Long - Time to go.

[Vision]

Snowball.

Can you compile a list of Championship strikers that have made 13 or more league starts this season and have yet to score a league goal other than from the penalty spot?

Not that it in any way is a sole indicator of their worth to their club by the way but it would be a damn sight shorter and more relevant than the near full page of absolute guff you posted yesterday evening.

[brendywendy]

Snowball is great.

His manner and responses might wind otherwise pretty placid people up but his stats are, and always have been, a breath of fresh air on the Team Board.

I don't even care if they are seen as selective, skewed or otherwise inaccurate, the fact is that somebody looking at the game we love through prism specs and doing the research he does should be welcomed.

agreed.

regardless of sample size, or skewing, the stats offer a fresh perspective, and challenge peoples in grained predjudices.

my only gripe is people are so intent on belittling them that every thread becomes an anti snowball gayfest

[Hoop Blah]

I would agree brendy/RR if, and that's a big IF, he didn't throw them out there as the definitive truth and of greater significance than how the game is actually played out in front of your eyes.

Absolutely, stats can highlight a few things of interest. But they don't get close to being able to measure ability or a players worth yet people like snowball don't seem to be able to grasp that.

If he was a little more selective about the stats he throws out there, more open to discuss their validity, and a lot better at presenting and interpreting them then I'd probably find them interesting. As it is I just find it's stifling any interesting debate (there did used to be some on here!).

[Maguire]

agreed.

regardless of sample size, or skewing, the stats offer a fresh perspective, and challenge peoples in grained predjudices.

my only gripe is people are so intent on belittling them that every thread becomes an anti snowball gayfest

TBF I don't mind the stats at all, nor would i put someone down for taking the time to put them together.

It's the conclusions that are drawn from them (often stated aggresively and IN BIG LETTERS) that are complete nonsense and I think it's that which people belittle.

Anyone with a scientific bent to them (*no homo*) can't help but shudder at the sub-GCSE approach to handling data i'm afraid.

[cmonurz]

Agreed HB, and further to that (and at risk of sounding a bit precious) - I wouldn't be so bothered if he was making an effort to argue my points, instead of insinuating that I'm stupid or can't read, or posting that he has no respect for me, and that I am a twat.

Fact is Snowball's stats often don't make a lot of sense in the context of the discussion being had, and he hates that being highlighted.

Edit: I realise I told him he can't read too, but tbf he did have 4 failed attempts at reading Diego Forlan's career goals from his Wiki page.

[Snowball]

There are EIGHTY-TWO strikers named. I'm hardly going to research every one
and work out when they scored, whether it was a starter's or a sub's goal,
how many minutes they have played etc etc

... as I know the answer won't suit my argument.


That's snowballistics!

Platt, don't be a dick. Just work out how many hours of work it would be to trawl through every game played this season, for every club, first finding out if the players started or didn't, when they came off if they started, when they came on if they came on a sub. It would be a nightmare!

of course any individuals could do it, for a few random players or for 1-2-3 clubs
and what they'd find, just like with RFC, there are a lot of late goals that
are often scored by late-arriving subs


That's why we have to separate out goals-scored-when-starting-scored in the first, say 75 minutes, goals-scored-when-starting-scored in the last 15 or so minutes, versus goals-scored-when on-as-a-sub, these USUALLY being in the last 15-20 minutes.

Simon Church is a perfect example.

Ian Royal was posting to "show" X Starts Y sub appearances 3 goals = 3 goals in X starts EVEN WHEN THE PLAYER HAD FAILED TO SCORE ANY GOALS WHEN STARTING.

This season, Simon Church has started 5 times and got three goals. BUT HE HAS FAILED TO SCORE A SINGLE GOAL WHEN STARTING
and his three goals have all been in the last 5 minutes of the game, every time as a substitute.

[Vision]

Snowball is great.

His manner and responses might wind otherwise pretty placid people up but his stats are, and always have been, a breath of fresh air on the Team Board.

I don't even care if they are seen as selective, skewed or otherwise inaccurate, the fact is that somebody looking at the game we love through prism specs and doing the research he does should be welcomed.

We could debate all day about how relevant his stats are or indeed how selective they are but the real problem for me is the inaccuracies

Either he's deliberately lying or he's incredibly sloppy in his research but either way I'm surprised that you of all people would welcome being mislead (deliberately or otherwise).

Frankly someone's instant honest opinion (however much i may disagree) is no less credible or welcome than a list of numbers compiled by a man who has been shown on at least 3 occasions to have got those numbers wrong. Its like Grammar Nazi's, if you're gonna wave that flag you'd better make sure you are infallible because otherwise you make yourself look a bit daft.

The irony is of course that when he's not spamming us with these selective/irrelevant/incorrect stats and actually giving his opinion I generally agree with him more than I do with most on here.

[Snowball]

certainly a great super sub or fine as a lone striker for away matches

Yes, ONCE he was. But last season and this season combined he has been a sub 13 times for 1 goal
at Liverpool, where he actually played 41 minutes or so, almost a full half's worth of minutes.

He came on in the 81st minute, won the equalising penalty, scored in open play in the 100th minute


Three years back he could score as a sub but (allegedly) couldn't score when he started.

Last season and this 10 out of his 11 goals were when he started.

Now CHURCH is the guy who scores well when coming on as a sub, and nothing like as deadly when starting.

I presume no-one disputes THESE facts?

[Snowball]

No it is about Long, as you wouldn't have felt the need to post these stats if you weren't looking to support Long's start to the season in goalscoring terms. The fact that you did post it, makes it about Long.

You just say it, so it's true. PS The moon is made of cheese.

I was trying to expand the argument to look at ALL strikers
and to show that where Long, OR Church OR Hunt are is not
in the slightest bit unusual at this time of the season

Just as Kevin Doyle has had goal-less consecutive runs of 7 games, 10 games and TWENTY-SEVEN games

[Vision]

certainly a great super sub or fine as a lone striker for away matches

Yes, ONCE he was. But last season and this season combined he has been a sub 13 times for 1 goal
at Liverpool, where he actually played 41 minutes or so, almost a full half's worth of minutes.

He came on in the 81st minute, won the equalising penalty, scored in open play in the 100th minute


Three years back he could score as a sub but (allegedly) couldn't score when he started.

Last season and this 10 out of his 11 goals were when he started.

Now CHURCH is the guy who scores well when coming on as a sub, and nothing like as deadly when starting.

I presume no-one disputes THESE facts?

Well the facts tell us Long isn't scoring from open play when he starts and he's no longer any use as a sub.

Looks like you agree with the original poster afterall.

Who'd have thought it...

[Snowball]

My post was perfectly reasonable, and quite succinct - that when you feel like it, you move the debate to scoring rates, and when that doesn't suit, you shift it back to absolute goals.

Unklike you, Gwathoppa, I am quite capable of looking at the world from more than one angle at a time.

Shane's overall scoring rate, goals to minutes played is very, very good, and using the rule of thumb of presuming starts are 90 minutes and sub appearances are 15 (proven to come out within 2-3% of actuality) he compares with Doyle (2.62 Doyle, 2.82 Long). However, if you look even more carefully, Doyle usually played 90 minutes, almost always played 85 minutes so in fact the rule-of-thum favours Doyle, over, for example Hunt, who STARTING rarely played more than 60-65 minutes, often replaced by long, or Long who was often replaced on 60/70 by Hunt.

The only way to resolve that would be to laboriously collate "minutes played" exactly.


NOW, the point about actual goals this season WAS NOT ABOUT SCORING RATES. Geddit? It's SIMPLY about goals. Geddit?

BECAUSE I'M NOT TRYING TO SHOW HOW GOOD LONG IS versus others, in terms of goals-per-minute, or shots-on-target, I AM SIMPLY TRYING TO POINT OUT, THAT AT ALMOST EVERY CLUB, THERE ARE STRIKERS, OFTEN GOOD ONES, who have played up to 14 games this season and have failed to score, or have only scored 1 goal, or like Long have only scored 2, or slightly better than Long have only scored 3.

That for God's sake, it 78% of all strikers at this time. SIXTY-SIX per cent. in other words, Long's current predicament is the same as TWO-THIRDS of all strikers, two-bloody-thirds. it's not rare, it's not unusual, and that is ALL I was trying to say. if you add in those strikers who have scored just one goal more than Shane (3) then that covers 78.1% almost four-fifths of all strikers.


Can't you lot get this? Almost four-fifths of all named strikers in the Championship have scored three or less goals this season. That is ALL





Shane, Church, Hunt are not even SLIGHTLY unusual. They are THE NORM for 14 games.

It would be fine you making these 'separate' points if they weren't new approaches to your same argument and that's all you're doing, running around in circles trying to show from every conceivable angle, how your argument is correct. You have completely tied yourself in knots and to top it all off, are quite happy to throw personal insults around too, when all people are doing are disagreeing with you (which is allowed, you know!)

Oh do me a favour. I receive twenty insults a day.

[Stranded]

No it is about Long, as you wouldn't have felt the need to post these stats if you weren't looking to support Long's start to the season in goalscoring terms. The fact that you did post it, makes it about Long.

You just say it, so it's true. PS The moon is made of cheese.

I was trying to expand the argument to look at ALL strikers
and to show that where Long, OR Church OR Hunt are is not
in the slightest bit unusual at this time of the season

Just as Kevin Doyle has had goal-less consecutive runs of 7 games, 10 games and TWENTY-SEVEN games

So it's about Long then. Thanks.

[cmonurz]

From me?

I said you couldn't read, when you showed you couldn't read a Wiki page. I apologise if that offended you. What else?

As I said above, it's the fact you resort to personal insults (another one in your most recent post) that I have an issue with, not the stats themselves, I'm perfectly happy to debate those.

[Snowball]

Apart from copy and paste from what looks like Wiki, you didn't really tell me what you think of him as a player. That was the point of the question.

Oh, I see...

You mean this:

I suspect Nugent is a bad trainer or has some kind of issues outside football because he was a fantastic talent that has gone seriously astray.

Nugent at his best was very good indeed.

is NOT commenting on what I think of him as a player?

And me posting that he clearly has issues off the pitch, citing his
problems with various managers and bust-ups with other players
and suspensions and fines, and then saying "I'd prefer Long"

is also not commenting?

[Snowball]

Snowball.

Can you compile a list of Championship strikers that have made 13 or more league starts this season and have yet to score a league goal other than from the penalty spot?

Not that it in any way is a sole indicator of their worth to their club by the way but it would be a damn sight shorter and more relevant than the near full page of absolute guff you posted yesterday evening.

I could, but as you point out, it's irrelevant.

Can you compile a list of players who have played 13 games for their club this season, won three penalties for their club this season, scored two penalties, had two clear assists, had two opponents sent off, won free-kicks that directly led to goals and been lauded by their manager as an unsung hero, a manager who essentially says the fans are simply wrong in their criticisms of the striker and he doesn't need to make any excuses for him?

[Snowball]

my only gripe is people are so intent on belittling them that every thread becomes an anti snowball gayfest

Precisely. Try looking carefully at how the typical thread of this type works, when the insults come in etc.

Sure I get fired up and start firing back, but in the last few days I've been told I'm out of control.
told to "go". told to shut the f--k up, LOLLed at countless times, and Hoop has formally asked for me to be banned.


NICE.

[cmonurz]

BECAUSE I'M NOT TRYING TO SHOW HOW GOOD LONG IS versus others, in terms of goals-per-minute, or shots-on-target, I AM SIMPLY TRYING TO POINT OUT, THAT AT ALMOST EVERY CLUB, THERE ARE STRIKERS, OFTEN GOOD ONES, who have played up to 14 games this season and have failed to score, or have only scored 1 goal, or like Long have only scored 2, or slightly better than Long have only scored 3.

But that's a meaningless thing to show. And it's not a personal dig at you that I am highlighting that fact. To show that there are lots of strikers who have played 'up to 14 games' who have 2 goals or less, doesn't mean anything at all. As you yourself said when I gave you the goals NHunt and Church have scored as a partnership (3), you immediately asked 'how many games have they played'. Are you telling me that the correct retort to you in that respect would have been 'I'M NOT CONSIDERING GOALS PER GAME'? That's not debating a point, it's just throwing your weight around.

If you want to post stats you have to accept that they will be challenged. And you really don't seem to like it when they are.

[Vision]

Snowball.

Can you compile a list of Championship strikers that have made 13 or more league starts this season and have yet to score a league goal other than from the penalty spot?

Not that it in any way is a sole indicator of their worth to their club by the way but it would be a damn sight shorter and more relevant than the near full page of absolute guff you posted yesterday evening.

I could, but as you point out, it's irrelevant.

Can you compile a list of players who have played 13 games for their club this season, won three penalties for their club this season, scored two penalties, had two clear assists, had two opponents sent off, won free-kicks that directly led to goals and been lauded by their manager as an unsung hero, a manager who essentially says the fans are simply wrong in their criticisms of the striker and he doesn't need to make any excuses for him?

I know this is your usual trick but you have spent the last day and a half spamming us solely with goalscoring stats so dont suddenly move the goal posts yet again to assists and everything else.Its not open to debate with me that i think his all-round contribution is very useful to us. My worry is his goalscoring record this season, nows your chance to prove those worries unfounded.

Try to focus on what you said earlier about Long's goalscoring record not being "unusual".

I'd say after 14 games of this championship season: Shane Long's 13 starts, 2 penalties and no goals from open play is very unusual for this division and its a concern for me as a supporter.

Thats his goal scoring record broken down succinctly which is what we've been debating and you've been statting on.

Now if thats not "unusual" for this division then presumably it wont be difficult to name dozens of strikers with the same record.

Please try to take this as an attempt to engage you in a discussion and not an attempt at point scoring.

[Vision]

my only gripe is people are so intent on belittling them that every thread becomes an anti snowball gayfest

Precisely. Try looking carefully at how the typical thread of this type works, when the insults come in etc.

Sure I get fired up and start firing back, but in the last few days I've been told I'm out of control.
told to "go". told to shut the f--k up, LOLLed at countless times, and Hoop has formally asked for me to be banned.


NICE.

To be fair though pretty much everything Ian Royal posts gets taken to task just as much, equally Royalee gets stick,finerain, Floyd Street etc etc. I'd be willing to guess you've posted more than anyone on the team board in the last few months and an awful lot of it isnt based on opinion but a list of statistics. You cant just print them and think no-one will comment or given your track record on accuracy actually dispute them?

[Royal Rother]

Snowball is great.

His manner and responses might wind otherwise pretty placid people up but his stats are, and always have been, a breath of fresh air on the Team Board.

I don't even care if they are seen as selective, skewed or otherwise inaccurate, the fact is that somebody looking at the game we love through prism specs and doing the research he does should be welcomed.

We could debate all day about how relevant his stats are or indeed how selective they are but the real problem for me is the inaccuracies

Either he's deliberately lying or he's incredibly sloppy in his research but either way I'm surprised that you of all people would welcome being mislead (deliberately or otherwise).

Frankly someone's instant honest opinion (however much i may disagree) is no less credible or welcome than a list of numbers compiled by a man who has been shown on at least 3 occasions to have got those numbers wrong.

Vision, I don't WELCOME being misled, but I do welcome someone who puts a totally different perspective on the game of football.

I only read about a quarter of the contributions to these threads but have not seen anything that brings into doubt the general accuracy of the stats quoted. If some are wrong / complete BS then big deal. So are at least 95% of the non-statted posts on this board.