Being more direct is the way to go?

[Khalekan]

The argument has been we need to stop playing it about at the back so much and get it forward more quickly. We've done that today and in the cup and it's being pointed to as the reason we stopped the rot. However, this lot seems to contradict that view and suggests that playing more patiently across the back serves us better in terms of games won.

Passes in defensive third - 2014/15:

Win
Draw
Loss


v Leicester (A) 124
v Arsenal (H) 106
v Chelsea (H) 96
v WBA (A) 132
v Palace (H) 100
v Liverpool (A) 70
v United (A) 94
v Villa (H) 158
v Burnley (A) 164
v Swansea (H) 80
v Sunderland (A) 65
v West Ham (H) 78
v Spurs (A) 120
v Hull (H) 121
v City (A) 88
v QPR (H) 100
v Southampton (A) 45
v Stoke (H) 99
v Newcastle (A) 60
v Hull (A) 66
v City (H) 52


Average defensive third passes in games won = 126
Average defensive third passes in games drawn= 103
Average defensive third passes in games lost = 85


Thoughts?

Dave, there are lies and there are damned lies.

And then there are statistics.

Me?

I hate this stat driven era of football by numbers.

All's I can say is I have been at every home game bar two this season and this last two are the only two I have enjoyed since August.

It looked better.....it felt better.....so in my eyes it was better.

And most importantly it seemed effective and I felt we'd could score every time we crossed the halfway line.

I felt positively nostalgic for the old days when Joel just feckin' lumped it long in the general direction of our re-invigorated battering ram of a centre forward in the business end of the pitch rather than start a game of keep ball with his centre half

That display today.....that is what this bugger wants to see on a regular basis......and to heck with "passes in the defensive third".

 

[Toffeelover]

Another I told you so thread from Dave, yawn.

 

[L4Everton]

Another I told you so thread from Dave, yawn.

Thats how he has tried to twist it. Falling way way short.

 

[Elong]

Another I told you so thread from Dave, yawn.

Found it interesting myself. Care to offer something to the forum?

 

[Toffeelover]

Found it interesting myself. Care to offer something to the forum?

These points have been discussed, analysed and chewed over so many times already, just look at all the RM threads, essentially this is just another one.

 

[Elong]

These points have discussed, analysed and chewed over so many times already, just look at all the RM threads, essentially this is just another one.

I might have sounded a bit obtooth, but people just want to find reasons to have a go at the moment, the place is full of <insert whatever name you feel suits>.

 

[Toffeelover]

I might have sounded a bit obtooth, but people just want to find reasons to have a go at the moment, the place is full of <insert whatever name you feel suits>.

Fine mate, me I just want us to comeout rip the other teams apart, score goals and win the bleeding games no matter who is in charge and that should be the prime aim of a manager.

 

[The Equaliser]

This thread's gone a bit....err.....direct.

 

[Tubey]

All it means is that when we win, the opposition have failed to interrupt our passing game, but when we lose, they have.

Which isn't news to anyone.

 

[davek]

I'm not getting into another argument with you. But to sum it up, you just can't say x + y = Z. You need to find the values of x and y first, and the reasons for those values, if you want to perform a statistical analysis on the data.

The formation of the other team, the percentage of time they spent in our final third, the average number of players they had in our final third, plus other data sets; these are things which affect the outcome in consideration to your initial post

But hold on, you and others have said that other teams have worked us out now and that they are pressing higher up the pitch, penning us in and forcing the mistake. All those factors you mention will be deployed in order to have achieved that - more especially of late during our slump. The corollary of that for you and others is that it stands to reason that a system that's less rigidly using a tactic of playing out from the back is the only thing to combat this opposition tactic of getting more players in our faces. Unfortunately for you the wins and defeats we suffer point in the opposite direction.

But if you feel you can bring in some detailed data sets to contradict my 'crude' conclusions then the floor is yours.

 

[L4Everton]

But hold on, you and others have said that other teams have worked us out now and that they are pressing higher up the pitch, penning us in and forcing the mistake. All those factors you mention will be deployed in order to have achieved that - more especially of late during our slump. The corollary of that for you and others is that it stands to reason that a system that's less rigidly using a tactic of playing out from the back is the only thing to combat this opposition tactic of getting more players in our faces. Unfortunately for you the wins and defeats we suffer point in the opposite direction.

But if you feel you can bring in some detailed data sets to contradict my 'crude' conclusions then the floor is yours.

I might have sounded a bit obtooth, but people just want to find reasons to have a go at the moment, the place is full of <insert whatever name you feel suits>.

 

[davek]

All it means is that when we win, the opposition have failed to interrupt our passing game, but when we lose, they have.

Which isn't news to anyone.

That's the mundane point to make. The question is why we've had success only by playing a greater number of passes in the defensive third and why the hell are some people advocating we move away from that to voluntarily going more direct.

 

[The Equaliser]

You can make stats tell you whatever you want if it suits your argument.

 

[Khalekan]

I read a study a while back that said if we score more goals than our opponent we will win more games.

That is true in almost every circumstance.

 

[L4Everton]

That is true in almost every circumstance.

Well, just to play devils advocate, if they are own goals it might not help. But don't quote me.
Also, to continue my advocacy, if the defence is more porous than a sieve and the rest of the side plays the ball continually to said worse that sieve, it's going to take record goals scored to overcome.