Jump to content

Interesting Stats!


Strovolos

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I will change my mind on the scores tomorrow.

Sheff Wed 0 - 0 Brighton

Brighton    2 - 1  Sheff Wed

Brighton win on aggregate 2 - 1

--------------------------------------

DCFC 1 - 1 Hull

Hull     2 -1 DCFC (AET)

Hull win on aggregate 3 - 2

--------------------------------------

Brighton 2 - 0 Hull

--------------------------------------

Concrete 4:1 mix v Concrete 3 :1 mix

Concrete 4:1 mix win on aggregate

Played at Hilton Gravel Pits

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Rampage said:

I will change my mind on the scores tomorrow.

Sheff Wed 0 - 0 Brighton

Brighton    2 - 1  Sheff Wed

Brighton win on aggregate 2 - 1

--------------------------------------

DCFC 1 - 1 Hull

Hull     2 -1 DCFC (AET)

Hull win on aggregate 3 - 2

--------------------------------------

Brighton 2 - 0 Hull

--------------------------------------

Concrete 4:1 mix v Concrete 3 :1 mix

Concrete 4:1 mix win on aggregate

Played at Hilton Gravel Pits

 

If we went to extra time with Hull I wouldn't be able to handle it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ahalftimereport said:

Difficult to see how we (Hull) didn't walk it based on those graphs, and anyone would think Burnley were mid table looking at them. Just shows how important it is to take your chances. 

I think the graph compared to actual table suggests more that the graph is a load of **** that tells us very little rather than telling us that Hull should have walked it.

Burnley, the champions should be closer to the relegation and Reading should be automatically promoted? Probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Kernow said:

I think the graph compared to actual table suggests more that the graph is a load of **** that tells us very little rather than telling us that Hull should have walked it.

Burnley, the champions should be closer to the relegation and Reading should be automatically promoted? Probably not.

Think that's a little harsh. The stats certainly show that Burnley were the most clinical team in front of goal whilst we were very poor. Their shots/goals ratio is very impressive and shows why they won the league. Obviously the stats don't tell the full story but I found some of those quite interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, ahalftimereport said:

Think that's a little harsh. The stats certainly show that Burnley were the most clinical team in front of goal whilst we were very poor. Their shots/goals ratio is very impressive and shows why they won the league. Obviously the stats don't tell the full story but I found some of those quite interesting. 

Interesting in a way. But when you look at the real life positions of the teams vs some of the positions they have on the graph, you can conclude that it doesn't really give an indication of where a team should or shouldn't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Gives more of an impression of how teams play than how many points they got.

They illustrate a few pints but don't tell a whole story.

Don't think stats can ever tell the whole story, still found them interesting myself. Didn't surprise me a great deal though, from watching Burnley this season they take their chances despite not creating a great deal, whilst we're the opposite, they're also pretty good from set pieces. Still didn't expect there to be such a disparity between ourselves and the rest of the league, we look like an anomaly on 3/4 of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Gives more of an impression of how teams play than how many points they got.

They illustrate a few pints but don't tell a whole story.

I'm going to illustrate a Straffe Hendrik Quadrupel now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kernow said:

I think the graph compared to actual table suggests more that the graph is a load of **** that tells us very little rather than telling us that Hull should have walked it.

Burnley, the champions should be closer to the relegation and Reading should be automatically promoted? Probably not.

Interested too see where Leicester are the PL one, compared to say Everton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's good. Gives you a rough idea of how aggressive a team plays. 

But the problem with stats is for example they tell you where the shot/ pass went. Not whether it was actually any good.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Rampage said:

I will change my mind on the scores tomorrow.

Sheff Wed 0 - 0 Brighton

Brighton    2 - 1  Sheff Wed

Brighton win on aggregate 2 - 1

--------------------------------------

DCFC 1 - 1 Hull

Hull     2 -1 DCFC (AET)

Hull win on aggregate 3 - 2

--------------------------------------

Brighton 2 - 0 Hull

--------------------------------------

Concrete 4:1 mix v Concrete 3 :1 mix

Concrete 4:1 mix win on aggregate

Played at Hilton Gravel Pits

 

You do realise concrete is sand, stone and cement, three parts? Mortar and bedding is two part 

They vary on flexibilty and strength dependant on sand & water content etc, no offence i dont know what 4:1 or 3:1 means or is trying to say.

id know if C25, C40 or an RC was specified  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Alpha said:

It's good. Gives you a rough idea of how aggressive a team plays. 

But the problem with stats is for example they tell you where the shot/ pass went. Not whether it was actually any good.

 

That is why I had assist stats, was the assist a simple pass,  or a great piece of technique, or a lucky move?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ahalftimereport said:

Difficult to see how we (Hull) didn't walk it based on those graphs, and anyone would think Burnley were mid table looking at them. Just shows how important it is to take your chances. 

The truth is, with our squad, we should have walked that league.  That's not arrogance just fact if you look at the players.  And whilst I love Steve Bruce, the the fact is that he has failed this season because he has not maintained enough consistency.

All that is water under the bridge now and we are faced with the lottery of the play-offs and to be honest, I think it's too close to call between the Rams and the Tigers.

Can't wait though!!!  :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...