So it's ok for you to doubt the Fabio stat, but not ok for me to question the Berb stat. Ok then.
That article just shows the stats for a particular game over one Prem weekend. The speeds a player reaches is entirely situation dependent. The top speeds mentioned often aren't anywhere near the speeds players are capable of. It takes 20 or 30 meters for players to reach top speed and it's not often a player needs to run at top speed for that long. So in many games a player wont get anywhere near his top speed. Hence often slower players clock quicker times than naturally faster players.
There is nothing wrong or dubious about those stats at all, it's just that the title of the article is terrible, as it suggests the stats demonstrate who are the fastest and slowest in each team. They don't do that, but merely demonstrate the top speed reached by each player over the course of a round of Prem games. Hence some slow players reached higher top speeds, than naturally fast players, as over a one off 90 minute game, player don't get an equal opportunity to really put their foot down over an extended distance in order to reach a decent top speed.
The only reason I posted it was to show you that the distance covered stats show that players from a variety of different positions run the furthest. If you look on the UEFA website it shows the same thing for the CL this season. The top 10 players who have covered the most distance are from a variety of different positions.
Way to ignore the rest of the post. And I said I doubted it -not that it was wrong. I also gave my idea as to why - I didnt read the stat and the details behind it.
But go on, ignore the rest of the post that qualifies my doubt.
Some real agenda posters here.
Look back at my post and you'll see that's all I said about Berbatov's stat. In fact that's exactly what I said, so when you call me an agenda poster perhaps you should look a little closer to home.
The blurb says they were complied over the course of a few weeks, so not sure it was just one game.
But anyway, the point here is that it's ok to doubt a stat when your eyes tell you something completely different.
Do you believe that Bale is only .02 mph faster than Wilshere at top speed, or only just as fast as Reo Cocker. Or did he not get chance to stretch his legs like Fabio?
C'mon, there are loads of questionable stats in just that article alone.
i see Berbatov's fan club is still very strong...
i see Berbatov's fan club is still very strong...
Just like always you need all the stats to hand and a context for those stats to prove fruitful.
Fabio isnt anywhere near slow, but perhaps he hadnt reached anywhere near his max speed so far that season when he played because he hadnt been making off the ball runs. Or do we even know if it included off the ball runs? As being a right footed player at left back is going to afford you little room to open up your legs and hit max speed with the ball at your feet.
Smalling is fast for a CB and when a team puts the ball behind our defence he often has to run as fast as he can to cover and deal with the ball. So I can see why he'd be at least among the fastest they'd managed to measure.
The real stat to ponder there is Gibson covering the most distance. He obviously wasnt our fittest player and covering the most distance is obviously not the best way to check that. Gibson covering the most ground definitely shows up why that particular stat doesnt tell you much about hard work and lazyness as I'm sure we can all agree that he wasnt racing around closing people down, clearing out of defence, supporting the strikers with good runs, running the channels etc. Its more than likely he walked his way to the top of the distance covered and thats why people need to think a bit more about that stat. Using it as an argument for why Berbatov shouldnt have been considered "lazy" isnt very good at all.
You don't even know what games this data was taken from! How can you doubt it without seeing the games!
It isn't saying Bales top speed is only marginally higher the Wilshires, but simply that on the days they recorded, that was the difference. I'm sure Bale is capable of much higher top speeds. But this data could have been recorded the day he played Everton when P Neville and others doubled up on him. He hardly got a run at all that day. There will be plenty of other days like that. The stats aren't trying to mislead anyone. It's just often people use them badly. All these stats tell us is what happened on a particular day or days. It tells us nothing conclusive about the top speeds of any players. Once you accept that, there is nothing to be suspicious about.
It's really easy data to collect. There is no reason to doubt it given that it's simple math. Once you have the dimensions of the pitch, it's really simple for a computer program to work out with extreme accuracy.
You don't need to question in regards this thread, as the purpose I used the article for was simply to demonstrate that distance covered by strikers wasn't usually more than a number of other positions. This is supported by the UEFA and Castrol Index data as well.
This is why you need to combine data with other things. As I pointed out Berbatov had the most touches of any Fulham player, which makes sense given Jols comments about the amount of ground he covered. He has made the most passes of any striker in the Prem. He is 5th in most tackles behind Long, Odemwingie, Wellbeck and Cisse. In terms of interceptions he is 2nd behind Odemwingie. For clearances he's 5th behind Carrol, Walters and Crouch. The fact he's so highly ranked in these defensive areas shows that his hard work by running so much is paying off. I'm sure even his biggest detractors will have to accept you can't rank so highly in comparison with other strikers without putting in some serious hard work.
Stand alone stats don't tell us much on their own, but it's more than clear basic human observation is one of the least reliable ways to judge players as our opinions are so influenced by pre conceptions etc.
Stats taken from whoscored.com before anyone asks.
You've said before that this was just measured in one game, but here you seem to be suggesting that it's been done over a few. It's important because your explanations for why there are surprising results in just one game is anything can happen, like Phil Neville preventing Bale from hitting top speed. If it has been recorded over a few, then that negates this explanation as it's more of an average.
Just had a look at whoscored.com
Am I right in thinking the figures for interceptions etc are an average per game?
If that's the case, he averages 1 tackle per game, 1.1 interception per game and 1.5 clearances per game. Is this what you referred to as 'putting in some seriously hard work.'
I'm not having a go at Berba here, he seems to be doing quite well, but you can't throw stats at people and be surprised when they question them.
Yes I'm comparing him with other Premier League strikers. As the stats show, he has to be putting i some serious hard work.
Btw it does seem like you are trying to have a go at Berbatov. You haven't praised him for the what the stats have revealed. To play in such a tough league and rack up the stats he does compared to his peers, is pretty impressive and for a guy who is often accused of being lazy, it would be decent for his critics to acknowledge this.
Yes I'm comparing him with other Premier League strikers. As the stats show, he has to be putting i some serious hard work.
Btw it does seem like you are trying to have a go at Berbatov. You haven't praised him for the what the stats have revealed. To play in such a tough league and rack up the stats he does compared to his peers, is pretty impressive and for a guy who is often accused of being lazy, it would be decent for his critics to acknowledge this.
This is a perfect example, rather than state how many tackles per game he averages, you've compared him positionally to others. Why's that I wonder? It's because he averages 1, so all the strikers below or around him must be within 0.something. A completely marginal difference. RVP averages 0.8, as does Grant Holt. I'd wager that pretty much every striker in the Prem is around that figure. From that 0.2 difference you've stated he must be putting in some seriously hard work.
This applies to your interception and clearance figures as well. It's a piece of piss to present stats to support a player and often even easier to dismiss them.
Of course I've compared him positionally. I'm not going to compare the amount of tackles he makes to a DM am I? It's not just in one category though is it, so these margins add up. This is why I showed a few of the defensive categories. If you add up his interceptions, tackles and clearances and compare them to players in similar roles, you'll see that the difference isn't that marginal.
Is it so hard for some people to acknowledge that perhaps they didn't realize just how much work he gets through and perhaps consider having a closer look from now on?
To still hold onto this idea that he's lazy, you'd have to believe that he covers so much ground by floating, is very lucky to intercept the ball so much due the opposition gently passing to him as they like to see his skills, makes so many clearances as the opposition target his receding hairline, puts the tackles in as they kindly run into him and passes the ball so much as his team mates just give him the ball no matter where he is and it has nothing to do with him working to find the space. But I find that hard to believe, so am tempted to say you and others are actively trying to see him in a negative light.
Of course I've compared him positionally. I'm not going to compare the amount of tackles he makes to a DM am I? It's not just in one category though is it, so these margins add up. This is why I showed a few of the defensive categories. If you add up his interceptions, tackles and clearances and compare them to players in similar roles, you'll see that the difference isn't that marginal.
Is it so hard for some people to acknowledge that perhaps they didn't realize just how much work he gets through and perhaps consider having a closer look from now on?
To still hold onto this idea that he's lazy, you'd have to believe that he covers so much ground by floating, is very lucky to intercept the ball so much due the opposition gently passing to him as they like to see his skills, makes so many clearances as the opposition target his receding hairline, puts the tackles in as they kindly run into him and passes the ball so much as his team mates just give him the ball no matter where he is and it has nothing to do with him working to find the space. But I find that hard to believe, so am tempted to say you and others are actively trying to see him in a negative light.
What are you on about? He makes 1 tackle per game, he makes 1.1 interception per game, he clears the ball 1.5 times per game. What's all this 'he makes so many....he does this so much...".
I think you're kidding yourself on these particular attributes.
Sidenote: By positionally I meant where he ranks compared to other strikers.
Compared with other strikers this is "so much." If he was this lazy player that some here try and make him out to be he wouldn't be making such a comparatively high number of tackles and interceptions. He wouldn't be making so many passes and he wouldn't be covering so much ground. I can't see how you can think a Prem footballer can be so involved in games and be lazy. It beggars belief.
I'd love to know what your explanation for his stats are, but I think it's actually best to simply draw a line under this. It's clear you do have an issue with Berba and no matter what data you are shown, or what SAF, Rio and Martin Jol etc have to say, you are going to to accept it.
Deary me, one tackle per game is comparatively high now is it. Bloody lazy RVP and his 0.8 tackles per game. I've never known a poster to gleam so much from such a minute differences in stats.
It doesn't suggest RVP is lazy at all. The point is that for a striker Berba's tackling stats are good and in the conjuncture with numerous other stats, demonstrate his heavy involvement in games, which doesn't make any sense for a lazy player. You are making out as if the tackling stat was used on its own to demonstrate he wasn't lazy. Of course that wasn't the case, as you know, which makes it seem increasingly like you do have an issue with Berbatov. As I said it's best just to leave it. Your mind is made up and you aren't going to change it, no matter what.
How do you make less than one tackle per game? How do you play as deep as he does and not make one interception? It would statistically impressive to not do these things at least once.
I've no issue with Berba, I'm just pointing out that these particular stats prove, well nothing really.
3 tackles every 4 games = .75 t/g.
How do you make less than one tackle per game? How do you play as deep as he does and not make one interception? It would statistically impressive to not do these things at least once.
I've no issue with Berba, I'm just pointing out that these particular stats prove, well nothing really.
You can't seriously need to ask how they work out average tackles per game.
It's very easy to play Berbas position and make less interceptions. Lots of players do so.
The stats don't prove "nothing." They tell us what they player is contributing in certain areas of the game. When used cumulatively, they give us a very good idea of a players overall contribution. In the case of Berbatov, they show he's involved a lot in games, which, as I've pointed out previously doesn't support the argument that he is lazy, unless of course there is another explanation of why he covers so much ground and is involved in so much of the play.
You keep saying you don't have a problem with him, but right from the start of this discussion you do seem to be coming up with odd reasons to criticize him. Initially you averaging the 9th amount of distance covered wasn't good, even though for the season as a whole he averaged 4th. Surely it's better to use the data for the whole season?
When I pointed out 9th in a squad of over 20 players is still average and not lazy, you said it wasn't good for a striker. I explained this makes no sense as strikers don't run any further than numerous other positions. I showed you data to demonstrate this. You then started making some irrelevant posts which seemed to be a way of trying to dismiss the data that suggested strikers don't run further. So I pointed to another data source, which suggested the same thing.
I then responded to another poster and you then started on that, trying to somehow suggest that comparing Berbatovs stats with other strikers didn't tell us much about his contribution, as if his apparent laziness shouldn't be judged against his peers.
Do you see why I find it tough to believe you don't have an issue with Berbatov? You seem to be going out of your way to dismiss evidence that he isn't and when your arguments are countered, you just move onto another reason to be critical. It does seem like you have an agenda. As I previously pointed out you haven't once even acknowledged any praise and admitted surprise at Berbas stats. Instead you go out of your way to come up with odd ways to ignore them.
At the end of the day this all comes from an argument about Berbatov being lazy in yesterdays game. We've since heard his own manager say he was tired towards the end as he ran further than ever before, which explains why he had more touches than any player on his team. I think it's safe to say he worked damn hard yesterday. The fact some people didn't recognize this just goes to show how unreliable fan observation can be. We all watched the same game, yet had very different opinions. But only one can be right. But the nature of message boards is such that no one ever backs down, no matter what the evidence against them is, hence we get into ridiculous arguments like this one.
It's difficult to get through whilst you keep up this Berba conspiracy thing, nowhere have I called him lazy, I simply question stats and these one's you use for tackles, interceptions and clearances are a perfect example.
You're impressed by him averaging around 1 a game, you think it shows something about his defensive work. I'm arguing that it's nigh on impossible to do much less,so they therefore prove nothing.
The fact you think they are a perfect example is why it's obvious you have an issue with Berbatov. You aren't being asked to take a stand alone statistic as evidence of anything, other than what it tells you. But when used in combination with several other stats, the picture should become a lot clearer.
Take Darren Bent for example. Villa fans have become divided on his worth to the team. Some say he's worth his place for the goals he scores, whilst other argue that his goals alone aren't enough to justify his place in the team. But both sides almost unanimously agree that when he doesn't score he's almost worthless as he doesn't work at all for them team or offer anything.
He averages 0.1 tackles per game. Basically in 10 games this season, he's made one tackle. He's made interceptions all season and just 12 clearances. He averages just 12 passes per game. The last match he started he managed a total of 20 touches. There was some debate among Villa fans to what extent this was his fault, until Benteke took his place and showed it was down to lack of hard work. Bent just seems totally disinterested in doing anything for the team and Lambert has at time not even named him on the bench. He's lazy and stats support this.
So it is very possible to do much less. A great many players do. It doesn't actually mean they are lazy necessarily. But if you look at the forwards in the Premier League who are known for working for the team, they all have one thing in common, which is that they see plenty of the ball. Rooney, Tevez and Suarez are all known for their constant work and it's reflected in their stats. You can't be that involved in Prem games, particularly as a forward without putting in a shift.
A hoofed clearance rises high into the night sky. The crowd at Craven Cottage looks up and follows it's path into the darkness. Dimitar Berbatov watches too. The Fulham striker watches as he runs, never taking his eye off it as the ball falls back into the light and down towards the centre-circle where he stands as if on centre-stage.
Not even the onrushing Newcastle United defender Fabricio Coloccini can distract his gaze. Instead Berbatov leans on him, just as he would on a wall while smoking a cigarette and brings the ball down as though he were reaching in his pocket for a match or a lighter rather than to play through his teammate Damien Duff on the break down the right wing.
It was 8:12pm on Monday night. Time for some pipe and slippers football. Time for Berbatov to stoke the fire, pour the whiskey and tell a story. "He was special tonight," Newcastle manager Alan Pardew acknowledged afterwards. "Everything he seemed to pluck out of the sky. Everything seemed to die on his toe - he was a real problem."
Before the match, Fulham fans who'd bought the matchday programme found a Berbatov interview within in which he did nothing to change the view held by Gary Neville on Monday Night Football that he is first and foremost an aesthete, who, to share an anecdote from their time together at Manchester United, "feels shooting is ugly."
In addition to explaining his outlook on the game such as "I don't want to watch players puffing around the pitch" and in particular expressing his disdain for "games where the ball is flying from one box to another" because it "makes my neck hurt", what stood out was his claim that he's misunderstood.
"People don't understand that I am a born No.10," Berbatov insisted. "They see me as a striker because that is where I've played all my life. But I have no problem playing in midfield. I can even play as a defender, no problem, because I see myself as experienced enough to know what my qualities are and basically I know how I can play."
He later added: "If I need to play in a No.10 role or more in the middle of the park I will gladly do this because I like playing with the ball. I like to get more touches, control the game and, like in music, orchestrate."
Certainly there's more Barenboim to Berbatov than Brian Glanville's Bull at the Gate. He's as much a conductor as a concluder of a team's play. And that's just as well for Fulham. Because following the departures of Danny Murphy and Mousa Dembele this summer and after the injury to Bryan Ruiz who had started the campaign so brilliantly with five assists in his first eight games, they need a creator just as much as they need a finisher to replace last season's 23-goal top scorer, Clint Dempsey. It threatened to become a major issue for Fulham.
"The truth of the matter," Fulham manager Martin Jol revealed, "is that every time when Bryan played we scored three against Arsenal, five against Norwich, three against West Brom, and [they] were flying and we beat them 3-0. Then he was out for four or five weeks so I was happy that Berbatov, after talking to him, will fill in that role."
Indeed, Fulham's goalscoring record in the league this season has been heavily affected by the absence of the Costa Rican. In the 9 league games Ruiz has played thus far, he and Berbatov have flourished, with the Cottagers averaging 2.33 goals per game. In the 7 games in which he hasn't featured, however, that figure has dropped to a lowly 0.86.
And so for the third time in the four matches since Ruiz's left hamstring problem emerged in the 3-1 home defeat to Sunderland nearly a month ago, Berbatov assumed the No 10 role against Newcastle.
Bump
Most pointless bump ever?
