The Snowball stat thread

[Wycombe Royal]

Doesn't Pearce have 5 goals?

[RoyalJames101]

ShambLOLes

[Shackleton Royal]

Yeah, saw he had 4 major contributions!

Give snowball a break, all these stats must be hard work! I for one enjoy reading this thread just for the debates (if you can call them that?!), the stats are ok too!!

[Wycombe Royal]

Yeah, saw he had 4 major contributions!

Give snowball a break, all these stats must be hard work! I for one enjoy reading this thread just for the debates (if you can call them that?!), the stats are ok too!!

I'm not criticising, just pointing out an error, although the total major contributions number of 7 is correct. I've given up critiquing his stats, as I may as well just waste my time talking to a brick wall.

[Shackleton Royal]

ShambLOLes

My previous was more in reference to this! But cheers for your clarification!
Have a good evening,
Mark (it's the done thing now apparently)

[StroudRoyal]

Just to fan the flames of the 'first 6 games excluded from stats to demonstrate point re form' argument:

Quote from Brian McD in the Grauniad/Observer after yesterday's game

""Looking back over the last 32 games we have got something like 69 points so that would put us top of the league. At the start of the season it took us six games to get going"

Pete

[Maguire]

Just to fan the flames of the 'first 6 games excluded from stats to demonstrate point re form' argument:

Quote from Brian McD in the Grauniad/Observer after yesterday's game

""Looking back over the last 32 games we have got something like 69 points so that would put us top of the league. At the start of the season it took us six games to get going"

Pete

And if we hadn't won the game against Doncaster (one of the worst teams in the division away from home) in game 7 he'd say "it took us seven games to get going". That's just being wise after the event. All teams start the season with new personnel, we're not alone in that.

[StroudRoyal]

Just to fan the flames of the 'first 6 games excluded from stats to demonstrate point re form' argument:

Quote from Brian McD in the Grauniad/Observer after yesterday's game

""Looking back over the last 32 games we have got something like 69 points so that would put us top of the league. At the start of the season it took us six games to get going"

Pete

And if we hadn't won the game against Doncaster (one of the worst teams in the division away from home) in game 7 he'd say "it took us seven games to get going". That's just being wise after the event. All teams start the season with new personnel, we're not alone in that.

Another way to illustrate the point is to look at,say, a marathon runner. Let's say somebody analysed their number of strides or average speed and they found that their average speed or number of strides over the first 6 miles was significantly less than their average speed over the following 20 miles. Now i would say that it is not unreasonable to say that there was a difference between the first 6 miles and what happened for the following 20. Keeping the same athletics analogy you hear commentators all the time saying things like 'she's really started to kick on now and has increased the pace' or pointing out that 'his time for the last 4 laps is significantly less than for the first 4.

Pete

[Maguire]

I'd suggest there are significantly more factors involved in determining the result of a football match than there are in how fast one person runs round an athletics track.

[exileinleeds]

Given that every team seems to have good and bad spells in a season- an injury, a seemingly tough series of games, whatever...

If our "bad run" of 4pts from games 1-6, had been replaced with the results we had say games 21-26, would we be in a substantially different place now?

Am I missing something? Surely everyone is where they are because of the sum so far...and that past performance is no guarantee of future results?

[StroudRoyal]

I'd suggest there are significantly more factors involved in determining the result of a football match than there are in how fast one person runs round an athletics track.

Yes, of course there are - wouldn't dream of suggesting otherwise.

The point I'm trying to illustrate is that it is not unreasonable to recognise a difference in form between the first 6 games and the subsequent 33.

I'm not trying to predict anything or determine the result of a football match. I'm merely stating, (in response to the claim that one cannot/should not draw a distinction between form over one period and form over another), that it is reasonable to do so and that there is a clear distinction between the form over the first 6 games and form over the next 33.

Pete

[StroudRoyal]

Given that every team seems to have good and bad spells in a season- an injury, a seemingly tough series of games, whatever...

If our "bad run" of 4pts from games 1-6, had been replaced with the results we had say games 21-26, would we be in a substantially different place now?

Am I missing something? Surely everyone is where they are because of the sum so far...and that past performance is no guarantee of future results?

No, not missing something except the point! All I'm saying is that it's not unreasonable to draw the distinction between form over games 1-6 and form over 7- 33. That's all - Same as Brian and others are doing.

There's a whole world of difference between doing that and suggesting that the form will continue on it's present trend. All one could say is IF the form continued on it's present trend then we would get such and such number of pointsetc etc. One could also make a prediction i.e. that I think we will get so many points et etc - but that's all it would be - a prediction, not a statement of fact.

I don't think I've seen anybody on this board (including Snowball) state that, based on statistical analysis, results or form will continue.

However, many people interpret what they say as being that they are stating these things as fact.

Pete

[Snowball]

Funny how it's not a problem to say Manchester United are strong finishers."

[Snowball]

Update after Blackpool Home



0,951 Minutes 10 Major Contributions one every 095 Minutes 5 Goals 5 Assists Roberts

1,647 Minutes 12 Major Contributions one every 138 Minutes 7 Goals 5 Assists ALF

2,452 Minutes 15 Major Contributions one every 163 Minutes 7 Goals 8 Assists HUNT

2,165 Minutes 14 Major Contributions one every 164 Minutes 3 Goals 10 Assists KEBE

1,540 Minutes 08 Major Contributions one every 193 Minutes 7 Goals 1 Assists CHURCH

2,065 Minutes 10 Major Contributions one every 207 Minutes 2 Goals 8 Assists HARTE

2,910 Minutes 14 Major Contributions one every 208 Minutes 5 Goals 9 Assists McAnuff

1,715 Minutes 07 Major Contributions one every 245 Minutes 4 Goals 3 Assists HRK

0,405 Minutes 01 Major Contributions one every 405 Minutes 0 Goals 1 Assists Connolly

3,610 Minutes 07 Major Contributions one every 516 Minutes 5 Goals 2 Assists PEARCE Corrected

2,876 Minutes 05 Major Contributions one every 575Minutes 3 Goals 2 Assists KARACAN

0,745 Minutes 01 Major Contributions one every 745 Minutes 0 Goals 1 Assists GRIFFIN

3,238 Minutes 04 Major Contributions one every 805 Minutes 2 Goals 1 Assists L-WOOD (Corrected)

0,949 Minutes 01 Major Contributions one every 949 Minutes 0 Goals 1 Assists TABB

1,198 Minutes 01 Major Contributions one every 1,198 Minutes 0 Goals 1 Assists MILLS

2,224 Minutes 01 Major Contributions one every 2,224 Minutes 0 Goals 1 Assists CUMMINGS

[Snowball]

Doesn't Pearce have 5 goals?

Yup.As you can see I had updated his contributions, just not added the goal.

[Ian Royal]

Football League website (official source) has somewhat different assist figures to snowball... (his numbers in brackets for comparison:

Roberts - 4 (5)
ALF - 3 (5)
Hunt - 4 (8)
Kebe - 8 (10)
Harte - 6 (8)
McAnuff - 11 (9)
HRK - 3 (3)
Karacan - 2 (2)
Pearce - 2 (2)

Now is it illuminating that snowball has over estimated in every case where his figures don't match except for with McAnuff? Who knows, I don't.

Shows how subjective (and therefore verging on unreliable) a statistic "assists" is. Now I wouldn't take the official figures as gospel by any means, but there's at least one extremely hefty discrepancy there.

[Royal With Cheese]

Football League website (official source) has somewhat different assist figures to snowball... (his numbers in brackets for comparison:

Roberts - 4 (5)
ALF - 3 (5)
Hunt - 4 (8)
Kebe - 8 (10)
Harte - 6 (8)
McAnuff - 11 (9)
HRK - 3 (3)
Karacan - 2 (2)
Pearce - 2 (2)

Now is it illuminating that snowball has over estimated in every case where his figures don't match except for with McAnuff? Who knows, I don't.

Shows how subjective (and therefore verging on unreliable) a statistic "assists" is. Now I wouldn't take the official figures as gospel by any means, but there's at least one extremely hefty discrepancy there.

To be fair Ian, Snowers has been at pains to point out that these are his statistics and his alone.

Dredging this up again will only end up with another 5 pages of rubbish diluting any reasoned point anyone tries to make.

[Snowball]

The assists have been explained every time a player's assist-count has changed.

The Club OS OFTEN gets it wrong. For example, weeks ago they were saying in their
"news" that Kebe had 9 assists this season, yet were only showing 6/7 in their actual stats.

They miss assists, award assists to the wrong player etc.

Ian will remember that last year I awarded an assist to Long for a goal by Pearce
where the club disagreed. I pointed to the video where Long is on the floor and
gets the ball out for Pearce. Ian watched the vid and agreed.

I have a list somewhere of goals and assists that I keep ongoing as a check-back


One example of "assist or not"... McAnuff shoots, hits a post. It hits the second post, comes out
and then Harte scores. Was Harte offside? Did the keeper touch it? I gave the assist to McAnuff
because, as far as I'm concerned he "made" the goal.


Whereas, at Barnsley, I had awarded McAnuff an assist for Karacan's goal, but later, when I looked again
I felt the assist was Kebe's. With higher-quality video and slow-mo it would be easier, but it ent.

[Snowball]

Take one example. Alfie

I have Alfie at 7 Goals and 5 Assists




Assists

Church Doncaster

I awarded an assist to Le Fondre for his challenge on the keeper which gifted a goal to Chiurch

Finally it paid off. A high ball over the top saw Le Fondre challenge with Sullivan. The Rovers keeper spilled the ball as a result and Church reacted quickest to race onto the loose ball and tap into a gaping net.


Church Coventry

But the Royals responded just as swiftly. Jay Tabb controlled the ball 30 yards out and fed a nice ball into Le Fondre. He turned to face goal and slid a lovely pass into Simon Church who had time to take a touch, line up his shot and place a right-footed effort wide of the diving Joe Murphy to level.


Kebe Cardiff

Reading had a response within a few minutes though, Adam Le Fondre putting in a great cross that Kebe headed home well as Marshall was caught cold.

Hunt Ipswich

And, incredibly, there was still time for a third Reading goal. Adam Le Fondre did very well on the break, turning to pass to Hunt, who produced a low finish beyond Wright to send our fans into raptures.

Church W Ham

But soon enough it was 2-0. Karacan and Kebe combined well on the right, and Le Fondre played a lovely chipped cross to the back post where Church did the rest for a goal on his 23rd birthday.


Goals

Alf Bristol (Second Goal [Equaliser] 3-2 Win)
Alf Derby 1 Goal 2-2 Draw
Alf Derby 2 Goal 2-2 Draw
Alf Peterboro (Second goal 3-2 win)
Alf Doncaster (Second Goal 2-0 win)
Alf Watford (winning goal 2-1)
Alf Milwall (winning goal 2-1)

[Maguire]

Church Doncaster

I awarded an assist to Le Fondre for his challenge on the keeper which gifted a goal to Church

This may be where you diverge - obvs it was a fair while ago now but I don't recall Le Fondre touching the ball, just pushing the goalkeeper (might be wrong, can't check it). If he didn't touch the ball then he'll not get an assist.