Scotland Players In Action - Page 80 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Scotland Players In Action


kmcca5

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You said the stats proved he is a great passer so would become a Scotland fixture. So your friend is suggesting there is more to it than that, and that other factors might inhibit him. Seems fair comment.

I hope you are right though, as natural ability to keep the ball is a cracking potential asset. Again though, other things like fitness, ego, temperament, workrate, teamwork, etc come into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd go with Gordon, he's a steadier head and his confidence seems to rub off on the players around him. That's what puts him ahead of McGregor for me. Marshall, I still have reservations about. He does silly things to make a point to the players around him which have almost cost us a couple of times, and so I don't really trust him. He kept throwing it out to the left back in one of the qualifiers, trying ot get him to carry it forward a bit, but because he wanted to make a point he did it at the wrong time, dropped the left back in it and he then lost the ball and the opposition had a quick counter they almost scored from. It was straight up foolish my Marshall, totally unnecessary and almost cost us. Decent keeper, no doubt, but i don't trust him as much as the other two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Gauld.... sporting have tweeted that he missed this weekends games due to suspension after picking up 5 yellow cards (they must be card happy out there as sure that's the 2nd time this season he has been suspended due to this)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a perfect illustration about how easily stats can be misinterpreted.

I know you have a distrust of statistics, but I don't know why.

I would say it's a perfect illustration of how not applying common sense can lead to a misinterpretation.

Even the most basic common sense would tell you that Jordan Rhodes can't be compared to Lionel Messi, so if any "statistic" puts the two together then it's obviously not an accurate interpretation.

Edited by davew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wont be long until he is playing in a top league.

I hope you're right but if there is one criticism of Rhodes it's his serious lack of pace. if he had a couple of extra yards of pace then he would be world class but he is actually very slow. He is quick in thought and reactions to anything around him But in a foot race over 10 yards he very rarely comes out on top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you have a distrust of statistics, but I don't know why.

I would say it's a perfect illustration of how not applying common sense can lead to a misinterpretation.

Even the most basic common sense would tell you that Jordan Rhodes can't be compared to Lionel Messi, so if any "statistic" puts the two together then it's obviously not an accurate interpretation.

It's not a mistrust of statistics, but you seem to put some form of religious faith in them, hence claiming that Kevin McDonald would be called up to a squad soon purely on the basis of some stats that can be interpreted as him being the best passer in the English Championship when you admit you really haven't seen him play for Wolves.

Opta stats - or whatever - are useful but they do not tell you the full story. Thankfully football is not a game solely of set play rehearsed moved like Baseball, American Football or Basketball. While I know that teams will practice set moves and organisation, it is largely a game of improvisation. I think there are legions of people trying to work out how you can apply Moneyball to football - I know I did when I read it - but I'm not convinced you can.

Personally, I use statistics - if football, as in all aspects of life - as a way of either supporting your own opinion and assumptions if the figures support that or in challenging them and forcing you to rethink if it doesn't.

For example. I believe that Player X* is not a particularly effective** player, especially when playing at a high level. My assumption is that while individual managers will favour players, they will generally play their most effective players most of the time. For me two statistics back this up. Firstly a poor appearance record of about 20 appearances a season across an extended period of time with no major injury problems and secondly the the fact that the majority of those appearances have not been playing the full 90.

*Barry Bannan

** effective does not necessarily mean most naturally talented

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, its funny how stats can make a few players seem better than they are

Agreed. Anthony Stokes has something like 12 assists this season, so based on that and highlights it makes him look like a top player. But most Celtic fans that have watched him regularly this year want him out the team. Never performs in big games and can't play without a partner.

Sorry to use a non-Scot as an example, but it proves the point.

You also have to take into account the teams they play for. Martin wouldn't score as many goals if he wasn't playing for Derby, likewise May would score more if he wasn't playing for Sheffield Wednesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Anthony Stokes has something like 12 assists this season, so based on that and highlights it makes him look like a top player. But most Celtic fans that have watched him regularly this year want him out the team. Never performs in big games and can't play without a partner.

Sorry to use a non-Scot as an example, but it proves the point.

You also have to take into account the teams they play for. Martin wouldn't score as many goals if he wasn't playing for Derby, likewise May would score more if he wasn't playing for Sheffield Wednesday.

Considering how much derby have struggled since Martin has been injured, you have to wonder if he's better than some say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a mistrust of statistics, but you seem to put some form of religious faith in them, hence claiming that Kevin McDonald would be called up to a squad soon purely on the basis of some stats that can be interpreted as him being the best passer in the English Championship when you admit you really haven't seen him play for Wolves.

I'm not sure why you think the difference between us is "religious faith".

I'm using statistics to back up my own opinion which is that McDonald is good enough, and still young enough to have a Scotland career.

I've not seem him play recently, but the fact that Strachan called him up recently also backs up my opinion.

Opta stats - or whatever - are useful but they do not tell you the full story. Thankfully football is not a game solely of set play rehearsed moved like Baseball, American Football or Basketball. While I know that teams will practice set moves and organisation, it is largely a game of improvisation. I think there are legions of people trying to work out how you can apply Moneyball to football - I know I did when I read it - but I'm not convinced you can.

Personally, I use statistics - if football, as in all aspects of life - as a way of either supporting your own opinion and assumptions if the figures support that or in challenging them and forcing you to rethink if it doesn't.

I agree with all of that. I'd never heard of moneyball, but it's a good comparison. From reading the wiki article, the gist of it seems to be that baseball stats were being misinterpreted, so they tried to come up with a better interpretation.

For example. I believe that Player X* is not a particularly effective** player, especially when playing at a high level. My assumption is that while individual managers will favour players, they will generally play their most effective players most of the time. For me two statistics back this up. Firstly a poor appearance record of about 20 appearances a season across an extended period of time with no major injury problems and secondly the the fact that the majority of those appearances have not been playing the full 90.

*Barry Bannan

** effective does not necessarily mean most naturally talented

I agree with this aswell. Although I think most managers in the bottom half of the EPL (and also the Championship) are strongly biased in favour of big, strong players. So Bannan not getting picked doesn't necessarily mean he's in-effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this aswell. Although I think most managers in the bottom half of the EPL (and also the Championship) are strongly biased in favour of big, strong players. So Bannan not getting picked doesn't necessarily mean he's in-effective.

It kind of does, in that he's not physically strong enough to compete in that league nor does he have the requisite level of talent to be able to counter that shortcoming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...