KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Stato's Five & Five Moments [Game 2]

can i ask what are you getting at? Have you watched the game since?

only one stat matters, and that one said 0-1 to Liverpool

so then why are you obsessing over them and using them in other threads?

I have been using stats. Saying they are deceptive says that logic is deceptive. Logic and the ability to solve everything within its only constraints is exactly the reason there is maths, and thereby by proxy, statistics. There is this delusion (personal opinion on the matter) that stats can prove and disprove anything. You're only right suggesting it, if they are plucking random stats. The whole idea of justification through statistics is that there are parts of the game that can be analysed (AND THIS IS DONE BY ALL OF THE TOP TEAMS)... the whole point is to find strengths and weaknesses. Whether that be in players, style, strategy, tactics, substitutions etc. The days of random scouts judging a player by solely watching him are fading, and it is much easier to analyse players with heaps of data. Why do you think football manager has actually become a practical scouting tool (and one used by our rivals)... Come on... A defensive midfielders ability in passing and tackling are his job. If you can't analyse that through numbers and realise there is sense in doing so, then logic based arguments can't be your thing. Opinion on a whim is basically what you're saying is the only thing that works.

Or just the way you think others follow you in thinking it is.

As in... You think people think that way because you think that way... But that others may not share your belief.

I know a lot of people that would completely disagree that stats can prove any argument. They only prove things when they are all laid out and clear, not just a random stat. A random stat proves nothing. They have to be appropriate, clear and directly related, or else it is useless.

Stats, this weekend, would show a lot of things. They would help clarify that the majority of chances Villa had were from the edge of the box and further away from goal. They would show that our ability to retain possession in the first half was very effective. They would show that we altered our style in the second half, and broke up most plays outside the box... There is a lot more to it that you and (if you believe so) others believe... I can understand scepticism, but I just don't agree.

stats can be a useful tool I suppose but the game will always be about your gut

I just don't agree EMP.

agree to disagree then.

what were countinho's stats at inter? crap?

so logically BR shouldn't have signed him.

so many factors come into play other than stats. stats can help but a good manager knows the player inside out.

Stats don't all come down to game-time. How do you analyse people physically? Or their passing ability/distance/precision? How do you analyse how well someone can tackle. It comes down to ranking players, analysing consistency, and taking precise data.

I had a discussion with someone that didn't believe we have enough data to be able to do it now. I respect that opinion much more than believing they don't prove enough.