the meaningless facts , ie possesion

[blade too long]

Liverpool 5 Arsenal 1 possession Liverpool 43% Arsenal 57%
Man United 2 Fulham 2 ManUtd 75% Fulham 25%

2 Games that illustrate the utter meaninglessness of bare facts, what opta and the like cant define is the quality of possession , 75 ManUtd crosses sounds awesome , the fact was only around 5 were of sufficient quality to cause concern , when Liverpool slipped 5-0 up under the hour Arsenal holding the ball becomes as useful as Carlton Palmer in an England shirt

So if we win a game dont ever argue we had 7 % less possession, just bask in the glow of a win

 

[Silent Blade]

Careful, Pinchy will dispute this!

 

[Pinchy]

Careful, Pinchy will dispute this!

I seldom turn down an invitation; it would be discourteous!

BTL is right to this extent, having the greater part of possession does not guarantee victory.

However:

1. I would suggest, as a matter of logic and common sense, that more games are won by the team having greater possession than by the team having lesser.

2. Of course, the most important thing is what you do with superior possession but two twin propositions are unassailable:
a) You can't score without the ball (freak own-goals excepted);
b) If you've got the ball, the opposition can't score (freak own-goals excepted);

3. Possession statistics should be taken with a huge pinch of salt. They can vary wildly within the same match, but different compilers.

 

[Sheff de party]

I'm also a lot less likely to be entertained if the other side have the ball.

Unless it's Nicklas Bendtner, as he is rubbish, but when are we likely to be playing him.

 

[Pinchy]

I'm also a lot less likely to be entertained if the other side have the ball.

Unless it's Nicklas Bendtner, as he is rubbish, but when are we likely to be playing him.

Yes, good point. Might not go down well though!

There are certain opposition players that you don't mind having possession, because you know it will be purely transient.

On a completely different topic, has anyone seen any Australian football lately?

 

[Sheff de party]

Yes, good point. Might not go down well though!

There are certain opposition players that you don't mind having possession, because you know it will be purely transient.

On a completely different topic, has anyone seen any Australian football lately?

I've regularly been chastised for valuing entertainment over results, but I stand by it. Unless it's in a cup final, then I would just want to win, even if it was boring. The fact I had a good time at Fulham is testament to that, as it felt like a cup final.

Australian football hey? I can't imagine who you might be talking about.

 

[Pinchy]

I've regularly been chastised for valuing entertainment over results, but I stand by it. Unless it's in a cup final, then I would just want to win, even if it was boring. The fact I had a good time at Fulham is testament to that, as it felt like a cup final.

Australian football hey? I can't imagine who you might be talking about.

Well, that makes two of us. In truth, though, it's not the trade-off that many would have you believe. That's just an S2 fallacy. Ultimately, the more attractive your football the more successful you will be. It's common sense. There's nothing attractive about rubbish football and rubbish football doesn't win matches. I speak in general terms, of course. In football, on a match by match basis, just about anything can happen but, over time, the League Table doesn't lie and the right names invariably go on the trophies.

 

[blade too long]

My point is opta stats are about numbers , no mention of quality in any respect
a SHOT AT GOAL FOR EXAMPLE

A 35 YARD THUNDERBOLT TIPPED OVER BY A KEEPER IS 1 SHOT AT GOAL
An 8 yard miss hit from Porter being easily dealt with by a cross eyed 38 year old defender is one shot at goal

A cross pin pointed on to a strikers head no matter how it ends is 1 cross
A cross by Doyle landing in the technical dug out on the half way line is 1 cross

one sweeping move scoring a winning goal is 2% of possession , but can collect 3 points

 

[cjx blade]

How much possession did we have in the weir days? Seemed to be a lot and then someone would give the ball away at the back and their striker would nip in and score.

 

[MBoreman]

I think numbers can be important, but rather than just basic possession we should be looking at key passes and where the possession was had. Villa and Fulham for example had a lot of the ball but much of this was around the halfway line. Fulham (on their website after the first leg) then said they were unlucky not to win and cited these completed passes and possession stats. Which clearly is utterly pointless and stupid!

 

[UnitedBlade]

How much possession did we have in the weir days? Seemed to be a lot and then someone would give the ball away at the back and their striker would nip in and score.

Things like shots, shots on target and % possession are just indicative and should be treated as such.

I can, however, give you some good stats on Weir.
- 5 points from 10 games
- 6 goals scored
- 0 points at all from away games

I also had the benefit of going to most of these dull games.

Conclusion:
- fucking clueless

And yes, they gave the ball away frequently.

I'm sure this was most people's experience.

 

[Sheff de party]

My point is opta stats are about numbers , no mention of quality in any respect
a SHOT AT GOAL FOR EXAMPLE

A 35 YARD THUNDERBOLT TIPPED OVER BY A KEEPER IS 1 SHOT AT GOAL
An 8 yard miss hit from Porter being easily dealt with by a cross eyed 38 year old defender is one shot at goal

A cross pin pointed on to a strikers head no matter how it ends is 1 cross
A cross by Doyle landing in the technical dug out on the half way line is 1 cross

one sweeping move scoring a winning goal is 2% of possession , but can collect 3 points

It's neither exhaustive nor meaningless. The percentage of possession in itself isn't worth any points, but most of the time if you dominate possession you'll win. Even in your example, Man U were an rebound-injury-time-goal away from winning 2-1.

 

[sitwell]

Stats are for train spotters.

 

[blade too long]

It's neither exhaustive nor meaningless. The percentage of possession in itself isn't worth any points, but most of the time if you dominate possession you'll win. Even in your example, Man U were an rebound-injury-time-goal away from winning 2-1.

again not true, five games weve won , weve had less possession
we were an injury time goal from staying up in at stamford bridge
we were an injury time penalty miss from avoiding div 4, a shot on goal in both cases
unfortunately the goals count , possession doesnt

 

[Sheff de party]

again not true, five games weve won , weve had less possession
we were an injury time goal from staying up in at stamford bridge
we were an injury time penalty miss from avoiding div 4, a shot on goal in both cases
unfortunately the goals count , possession doesnt

According to the BBC, we've only won twice where we've had less possession.

I'm not saying that it is all definitive. But it is one indicator of a team being on top.

Anyway, we did win on Satdi, lets be thankful!

 

[Swanseablade]

FFS here we go again, tripe talked about "beautiful football," strict categories of tactics & boxitis.

 

[super_pig]

How much possession did we have in the weir days? Seemed to be a lot and then someone would give the ball away at the back and their striker would nip in and score.

possession is not about endlessly passing the ball backwards and forwards across the backline.. let's refine this concept.. you need 'constructive possession'
style is for ice skating .. there is also a difference between possession football and pass and move football