by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 11:43
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 11:47
by Zip » 10 Oct 2020 11:50
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 11:58
Zip Snowers. Aerials won. Is that 19th as in better than only 5 teams?
by Zip » 10 Oct 2020 12:00
SnowballZip Snowers. Aerials won. Is that 19th as in better than only 5 teams?
We have 18 aerials won, yes 19th best. BUT I'VE JUST REALISED this isn't a percentage.
Maybe we simply stop more crosses, so there are less headers to win!
36.3 1. Rotherham
34.3 2. Cardiff
33.5 3. Birmingham
32.3 4. Preston
31.5 5. Middlesbrough
31.3 6. Millwall
29.3 7. Stoke
18.0 19. Reading
16.5 20. Blackburn
16.0 21. Huddersfield
15.5 22. Norwich
14.8 23. Coventry
13.5 24. Derby
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 12:09
ZipSnowballZip Snowers. Aerials won. Is that 19th as in better than only 5 teams?
We have 18 aerials won, yes 19th best. BUT I'VE JUST REALISED this isn't a percentage.
Maybe we simply stop more crosses, so there are less headers to win!
36.3 1. Rotherham
34.3 2. Cardiff
33.5 3. Birmingham
32.3 4. Preston
31.5 5. Middlesbrough
31.3 6. Millwall
29.3 7. Stoke
18.0 19. Reading
16.5 20. Blackburn
16.0 21. Huddersfield
15.5 22. Norwich
14.8 23. Coventry
13.5 24. Derby
Only 18 aerials win over four games seems very low to me. That’s only just over four a game.
by Zip » 10 Oct 2020 12:10
SnowballZipSnowball
We have 18 aerials won, yes 19th best. BUT I'VE JUST REALISED this isn't a percentage.
Maybe we simply stop more crosses, so there are less headers to win!
36.3 1. Rotherham
34.3 2. Cardiff
33.5 3. Birmingham
32.3 4. Preston
31.5 5. Middlesbrough
31.3 6. Millwall
29.3 7. Stoke
18.0 19. Reading
16.5 20. Blackburn
16.0 21. Huddersfield
15.5 22. Norwich
14.8 23. Coventry
13.5 24. Derby
Only 18 aerials win over four games seems very low to me. That’s only just over four a game.
I think that's an average of 18 per game
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 12:29
Zip
The least number of shots is a real surprise. It must be incredibly rare for a team doing so well to have had fewer shots than the rest of the League.
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 12:32
by Nameless » 10 Oct 2020 12:33
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 12:35
by Franchise FC » 10 Oct 2020 12:36
Snowball We are currently scoring from 1 in 4 of all shots.
I think it was Ipswich who topped the league for a while with a similar
"crazy" conversion rate. When the rate reverted to average they dropped
down the table and were eventually relegated.
But I don't think our scoring is "freaky". We are getting no extra luck.
I think we are running a tight game (certainly suggested by our goals against column)
and, instead of wasteful long-shots, we are working good chances.
Because they are better than average chances, more go in.
by TiagoIlori » 10 Oct 2020 12:37
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 12:38
Nameless But how many ‘aerials’ did we lose ? As an absolute number it isn’t totally meaningless, typical rubbish football pretend statistic.
If there were only 18 ‘aerials’ to win then it is a good number !
How there can be a ranking on such a pointless thing I fail to see....
Plenty of the other numbers are nonsense as well.
by Zip » 10 Oct 2020 12:40
Franchise FCSnowball We are currently scoring from 1 in 4 of all shots.
I think it was Ipswich who topped the league for a while with a similar
"crazy" conversion rate. When the rate reverted to average they dropped
down the table and were eventually relegated.
But I don't think our scoring is "freaky". We are getting no extra luck.
I think we are running a tight game (certainly suggested by our goals against column)
and, instead of wasteful long-shots, we are working good chances.
Because they are better than average chances, more go in.
Not sure Ben Foster would necessarily agree that we’ve had no extra luck
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 12:40
Franchise FCSnowball We are currently scoring from 1 in 4 of all shots.
I think it was Ipswich who topped the league for a while with a similar
"crazy" conversion rate. When the rate reverted to average they dropped
down the table and were eventually relegated.
But I don't think our scoring is "freaky". We are getting no extra luck.
I think we are running a tight game (certainly suggested by our goals against column)
and, instead of wasteful long-shots, we are working good chances.
Because they are better than average chances, more go in.
Not sure Ben Foster would necessarily agree that we’ve had no extra luck
by Nameless » 10 Oct 2020 13:04
SnowballNameless But how many ‘aerials’ did we lose ? As an absolute number it isn’t totally meaningless, typical rubbish football pretend statistic.
If there were only 18 ‘aerials’ to win then it is a good number !
How there can be a ranking on such a pointless thing I fail to see....
Plenty of the other numbers are nonsense as well.
I agree you need both numbers.
If you are talking crosses into the box, and there are 20 per game and you "only" win 18, then you're giving away 2 chances (or half-chances)
OTOH you might be winning 35 aerials but out of FIFTY crosses and are thus conceding 15 chances
There are "detailed" stats which I've not looked at yet. Maybe they deal with crosses allowed etc.
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 13:11
Nameless But how many ‘aerials’ did we lose ? As an absolute number it isn’t totally meaningless, typical rubbish football pretend statistic.
If there were only 18 ‘aerials’ to win then it is a good number !
How there can be a ranking on such a pointless thing I fail to see....
Plenty of the other numbers are nonsense as well.
by Snowflake Royal » 10 Oct 2020 13:21
Zip Snowers. Aerials won. Is that 19th as in better than only 5 teams?
The least number of shots is a real surprise. It must be incredibly rare for a team doing so well to have had fewer shots than the rest of the League.
by Snowball » 10 Oct 2020 13:22
Nameless
But are ‘aerials’ headers from crosses ?
Nameless
Is every header an ‘aerial’ and do they only include contested headers ?
Nameless
What about headers from long balls in open play ?
Nameless
What if the ball pings around the area and each team has a couple of headers ?
Nameless
And it will (depend) very much on how you play. We tend to play along the ground and don’t have wingers pinging in crosses so inevitably we’ll have fewer ‘aerials’ in attack.
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 415 guests