The Snowball stat thread

[Snowball]

First-half v Second Half


We have not led at half-time once in twenty-one games

We are losing 2-7 in the first half
We are losing 4-15 in the first hour of games

We are winning 20-9 in the last 30 minutes
we are winning 12-2 in the last 15 minutes


First Half Form

P21 W0 - D17 - L4 02-07 17 Points First Half Form
P21 W7 - D09 - L4 22-18 30 Points Second Half Form

Only 2 goals in the first 51 Minutes, 1,071 Minutes, a goal every 536 Minutes
Only 4 goals in the first 60 Minutes, 1,260 Minutes, a goal every 315 Minutes
Only 6 goals in the first 70 minutes, 1,470 minutes, a goal every 245 Minutes

18 Goals in the last 20 Minutes plus injury time = 18 goals in 500 Minutes, a goal every 28 Minutes


[/b]

04% of our goals in the first 45 minutes 50% of the game
04% of our goals in the first 51 Minutes 57% of the game

25% of our goals 06 of 24 in the first 70 minutes 77% of the game
75% of our goals 18 of 24 in the last 20 minutes 22% of the game (plus ET)

46% of our goals 11 of 24 between 70 and 79 minutes 11% of the game
29% of our goals 07 of 24 between 85 minutes and the final whistle = 10% of playing time


1st. 2nd
0-0 2-2 Millwall Home
0-0 2-0 Leicester Away
0-0 0-1 Portsmouth Away
0-1 1-1 Barnsley Home
0-1 1-1 Charlton Away (League Cup)
0-0 0-1 Hull Away
0-1 0-2 Watford Home
0-0 2-0 Doncaster Home
1-1 0-0 Coventry Away
0-1 3-1 Bristol Away
0-0 0-0 Boro Home
0-0 1-0 Burnley Away
0-0 2-2 Derby Home
0-0 1-1 Saints Home
0-0 0-0 Palace Away
0-0 0-1 Forest Away
0-0 1-0 Birmingham Home
0-1 1-1 Cardiff Home
0-0 3-2 Ipswich Away
1-1 2-1 Peterboro Home
0-0 0-1 Blackpool Away<<<<<<<<<<<<<

2-7 22-18 TOTAL





Goal Times

2, 2, 12, 15, 25, 27,29, 48, 50, 51, 55, 56, 59, 59, 61, 64, 67, 67, > >> > 73, 75, 75, 77>>>>>>>>>>>> 80 >>>>>>>>>>90 Goals Conceded
>>10>>>>>26>>>>>>>> 52, 59, > > > > > 64, 65 >>>>> 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 75, 75, 77, 77, 79 >>>>>>> 85, 87, 90, 93, 93, 94, 99 Goals Scored



Histogram


Goals Conceded

00-15 XXXX
16-30 XXX
31-45

46-60 XXXXXXXX
61-75 XXXXXXX
76-90 XX



Goals Scored

00-15 X
16-30 X
31-45

46-60 XX
61-75 XXXXXXXX
76-90 XXXXXXXXX
....90+ XXXXX

[Snowball]

And I thought it was pretty common knowledge throughout the game that we're one of the very fittest sides there is.

Pretty common knowledge, huh?

So on other sites they talk about RFC's fitness?

Other manager's talk about our fitness?

Where exactly does this common knowledge come from?

[Snowball]

if we are crediting half assists to the player that touched the ball before the player, before the player that scored the goal.

Get Hahnemann back and stick him on the right wing.

Typical HNA mis-quoting. I made it explicitly clear that I WASN'T doing that.

I made it clear that "half-assists" were EXCEPTIONAL where a player did something extra-special and clearly
took a MAJOR part in the goal.



Examples, Kebe's pitch-length run for a goal last season. He was not the scorer, nor did he pass to the scorer, but he was a HUGE part of the goal.

Harte's superb cross for "Kebe's Goal" v Peterboro. (Initially credited to Kebe)... Called, "conversationally" "virtually a Kebe goal".
The fact that Church got a toe to it and helped it over the line doesn't detract from Harte's contribution or Kebe's header.


So far in 21 games, I've mention just three of these half-assists, also called major contributions to a goal. 3 in 21 games, that really distorts the stats, doesn't it?

[Snowball]

if we are crediting half assists to the player that touched the ball before the player, before the player that scored the goal.

But we are NOT.

[Snowball]

Prem. when goals are scored

00-15 50 in 15 minutes 13.1%
16-30 52 in 15 minutes 13.6%
31-45 69 in 15 minutes 18.1% <<<< Most Goals per minute
46-60 61 in 15 minutes 16.0%
61-75 66 in 15 minutes 17.3% <<<<< second most goals per minute
76-94 83 in 19 minutes 21.8%

50 15 3.33 Goals per minute
52 15 3.47 Goals per minute
69 15 4.60 Goals per minute HIGHEST <<<<<

61 15 4.07 Goals per minute Fourth
66 15 4.40 Goals per minute SECOND HIGHEST
83 19 4.37 Goals per minute THIRD HIGHEST

So the most goal-full sixth is NOT the last fifteen minutes.

It's the last part of the first half. Strange that.

And the time period from 60-75 is the next highest.

So NOT tired legs, then? Maybe it's to do with strategy?

Shouldn't you also make an adjustment for injury time at the end of the first half?

Yes. It's usually 1 minute

50 15 3.33 Goals per minute
52 15 3.47 Goals per minute
69 16 4.31 Goals per minute
61 15 4.07 Goals per minute
66 15 4.40 Goals per minute THE MOST GOALS SCORED ARE IN THE SEGMENT FROM 61-75 MINUTES
83 19 4.37 Goals per minute


Please explain, folks, if fitness is such a big deal that it's 61-75 minutes NOT the end of the game that matters.

To me it's obviously TACTICS. Clubs play conservatively for 30-35 minutes, then go for a killer goal before half-time.

Clubs come out after half-time and are still a bit conservative, but open up a little.

They really try between 60-75 and then shut up shop (or try to) either settling for a draw or closing down the game when a goal up

It's obvious that sides losing in the last 15 + ET will go for it, or sides needing to win rather than draw, ditto.

The realities of tactics make a lot more sense then fitness levels.

[Snowball]

Why don't you try thinking about it seeing as you're supposedly so clever.

(a) I am clever
(b) I DO think about it
(c) I have been taught to think beyond the knee-jerk level

Evidence? None.

I bow to your superior knowledge.

Measured IQ is meaningless. Degrees are meaningless. Doing courses in careful thinking, also meaningless.

[Snowball]

Shane Long, BTW. Top Scorer at WBA



12 Starts, 983 Minutes played for Premiership WBA and 5 goals, a Premiership goal every 197 Minutes


Well on the way to a ten-goal Premiership Season.

Interestingly, he's still quite deadly. 15 chances, 10 on-target, 5 goals

[Maguire]

I made it clear that "half-assists" were EXCEPTIONAL where a player did something extra-special and clearly took a MAJOR part in the goal.

You gave one to Leigertwood for bumping a pass down the right channel at Ipswich

What a load of nonsense.

[Svlad Cjelli]

And I thought it was pretty common knowledge throughout the game that we're one of the very fittest sides there is.

Pretty common knowledge, huh?

So on other sites they talk about RFC's fitness?

Other manager's talk about our fitness?

Where exactly does this common knowledge come from?

From the number of people in football who talk about it. That's what "common knowledge" means.

Also from the number of players who we've bought from other clubs who we don't play until we've brought them up to our standards of fitness.

[Ian Royal]

I made it clear that "half-assists" were EXCEPTIONAL where a player did something extra-special and clearly took a MAJOR part in the goal.

You gave one to Leigertwood for bumping a pass down the right channel at Ipswich

What a load of nonsense.

And yet hasn't bothered to do anything similar for all our games, thus making his statistics completely unreliable, as usual.

If we want to talk about attacking statistics, I'd say one of the more illumintating points IMO would be our scoring rate whilst Karacan is on the pitch, and whilst Church is on the pitch. In both cases it's less than 0.7 goals a game iirc. Which, lets face it, is piss poor. Shows we don't have enough goal threat with Church playing upfront and we don't have enough creativity through the middle to spread our attacking threat. IMO.

[Svlad Cjelli]

And yet hasn't bothered to do anything similar for all our games, thus making his statistics completely unreliable, as usual.

If we want to talk about attacking statistics, I'd say one of the more illumintating points IMO would be our scoring rate whilst Karacan is on the pitch, and whilst Church is on the pitch. In both cases it's less than 0.7 goals a game iirc. Which, lets face it, is piss poor. Shows we don't have enough goal threat with Church playing upfront and we don't have enough creativity through the middle to spread our attacking threat. IMO.

Don't be silly - according to Snowball's statistics the fact that there are 10 other players in the team are irrelevant. It's just the individual's goal-scoring that's being measured here, and none of the other numerous variables that affect this are taken into account.

[Snowball]

I made it clear that "half-assists" were EXCEPTIONAL where a player did something extra-special and clearly took a MAJOR part in the goal.

You gave one to Leigertwood for bumping a pass down the right channel at Ipswich

What a load of nonsense.

And yet hasn't bothered to do anything similar for all our games, thus making his statistics completely unreliable, as usual.

/quote]


You really are a simpleton Ian, and always sniffing blood.



I HAVE done this for ALL the games, and have said so.

I have said that, IMO, there have only been three cases this season.

1. Elwood's brilliant cross-field ball to Alf which led to a cross and Hunt's goal (Ipswich)

2. Harte's superb cross for Kebe's header which probably would have been a goal even if Church hadn't touched it. (Peterboro)

3. Harte's superb cross which found kebe at the far-post, Kebe then setting up Alf (Peterboro)


Just to explain YET AGAIN. The idea of half-assists is NOT merely the touch before the assist, or any old
pass before the assist, but an EXCEPTIONAL case where (IMO) a player has a MAJOR part in a goal but
is neither the scorer or the official assist.

Examples are the three above, and Kebe's 100 meter dribble last season

[Snowball]

Don't be silly - according to Snowball's statistics the fact that there are 10 other players in the team are irrelevant.
It's just the individual's goal-scoring that's being measured here, and none of the other numerous variables that affect this are taken into account.

Rubbish. Utter rubbish.

Yesterday, the Wolves keeper saved a penalty when his side were already losing 1-0.

That lifted the crowd and lifted the Wolves team who scored the equaliser within 30 seconds and the winner soon after.

Of COURSE I am aware of "other contributions"


But firstly, the thread says ATTACKING stats.

That is, saves, blocks, great defensive organisation etc are NOT BEING EXAMINED


Geddit?




Why is it on the one hand I'm being accused of limiting myself to "just goals" (I'm not)
but ALSO being accused of "nonsense" expansion when I look for assists ans secondary assists?

[Svlad Cjelli]

You really are a simpleton Ian, and always sniffing blood.

Abuse doesn't help your case or enhance your credibility.

Just to explain YET AGAIN. The idea of half-assists is NOT merely the touch before the assist, or any old
pass before the assist, but an EXCEPTIONAL case where (IMO) a player has a MAJOR part in a goal but
is neither the scorer or the official assist.

Doesn't the loose definition and the resulting subjectivity when deciding if these apply or not make the statistics much more open to question - especially as it makes it much more likely that the person making such subjective decisions could be influenced in their selections by what they are trying to prove with this data?

[Svlad Cjelli]

Don't be silly - according to Snowball's statistics the fact that there are 10 other players in the team are irrelevant.
It's just the individual's goal-scoring that's being measured here, and none of the other numerous variables that affect this are taken into account.

Rubbish. Utter rubbish.

Yesterday, the Wolves keeper saved a penalty when his side were already losing 1-0.

That lifted the crowd and lifted the Wolves team who scored the equaliser within 30 seconds and the winner soon after.

Of COURSE I am aware of "other contributions"


But firstly, the thread says ATTACKING stats.

That is, saves, blocks, great defensive organisation etc are NOT BEING EXAMINED


Geddit?




Why is it on the one hand I'm being accused of limiting myself to "just goals" (I'm not)
but ALSO being accused of "nonsense" expansion when I look for assists ans secondary assists?

You may be aware of them - but you are completely ignoring them in your stats, which only measure individual goal-scoring/assists without considering any other variables, of which there are a countless number.

This is not bar-football, where attack and defence each stay in line and don't interact. This is real-world football, where there are so many different variables affecting the opportunities for each single player that it is akin to chaos theory in many ways.

[Snowball]

And I thought it was pretty common knowledge throughout the game that we're one of the very fittest sides there is.

Pretty common knowledge, huh?

So on other sites they talk about RFC's fitness?

Other manager's talk about our fitness?

Where exactly does this common knowledge come from?

From the number of people in football who talk about it. That's what "common knowledge" means.

Like WHO, exactly?

Can you name football pundits who have specifically said Reading FC is the fittest or even one of the fittest?

Can you name any opposition managers who have specifically said Reading FC is the fittest or even one of the fittest?

Can you name any opposition players who have specifically said Reading FC is the fittest or even one of the fittest?


Errr, nope......

Also from the number of players who we've bought from other clubs who we don't play until we've brought them up to our standards of fitness.

Like Alf, you mean, who came straight in?

Like Gorks, you mean, who came straight in?

Like Griffin, you mean, who came straight in?

Like Leighterwood, you mean, who came straight in?

Like Harte, you mean, who came straight in.

And both Mills brothers?


I don't see a lot of sitting round waiting. Do you?



So, basically, you mean Manset, who was too muscled-up, and looks to have a specific
fitness problem/lack of stamina, AND STILL APPEARS TO HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM
AFTER BEING AT THE CLUB FOR ALMOST A YEAR. Does that mean our incredible
fitness regime doesn't work on Manset?

[Snowball]

You may be aware of them - but you are completely ignoring them in your stats, which only measure individual goal-scoring/assists without considering any other variables, of which there are a countless number.

This is not bar-football, where attack and defence each stay in line and don't interact. This is real-world football, where there are so many different variables affecting the opportunities for each single player that it is akin to chaos theory in many ways.

Yeah, right.

So why have top-scorer stats at all?

Why have top-assist stats at all?

[Snowball]

I made it clear that "half-assists" were EXCEPTIONAL where a player did something extra-special and clearly took a MAJOR part in the goal.

You gave one to Leigertwood for bumping a pass down the right channel at Ipswich

Actually, it was a super cross-field, diagonal ball

NOT merely a routine ball down the same side for strikers to chase

What a load of nonsense.

I agree. You're talking nonsense

[Svlad Cjelli]

Which one do you want me to answer first? You don't mind if I keep all my text the same size, do you - I'm confident enough in my own arguments that I don't need to increase the font size to make points.

Yes, I have heard many people comment on Reading's fitness - it was always a source of great pride to Coppell, Dillon and others,, who mentioned it several times. I have the exact date of at least 3 such quotes at home if you really need them. It's frequently been mentioned as something that we have over other teams. Players at Fans Forums have also mentioned a couple of times how more intensive our training is and how they are expected to maintain a higher level of fitness than at previous clubs.

Similarly when Rodgers came in and announced that he was going to have less of an emphasis on fitness and there was substantial criticism. TBH I'm amazed it's in dispute, because it is actually a perfect example of what common knowledge means - the sort of thing that is so will known that people don't mention it frequently any more. Everyone in football knows that the sky is blue, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a quote from anyone pointing this out.

BTW, and for your information, I wasn't talking about Manset at all, but thanks for telling me who I'm talking about. I was actually talking about both Kitson and Halford - both of whom weren't brought into the team until they had got fitness up to required levels )admittedly Kitson was injured initially, but even then his ambient fitness levels were below standard).

As to why we have top-scorer and top-assist stats, it's because they're of interest and fun. But what they measure is very coarse and such basic data, without context or other variables taken into account, just can't be used to justify the sort of things you persistently try to use them for.

Stats are all very well - in context - but you refuse to recognise their limitations.

[Maguire]

I made it clear that "half-assists" were EXCEPTIONAL where a player did something extra-special and clearly took a MAJOR part in the goal.

You gave one to Leigertwood for bumping a pass down the right channel at Ipswich

Actually, it was a super cross-field, diagonal ball

I completely disagree. He side-footed a fairly simple pass down the channel which ALF beat the defender to.

And herein lies the problem - when you can base analysis on actual facts (goals scored, minutes on pitch etc), only the most unscientifically minded of us would choose to introduce subjective measures like "half-assists" into the equation.