Rev Algenon Stickleback HSnowball The stat that matters is possession in the final third, shots on target, goals.
Shots on target is a pretty awful way of measuring good chances created. A shot that goes wide can be a far better chance than a tame effort from 20 yards that's on target. Those sort of shots are normally the result of a team failing to be able to create clear chance, and getting desperate, rather than indicating playing well.
I didn't ONLY say "shots on target". I said, "possession in the final third, shots on target, goals." ie, it's getting hotter.
Any team can increase its possession stats by passing around the back four. The point of my statement was the obvious one, that what matters is the chances you make, and, ultimately, goals.
For passing you really want to be measuring effective passes, i.e. ones that make a contribution to play, rather than just passes made.
I'm sure we had much more possession under Rodgers then now, but we were far less effective, and created far less.
Oh I didn't know that.
I thought a pass that went to the opposition was better.
I think if you check the article they were on about COMPLETED passes.
Possesion in the final third isn't an indicator of much either.
Most teams who struggle to break down a defence will have a lot of final third possession.
Possession inside the box would be indicative of creating dangerous situations, while relating
that to the number of decent chances creating would give some sort of measure how creative a team is.
I wasn't trying to get into a detailed analysis of the above, merely to say
"a lot of Swansea's possession is meaningless, back-four boring stuff"
That is all.
The basic fact is that for all of Swansea's possession, we've still scored a lot more goals than them.
Means NOTHING. They finished with a better GD, did they not, and three points above us?
(Actually, had we not played silly buggers v Sheffield United and WON 3-2 instead of lost 2-3
we'd've been third on GD, and probably clear favourites for the PO Final.)
