by paddy20 » 13 Aug 2013 09:03
by stickywhisky » 13 Aug 2013 09:14
by Colin Cheeselog » 13 Aug 2013 09:28
by Cureton's Volley » 13 Aug 2013 09:40
by Fox Talbot » 13 Aug 2013 09:47
stickywhisky Not sure if serious??
by paddy20 » 13 Aug 2013 10:36
Colin Cheeselog So in order to improve, football teams should replace their poorest performers with players that will play better? This is a revolutionary new way of thinking.
Dear Football Association,
I have an idea that will change football forever...
by paddy20 » 13 Aug 2013 10:37
Fox Talbotstickywhisky Not sure if serious??
Read 'The Numbers Game' - all in there.
by Platypuss » 13 Aug 2013 10:39
by Davezk » 13 Aug 2013 10:40
by blueroyals » 13 Aug 2013 10:59
by Geekins » 13 Aug 2013 11:05
by PistolPete » 13 Aug 2013 11:40
paddy20Colin Cheeselog So in order to improve, football teams should replace their poorest performers with players that will play better? This is a revolutionary new way of thinking.
Dear Football Association,
I have an idea that will change football forever...
Not sure that you understood. If the best player is slightly worse and the worst player is slightly better statistics show that you will get better results
by Ian Royal » 13 Aug 2013 12:43
by NewCorkSeth » 13 Aug 2013 13:01
PistolPete
Neuer
Dante
Van Buyten
Lahm
Alaba
Schweinsteiger
Muller
My 62 year old dad
Robben
Ribery
Mandzukic
Vs
Aldershots Team Vs Grimbsby
01 Morris
02 Oastler
05 Goodman
06 Webster
15 Barker
04 Stanley
07 Mekki
08 Rowlands
19 Molesley
09 Williams
10 Paterson
Who would win? Or have I got it wrong? Surely the idea is a bit more complex??
Better to rename the thread "Who is the weakest link"? But then again, it's a flawed question as it depends on formation etc!
by PistolPete » 13 Aug 2013 13:14
by NewCorkSeth » 13 Aug 2013 13:17
by paddy20 » 13 Aug 2013 14:07
PistolPetepaddy20Colin Cheeselog So in order to improve, football teams should replace their poorest performers with players that will play better? This is a revolutionary new way of thinking.
Dear Football Association,
I have an idea that will change football forever...
Not sure that you understood. If the best player is slightly worse and the worst player is slightly better statistics show that you will get better results
Neuer
Dante
Van Buyten
Lahm
Alaba
Schweinsteiger
Muller
My 62 year old dad
Robben
Ribery
Mandzukic
Vs
Aldershots Team Vs Grimbsby
01 Morris
02 Oastler
05 Goodman
06 Webster
15 Barker
04 Stanley
07 Mekki
08 Rowlands
19 Molesley
09 Williams
10 Paterson
Who would win? Or have I got it wrong? Surely the idea is a bit more complex??
Better to rename the thread "Who is the weakest link"? But then again, it's a flawed question as it depends on formation etc!
by paddy20 » 13 Aug 2013 14:14
Ian Royal Statistically (in other words, not necessarily reliably) the two weakest performers so far, iirc, have been Blackman against Bolton (definitely) followed by ALF against Ipswich (I think). I'll check when I'm home.
But the sample size is really too small to draw any firm conclusions yet, and in any case, performance has far too many unmeasurable or subjective variables to be based solely on statistics, which is where snowstat consistently goes wrong. It must also be based on observation and opinion.
by NewCorkSeth » 13 Aug 2013 14:15
by creative_username_1 » 13 Aug 2013 14:24
Users browsing this forum: Biscuit goalie, Franchise FC, From Despair To Where?, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Tinpot Royal, WestYorksRoyal and 576 guests