Swansea-Reading Results Comparison

[Snowball]

Looking at Swansea's last 31 games and seeing how RFC
did in the same games (whenever played) it's more than clear
how much better we've done against these other teams

Over these 31 Games, (comparative fixtures)
RFC gained 6 points more than Swansea and +6 GD


The Second 2/3 of the Season (31 Games)

15 Games where RFC were better than Swansea.
RFC gained 27 extra points in the equivalent fixtures

Swansea 0-1 Reading 4-1 H Bristol City
Swansea 1-0 Reading 5-2 H Middlesbrough
Swansea 1-1 Reading 3-0 A Doncaster
Swansea 1-2 Reading 2-0 H Portsmouth
Swansea 1-1 Reading 2-1 H Millwall
Swansea 0-1 Reading 1-1 A Sheffield Utd
Swansea 0-4 Reading 1-3 A QPR
Swansea 1-0 Reading 3-0 H Barnsley
Swansea 1-2 Reading 2-1 A Leicester
Swansea 1-1 Reading 1-0 A Barnsley
Swansea 0-1 Reading 1-1 H Cardiff
Swansea 0-1 Reading 2-0 A Scunthorpe
Swansea 1-2 Reading 2-1 A Derby
Swansea 1-2 Reading 1-1 A Preston
Swansea 1-2 Reading 4-0 A Burnley


Swansea 10-21 RFC 34-12




Five Identical Results

Swansea 3-0 Reading 3-0 H Crystal Palace
Swansea 3-1 Reading 3-1 A Ipswich
Swansea 1-1 Reading 1-1 H Watford
Swansea 1-1 Reading 1-1 H Hull
Swansea 0-0 Reading 1-1 A Portsmouth


Swansea Beat Reading 1-0

11 Games where Swansea did better gaining 21 points

Swansea 1-0 Reading 2-2 A Cardiff City
Swansea 2-0 Reading 0-1 A Bristol
Swansea 4-3 Reading 1-3 A Middlesbrough
Swansea 3-0 Reading 4-3 H Doncaster
Swansea 1-0 Reading 0-0 A Coventry
Swansea 3-0 Reading 0-0 H Leeds
Swansea 3-2 Reading 1-1 H Nottm Forest
Swansea 3-0 Reading 3-3 H Norwich
Swansea 4-1 Reading 1-0 H Ipswich T
Swansea 2-0 Reading 0-0 A Millwall
Swansea 4-0 Reading 2-3 H Sheffield Utd

30-6 Swansea 14-17 RFC

[Z175]

Agreed that over the medium term we're on form. Presumably you read this article someone linked to .
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog ... -off-final

Thanks as always Mr Snowball.

Only Blackpool made up a form deficit but that was 1 point. It is highly unlikely Swansea will go up if you go by the form book.

But sadly we are included an awesome run for us which clearly ended on the 5th last game. Swansea are flying on short term form.

What I would love to see is when Shane Long has followed up a run of barren games with 1 or 2 goals how many does he score in the next game?

[JackFish]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

[Wycombe Royal]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

Please don't start him off.......(and yes I do agree with your sentiments)

[wolsey]

Who cares?

It is a one off game.

A Cup Tie if you like.

Under Brian we are generally quite good at Cup Ties.

Ergo.....who knows?

(Can't wait to find out though)

[Svlad Cjelli]

Who cares?

It is a one off game.

A Cup Tie if you like.

Under Brian we are generally quite good at Cup Ties.

Ergo.....who knows?

(Can't wait to find out though)

My thoughts exactly - if ever there was a time where endless statistics of past performances are utterly pointless now is that time.

When Snowball starts living off his winning football bets I'll start taking notice of the endless numbers he posts before matches.

[Ian Royal]

Snowball doesn't do arbitrary cut off points, but if he did, he'd do 31 games.



Oh.

[papereyes]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

You did not want to go there.

[Svlad Cjelli]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

You did not want to go there.

[RobRoyal]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

The Jack is right.

As someone who cares (moderately) about quality statistics, it really pissed me off when on sky they said "Cardiff have one defeat in 11... which is the same as Reading!" What they've done there, quite evidently, is to chose a time period which gives the most convincing statistic regarding Cardiff's form (i.e. I imagine they were 2 defeats in 12, so we start from the game after that first defeat) and then compare Reading's record over the same period. But we were also 1 defeat in 16, which exposes the arbitrariness of that choise of time period - it makes as much sense to say "Reading have one defeat in 16, Cardiff have X defeats in 16, therefore Reading are on better form." Rather better to say how many games in a row have the two sides gone unbeaten? Or, how many games do you have to go back before their 2 most recent defeats?

Snowball's crime is less severe, but it's basically the same thing.

[Z175]

Agreed with above post, but two key facts swing it for me.

1. In 20 (TWENTY!) games we have only lost to Sheff utd (fluke) and Man city (unlucky/3rd best side)

2.Over the final 10 league games we got 23 points to Swansea's 17. Since our defeat to Bolton the 14/15 teams succcesful teams were the form leaders over the 10 final games. Only Blackpool bucked this trend but they only trailed by 1 point, not 6.

Therefore if Swansea win it will be actually be an upset. which the bookies are (cautiously) predicting.

[Maguire]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

Well you know it JF, and I know it, and indeed we all know it.

Swansea were the better team over the season and will start marginal favourites in my book, but only marginal.

[Gordons Cumming]

Sod statistics.

Anyone can win on the day.

[who are ya?]

Shane Long has also scored more goals for Reading this season than for Swansea, does this mean we have the better of them Snowball?

[Sarah Star]

Sod statistics.

Anyone can win on the day.

True or there'd be no point playing the game.

[Gordons Cumming]

Sod statistics.

Anyone can win on the day.

True or there'd be no point playing the game.

Very profound

[Wimb]

Why over 31 games? You've just plucked an arbitary number from somewhere which shows that you've been better over that period. Over the 46 games we were three points better than you. Over the last six games, we've been better than you. Over the medium term you've been better than us. You could pick any random number of games to show which side performed better than the other during that time period.

You did not want to go there.

^^^^^

This x19835093621.5

[Snowball]

Picking an arbitrary "31 games"?


REALLY? We started that 31-Game run with FIVE CONSECUTIVE DRAWS.


These were games 16-20

H 1-1 Cardiff
H 3-3 Norwich
A 1-1 Watford
H 0-0 Leeds
H 0-0 Coventry


SURELY, IF I WANTED TO BEND THE DATA, I WOULD START FROM GAME 21?


*I* didn't choose 31 games, the manager did when he said it took him a dozen games
after Gylfi left to find a new system that worked for his players.

15 games = 4 Gylfi games and then floundering around learning to play 442 again
31 games = games 16-46, or as near as we can get to two-thirds of the season.

I said at the time (games 5 onwards) that "trying to replace Gylfi" was not the way
and we were stuck in the recent past. We needed to change back and play to our
strengths. Gradually and eventually we did, and used Noel Hunt in 442 or in a
half-hearted 451 where he played deeper.

As I said, I DID NOT choose 31 games. I posted a thread to discuss the
manager's statement about a dozen games.

Incidentally I have posted current form for 6-8-10-12-14-16-18-10, 23, 42 and 46 games
and they all show more or less the same thing. Swansea got ahead of us while we played Gylfi
(by 1 point, 6 to our 5) and then got further ahead of us in games 5-15 (4 points)


By game 20, after those five draws, they were TEN points clear of us (we were 14th) (but we had a game in hand (Sheffield Utd, eventually a draw)

From games 21 to game 46 we have gained SEVEN POINTS and +3 Goals GD.

[Snowball]

AND HERE IS THE TABLE FROM DECEMBER 18TH

One more win, 4 less defeats, scored 8 more goals. +3 better GD

1 25 14-9-2 . . . 50-29 +21 51 2.04 Norwich City
2 26 14-8-4 . . . 49-29 +20 50 1.92 Reading <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
3 26 13-8-5 . . . 35-20 +15 47 1.81 Queens Park Rangers
4 27 14-6-7 . . . 48-33 +15 48 1.78 Nottingham Forest
5 25 13-4-8 . . . 41-24 +17 43 1.72 Swansea City <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
6 25 12-7-6 . . . 41-32 +09 43 1.72 Cardiff City

.2 points per game more, = 9 points a season.

[RobRoyal]

Oh wow, you've found another date in the year from which point we have a better record then Swansea. Brilliant.

Shall I give you a few that work the other way, or are you not bothered?

You are utterly fixated on McDermott's comments regarding the time the team "clicked," but I'm sure it's possible for you to imagine Rodgers saying something like " I never really felt like the team was my own until X date" which would give an equal rationale for saying that some period of time other the last 31 games represents Swansea's true quality.

Moreover, showing that you could have picked a date more favourable to Reading than 15 games in does not support your case at all. It might show you're not being cynical, but you're still being naive.