Weekend Football

[Winston Biscuit]

Excuse my ignorance, but WTF is that ?

it's literally looking over your shoulder etc. having an awareness of what's going on

It's one of those things you think is bullshit until you watch Harrry Maguire not doing it and getting continually caught out

As with any stats depends upon how you use them. Say you work out that scanning contributes 3% to player success (however you've chosen to measure this) you can add this to your model.

prediction = (weight_1).factor_1 + (weight_2). factor_2.... + bias

Are you seriously suggesting that there is someone watching each and every player for every minute of the game, checking whether they are checking ?
If so that is
If not, then the stat is completely useless (even if it’s not useless by default)

its made up nonsense for social media folk.

Its trying to invent the next drilled down level of analysis because we seem to live in a world where the more you pretend you have looked at something in detail, the more credit some people give you for it and assume it means you must know something.

[BRO_BOT]

it's literally looking over your shoulder etc. having an awareness of what's going on

It's one of those things you think is bullshit until you watch Harrry Maguire not doing it and getting continually caught out

As with any stats depends upon how you use them. Say you work out that scanning contributes 3% to player success (however you've chosen to measure this) you can add this to your model.

prediction = (weight_1).factor_1 + (weight_2). factor_2.... + bias

Are you seriously suggesting that there is someone watching each and every player for every minute of the game, checking whether they are checking ?
If so that is
If not, then the stat is completely useless (even if it’s not useless by default)

its made up nonsense for social media folk.

Its trying to invent the next drilled down level of analysis because we seem to live in a world where the more you pretend you have looked at something in detail, the more credit some people give you for it and assume it means you must know something.

no it isn't. Companies monitor all the data.

Ask yourself what you value in a player. Then think how can I quantify that...if one of those things is awareness, then measuring how many times a player 'scans' isn't ridiculous.

[Winston Biscuit]

Are you seriously suggesting that there is someone watching each and every player for every minute of the game, checking whether they are checking ?
If so that is
If not, then the stat is completely useless (even if it’s not useless by default)

its made up nonsense for social media folk.

Its trying to invent the next drilled down level of analysis because we seem to live in a world where the more you pretend you have looked at something in detail, the more credit some people give you for it and assume it means you must know something.

no it isn't. Companies monitor all the data.

Ask yourself what you value in a player. Then think how can I quantify that...if one of those things is awareness, then measuring how many times a player 'scans' isn't ridiculous.

to know what he is 'scanning' you would need to know exactly where his eyes are focused on, whats in his peripheral vision, how quickly his brain is processing it and what he takes from it. All things no one but the player could ever know. 'scan stats' are basically 'turned his head in a direction stats'

its laughable nonsense

[Franchise FC]

its made up nonsense for social media folk.

Its trying to invent the next drilled down level of analysis because we seem to live in a world where the more you pretend you have looked at something in detail, the more credit some people give you for it and assume it means you must know something.

no it isn't. Companies monitor all the data.

Ask yourself what you value in a player. Then think how can I quantify that...if one of those things is awareness, then measuring how many times a player 'scans' isn't ridiculous.

to know what he is 'scanning' you would need to know exactly where his eyes are focused on, whats in his peripheral vision, how quickly his brain is processing it and what he takes from it. All things no one but the player could ever know. 'scan stats' are basically 'turned his head in a direction stats'

its laughable nonsense

I’m with the Biscuit on this one

[BRO_BOT]

no it isn't. Companies monitor all the data.

Ask yourself what you value in a player. Then think how can I quantify that...if one of those things is awareness, then measuring how many times a player 'scans' isn't ridiculous.

to know what he is 'scanning' you would need to know exactly where his eyes are focused on, whats in his peripheral vision, how quickly his brain is processing it and what he takes from it. All things no one but the player could ever know. 'scan stats' are basically 'turned his head in a direction stats'

its laughable nonsense

I’m with the Biscuit on this one

...and you can quantify this how?

As I said earlier it depends on what you want to do with the stats. If I was building a player recruitment model I'd have some metric that determined a good player (say their avg rating) then you'd work out how the rest of the data correlates. Scanning would have a low weight but it still might provide some useful info (which it does) i.e.



As for journos/pundits using the stat it should be limited to he does/doesn't scan. Watch Harry Maguire, he barely looks around, so he often gets caught out

[Pepe the Horseman]

to know what he is 'scanning' you would need to know exactly where his eyes are focused on, whats in his peripheral vision, how quickly his brain is processing it and what he takes from it. All things no one but the player could ever know. 'scan stats' are basically 'turned his head in a direction stats'

its laughable nonsense

I’m with the Biscuit on this one

...and you can quantify this how?

As I said earlier it depends on what you want to do with the stats. If I was building a player recruitment model I'd have some metric that determined a good player (say their avg rating) then you'd work out how the rest of the data correlates. Scanning would have a low weight but it still might provide some useful info (which it does) i.e.



As for journos/pundits using the stat it should be limited to he does/doesn't scan. Watch Harry Maguire, he barely looks around, so he often gets caught out

Take a hike, nerd.

[Snowflake Royal]

to know what he is 'scanning' you would need to know exactly where his eyes are focused on, whats in his peripheral vision, how quickly his brain is processing it and what he takes from it. All things no one but the player could ever know. 'scan stats' are basically 'turned his head in a direction stats'

its laughable nonsense

I’m with the Biscuit on this one

...and you can quantify this how?

As I said earlier it depends on what you want to do with the stats. If I was building a player recruitment model I'd have some metric that determined a good player (say their avg rating) then you'd work out how the rest of the data correlates. Scanning would have a low weight but it still might provide some useful info (which it does) i.e.



As for journos/pundits using the stat it should be limited to he does/doesn't scan. Watch Harry Maguire, he barely looks around, so he often gets caught out

What cock.

[Sanguine]

I'd counter the supposed usefulness of the 'scanning' stat anecdotally. 'In my playing days' I spent a lot of time looking around having no clue what was going on at all.

[6ft Kerplunk]

Plus don't they tell us all the time the the great players don't have to look because they know instinctively whats going on. Its just the latest buzzword bullshit needed now that xG is so commonplace.

[Winston Biscuit]

I have invented In Game Think (IGT) Stats. Going to watch a player to see when I decide he is thinking, how much I reckon he is thinking and then give it a score.

Haaland has an IGT score of 8.467, whereas Salah has an IGT score of 7.853. If you look at the difference you'll see there is a clear 0.614 IGT differential between the two players. No differential this wide on IGT has been seen since stats started being compiled on this!

[BRO_BOT]

Plus don't they tell us all the time the the great players don't have to look because they know instinctively whats going on. Its just the latest buzzword bullshit needed now that xG is so commonplace.

They know because they looked, if anything the 'instinctive' part is the made-up buzzword.

As stated, I wouldn't put much weight on it. It's one small factor out of (probably) hundreds

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Psychol., 06 October 2020
Sec. Movement Science
Volume 11 - 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.553813
Scanning, Contextual Factors, and Association With Performance in English Premier League Footballers: An Investigation Across a Season

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/ps ... 53813/full

Conclusion
Elite professional football players competing in an EPL team engaged in frequent visual scanning behaviors in the seconds prior to receiving the ball. There were some positional and contextual differences in scanning, which can be explained by the requirements of different phases and aspects of the game. Through a statistically sophisticated model, our data added evidence toward a positive, albeit small, relationship between scanning and pass completion, suggesting that scanning can play a positive role for pass completion. With that said, particularly given that many of the differences we uncovered were relatively small or modest, we do not believe or claim that scanning is the conclusive variable associated with football performance. Innumerable and immeasurable factors can affect a player and team performance at any given time (on or off the grass). Instead our interest with this article lies in exploring this one variable, on the grass, in the game, knowing its incompleteness, but also its future potential to be linked with other multidisciplinary data that could lead to fascinating and insightful dialogue and interventions with players and coaches if the marriage of technology and human relationships continue to strengthen.

[Winston Biscuit]

As stated, I wouldn't put much weight on it. It's one small factor out of (probably) hundreds

how do you know where someone is 'scanning'?

[BRO_BOT]

As stated, I wouldn't put much weight on it. It's one small factor out of (probably) hundreds

how do you know where someone is 'scanning'?

That's dealt with in 'Limitations' section of that study

[Winston Biscuit]

the limitation being that no one can actually know where anyone else is 'scanning'?

[BRO_BOT]

Terrible football game, Utd could have another 2 pens as well <smh>

[Snowflake Royal]

the limitation being that no one can actually know where anyone else is 'scanning'?

Do you think they call it scanning instead of looking to make it sound less bullshit?

[Winston Biscuit]

the limitation being that no one can actually know where anyone else is 'scanning'?

Do you think they call it scanning instead of looking to make it sound less bullshit?

Absolutely. But even looking stats would be total nonsense as you can never know exactly where someone else is looking

See how many blinks Garnacho did in that last game? His average blink per minute was way above the XB (expected blinks).

[Snowflake Royal]

the limitation being that no one can actually know where anyone else is 'scanning'?

Do you think they call it scanning instead of looking to make it sound less bullshit?

Absolutely. But even looking stats would be total nonsense as you can never know exactly where someone else is looking

See how many blinks Garnacho did in that last game? His average blink per minute was way above the XB (expected blinks).

That Haaland, forget the goals, the way he maybe looks around the pitch... what a player.

[BRO_BOT]

Do you think they call it scanning instead of looking to make it sound less bullshit?

Absolutely. But even looking stats would be total nonsense as you can never know exactly where someone else is looking

See how many blinks Garnacho did in that last game? His average blink per minute was way above the XB (expected blinks).

That Haaland, forget the goals, the way he maybe looks around the pitch... what a player.

Forwards don't scan as much as central midfielders

[Ascotexgunner]

Havertz of all people. This really was one of the games where Arsenal bottled it last season. Thought it might be a banana skin this time. But they coped.....really on for them now.