The Snowball stat thread

[Snowball]

Ten of our first eleven in the Index Top 86 of the 100


04 562 Points Alex Pearce
07 536 Points Adam Federici

29 467 Points Jobi McAnuff
37 440 Points Jem Karacan
42 420 Points Kaspar Gorkss
45 432 Points Noel Hunt

53 421 Points Mikele Leigertwood
55 420 Points Ian Harte
62 405 Points Jimmy Kebe
86 368 Points Shaun Cummings

[Snowball]

But don't we ignore the first six games?

And seeing as he didn't start the first six games that affects the stats greatly, surely.

Of course part of the reason we started so badly could have been because Church didn't start those games!

Taking out the first 6 games the non-starting games become too-small a sample but even so
there's still a big difference. Starting Church we were averaging a 94-Point Season compared
with a 46 Point Season when he didn't start.

(I know the Church-not-starting sample is now too small)


However, I don't see why the first six games have to be dropped for this stat.
Church played (but didn't start) in 3 of the first 6 games (all losses) and it might
be argued that we did less well because we lacked his energy.

Manset started most of those.




P18 W10 D5 L3 35 Points 1.94 ppg - Church Starting

P03 W01 D0 L2 02 Points 1.00 ppg - Church not Starting

[chilipepper91]

Yeah I just realised that I basically proved a point I wasn't trying to make

I do however think that's still relevant in the grand scheme of things - certainly nobody has said "well we only started Churchy after the first six games and that's what changed our season". Maybe you're onto something

[facaldaqui]

Here is a VERY surprising statistic (Shocked me!)

If someone else wants to check this I'd appreciate it.

I'm amazed by this stat and find it hard to believe



Church has started 18 games. His last start was 21-Jan-12

Our ppg from the start of the season to 21-Jan was 1.56 ppg
but our ppg with Church starting was a lot higher, and without, a lot lower

27 12-6-9 34-27 +7 GD 42 1.56 Overall


P18 W10 D5 L3 35 Points 1.94 ppg - Church Starting

P09 W02 D1 L6 07 Points 0.78 ppg - Church not Starting




Here are the games

Starting 10-5-3

00 (90) Won 2-0 Scored Doncaster
00 (67) Won 3-2 Bristol (Losing 2-0 when he went off)
00 (75) Won 1-0 Birmingham
00 (71) Won 3-2 Ipswich
00 (61) Won 3-2 Peterboro (Scored)
00 (90) Won 1-0 Leeds (Scored)
00 (88) Won 3-0 Brighton
00 (90) Won 1-0 Ipswich
00 (83) Won 2-1 Ipswich (1-1 when came off)
00 (81) Won 1-0 (99th minute goal)

00 (90) Drew 1-1 Coventry Scored
00 (82) Drew 0-0 Middlesboro
00 (79) Drew 2-2 Derby
00 (81) Drew 1-1 Saints
00 (71) Drew 0-0 Palace

00 (70) Lost 1-0 Blackpool (Scored good goal, disallowed)
00 (61) Lost 3-1 Cardiff
00 (68) Lost 1-0 Hull

Interesting. This may reflect how hard he works--Brian always says that about him. Some people accuse him of running about ineffectually, but in fact by darting across at any defender who has the ball, he defends from the front and disrupts the opponents' comfort zone. Even did that against Liverpool, to the final second.

[weybridgewanderer]

what have been our PPG since january, when church stopped starting?

is it down to him not starting or isi t what happens whne you can pair the same strikers week after week and let them form a partnership?

[Snowball]

what have been our PPG since january, when church stopped starting?

is it down to him not starting or isi t what happens whne you can pair the same strikers week after week and let them form a partnership?

He's barely been played since Roberts arrived and we all know how good we've been since 28-Jan


But I hardly think the comparison can be fair. Kebe re-signed, Roberts, Connolly, Cwyka, Mullins
and the side slowly improving before that too,

Whereas the side with him/without him starting (up to 21-Jan) was relatively stable and a fair comparison

[Ian Royal]

Here is a VERY surprising statistic (Shocked me!)

If someone else wants to check this I'd appreciate it.

I'm amazed by this stat and find it hard to believe



Church has started 18 games. His last start was 21-Jan-12

Our ppg from the start of the season to 21-Jan was 1.56 ppg
but our ppg with Church starting was a lot higher, and without, a lot lower

27 12-6-9 34-27 +7 GD 42 1.56 Overall


P18 W10 D5 L3 35 Points 1.94 ppg - Church Starting

P09 W02 D1 L6 07 Points 0.78 ppg - Church not Starting




Here are the games

Starting 10-5-3

00 (90) Won 2-0 Scored Doncaster
00 (67) Won 3-2 Bristol (Losing 2-0 when he went off)
00 (75) Won 1-0 Birmingham
00 (71) Won 3-2 Ipswich
00 (61) Won 3-2 Peterboro (Scored)
00 (90) Won 1-0 Leeds (Scored)
00 (88) Won 3-0 Brighton
00 (90) Won 1-0 Ipswich
00 (83) Won 2-1 Ipswich (1-1 when came off)
00 (81) Won 1-0 (99th minute goal)

00 (90) Drew 1-1 Coventry Scored
00 (82) Drew 0-0 Middlesboro
00 (79) Drew 2-2 Derby
00 (81) Drew 1-1 Saints
00 (71) Drew 0-0 Palace

00 (70) Lost 1-0 Blackpool (Scored good goal, disallowed)
00 (61) Lost 3-1 Cardiff
00 (68) Lost 1-0 Hull

Interesting. This may reflect how hard he works--Brian always says that about him. Some people accuse him of running about ineffectually, but in fact by darting across at any defender who has the ball, he defends from the front and disrupts the opponents' comfort zone. Even did that against Liverpool, to the final second.

I'd have to recheck everything, but I believe our record with Church on the pitch from the start was absolutely terrible and that lots of the decent results we got when he started, only came after he'd been subsituted.

[cmonurz]

To give some context to those Church starting stats - 5 of the wins and 11 of the points have been earned after Church left the field. 4 draws and 1 losing situation (Bristol City away) have been turned into wins after Church was subbed off.

Not running Church down, just adding a bit to those original stats.

[Ian Royal]

To give some context to those Church stats - 5 of the wins and 11 of the points have been earned after Church left the field.

What's this? Blindly taking stats without checking context gives you misleading answers!?

Shirley not?!?!

[Wimb]

I've gotta say that I find Snowball's submissions a far more interesting (and tolerable) read now they're all in one place - I actually enjoying having a look these days, which has greatly improved the quality of the whole team board. It's actually readable now.

^^^^ 100% agreed

[Snowball]

what have been our PPG since january, when church stopped starting?

is it down to him not starting or isi t what happens whne you can pair the same strikers week after week and let them form a partnership?

The recent run isn't so much to do with a settled front two, but ROBERTS, surely, and the right "fit".


Church's 18 Starts were started with

12 Alf
06 Hunt (but one of these Kebe went off, Hunt went wide, Alf came on)

10-5-3 1.94 ppg Church Starting Overall
06-5-1 1.92 ppg Church Starting with ALF
04-0-2 2.00 ppg Church Starting with Hunt

[Snowball]

To give some context to those Church starting stats - 5 of the wins and 11 of the points have been earned after Church left the field. 4 draws and 1 losing situation (Bristol City away) have been turned into wins after Church was subbed off.

Not running Church down, just adding a bit to those original stats.

Didn't you used to say that Long got goals late on
because other players had tired out the opposition?


RFC quite obviously played rope-a-dope, at least they did for 25 games or so
where they wore down the opposition (mostly using Church up front) until
really going for the game in the last 30 minutes.

This is why we have so many late goals and (obviously) goals by a sub

Also interesting (see other thread) that ALF, despite 16 Starts has failed
to score AT ALL in the first half, and just ONCE (57th minute) in the first hour

ALF also was pretty much played for the full 90 when starting only coming off noticeably early twice = 62-75-82-88-89 minute

and 6 of ALF's 9 goals (67%) have been as a sub.


Many have argued that it's easier to score later on in a game, and it's therefore reasonable
to expect those coming on as subs to have enhanced minutes-per-goal statistics

Also, a player starting, if coming off around the hour mark or soon after would have WORSE stats

ALF has only been denied a total of 54 minutes from his 16 starts, so when starting has played 15.4 x "90"

By contrast Church has clearly been used differently losing 202 minutes in his 18 starts

Coming off as a sub after: 61-61-67-68 - ----- 70-71-71-75-79 - - - - 81-81-82-83-88


One argument would be... Church was tried for 60+ minutes, seen to fail and then subbed (unfair)

Much more likely he was started with the brief to run himself into the ground for the first hour
expecting to be pulled off... he was subbed 14/18 times compared with ALF's 5/16

[Snowball]

To give some context to those Church stats - 5 of the wins and 11 of the points have been earned after Church left the field.

What's this? Blindly taking stats without checking context gives you misleading answers!?

Shirley not?!?!

You really can't help yourself, can you?


I stumbled on this stat, not looking for it, and was frankly amazed by it.

[Snowball]

I'd have to recheck everything, but I believe our record with Church on the pitch from the start was absolutely terrible and that lots of the decent results we got when he started, only came after he'd been subsituted.

1. A player working hard for 60-75 minutes wearing down defenders IS doing an important job.

2. You have no way of judging whether said player would have scored the late goals against tired defences.

3. Church, for half-a-season was the only RFC player who knew how to score in the first half


His record doesn't look bad

Two games where the team really turned it round

00 (67) Won 3-2 Bristol (Losing 2-0 when he went off)
00 (71) Won 3-2 Ipswich Losing 1-0 when subbed

We were losing that second one in the 90th minute...



Two where subbing made no difference

00 (61) Lost 3-1 Cardiff 3-1 down when subbed, team had an off-day
00 (68) Lost 1-0 Hull subbed immediately after Hull's goal


One where Church was robbed, and subbing him made no difference

00 (70) Lost 1-0 Blackpool (Scored good goal, disallowed) 1-0 down when subbed



Four Games where he was clearly a major part in a win

00 (90) Won 1-0 Played 90 Leeds (Scored only goal)
00 (90) Won 1-0 Played 90 Ipswich
00 (90) Won 2-0 Played 90 Scored Doncaster
00 (88) Won 3-0 Played 88 Winning 2-0 when subbed Brighton


Eight games all-square when he came off

(Considering we played a method that depended on late goals, not surprising)

00 (90) Drew 1-1 Coventry Scored With ALF
00 (82) Drew 0-0 Middlesboro With ALF
00 (79) Drew 2-2 Derby With ALF 2-2 when subbed
00 (81) Drew 1-1 Saints. 1-1 when subbed

00 (81) Won 1-0 Played 81 Minutes. Drawing 0-0 (99th minute Karacan goal) Burnley
00 (61) Won 3-2 Peterboro (Scored 1-1 Equaliser) 1-1 when came off
00 (83) Won 2-1 Watford (1-1 when he came off)
00 (74) Won 1-0 Birmingham (0-0 when subbed, Hunt scored with first touch as a sub)

[cmonurz]

To give some context to those Church starting stats - 5 of the wins and 11 of the points have been earned after Church left the field. 4 draws and 1 losing situation (Bristol City away) have been turned into wins after Church was subbed off.

Not running Church down, just adding a bit to those original stats.

Didn't you used to say that Long got goals late on
because other players had tired out the opposition?

No, I don't believe I personally did say that, although I know it's an opinion that was posted on here by some.

I'm not sure why you've now done an analysis of Alf's goals when you simply stumbled upon a stat about Simon Church, but that's your prerogrative. Your stat showed Church's ppg when he starts so I added some context to that ppg statistic. I feel that this is another example of a situation where no matter which way you play the stats, they don't describe the full picture - as you say, no-one can no for certain if those 11 points earned after Church was subbed would otherwise have been earned anyway.

[Snowball]

1 42 36 82 Points - Max = 94 Southampton
2 41 26 79 Points - Max = 94 Reading

==============================

3 41 25 75 Points - Max = 90 West Ham
4 41 25 69 Points - Max = 84 Birmingham
5 42 15 67 Points - Max = 79 Blackpool
6 42 09 65 Points - Max = 77 Cardiff

==============================

7 41 07 63 Points - Max = 78 Brighton
8 42 00 63 Points - Max = 78 Middlesbrough
9 42 12 62 Points - Max = 77 Leicester

[Snowball]

I'm not sure why you've now done an analysis of Alf's goals when you simply stumbled upon a stat about Simon Church, but that's your prerogrative.

Someone asked about pairings

Your stat showed Church's ppg when he starts so I added some context to that ppg statistic.
I feel that this is another example of a situation where no matter which way you play the stats,
they don't describe the full picture - as you say, no-one can no for certain if those 11 points
earned after Church was subbed would otherwise have been earned anyway.

It's irrelevant cm. My statement was simple and factual

These results when he starts, these when he doesn't start.

Applying straightforward logic, a pundit would have said (prior to Roberts' arrival) "RFC do better, MUCH better, when Church starts"

That was all I was saying, and, as I have already said, it surprised me.

It suggests to me, when placed along ALF's inability to score
(in 16 starts) before the 57th minutes that it was all a McD plan
and that Church's job was a lot more than getting goals.

[Snowball]

Despite Saints important win yesterday our form from Game 7
equates to winning a 46-Game League by 13 points (99 v 86)

Defeat at Saints would make that 96 v 87 with roundings


01 35 23 06 06 17 CS 57-28 +29 75 2.14 ppg Reading
02 36 19 10 07 15 CS 61-32 +29 67 1.86 ppg Southampton

03 36 17 12 07 14 CS 55-38 +17 63 1.75 ppg West Ham
04 37 17 12 08 11 CS 64-40 +24 63 1.70 ppg Birmingham

05 36 15 11 10 08 CS 64-52 +12 56 1.56 ppg Blackpool
06 36 15 09 12 12 CS 54-41 +13 54 1.50 ppg Leicester
07 36 13 15 08 11 CS 51-45 +06 54 1.50 ppg Cardiff
08 37 16 06 15 11 CS 54-44 +10 54 1.46 ppg Burnley
09 36 14 10 12 15 CS 36-33 +03 52 1.44 ppg Hull City
10 36 14 10 12 08 CS 43-49 -06 52 1.44 ppg Watford
11 36 14 08 14 11 CS 56-54 +02 50 1.39 ppg Ipswich
12 36 14 08 14 10 CS 48-52 -04 50 1.39 ppg Leeds
13 36 12 13 11 11 CS 36-43 -07 49 1.36 ppg Middlesbrough


14 35 12 11 12 12 CS 38-38 +00 47 1.34 ppg Brighton
15 36 13 09 14 09 CS 39-48 -09 48 1.33 ppg Derby
16 36 10 14 12 15 CS 32-37 -05 44 1.22 ppg Crystal Palace
17 36 11 08 17 04 CS 50-58 -08 41 1.14 ppg Peterborough
18 36 12 05 19 08 CS 39-49 -10 41 1.14 ppg Nottingham Forest

[Snowball]

The Teams that Matter Directly

Southampton, Brighton, Birmingham and Forest have much better recent form. Palace are fading badly


01 35 23 06 06 17 CS 57-28 +29 75 Points 2.14 ppg Reading

02 36 19 10 07 15 CS 61-32 +29 67 Points 1.86 ppg Southampton

03 36 17 12 07 14 CS 55-38 +17 63 Points 1.75 ppg West Ham

04 37 17 12 08 11 CS 64-40 +24 63 Points 1.70 ppg Birmingham

14 35 12 11 12 12 CS 38-38 +00 47 Points 1.34 ppg Brighton

16 36 10 14 12 15 CS 32-37 -05 44 Points 1.22 ppg Crystal Palace

18 36 12 05 19 08 CS 39-49 -10 41 Points 1.14 ppg Nottingham Forest

[Snowball]

Reading look much better than below if you look at Last 9, 12, 14 games


Last 8 Game Form

01 8 6 1 1 19-08 GD 11 2.37F 1.00A 2.37 19 Reading
02 8 5 2 1 14-08 GD 06 1.75F 1.00A 2.12 17 Southampton
03 8 4 3 1 10-06 GD 04 1.25F 0.75A 1.87 15 Watford
04 8 4 2 2 15-07 GD 08 1.87F 0.87A 1.75 14 Nottingham Forest
05 8 4 2 2 15-10 GD 05 1.87F 1.25A 1.75 14 Leicester
06 8 4 2 2 18-14 GD 04 2.25F 1.75A 1.75 14 Birmingham

11 8 2 5 1 16-12 GD 04 2.00F 1.50A 1.37 11 West Ham (Only defeat in 8 games by Reading)

16 8 2 4 2 10-09 GD 01 1.25F 1.12A 1.25 10 Brighton (Only won 2 in 8 Games)

21 8 1 3 4 06-13 GD -7 0.75F 1.62A 0.75 06 Crystal Palace (Only won 1 in 8 Games)