect.
Regressing towards a median is in very broad terms where the variables meet after measuring outliers in one and and the other and the set in between. You use the numbers to predict a set of outcomes based on x numbers of stats that all relate to a predefined action such as GA, GF, xG, xP, etc. If the term is long enough, you can very accurately predict anything over a time period, not just accurately predict the outcome of any given action, in this case a premier league match, just a statistical likelihood.
Take the famous coin toss. "if you flip it enough times, it will always land 50/50". This is based on probability. In the real world you can affect the outcome and game the results if you will. This is also true in football, and that comes down to a players personal skill level, which is why, lo and behold, good players perform better than bad ones.
But in short: Stats are important, both averages and performance metrics that influence game stats. Outside of that you have an value close to infinity of actions that can take part on a football pitch (only limited by the plank constant).
So cheere up friend, these numbers count for something! Even if beating Roachdale is a struggle.
ManUtd covered more distance than City, covered 111.49 kms with Lingard covering the most, 11.88 kms
I wonder how long it will take for someone to find a negative in us outrunning everyone we play.
Without any doubt, will come up with since we are shit we have to outrun.
Anyways we don't get these stats consistently, which is a big shame.
Vs Chelsea - 107.89 KMs - Outran them by 1km
Vs Liverpool - Don't know the total KMs but outran them by 2 kms,
Vs Spurs - 111.55 kms, outran them by 4 kms
Vs City - 111.49 kms, more than City
That's very impressive considering we were at the bottom of the league or in bottom 3 in last 3 years.
How the feck can Jesse cover so much ground and remain so anonymous? 
Absolutely. It shows that this "cultural reboot" that so many people are scoffing at is translating into the effort on the pitch. This will likely continue to improve as Ole manages to strengthen the squad and we are able rotate players a bit more. It's a good sign.
So can we only find out a few games' info in distance covered in some random website quizzes?
How can there be so much coverage and interest, and not any way to get access to these essential stats?
How can there be so much coverage and interest, and not any way to get access to these essential stats?
ManUtd covered 113 KMs vs City (110 KMs). Fred covered 12.18 kms.
I want to say Fred but I’m guessing it’s a trick and the answer is someone who was slated, that being James.
It's Fred. I just took screenshot before answering.
So I kept wondering the whole season when we'd get stats on teams' average distance covered - not yet it appears. But there are individual stats - went searching for it after Ole mentioned Southampton might be the team in the league that runs the most.
Stats from before the league resumed:
Most distance covered this season
I still don't understand why these key stats aren't readily available throughout the season.
Stats from before the league resumed:
Most distance covered this season
- 1 Brighton 3.260 km
- 2 Norwich 3.230 km
- 3 Bournemouth 3.225 km
- 4 Everton 3.168 km
- 5 Chelsea 3.164 km
- 6 Watford 3.163 km
- 7 Liverpool 3.157 km
- 8 Burnley 3.147 km
- 9 Tottenham 3.145 km
- 10 Sheffield 3.126 km
- 11-12 Southampton 3.117 km
- 11-12 United 3.117 km
- 13 Newcastle 3.101 km
- 14 Man City 3.089 km
- 15 Leicester 3.086 km
- 16 West Ham 3.076 km
- 17 Palace 3.065 km
- 18 Wolves 3.046 km
- 19 Arsenal 3.031 km
- 20 Villa 2.998 km
I still don't understand why these key stats aren't readily available throughout the season.
I'm not sure how useful it necessarily is. The three best pressers in the league aren't even in the top 6.
Kind of think it's more about the speed and sharpness you do things at rather than how much you're constantly running about. Norwich run about like mad men but their defenders react to everything about 2 seconds too late.
Brighton seem to run about a lot but you could watch a Lord of the Rings film in the time it takes one of their midfielders to actually play a forward pass.
We were one of the hardest working teams in the league under LVG in terms of distance covered, but we played at half the speed of most teams.
If you move the ball quickly and effectively you don't really need to constantly run about to look like you're buzzing around the pitch.
Brighton seem to run about a lot but you could watch a Lord of the Rings film in the time it takes one of their midfielders to actually play a forward pass.
We were one of the hardest working teams in the league under LVG in terms of distance covered, but we played at half the speed of most teams.
If you move the ball quickly and effectively you don't really need to constantly run about to look like you're buzzing around the pitch.
Bournemouth and Norwich are two teams who are in the bottom 3 who have ran the most? Because they never have the ball?
The distance between top and bottom isn’t even that big, I’m not sure what conclusions could be drawn from this.