Derby County v Hull City

[ramblur]

1 hour ago, ramblur said:

Come on angie,you know she'll have other ideas for afters

You say it best,when you say nothing at all. Apologies to all,I sometimes forget this is a family show.

[Day]

14 minutes ago, Ellafella said:

Very good Carl! So you've found about 13 games that match your argument. But let's see now, how many teams are there in the English League system - about 96 and they play 40 odd games per season so that's about 4,000 games. So you think assessing 13 games that you "looked up" (not even a random sample) is statistically representative of all football league games? I don't think so...I would be very surprised if possession didn't account for at least 15-20% of the variance in winning outcomes.

This weekends winners and possession. Bold = 50% possession and under. Stats from BBC Football.

35 winners - 18 with less possession. 

Man City 5-0 - 66%
Arsenal 3-0 - 59%
Brighton 3-1 - 49%
Spurs 3-0 - 49%
Chelsea 2-1 - 60%
Watford 2-0 - 47%

Derby 5-0 - 42%
Leeds 5-0 - 69%
Norwich 1-0 - 42%
Boro 3-0 - 66%
QPR 2-1 - 55%
Bristol City 1-0 - 39%
Sheff Utd 2-1 - 44%
Wolves 1-0 - 68%
Sheff Wed 3-1 - 44%

Bradford City 3-1 - 55%
Portsmouth 2-0 - 51%
Charlton 2-1 - 60%
Northampton 1-0 - 54%
Oxford City 3-0 - 60%
Bristol Rovers 2-1 53%
MK Dons 1-0 - 54%
Blackburn 3-0 - 47%
Rotherham 3-2 - 58%
Shrewsbury 1-0 - 48%

Mansfield 4-1 - 52%
Barnet 3-1 - 50%
Colchester 3-1 - 42%
Coventry 1-0 - 48%
Crewe 5-1 - 50%
Accrington Stanley 3-0 - 48%
Swindon 3-0 - 46%
Notts County 2-0 - 51%
Lincoln 2-1 - 50%
Exeter 3-1 - 46%

[ossieram]

14 minutes ago, David said:

This weekends winners and possession. Bold = 50% possession and under. Stats from BBC Football.

35 winners - 18 with less possession. 

Man City 5-0 - 66%
Arsenal 3-0 - 59%
Brighton 3-1 - 49%
Spurs 3-0 - 49%
Chelsea 2-1 - 60%
Watford 2-0 - 47%

Derby 5-0 - 42%
Leeds 5-0 - 69%
Norwich 1-0 - 42%
Boro 3-0 - 66%
QPR 2-1 - 55%
Bristol City 1-0 - 39%
Sheff Utd 2-1 - 44%
Wolves 1-0 - 68%
Sheff Wed 3-1 - 44%

Bradford City 3-1 - 55%
Portsmouth 2-0 - 51%
Charlton 2-1 - 60%
Northampton 1-0 - 54%
Oxford City 3-0 - 60%
Bristol Rovers 2-1 53%
MK Dons 1-0 - 54%
Blackburn 3-0 - 47%
Rotherham 3-2 - 58%
Shrewsbury 1-0 - 48%

Mansfield 4-1 - 52%
Barnet 3-1 - 50%
Colchester 3-1 - 42%
Coventry 1-0 - 48%
Crewe 5-1 - 50%
Accrington Stanley 3-0 - 48%
Swindon 3-0 - 46%
Notts County 2-0 - 51%
Lincoln 2-1 - 50%
Exeter 3-1 - 46%

So more than 50% with less than 50%.

[Ellafella]

13 minutes ago, David said:

This weekends winners and possession. Bold = 50% possession and under. Stats from BBC Football.

35 winners - 18 with less possession. 

Man City 5-0 - 66%
Arsenal 3-0 - 59%
Brighton 3-1 - 49%
Spurs 3-0 - 49%
Chelsea 2-1 - 60%
Watford 2-0 - 47%

Derby 5-0 - 42%
Leeds 5-0 - 69%
Norwich 1-0 - 42%
Boro 3-0 - 66%
QPR 2-1 - 55%
Bristol City 1-0 - 39%
Sheff Utd 2-1 - 44%
Wolves 1-0 - 68%
Sheff Wed 3-1 - 44%

Bradford City 3-1 - 55%
Portsmouth 2-0 - 51%
Charlton 2-1 - 60%
Northampton 1-0 - 54%
Oxford City 3-0 - 60%
Bristol Rovers 2-1 53%
MK Dons 1-0 - 54%
Blackburn 3-0 - 47%
Rotherham 3-2 - 58%
Shrewsbury 1-0 - 48%

Mansfield 4-1 - 52%
Barnet 3-1 - 50%
Colchester 3-1 - 42%
Coventry 1-0 - 48%
Crewe 5-1 - 50%
Accrington Stanley 3-0 - 48%
Swindon 3-0 - 46%
Notts County 2-0 - 51%
Lincoln 2-1 - 50%
Exeter 3-1 - 46%

Very good David. But is 49% statistically less? Statistically less I mean? 49-51, 48-52, 47-53 and even 44-56 is not really difference in a statistically significant way, especially when you consider how it is "measured" by many of the statistics houses. You've found at best negligible difference in 35 games...but that's still less than 1% of games throughout a season. Again, like Carl, your sample isn't big enough...400 games would only be 10% of matches in a season. It is an interesting statistical enquiry though...I might look into this further. I wonder if experimental 361 has a view on this? 

[Day]

4 minutes ago, Ellafella said:

Very good David. But is 49% statistically less? Statistically less I mean? 49-51, 48-52, 47-53 and even 44-56 is not really difference in a statistically significant way, especially when you consider how it is "measured" by many of the statistics houses. You've found at best negligible difference in 35 games...but that's still less than 1% of games throughout a season. Again, like Carl, your sample isn't big enough...400 games would only be 10% of matches in a season. It is an interesting statistical enquiry though...I might look into this further. I wonder if experimental 361 has a view on this? 

Well we could do this each week but I would be surprised if it's a significant percentage either way. As you say couple percent is neither here or there, you could throw another 3 games in at only 52%.

As with all stats these may not show the true reflection of the game, a side could easily boost this percentage by playing keep ball in the last 10 minutes. Winning games with less percentage is possible and happens each week, quite a bit, still 3 points.

I know the purists would like a more controlled game and I'm sure we will have those games as well, have to say I'm liking the new focus on getting the ball in the net as quickly as possible even if you take a chance and lose the ball, than play around with it for 5 minutes and getting nowhere. 

[RiddingsRam]

2 hours ago, lioncoeur said:

David Beckham, isn't Nick Blackman.

He definitely isn't your right there. That will teach me for not reading properly.

[richinspain]

Percentage possession doesn't really tell us anything about the game though. When the first goal is scored is probably the most important factor in the amount of possession a team has. An early goal, especially away from home, and the team drops back conceding ground and possession. The team that is losing gains much more control of the ball, but not necessarily of the game. Us against Bolton is a good example. Bolton had 52% possession, but in the first half I would imagine that we had more than 48% and then sat back picking them off on the counter. We were in complete control of the game and only a sloppy piece of defending in the 92nd minute gave them a consolation goal.

[Mistaram]

13 minutes ago, David said:

Well we could do this each week but I would be surprised if it's a significant percentage either way. As you say couple percent is neither here or there, you could throw another 3 games in at only 52%.

As with all stats these may not show the true reflection of the game, a side could easily boost this percentage by playing keep ball in the last 10 minutes. Winning games with less percentage is possible and happens each week, quite a bit, still 3 points.

I know the purists would like a more controlled game and I'm sure we will have those games as well, have to say I'm liking the new focus on getting the ball in the net as quickly as possible even if you take a chance and lose the ball, than play around with it for 5 minutes and getting nowhere. 

David your spot on possession is not everything in football I think Ella is having a problem accepting that Hull lost 5-0 but had more possession most of that came about because they played four recognised midfielder to our two Its either that or maybe its because he comes from Nottingham ?

[angieram]

57 minutes ago, ramblur said:

You say it best,when you say nothing at all. Apologies to all,I sometimes forget this is a family show.

No problem, I  was trying to think what you meant. We take toffees for half time. Although you could be talking about George Thorne......? 

[Carl Sagan]

1 hour ago, Ellafella said:

Very good Carl! So you've found about 13 games that match your argument. But let's see now, how many teams are there in the English League system - about 96 and they play 40 odd games per season so that's about 4,000 games. So you think assessing 13 games that you "looked up" (not even a random sample) is statistically representative of all football league games? I don't think so...I would be very surprised if possession didn't account for at least 15-20% of the variance in winning outcomes. A simple chi square analysis would probably do, but for predictive power it would have to be a multiple regression analysis. If I find the time I might do the work and see what comes out...bashing in the data from WhoScored.com might be a bit of a ball-ache but running the multiple regression through SPSS wouldn't take long. It's probably already been done and featured in The Numbers Game so that may help, but 13 games selected by your "biased" curiosity would not cut the scientific mustard and convince a statistician that your findings are robust, reliable or have any predictive validity. 

The games weren't picked entirely at random. I looked at every game we've lost by three or more goals in the last two seasons and then to see if we were unusual I looked at every game in the Championship so far this season that's been won by three or more goals. I'm not arguing about narrow victories. I'm saying specifically that when a team wins big against reasonable opposition who are trying to retrieve the game, it is very much the norm for the winning side to retreat once in a commanding position, allowing the opposition on with the intention of picking them off with fast breaks.

If you're still not convinced I'm happy to see your statistical analysis of victories by large margins when it's 11 vs 11.

[Ellafella]

19 minutes ago, Mistaram said:

David your spot on possession is not everything in football I think Ella is having a problem accepting that Hull lost 5-0 but had more possession most of that came about because they played four recognised midfielder to our two Its either that or maybe its because he comes from Nottingham ?

I don't come from Nottingham Mista...I was born in Derbyshire just live in Notts...

[ramblur]

12 minutes ago, angieram said:

No problem, I  was trying to think what you meant. We take toffees for half time. Although you could be talking about George Thorne......? 

You've definitely got a thing about Georgie Boy,angie. Makes me feel better about that Rams TV presenter now After what I said,I can't possibly go into what I meant now.

[ronnieronalde]

Brilliant result lads and lasses, nights like last night make it all worthwhile.

So glad I didn't post my Gary hasn't convinced me at all yet, thread ;-)

[Ellafella]

12 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

The games weren't picked entirely at random. I looked at every game we've lost by three or more goals in the last two seasons and then to see if we were unusual I looked at every game in the Championship so far this season that's been won by three or more goals. I'm not arguing about narrow victories. I'm saying specifically that when a team wins big against reasonable opposition who are trying to retrieve the game, it is very much the norm for the winning side to retreat once in a commanding position, allowing the opposition on with the intention of picking them off with fast breaks.

If you're still not convinced I'm happy to see your statistical analysis of victories by large margins when it's 11 vs 11.

Ok Carl, I'll show you a big analysis when I do one I promise. I will suggest that possession is not  a "sine qua non" but possession tends to be associated with an increased likelihood of winning a game. If I fail to find a positive relationship between possession and victory, I'll say so. 

 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

 

7 hours ago, TroyDyer said:

It was crap. Hated it. Wish i hadn't bothered. 

 

7 hours ago, ossieram said:

You didn't look that happy when I saw you at HT as I was queuing for beer

Was Richard having a good game by any chance? 

[archied]

Possession,possession,possession,,,,,,,, if you become so obsessed with keeping the ball you stop taking the risks that can cut other teams open ,you become stale and negative ,,, don't get me wrong you can't score without possession but thank god the myth that having a bit more possession than the other team is some kind of holy grail and moral high ground is being busted ,,,,,

yes we don't want to be giving the ball away cheaply all the time and we don't want to make a habit of having big deficit s of possession in games but ten percent difference in games really means bugger all if you are very solid in defence when you don't have the ball and incisive when you do ,,the whole focus of the game is to score more than the other team  , shifting the main focus to keeping the ball above all else is fantastic and workable if you can afford to put together the best players in the world but that's not the way for most clubs and it seems to me we Derby fans have lost sight of what the game is and we constantly put our own players to the sword to the point where they play safe negative stuff ,,, rowett it seems is a breath of fresh air and seems intent on changing that

[1967Ram]

11 hours ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Really impressed with us last night - every one of the 11 contributed to what was a very thorough team performance. High work rate allied to the undoubted class of Vydra, Huddlestone & Lawrence really makes such a difference. I've ignored the snide remarks on here about hoofball but last night demonstrated what a Rowett team really looks like - hard working, pragmatic & clinical. And that second goal was a fabulous passage of play worthy of anything served up during McClaren's first spell.

To follow up on Bris' posts about whether the score flattered us - I think it probably did if you only have regard to the quality of performance of both sides. Hull are a decent side, didn't actually play that badly (defence aside) & I'll be very surprised if they're not top 10 this year. Therefore to expect us to control a game against players of that quality isn't really realistic. Secondly, whilst some of my favourite Derby sides have been sides that control possession (Burley's 04/05 team in particular), this should be a means to an end & all too often with us it hasn't been. Last year in particular saw us regularly secure 55% of possession but quite literally create zero chances - its pointless football. Hull didn't really create that many chances whilst the game was still competitive - that's their problem, not ours.

The interesting bit will be how we react to teams that purely come to PP to strangle the game - i.e. not like Hull last night. Last season that was a real problem & after last night's result, I expect most teams to set up to be solid rather than come onto us. The quality of our passing, creativity & clinical nature of our finishing last night bodes well though.

Good post. I reckon we should be more dangerous away from home if we play this quick, catch them on the break style too.

[Ruud Aralliss]

Just watched the game again on the football league show, the neutral pundit Mickey Gray who was there discribed us as 'outstanding '

The word dominant was used twice by the commentator

why are so many of us unhappy after this?

 

[ossieram]

2 minutes ago, Ruda Harliss said:

Just watched the game again on the football league show, the neutral pundit Mickey Gray who was there discribed us as 'outstanding '

The word dominant was used twice by the commentator

why are so many of us unhappy after this?

 

Because Mickey Gray and these so called pundits aren't experts like some "Derby fans"

[Curtains]

3 minutes ago, ossieram said:

Because Mickey Gray and these so called pundits aren't experts like some "Derby fans"

Very true