A few updated observations from the stats (Selles v Wilder)

[Coolblade]

A few observations from the stats (Selles vs Wilder 25/26):

Thirty league games into the Championship season, our story is a tale of two managers, and, within Wilder’s reign, two very different halves. What began as a crisis under Selles has evolved into a competitive, mid‑table side under Wilder and we can track not only the overall improvement but also the stabilisation trend within Wilder’s own 25‑game block.

Below is an update across Points (obvious and stark), Attack & Defence, plus Wilder’s Phase 1 vs Phase 2, and perhaps importantly, what we now need.

1. Points‑Per‑Game:

Selles (5), 0 points, PPG: 0.00
Wilder (25), 39 points, PPG:1.56

Results verdict: The jump from 0.00 to 1.56 PPG is the clearest indicator of transformation. Selles’ six defeats created certain relegation. Wilder’s return brought structure, identity, and mid‑table form.

2. Attack: Purpose Over Possession

Selles (5): Goals per game: 0.20 , Shots: 12.17 per match, Possession: 57.8%. Looked good on the ball, achieved little with it. Low chance quality, little penetration.

Wilder (25): Goals per game: 1.80 overall (1.58 in first 12, 1.85 in second 13) Shots: 13.54 per match, Possession: 50.2%. More direct, more vertical, more threatening. United now build attacks with intent rather than sterile circulation. Season xG steady around 1.5, far healthier balance than in the opening block.

Attacking verdict: Wilder has added danger, aggression and clarity. The team now plays attacking football with purpose rather than possession for possession’s sake (most of the time!).

3. Defence: Still a problem

Selles (5): Goals Against: 12 in 5 so 2.40 per match, Clean Sheets: 0, xGA 1.8–2.1+; High concession rates with no clean sheets. Opponents consistently generated high‑value chances. Defensive structure repeatedly collapsed under transitions Worst defensive six‑game start in modern club history

Wilder (25): GA per match: 1.42 (heavily pulled up by early disasters) with xGA 1.33 (mid‑table defensive footprint). Structure now recognisable: better spacing, more rest defence, fewer implosions. Still inconsistent, but no longer systemic chaos

Defensive Verdict The jump from 2.40 GA to 1.42 GA is already transformational. Improved but not complete. Wilder’a team can now hold a shape, defend phases, and absorb periods of pressure. But still short of play‑off calibre (1.0 GA required)

4. Wilder’s First 12 vs Next 13:

To understand Wilder’s impact, his own tenure splits naturally into a settling period (games 6–17) and a stabilised period (games 18–30)

Wilder: First 12 matches (Games 6–17), W 6 | D 1 | L 5 → 19 points → PPG 1.58, Goals scored: 19 → GPG 1.58.

Immediate improvement in attacking threat but defence still too porous. Performances swung between excellent and poor. Tactical patterns re‑emerging. Identity returning. Volatility still high

Verdict: This was the rebuild phase, encouraging but inconsistent.

Wilder: Next 13 matches (Games 18–30), W 6 | D 2 | L 7 → 20 points → PPG 1.54, Goals scored: 24 → GPG 1.85

This block represents greater stability: More consistent performances, Greater control of games. Better game‑state management. Defensively calmer but still with serious consistency issues impacting on results. Attacking output improves significantly. A recognisable Wilder team, structurally and stylistically

Verdict: This is the identity phase, a coherent, repeatable, competitive Sheffield United.

Key takeaway: Wilder didn’t just improve the team versus Selles, he has improved his team over time in key ways but without uplifting the PPG. The second phase is cleaner, calmer, sharper, more cohesive and at play‑off attacking levels. But a further shift is required

5. What’s Needed Now to Reach the Play‑Offs (Final 16 Games) with apologies for duplication with other posts.

Play‑off likely cut line: 73 to 75 points so need 34 to 36 from final 16 games so PPG: 2.13 to 2.25 which is strong automatic promotion form.

At Wilder’s current Phase‑2 PPG (1.54) we reach 66 points so we need a further shift to an exceptional level.

What is required:

• Concede fewer goals: Current GA: 1.45, need GA: 1.0–1.1
• Maintain/ improve finishing slightly: Convert xG (–4.37 underperformance) and maintain set‑piece strength (14 goals already)
• Control games emotionally and tactically: Fewer errors leading to goals, no post‑goal collapses, fewer cards (43 yellows, 3 reds already

We don’t need to attack better, we just need to keep scoring at our current rate (1.85 to 2.25 GPG) and defend properly. The attack in Wilder’s second 12 matches is already play‑off level. The only missing ingredient is cutting GA by 20–25%.

Do that, and PPG rises to 2.1, which is exactly the zone required. We don’t need to be perfect, we just need to be consistent for 16 games. Unavoidable team rotation would assist with this!

Final Word: Three Teams in One Season, one more needed

The season’s narrative is now unmistakable:

Selles: A structurally broken side, Zero points, No attacking threat, No defensive integrity

Wilder (first 12): Stops the bleeding. Installs identity. Mixed but competitive results

Wilder (next 13): Mid‑table levels of performance. Cohesive, assertive football. High goal scoring. Real progress in output and consistency. But defensive issues remain

We are still not where we want to be, but we are so far from the team that started the season. The curve continues upward, the structure is firmer, and the numbers finally reflect a side that can impose itself rather than simply endure.

Although do we really want to make the play offs! I’m not sure I could take it!

UTB

PS I do have some sympathy for Selles. 6 games (including the cup) is a small sample size and he was replaced just a few days after we added in new players. Or do the stats still speak for themselves!

PPS Please forgive any minor typos….

 

[brownblade]

A few observations from the stats (Selles vs Wilder 25/26):

Thirty league games into the Championship season, our story is a tale of two managers, and, within Wilder’s reign, two very different halves. What began as a crisis under Selles has evolved into a competitive, mid‑table side under Wilder and we can track not only the overall improvement but also the stabilisation trend within Wilder’s own 25‑game block.

Below is an update across Points (obvious and stark), Attack & Defence, plus Wilder’s Phase 1 vs Phase 2, and perhaps importantly, what we now need.

1. Points‑Per‑Game:

Selles (5), 0 points, PPG: 0.00
Wilder (25), 39 points, PPG:1.56

Results verdict: The jump from 0.00 to 1.56 PPG is the clearest indicator of transformation. Selles’ six defeats created certain relegation. Wilder’s return brought structure, identity, and mid‑table form.

2. Attack: Purpose Over Possession

Selles (5): Goals per game: 0.20 , Shots: 12.17 per match, Possession: 57.8%. Looked good on the ball, achieved little with it. Low chance quality, little penetration.

Wilder (25): Goals per game: 1.80 overall (1.58 in first 12, 1.85 in second 13) Shots: 13.54 per match, Possession: 50.2%. More direct, more vertical, more threatening. United now build attacks with intent rather than sterile circulation. Season xG steady around 1.5, far healthier balance than in the opening block.

Attacking verdict: Wilder has added danger, aggression and clarity. The team now plays attacking football with purpose rather than possession for possession’s sake (most of the time!).

3. Defence: Still a problem

Selles (5): Goals Against: 12 in 5 so 2.40 per match, Clean Sheets: 0, xGA 1.8–2.1+; High concession rates with no clean sheets. Opponents consistently generated high‑value chances. Defensive structure repeatedly collapsed under transitions Worst defensive six‑game start in modern club history

Wilder (25): GA per match: 1.42 (heavily pulled up by early disasters) with xGA 1.33 (mid‑table defensive footprint). Structure now recognisable: better spacing, more rest defence, fewer implosions. Still inconsistent, but no longer systemic chaos

Defensive Verdict The jump from 2.40 GA to 1.42 GA is already transformational. Improved but not complete. Wilder’a team can now hold a shape, defend phases, and absorb periods of pressure. But still short of play‑off calibre (1.0 GA required)

4. Wilder’s First 12 vs Next 13:

To understand Wilder’s impact, his own tenure splits naturally into a settling period (games 6–17) and a stabilised period (games 18–30)

Wilder: First 12 matches (Games 6–17), W 6 | D 1 | L 5 → 19 points → PPG 1.58, Goals scored: 19 → GPG 1.58.

Immediate improvement in attacking threat but defence still too porous. Performances swung between excellent and poor. Tactical patterns re‑emerging. Identity returning. Volatility still high

Verdict: This was the rebuild phase, encouraging but inconsistent.

Wilder: Next 13 matches (Games 18–30), W 6 | D 2 | L 7 → 20 points → PPG 1.54, Goals scored: 24 → GPG 1.85

This block represents greater stability: More consistent performances, Greater control of games. Better game‑state management. Defensively calmer but still with serious consistency issues impacting on results. Attacking output improves significantly. A recognisable Wilder team, structurally and stylistically

Verdict: This is the identity phase, a coherent, repeatable, competitive Sheffield United.

Key takeaway: Wilder didn’t just improve the team versus Selles, he has improved his team over time in key ways but without uplifting the PPG. The second phase is cleaner, calmer, sharper, more cohesive and at play‑off attacking levels. But a further shift is required

5. What’s Needed Now to Reach the Play‑Offs (Final 16 Games) with apologies for duplication with other posts.

Play‑off likely cut line: 73 to 75 points so need 34 to 36 from final 16 games so PPG: 2.13 to 2.25 which is strong automatic promotion form.

At Wilder’s current Phase‑2 PPG (1.54) we reach 66 points so we need a further shift to an exceptional level.

What is required:

• Concede fewer goals: Current GA: 1.45, need GA: 1.0–1.1
• Maintain/ improve finishing slightly: Convert xG (–4.37 underperformance) and maintain set‑piece strength (14 goals already)
• Control games emotionally and tactically: Fewer errors leading to goals, no post‑goal collapses, fewer cards (43 yellows, 3 reds already

We don’t need to attack better, we just need to keep scoring at our current rate (1.85 to 2.25 GPG) and defend properly. The attack in Wilder’s second 12 matches is already play‑off level. The only missing ingredient is cutting GA by 20–25%.

Do that, and PPG rises to 2.1, which is exactly the zone required. We don’t need to be perfect, we just need to be consistent for 16 games. Unavoidable team rotation would assist with this!

Final Word: Three Teams in One Season, one more needed

The season’s narrative is now unmistakable:

Selles: A structurally broken side, Zero points, No attacking threat, No defensive integrity

Wilder (first 12): Stops the bleeding. Installs identity. Mixed but competitive results

Wilder (next 13): Mid‑table levels of performance. Cohesive, assertive football. High goal scoring. Real progress in output and consistency. But defensive issues remain

We are still not where we want to be, but we are so far from the team that started the season. The curve continues upward, the structure is firmer, and the numbers finally reflect a side that can impose itself rather than simply endure.

Although do we really want to make the play offs! I’m not sure I could take it!

UTB

PS I do have some sympathy for Selles. 6 games (including the cup) is a small sample size and he was replaced just a few days after we added in new players. Or do the stats still speak for themselves!

PPS Please forgive any minor typos….

Great post. If we do (almost miraculously) make the playoffs, shall we all just watch it outside Wembley on someone's laptop?

 

[Uganda Blade]

A few observations from the stats (Selles vs Wilder 25/26):

Thirty league games into the Championship season, our story is a tale of two managers, and, within Wilder’s reign, two very different halves. What began as a crisis under Selles has evolved into a competitive, mid‑table side under Wilder and we can track not only the overall improvement but also the stabilisation trend within Wilder’s own 25‑game block.

Below is an update across Points (obvious and stark), Attack & Defence, plus Wilder’s Phase 1 vs Phase 2, and perhaps importantly, what we now need.

1. Points‑Per‑Game:

Selles (5), 0 points, PPG: 0.00
Wilder (25), 39 points, PPG:1.56

Results verdict: The jump from 0.00 to 1.56 PPG is the clearest indicator of transformation. Selles’ six defeats created certain relegation. Wilder’s return brought structure, identity, and mid‑table form.

2. Attack: Purpose Over Possession

Selles (5): Goals per game: 0.20 , Shots: 12.17 per match, Possession: 57.8%. Looked good on the ball, achieved little with it. Low chance quality, little penetration.

Wilder (25): Goals per game: 1.80 overall (1.58 in first 12, 1.85 in second 13) Shots: 13.54 per match, Possession: 50.2%. More direct, more vertical, more threatening. United now build attacks with intent rather than sterile circulation. Season xG steady around 1.5, far healthier balance than in the opening block.

Attacking verdict: Wilder has added danger, aggression and clarity. The team now plays attacking football with purpose rather than possession for possession’s sake (most of the time!).

3. Defence: Still a problem

Selles (5): Goals Against: 12 in 5 so 2.40 per match, Clean Sheets: 0, xGA 1.8–2.1+; High concession rates with no clean sheets. Opponents consistently generated high‑value chances. Defensive structure repeatedly collapsed under transitions Worst defensive six‑game start in modern club history

Wilder (25): GA per match: 1.42 (heavily pulled up by early disasters) with xGA 1.33 (mid‑table defensive footprint). Structure now recognisable: better spacing, more rest defence, fewer implosions. Still inconsistent, but no longer systemic chaos

Defensive Verdict The jump from 2.40 GA to 1.42 GA is already transformational. Improved but not complete. Wilder’a team can now hold a shape, defend phases, and absorb periods of pressure. But still short of play‑off calibre (1.0 GA required)

4. Wilder’s First 12 vs Next 13:

To understand Wilder’s impact, his own tenure splits naturally into a settling period (games 6–17) and a stabilised period (games 18–30)

Wilder: First 12 matches (Games 6–17), W 6 | D 1 | L 5 → 19 points → PPG 1.58, Goals scored: 19 → GPG 1.58.

Immediate improvement in attacking threat but defence still too porous. Performances swung between excellent and poor. Tactical patterns re‑emerging. Identity returning. Volatility still high

Verdict: This was the rebuild phase, encouraging but inconsistent.

Wilder: Next 13 matches (Games 18–30), W 6 | D 2 | L 7 → 20 points → PPG 1.54, Goals scored: 24 → GPG 1.85

This block represents greater stability: More consistent performances, Greater control of games. Better game‑state management. Defensively calmer but still with serious consistency issues impacting on results. Attacking output improves significantly. A recognisable Wilder team, structurally and stylistically

Verdict: This is the identity phase, a coherent, repeatable, competitive Sheffield United.

Key takeaway: Wilder didn’t just improve the team versus Selles, he has improved his team over time in key ways but without uplifting the PPG. The second phase is cleaner, calmer, sharper, more cohesive and at play‑off attacking levels. But a further shift is required

5. What’s Needed Now to Reach the Play‑Offs (Final 16 Games) with apologies for duplication with other posts.

Play‑off likely cut line: 73 to 75 points so need 34 to 36 from final 16 games so PPG: 2.13 to 2.25 which is strong automatic promotion form.

At Wilder’s current Phase‑2 PPG (1.54) we reach 66 points so we need a further shift to an exceptional level.

What is required:

• Concede fewer goals: Current GA: 1.45, need GA: 1.0–1.1
• Maintain/ improve finishing slightly: Convert xG (–4.37 underperformance) and maintain set‑piece strength (14 goals already)
• Control games emotionally and tactically: Fewer errors leading to goals, no post‑goal collapses, fewer cards (43 yellows, 3 reds already

We don’t need to attack better, we just need to keep scoring at our current rate (1.85 to 2.25 GPG) and defend properly. The attack in Wilder’s second 12 matches is already play‑off level. The only missing ingredient is cutting GA by 20–25%.

Do that, and PPG rises to 2.1, which is exactly the zone required. We don’t need to be perfect, we just need to be consistent for 16 games. Unavoidable team rotation would assist with this!

Final Word: Three Teams in One Season, one more needed

The season’s narrative is now unmistakable:

Selles: A structurally broken side, Zero points, No attacking threat, No defensive integrity

Wilder (first 12): Stops the bleeding. Installs identity. Mixed but competitive results

Wilder (next 13): Mid‑table levels of performance. Cohesive, assertive football. High goal scoring. Real progress in output and consistency. But defensive issues remain

We are still not where we want to be, but we are so far from the team that started the season. The curve continues upward, the structure is firmer, and the numbers finally reflect a side that can impose itself rather than simply endure.

Although do we really want to make the play offs! I’m not sure I could take it!

UTB

PS I do have some sympathy for Selles. 6 games (including the cup) is a small sample size and he was replaced just a few days after we added in new players. Or do the stats still speak for themselves!

PPS Please forgive any minor typos….

Thanks.
Interesting that the ppg dropped in the second phase.

 

[Rudders]

Reckon Kalvin Phillips in midfield will help with reducing GA. Bindon is still a bit too soft for my liking, but is definitely improving and if he can stay fit and available may/should improve further. Not getting a decent back up keeper maybe allows Cooper to 'free-ride' a bit??

 

[Balham]

4. Wilder’s First 12 vs Next 13:

To understand Wilder’s impact, his own tenure splits naturally into a settling period (games 6–17) and a stabilised period (games 18–30)

Wilder: First 12 matches (Games 6–17), W 6 | D 1 | L 5 → 19 points → PPG 1.58, Goals scored: 19 → GPG 1.58.

Immediate improvement in attacking threat but defence still too porous. Performances swung between excellent and poor. Tactical patterns re‑emerging. Identity returning. Volatility still high

Verdict: This was the rebuild phase, encouraging but inconsistent.

Wilder: Next 13 matches (Games 18–30), W 6 | D 2 | L 7 → 20 points → PPG 1.54, Goals scored: 24 → GPG 1.85

This block represents greater stability: More consistent performances, Greater control of games. Better game‑state management. Defensively calmer but still with serious consistency issues impacting on results. Attacking output improves significantly. A recognisable Wilder team, structurally and stylistically

Verdict: This is the identity phase, a coherent, repeatable, competitive Sheffield United.

Key takeaway: Wilder didn’t just improve the team versus Selles, he has improved his team over time in key ways but without uplifting the PPG. The second phase is cleaner, calmer, sharper, more cohesive and at play‑off attacking levels. But a further shift is required

This is wrong Coolblade , sorry.



I'd suggest that the line should actually be drawn at the international break after the QPR match. Before then, we were really struggling with belief, with ludicrous errors costing us multiple matches, a situation which reached its nadir against Derby (Peck, Matos) and then Coventry (A Davies x2). Since then, there's been a very occasional blip (West Brom (tactics), Wrexham (individual errors), Charlton (individual errors, impact rolled into Southampton) but on the whole we've been a different side.



Put simply, had we not had two players sent off at Charlton I'd suggest that we would have won there and at Southampton and would be looking at 35 points from 15 matches which is outstanding....and which replicated over the next 16 matches would put us in the play-offs on 76/77 points and, crucially, put us into the end of season lottery as the form side, a position we've amazingly never been in before.

 

[SwissBlade]

A few observations from the stats (Selles vs Wilder 25/26):

Thirty league games into the Championship season, our story is a tale of two managers, and, within Wilder’s reign, two very different halves. What began as a crisis under Selles has evolved into a competitive, mid‑table side under Wilder and we can track not only the overall improvement but also the stabilisation trend within Wilder’s own 25‑game block.

Below is an update across Points (obvious and stark), Attack & Defence, plus Wilder’s Phase 1 vs Phase 2, and perhaps importantly, what we now need.

1. Points‑Per‑Game:

Selles (5), 0 points, PPG: 0.00
Wilder (25), 39 points, PPG:1.56

Results verdict: The jump from 0.00 to 1.56 PPG is the clearest indicator of transformation. Selles’ six defeats created certain relegation. Wilder’s return brought structure, identity, and mid‑table form.

2. Attack: Purpose Over Possession

Selles (5): Goals per game: 0.20 , Shots: 12.17 per match, Possession: 57.8%. Looked good on the ball, achieved little with it. Low chance quality, little penetration.

Wilder (25): Goals per game: 1.80 overall (1.58 in first 12, 1.85 in second 13) Shots: 13.54 per match, Possession: 50.2%. More direct, more vertical, more threatening. United now build attacks with intent rather than sterile circulation. Season xG steady around 1.5, far healthier balance than in the opening block.

Attacking verdict: Wilder has added danger, aggression and clarity. The team now plays attacking football with purpose rather than possession for possession’s sake (most of the time!).

3. Defence: Still a problem

Selles (5): Goals Against: 12 in 5 so 2.40 per match, Clean Sheets: 0, xGA 1.8–2.1+; High concession rates with no clean sheets. Opponents consistently generated high‑value chances. Defensive structure repeatedly collapsed under transitions Worst defensive six‑game start in modern club history

Wilder (25): GA per match: 1.42 (heavily pulled up by early disasters) with xGA 1.33 (mid‑table defensive footprint). Structure now recognisable: better spacing, more rest defence, fewer implosions. Still inconsistent, but no longer systemic chaos

Defensive Verdict The jump from 2.40 GA to 1.42 GA is already transformational. Improved but not complete. Wilder’a team can now hold a shape, defend phases, and absorb periods of pressure. But still short of play‑off calibre (1.0 GA required)

4. Wilder’s First 12 vs Next 13:

To understand Wilder’s impact, his own tenure splits naturally into a settling period (games 6–17) and a stabilised period (games 18–30)

Wilder: First 12 matches (Games 6–17), W 6 | D 1 | L 5 → 19 points → PPG 1.58, Goals scored: 19 → GPG 1.58.

Immediate improvement in attacking threat but defence still too porous. Performances swung between excellent and poor. Tactical patterns re‑emerging. Identity returning. Volatility still high

Verdict: This was the rebuild phase, encouraging but inconsistent.

Wilder: Next 13 matches (Games 18–30), W 6 | D 2 | L 7 → 20 points → PPG 1.54, Goals scored: 24 → GPG 1.85

This block represents greater stability: More consistent performances, Greater control of games. Better game‑state management. Defensively calmer but still with serious consistency issues impacting on results. Attacking output improves significantly. A recognisable Wilder team, structurally and stylistically

Verdict: This is the identity phase, a coherent, repeatable, competitive Sheffield United.

Key takeaway: Wilder didn’t just improve the team versus Selles, he has improved his team over time in key ways but without uplifting the PPG. The second phase is cleaner, calmer, sharper, more cohesive and at play‑off attacking levels. But a further shift is required

5. What’s Needed Now to Reach the Play‑Offs (Final 16 Games) with apologies for duplication with other posts.

Play‑off likely cut line: 73 to 75 points so need 34 to 36 from final 16 games so PPG: 2.13 to 2.25 which is strong automatic promotion form.

At Wilder’s current Phase‑2 PPG (1.54) we reach 66 points so we need a further shift to an exceptional level.

What is required:

• Concede fewer goals: Current GA: 1.45, need GA: 1.0–1.1
• Maintain/ improve finishing slightly: Convert xG (–4.37 underperformance) and maintain set‑piece strength (14 goals already)
• Control games emotionally and tactically: Fewer errors leading to goals, no post‑goal collapses, fewer cards (43 yellows, 3 reds already

We don’t need to attack better, we just need to keep scoring at our current rate (1.85 to 2.25 GPG) and defend properly. The attack in Wilder’s second 12 matches is already play‑off level. The only missing ingredient is cutting GA by 20–25%.

Do that, and PPG rises to 2.1, which is exactly the zone required. We don’t need to be perfect, we just need to be consistent for 16 games. Unavoidable team rotation would assist with this!

Final Word: Three Teams in One Season, one more needed

The season’s narrative is now unmistakable:

Selles: A structurally broken side, Zero points, No attacking threat, No defensive integrity

Wilder (first 12): Stops the bleeding. Installs identity. Mixed but competitive results

Wilder (next 13): Mid‑table levels of performance. Cohesive, assertive football. High goal scoring. Real progress in output and consistency. But defensive issues remain

We are still not where we want to be, but we are so far from the team that started the season. The curve continues upward, the structure is firmer, and the numbers finally reflect a side that can impose itself rather than simply endure.

Although do we really want to make the play offs! I’m not sure I could take it!

UTB

PS I do have some sympathy for Selles. 6 games (including the cup) is a small sample size and he was replaced just a few days after we added in new players. Or do the stats still speak for themselves!

PPS Please forgive any minor typos….

Cheers for that. Detailed stats, not entirely sure i agree with all of your conclusions on the first and second Wilder blocks as they don't tell the full story. I would imagine that the stats were used to justify bringing in players like Bamford and Riedewald though, both of whom have contributed a lot

But as much as the stats are important, they don't tell the full story. Tactics changes, player changes, again like Bamford have enabled us to get a greater goal scoring output.

The sympathy for Selles gets less and less by the game for me as watching his games was just a clear confirmation that he was never up to the job. Sad to say.

 

[Coolblade]

Thanks Swiss; and stats never tell the whole story, and always require context. And my previous posts have stressed (in particular) the key skills and balance which Bamford and Reidewald uniquely bring to our team. I hope the new signings in midfield take away some of our reliance on Reid. But with Campbell's dip in form and/or lack of fitness, keeping Bamford fit is key if a play off run is to occur

 

[Tom Bott]

Thanks.
Interesting that the ppg dropped in the second phase.

Lady luck fails to have stats but can cause all sorts of issues within the stats.
I think during the second phase we suffered as a result of injuries and refereeing decisions.