Player ratings vs Liverpool

[Tubey]

I think that'd be a perfectly fair argument if this was a random website providing facts, but these are from Opta - if their stats were as questionable as you make out, I doubt they'd be as successful as they are in this industry.

I'm not saying he 'didn't give the ball away' I'm disagreeing with this: "[Phil Neville] never requested the ball, gave it away consistently" - now, let's say for example that there is a 4-8% margin of error in the stats (and that's being generous), even if they were out by that much, that certainly wouldn't suggest that he "gave it away consistently", regardless of how it's spun.

Regarding the ratings, from the WhoScored website:



I'm not disagreeing with the rating, because I'm not discussing his overall performance, I specifically highlighted one part of your original post and I've not deviated from debating that - although for what it's worth I thought Neville did a very good job overall, but then again when I'm at the match I do not have the kind of stats Opta provide to form my opinion.

Can't you see that if he gives the ball away three times from three actual attempts to play an "actual" pass (I think you know what I mean by actual by now!) then that's what you'd call consistent loss of possession? Because of those passes he made, let's be honest, we all know that the vast, vast majority were 5 - 10 yard "gimmes".

Here's where we're differentiating massively. You're going on stats alone so you aren't seeing the subtleties. I can't take the passing stats seriously when we all know a trained chimp could have completed the vast majority of the passes he did.

Osman would have completed far fewer passes, but he clearly had the far superior game because he completed the more incisive passes. Do you see what I mean? Going back to that website, Osman made seven accurate long balls apparently compared to Neville's three - exactly what constitutes a long ball exactly I have no idea but there you go, once again a subjective stat!

You can't say he didn't give the ball away based on a raw, subjective stat, as the interpretation can easily be wrong. You may think his distribution was OK. That's an opinion, that's fine. But as you say - that's judged on what your own eyes saw. If you had got home and the stats said he had 70% success rate, you'd have been baffled right? But that was what my earlier comparison with Xavi was - 65% success rate as Barcelona beat Rayo or somebody 5-0 but he dominated the game in midfield. He misplaced something daft like eleven or twelve passes but you'd be braindead if you thought that meant he played sh*te!

You can't go on stats alone, you just can't! If you did, we'd all have to acknowledge here and now that Allen is the best player in Britain - yet he didn't play one adventurous pass yesterday of note. Not one. All he did was spoil Fellaini for 90 minutes.

 

[Mrk]

Can't you see that if he gives the ball away three times from three actual attempts to play an "actual" pass (I think you know what I mean by actual by now!) then that's what you'd call consistent loss of possession? Because of those passes he made, let's be honest, we all know that the vast, vast majority were 5 - 10 yard "gimmes".

Here's where we're differentiating massively. You're going on stats alone so you aren't seeing the subtleties. I can't take the passing stats seriously when we all know a trained chimp could have completed the vast majority of the passes he did.

Osman would have completed far fewer passes, but he clearly had the far superior game because he completed the more incisive passes. Do you see what I mean? Going back to that website, Osman made seven accurate long balls apparently compared to Neville's three - exactly what constitutes a long ball exactly I have no idea but there you go, once again a subjective stat!

You can't say he didn't give the ball away based on a raw, subjective stat, as the interpretation can easily be wrong. You may think his distribution was OK. That's an opinion, that's fine. But as you say - that's judged on what your own eyes saw. If you had got home and the stats said he had 70% success rate, you'd have been baffled right? But that was what my earlier comparison with Xavi was - 65% success rate as Barcelona beat Rayo or somebody 5-0 but he dominated the game in midfield. He misplaced something daft like eleven or twelve passes but you'd be braindead if you thought that meant he played sh*te!

You can't go on stats alone, you just can't! If you did, we'd all have to acknowledge here and now that Allen is the best player in Britain - yet he didn't play one adventurous pass yesterday of note. Not one. All he did was spoil Fellaini for 90 minutes.

I am not going on stats alone, I was at the match. Just like you, I presume, so there's no difference.

Osman had a very good game and was playing as our creative midfielder, so I don't think it should come as any shock that he was involved in more complicated play than Neville.

This highlighted bit is where you're going all wrong, I am not using stats to determine how well he played, I have made that crystal clear several times already. I am using stats to disprove your original point.

Interestingly, I just decided to check out Neville's 'forward passes' against Liverpool to see if he had just been playing chimp like 5 yard passes all game:

Now compare that to Gibson against Newcastle in the last game of last season:

Gibson completed several longer passes, but failed to play as many forward passes as Neville.

 

[Tubey]

Osman had a very good game and was playing as our creative midfielder, so I don't think it should come as any shock that he was involved in more complicated play than Neville.

As to that bit, actually Osman was box to box - had far more interceptions and tackles than Neville and cleared the ball more too. He was just better all round than Neville both offensively and defensively. He was fantastic all round.

As for the diagrams - you're comparing chalk and cheese, two separate games, different team sheets, on a very limited set of examples. You can't really do that. And again, you're going on stats alone, although I'd argue that backs up my view on Neville - in all of that, one good pass which was his interaction with Coleman down the right I mentioned in the first post. The rest of that is standard, unambitious passes or sideways. You'd have to be very generous to call the bulk of those legitimate forward balls.

That diagram is basically a carbon copy of what you'd see from a typical Joe Allen game.

Looks impressive because of the wave of blue arrows, but dissect it and you see very little of note.

 

[Tubey]

Oh, about the above post, I know (and have said consistently) you're talking about the passing stat alone, not performance, but I can't help weaving that in!!!

You are going on stats alone to determine pass success though.

 

[Mrk]

As to that bit, actually Osman was box to box - had far more interceptions and tackles than Neville and cleared the ball more too. He was just better all round than Neville both offensively and defensively. He was fantastic all round.

As for the diagrams - you're comparing chalk and cheese, two separate games, different team sheets, on a very limited set of examples. You can't really do that. And again, you're going on stats alone, although I'd argue that backs up my view on Neville - in all of that, one good pass which was his interaction with Coleman down the right I mentioned in the first post. The rest of that is standard, unambitious passes or sideways. You'd have to be very generous to call the bulk of those legitimate forward balls.

That diagram is basically a carbon copy of what you'd see from a typical Joe Allen game.

Looks impressive because of the wave of blue arrows, but dissect it and you see very little of note.

You're right, it's not fair to compare two different games, here is the stats from the 4-4 at Utd last season (both played 90 minutes):

This idea that Neville just passes sideways all game is misguided - his passing range and creativity aren't anywhere near that of others in the squad, but he is more than capable of passing effectively.

 

[Tubey]

You're right, it's not fair to compare two different games, here is the stats from the 4-4 at Utd last season (both played 90 minutes):

This idea that Neville just passes sideways all game is misguided - his passing range and creativity aren't anywhere near that of others in the squad, but he is more than capable of passing effectively.

Yeah... no. It's not. No. ^^ It's not misguided at all. You've sort of just picked out his only outstanding game of 2012 when in possession there xD

Although he was completely responsible for the first goal for Rooney. And the second when he got outjumped by Nani. Which is actually a good illustration of my point regarding Neville - because we came back and drew that game, people completely forget how bad he is. The amount of games he costs us is unreal.

Out of interest, how about posting his performance against Newcastle on the 17th September.

But I know you're not seriously contending that Neville is a driving force in a game ever so no worries - you're talking of passing accuracy alone.

 

[Tubey]

Still, great chance to use those stats to have a go at 'em.

http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/1...should-have-been-sent-off.html?#disqus_thread

I fear for my safety if they find my address though....

 

[Elong]

The legend of Damon lives on

 

[Tubey]

The legend of Damon lives on

I just went with the most annoying username I could think of.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Can't you see that if he gives the ball away three times from three actual attempts to play an "actual" pass (I think you know what I mean by actual by now!) then that's what you'd call consistent loss of possession? Because of those passes he made, let's be honest, we all know that the vast, vast majority were 5 - 10 yard "gimmes".

Looks to me that of thr 4 longest offensive passes 3 were successful and 1 was not.

You really have dug yourself a hole here Tubes and keep talking guff to try and get out of it.

You've yet to give any actual proof that Neville "constantly gave the ball away" yet there has been plenty to back up the fact he didn't.

Admirable use of the damon defense but come man, just give it up now

 

[Tubey]

Looks to me that of thr 4 longest offensive passes 3 were successful and 1 was not.

You really have dug yourself a hole here Tubes and keep talking guff to try and get out of it.

You've yet to give any actual proof that Neville "constantly gave the ball away" yet there has been plenty to back up the fact he didn't.

Admirable use of the damon defense but come man, just give it up now

I've repeatedly said I'm not deflecting.

Nobody has provided proof he didn't. Using those stats is subjective.

They're not the only three times he gave the ball away. My proof is watching the game with my own eyes.

Here's one for you - prove without a shadow of a doubt that Neville only gave the ball away three times.

And don't "talk guff".

Ta.

 

[Elong]

Neville has to have the ball to give it away like. Not doing enough in a game, not showing for a ball, being off the pace, will therefore mean he will give it away less.

 

[Tubey]

Actually deathbyropeandglass, I'll make this even easier for you.

Did Neville only lose possession in the game three times?

Ta.

 

[Brennan]

I remember a point in the second half where the ball bounced free in our box and Neville was the first to get to the ball, he ran towards the ball from edge of the area and proceeded to somehow kick the ball out for a Liverpool corner when there was nobody near him and no player anywhere near where he played the ball.

That pretty much summed him up for me. He's gone.

Will add that he wasn't terrible on Sunday, but the job he was doing wasn't exactly a very demanding one. I didn't spend much time muttering 'FFS Neville' like i normally do, but i certainly didn't say 'Well done Nev' any more than i normally do either.

 

[Goat]

Phil Neville, The Manc Iniesta.

Tubes mate, you wanna try a belt, might stop people pulling your pants down.