Barclays Premier League 13/14 Thread

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:57 am

First topic message reminder :

Swansea 3-2 Stoke

What has happened to Stoke's defence

by **Dolphin Ziggler** Wed Nov 13, 2013 12:56 am

Opta and Whoscored will be reasonable good. Theres a free app from Opta and fourfourtwo (i think) thats quite good

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:22 am

----------------------RVP--------------

---Welbeck---Rooney----Reus----

----------Carrick----Gundogan---

Coentrao-Evans-Jones-Smalling

------------------- De Gea-----------------

Forget the stats for a minute, basically mysti ( pro arsenal/ozil) loves the stats/assists, whereas Ent n others who don't have Ozil don't rate stats......its a pretty obvious outcome

Daily Mail going on about Moyes long term targets today, Kagawa again seen as bait in a player plus cash deal for Reus n Gundogan. He`ll probably abandon Herrera as he`s not impressing. Coentrao would be available, sure baines deal is 100% dead now. What people think about that possible line up next year?

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:26 am

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Opta and Whoscored will be reasonable good. Theres a free app from Opta and fourfourtwo (i think) thats quite good

ta

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:28 am

By the way I also think won penalty's should be classed as an assist as well!

by Hammersmith harrier Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:30 am

You can read into stats whatever you want really, what is clear is to me is that Rooney is the most creative forward in the premier league.

It's a decent line up but personally don't want Coentrao while Reus doens't get my pulses running, wouldn't mind Gundogan though. Get Luke Shaw in at left back and the defence can build for years to come.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 4:08 am

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's a decent line up but personally don't want Coentrao while Reus doens't get my pulses running, wouldn't mind Gundogan though. Get Luke Shaw in at left back and the defence can build for years to come.

Not sure Shaw would be quite ready for United come the summer, still young & inexperienced & next year is the year Moyes will really be judged. Don't think throwing Shaw into European games is a direction he would take. He likes his attacking full backs & Coentrao fits the bill & has already had a bid for him. Moyes wouldn't want to miss out on Coentrao to AVB. I don't see Dortmund selling too many, seeing as Lewandowski is already leaving. Kagawa for one or the other in terms of Gundogan or Reus most likely.

Giggs, Vidic, Anderson, Fabio, Evra, Kagawa & possibly Young - Exit door

by Hammersmith harrier Wed Nov 13, 2013 4:56 am

Swap Vidic for Ferdinand with Evra staying, Buttner going and you've probably got it right there.

I would personally keep Evra and bring Shaw in, gives him the perfect player to learn from, he's a bit of a prat and past his best but he's a got a very good attitude towards playing for the team. Get rid of the deadwood, blood Evans and Jones into the centre back slots, tie Rooney down to a new deal and bring in a young left back and a creative midfielder then we've got a good young squad again.

by Ent Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:02 am

mystiroakey wrote:By the way I also think won penalty's should be classed as an assist as well!

They are unless you score it yourself.

Stats are stupid In football as they aren't arbitrary like us sports. There is always somebody's interpretation behind the stat no matter how it is clarified. E.g. Key pass - how on earth is this properly utilised.

Statistics are nothing without context in any walk of life. To use them and directly compare numbers from another individual with no context is just plain stupid.

Use your eyes to judge players.

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 2:02 pm

Ent these stats show how effective a player is.

Its that simple..

its impossible to watch 1000's of players. sometimes you need to see how effective the player is without watching them. AND you also need stats to back up what you see.

I suggest you watch Moneyball.

And I will give you a couple of footballing stats.

in all forms of football- youth to the top leagues 1 in 9 shots result in a goal..(which is good symmetry- it shows us the standard of the keeper/defence is on par with the strikers throughout all forms of football.

another one.

taking a long corner in the long run is useless. it results in the opposition scoring a goal just as much as it results in the corner taking team scoring a goal .

There is so much more to football than what you just see.

A classic example is the board arguing against arsernal at the start of the season and I was telling everyone that arsernal just do things differently, they are a possession team and big defensive players that lack the technical ability will not help them out. And that Ozil was a top signing and showed real intent. Everyone else stated Arsenal where rubbish defensively- using there fooled eyes as the gauge. No the stats say arsenal were 4th in the league and 2nd defensively!!!!

What I and Wenger knew(probally plenty of others but i still here so many talking against this point!!) was that Arsenals problem was in the striker area- they didn't score enough goals with there possesion!!. The fact they couldn't get one was the reason they went for ozil.

If you cant get a striker that scores more goals per game or minute than what you have- how do you improve goal scoring??

you get a player in that is top in assists!!!

by Ent Wed Nov 13, 2013 2:19 pm

No, sigh.

US sports have dedicated positions were the players role is easily definable statistically, hence it works for those sports eg money ball.

Do you know statistically the most associated condition with death is birth? After all 100% of people born die.

It is all about context, numbers are just numbers.

Arsenal are poor without the ball, which you could tell if you actually watched them, whereas the statistics only show they haven't conceded that many goals- doesn't stop the ones they concede being sloppy.

by Ent Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:51 pm

Dear god carrick is out for 6 weeks following ankle surgery.

That leaves us with fellaini, cleverly and Anderson to choose from in central midfield for 10 matches.

Was a good season whilst it lasted.

Will Rooney be an emergency midfielder again? Will giggs deputise, will fletcher be fit - I hope to god one of these things happens.

by compelling and rich Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:00 pm

I have liked jones playing in the middle ent, no world beater on the ball but does all the donkey work and gives some greatly needed legs in midfield. Thought he was great against arsenal in the first half

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:20 pm

Ent wrote:No, sigh.

US sports have dedicated positions were the players role is easily definable statistically, hence it works for those sports eg money ball.

Do you know statistically the most associated condition with death is birth? After all 100% of people born die.

It is all about context, numbers are just numbers.

Arsenal are poor without the ball, which you could tell if you actually watched them, whereas the statistics only show they haven't conceded that many goals- doesn't stop the ones they concede being sloppy.

yes you do need context and good data, you need to understand how to use stats. Which isnt hard tbh and shouldnt need to be discussed.

what you have then done is missed the point.

you may think arsernal are sloppy without the ball. Personally i dont really see any signs of that. However it doesnt matter what you think, all that matters is how many goals they conceaded and how that impacted on how many games they won, drew or lost.

arsernal finished top 4, they had the second best defensive record.. (therefore there better stat is defense!!- it doesnt matter how they defend- THE REALITY is how good they are at defending!!)

to do better they need to score more goals.. so from that pov - you buy a better play maker or a better striker or both..

Now you could say - well aresrnal could still be better defensively- This is where context and styels come in to play.

Arsernal are a 'footballing side' - they thrive on possesion and tecnical players . By bringing in defensive players could actual mean they have to defend more because that will impact on there possesion stats!!

It could also impact on there ability to score.

You cant have everything in football, and the tired old - you need a back 4, you need two quality strikers and you need a midfield with a hard man is over!!! There are many ways to skin a cat..

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:29 pm

by the way,

when you shut out Dortmund , lliverpool and restrict roony and rvp on fire to one goal(2 away games!!) I have no idea how anyone can possibly state that arsernal are bad defensively or bad without the ball.

Arsernal need a striker though , I think thats clear enough..

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:53 pm

compelling and rich wrote:I have liked jones playing in the middle ent, no world beater on the ball but does all the donkey work and gives some greatly needed legs in midfield. Thought he was great against arsenal in the first half

Agree. His demotion to CB in the second half was responsible was Arsenal's resurgence IMO.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:00 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
Ent wrote:No, sigh.

US sports have dedicated positions were the players role is easily definable statistically, hence it works for those sports eg money ball.

Do you know statistically the most associated condition with death is birth? After all 100% of people born die.

It is all about context, numbers are just numbers.

Arsenal are poor without the ball, which you could tell if you actually watched them, whereas the statistics only show they haven't conceded that many goals- doesn't stop the ones they concede being sloppy.
yes you do need context and good data, you need to understand how to use stats. Which isnt hard tbh and shouldnt need to be discussed.

what you have then done is missed the point.

you may think arsernal are sloppy without the ball. Personally i dont really see any signs of that. However it doesnt matter what you think, all that matters is how many goals they conceaded and how that impacted on how many games they won, drew or lost.

In the first half v United they barely touched the ball and looked pretty dismal, not a patch on the side seen rolling over weak sides previously. Second half they suddenly saw a lot more of the ball and hey presto they looked as great as ever (this season).

That seems like evidence to me that they're great with it a poor without it. Basically half way to being Barca, which'll work against the weak sides but get found out against the strong.

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:10 pm

and yet they rarely conceade goals.

I would also suggest that barca are even worse without the ball, but have it more.

And going back to that particular game- i think Vidic going off and p jones being shifted back into defnece was the main reason Arsernal looked better.

It was more about United!!( for the first time in the PL this season!!)

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:22 pm

I just noticed you kind of agreed in your first post RE: Jones!!

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:22 pm

Not from what I've seen, Barca look great without the ball, the way they chase and hurry teams is an example to all other clubs. Despite being the best their hunger was perhaps their most impressive feature.

Also, re your second point, I agree - that's exactly what I had said. P Jones was doing a job in the midfield and Arsenal won't getting any ball time. Once Jones was shifted back that all changed, they got on the ball and looked immeasurably better.

Great with, poor without.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:23 pm

mystiroakey wrote:I just noticed you kind of agreed in your first post RE: Jones!!

Lol

by mystiroakey Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:27 pm

Yes arsernal may look a bit tosh without the ball, but is that impacting on there results?

And if they did go for real solid back 4 and 1 or 2 DM's to sure things up would that be counter productive?

by **Dolphin Ziggler** Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:05 pm

Arsenal's play without the ball against Dortmund.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:06 pm

mystiroakey wrote:Yes arsernal may look a bit tosh without the ball, but is that impacting on there results?

See my point re opposition though.

Arsenal have benefitted from the easiest opening fixture list of any of the top teams. Liverpool a close second but they at least had to take on United (and fluked a 1-0 win). The first time Arsenal came up against a decent side they seriously struggled (in the first half) as they didn't get enough of the ball. Once they had it they looked better but their lack of a top class striker meant they still lost the game.

Against Spurs they managed to do as 'Pool did against United at least. But they got beaten quite comprehensively by Chelsea in the Cup, with neither side having its first XI out.

I still think Arsenal will finish top3 this season, and I'd like them to win the League, but I don't think we can honestly assess them until they've played City and Chelsea. See what their record against the Big 3 is like, that's a measure.

by Ent Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:24 pm

Mysti you don't seem to understand the use of stats.

I'm weary of it, been here done that with regards to football. Numbers are just numbers - for example your corner stat is a lot of nonsense.

But go ahead and compare away, most of us will see arsenal conceding few goals but being sloppy without the ball and very vulnerable in transitional phases.

Marvel at ozils key passes while the rest of us watch him tired and ailing after 70 minutes and offering very little when he doesn't have the ball.

Laugh at all those clubs who take long corners whilst the reigning champions on England continue to score approx 10% of their goals from them.

Stats in football, what a load of crap.

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:33 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:Yes arsernal may look a bit tosh without the ball, but is that impacting on there results?

See my point re opposition though.

Arsenal have benefitted from the easiest opening fixture list of any of the top teams. Liverpool a close second but they at least had to take on United (and fluked a 1-0 win). The first time Arsenal came up against a decent side they seriously struggled (in the first half) as they didn't get enough of the ball. Once they had it they looked better but their lack of a top class striker meant they still lost the game.

Against Spurs they managed to do as 'Pool did against United at least. But they got beaten quite comprehensively by Chelsea in the Cup, with neither side having its first XI out.

I still think Arsenal will finish top3 this season, and I'd like them to win the League, but I don't think we can honestly assess them until they've played City and Chelsea. See what their record against the Big 3 is like, that's a measure.

Do we only count Premier League teams as decent teams these days? Are they only teams that can test how good a team is? Dortmund are just as good, if not better than, United at the present time and they lost one and won one against them. You can't really write Liverpool off either saying that wasn't a test. Can't call them beating United a fluke either, a close game in which either side could have scored more goals.

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:59 pm

Dortmund are indeed a useful indicator. Arsenal are 1-1 with them and further evidenced how poor they look without the ball when they visited BD.

Liverpool are a two man team that steamroll weak sides and struggle against the strong ones. They were totally dominated by United and did nothing after their 5th minute goal, the next time they troubled de gea was the 93rd minute.

United-Arsenal was a much much closer affair. I still expect Arsenal to be right up there come may, but Liverpool's steam will run out once they play big/better sides and either Sturridge gets injured or Suarez suspended and they'll end up around 6th as normal. Only thing in their favour is Spurs' inability to put it in the back of the net.

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:22 pm

Two man team? Don't talk garbage....every team has their players who stand out, United have RVP and Rooney, Arsenal have Ozil. Liverpool have got a decent side, probably not good enough to challenge for a top 4 finish but players like Coutinho, Gerrard, Lucas, Agger, Skrtel, Johnson are all good enough to get in to most squads in the EPL.

When ever someone says that a team is a one man team or a two man team they are talking complete and utter garbage.

by MIG Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:26 pm

I think Liverpool without Suarez and Sturridge would be a very average PL team. Mid table.

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:36 pm

We've played without Suarez and got just as many points with him as we did without him, in fact we had our best start to a season for sometime this year. Sturridge was written off as an average player who wasn't worth the money when he signed last January.

If you take Rooney and RVP out of United were do the goals come from? Does Welbeck all of a sudden become a 20 goal a season striker?

by MIG Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:41 pm

I think United without VP and Rooney would also struggle but probably still compete for European places just about.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:42 pm

I'd say Palace are a no man team

by SirJohnnyEnglish Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:55 pm

hampo171 wrote:If you take Rooney and RVP out of United were do the goals come from? Does Welbeck all of a sudden become a 20 goal a season striker?

Hernandez leading the line week in week out could score 20 goals a season Whistle

by MIG Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:57 pm

Yeah I think Kagawa and Welbeck either side of Hernadez would still be pretty decent.
What would Liverpool play up top without SAS?

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:59 pm

Hernandez isn't a 20 goal a season striker Laugh

We'd probably give Aspas a run in the side, young lad who hasn't really had a chance because of the form or Sturridge and Suarez.

by **Crimey** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:02 pm

---------Aspas------

Sterling--Coutinho--Moses

-----Gerrard---Lucas----

Enrique-Agger-Skrtel-Johnson

-----------Mignolet

That's still a good side, certainly strong enough for 7th or 8th place. Take Suarez and Sturridge out and the team isn't that much poorer, I would say the drop in quality is similar to drop in quality of Manchester United if you take our RVP and Rooney certainly.

by MIG Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:03 pm

I think Hernandez could quite possibly get 20 goals a season if he played all games. What is the longest run of games he's been given so far?

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:06 pm

He misses to many easy chances. I'm sure he put one over the bar from about 8 yards in the recent Carling Cup game, it was genuinely harder to miss that chance than it was to score.

by MIG Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:08 pm

With a run of games he would stop missing those sorts of chances imo.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:10 pm

Aspas lol

by Ent Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:12 pm

A ball bobbled on him in the champions league and suddenly he's a poor finisher?

I don't think he misses easy chances at all.

It is not a great leap to think he could get to 20 goals in a 40 game season if he played every week.

Don't know what the argument is about, united are poor this season and would struggle without rvp and Rooney.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:15 pm

Any team in the league would struggle without there two best attacking players

Bar Palace, who dont really attack Whistle

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:15 pm

hampo171 wrote:Hernandez isn't a 20 goal a season striker

We'd probably give Aspas a run in the side, young lad who hasn't really had a chance because of the form or Sturridge and Suarez.

So the guy that got 20 goals in 10/11 and 18 goals in 12/13 despite playing a large number of games as sub and with one of the highest goals per minute ratios in the prem the last few seasons wouldn't be able to score 20 goals a season playing twice as much football??

Interesting take.......

I think you could take Ozil & Ramsey out of Arsenal or Aguero & any1 out of Citeh or Torres & Mata (or other) out of Chelskia or RnR out of United and none of those teams would suffer as much as Liverpool would without SAS.

Since you beat United you've drawn to Swansea, lost to Southampton & United, drawn with Newcastle and lost to Arsenal. All with SAS intact. God help you without them......

by Ent Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:15 pm

Also just had a look and he has scored 20, 13 and 18 in his 3 seasons with us as a firm understudy.

No guarantee but the lads a goal scorer, would get loads playing every game if the service was good.

by compelling and rich Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:16 pm

hampo171 wrote:Hernandez isn't a 20 goal a season striker

We'd probably give Aspas a run in the side, young lad who hasn't really had a chance because of the form or Sturridge and Suarez.

Hernandez has already scored 20 in one season and 18 in another, and thats playing a bit part role! hernadez is the epitome of a twenty goal a season striker. it just makes us that bit more predictable and have to feed him service

by Fernando Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:19 pm

If Hernandez was good enough to be a 1st choice 20 goal a season striker United would not have bought Van Persie.

The most he's scored in the league is 13 C&R -

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:21 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
hampo171 wrote:Hernandez isn't a 20 goal a season striker

We'd probably give Aspas a run in the side, young lad who hasn't really had a chance because of the form or Sturridge and Suarez.
So the guy that got 20 goals in 10/11 and 18 goals in 12/13 despite playing a large number of games as sub and with one of the highest goals per minute ratios in the prem the last few seasons wouldn't be able to score 20 goals a season playing twice as much football??

Interesting take.......

I think you could take Ozil & Ramsey out of Arsenal or Aguero & any1 out of Citeh or Torres & Mata (or other) out of Chelskia or RnR out of United and none of those teams would suffer as much as Liverpool would without SAS.

Since you beat United you've drawn to Swansea, lost to Southampton & United, drawn with Newcastle and lost to Arsenal. All with SAS intact. God help you without them......

We've lost to Southampton who are on a great run of form
Drew with Newcastle who have just beaten Chelsea and Spurs
Lost to Arsenal who have been the form team in the league

Hardly like we're the only team they are getting good results against is it? Should we write City off because they lost to Sunderland? Or Chelsea because they lost to Newcastle?

I'll hold my hands up I didn't believe that Hernandez had scored that many goals, Crimey posted a team without S&S and isn't vastly different from what we play now and I have no doubts we'd find ways to score goals.

by compelling and rich Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:26 pm

its not whether he's a 20 goal a season man more his overall contribution to the team why we brought RVP in

think the fairest way would be to judge him on starts, in the prem

10/11- starts - 15 goals -13
11/12 - starts- 18 goals - 10
12/13 - starts - 9 goals - 10

think those stats suggest that if he started more games he would easily be bagging 20 a season in the prem, let alone all comps

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:28 pm

I sort of get Nando's point but I do think Hernandez could score 20 a season if he started week in week out, bit like Defoe I think both guys just score goals but dont offer the all round game

by TopHat24/7 Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:31 pm

Olly wrote:I sort of get Nando's point but I do think Hernandez could score 20 a season if he started week in week out, bit like Defoe I think both guys just score goals but dont offer the all round game

Mmmmmmmmmmm, Nandos........

by **hampo17** Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:32 pm

compelling and rich wrote:its not whether he's a 20 goal a season man more his overall contribution to the team why we brought RVP in

think the fairest way would be to judge him on starts, in the prem

10/11- starts - 15 goals -13
11/12 - starts- 18 goals - 10
12/13 - starts - 9 goals - 10

think those stats suggest that if he started more games he would easily be bagging 20 a season in the prem, let alone all comps

Surely those stats are his overall goals though? How many of those goals where in games that he started? Personally I think he's a fantastic impact player, great off the bench but by him starting it makes the game plan predictable.

by Sponsored content