Minority Report v Sheffield United

are you a mouse?

 

Primarily, this is a football forum. For people to air their views on primarily Barnsley Football Club. You seem to think that you can air your views about teams, formations and performance indices and such forth and your views are to be correct. Everyone else are unqualified to make such assessments and debate with you the why's and wherefore's of your analysis.

Please explain to us all again why this is so? Why can't we all have reasoned debate on our football team? Why aren't any of us, apart from you, able to form opinions on why our team is not doing very well?

Most of us on here have watched football and ourbeloved Barnsley for many many years. At least allow us all to be able to share our opinions and thoughts on these matters. No one persons opinions are correct. Yours, mine, everyone 's. But lets have a debate and none of these condescending tones that you know more than anyone else, because you don't

 

We all have opinions, and we are all required to justify those opinions from time to time. You and I are no different from the rest

 

But you don't justify your views at all. Your views must be right hence everyone else is wrong. You do it all the time

 

I have no idea how anyone could conclude we were better/more entertaining/less crap than Sheff United on Sunday

 

Less crap might be debatable, but I think their goals were all mistakes from us, and ours were much better and set up a grandstand finish that made the last 15 minutes the most entertaining part of the match due to us going for it. The first half should have scored equally poorly for both teams.

 

On the contrary, I always explain why I think in a particular way.

I tell you what, you pick out something that justifies your opinion, and if I have not explained why, I will do so.

 

Ok. Please explain why winning football under Valerien Ismael was so wrong last season. It's just your opinion that you didn't like the style but I'm still at a loss as to why you still dictate to people that did like it. Your opinion v others opinion, doesn't make you right and others wrong.

 

I guess that you are referring to the indexes.

I have allocated numbers to each statistic that makes up each index. I have typed the actual statistics into Excel, but the statistics are not mine and therefore the indexes are not mine. When I formulate the idea for indexes, what I was trying to do was to remove opinion from the comparison. I was hoping to let the statistics decide which was the better team. I explained my idea, and it is fair to say that the reaction was not good. I said that I would use the numbers, but they have not featured in the text of Minority Report because I did not want the unpopularity of the number to get in the way of what I was saying in the report. I am only responding now because you have called me out on it.

Looking back over the season, the Performance Index usually reflects the score. However, there have been a number of occasions when is has not done so. The only game we have won was Coventry City, but the Performance Index made Coventry the best team. On the other hand, Barnsley had the better Performance Index score in the home games against Luton Town (lost 1-0), Blackburn Rovers (drew 0-0) and Sheffield United (lost 3-2) and in the away game at Reading (lost 1-0).

Now you may insist that that makes the Index useless, and you may be right. However, the index provides another subject for debate, and I regret that it was received so badly

 

Your indices are indeed based on statistics but they are attributes that you subjectively feel influence a person's enjoyment of a game or what constitutes a good performance. That's where it quickly falls down, as there is no scientific basis for you making those judgments.

If you'd conducted a quantitative or qualitative study with a decent sample size of what people found entertaining in a football game and based it upon that, then it might have some merit. As you haven't done that, it calls into question the face validity of your data analysis.

 

I do not dictate to anyone. I simply give my opinion.

I did not like the direct style of football when Wimbledon played that way back in the day. They did not play in quite the same way, but the idea was similar. I used to say at regular intervals when watching Wimbledon, "I couldn't watch this every week". When Barnsley played in a similar way, do you want me to be true to myself, or do you want me to be happy because that way of playing was efficient at gathering points. I had to be true to myself. In fact, the way that we played was even uglier than the way that Wimbledon played. They used the long ball to a target man. We simply hit long balls into the space behind the opposition full backs. We did not care if the ball went out of play, because the whole point of the tactic was to get the ball up field so that we could play the forward press. In my view, our tactics were anti-football because they encouraged the opposition to do the same thing in order to void our press, and the fact that those tactics worked does not make them any better in my book. Sorry, but that is the way that I felt then, and that is the way that I feel now, in spite of our dreadful start to the new season under Markus Schopp, which I hope will improve when our injured players are fit again.

 

What do you believe are the important statistics in the game of football? Obviously, the final score is the most important one.

 

It doesn't matter what I think is important, I'd personally rather not suck the life out of a game I enjoy by overly analysing it. I don't want to dig to that level.

It is 100% a fact though that your indices are majorly flawed for the reasons I've stated above. My first full-time job for 7 years was in data analysis and my most recent degree's final dissertation project was a literature review of scientific studies. I'm not just making it up.

For your indices to be valid you need to ensure that there is a scientific basis for choosing each variable. As it stands it would basically be pseudoscience if you were to try to pass it off as anything other than your own opinion (which you do).

 

But basically you said that I should have asked more people, and when I ask you, you refuse to take part. Supertyke said something similar back in August, so I asked him to take part, and he refused as well. You know what it looks like from where I am sitting don't you.

 

Asking me and Supertyke is not a large enough sample size. It is irrelevant what I think. it wouldn't make your data any more valid if you tweaked it I'm afraid.

 

Lets be right. It was never intended to be some final say upon the game of football. It was intended as an interesting talking point. Something extra to discuss about a game. Another dimension to the discussions that are had on a regular basis at the end of 90 minutes. Something to contradict the standpoint about games that we all hold.

Frankly your reluctance to commit yourself to making any comment that would draw you closer to my discredited numbers does your technical argument no service at all.

 

Don't spit the dummy out because I've proven to you that your indices are not valid and I have the cheek to know a bit more about data analysis than you do. Just accept what you've created to be an opinion and nothing more.

Your earlier comment that "the statistics are not mine and therefore the indexes are not mine. When I formulate the idea for indexes, what I was trying to do was to remove opinion from the comparison." was what I picked up on as they absolutely are yours as you've chosen the variables for them. It is you making this out to be something more than it is, not me!

I genuinely, genuinely like that you have an interest in this and have occupied yourself creating it, but please stop kidding yourself that it is scientifically accurate and in turn using this and other things to discredit other views on here. I don't know if you do it intentionally or not, but the comments you make about others not studying the game suggests so. That's what I don't like.

I've tried to show you why it is flawed but you're either too stubborn, ignorant and arrogant to see or accept it. It isn't my opinion, it is fact and anyone else with a data analysis background will tell you the same. You don't like people criticising managers when they lack experience of a particular field, yet here we are.

Lose a little of the self-importance in what you do and people including me might respond better to you.


Edit: Just to clarify if I really must as you have a bee in your bonnet about me not telling you... I enjoy football games where it is end to end and played at a fast pace, a few goals, some decent passing and individual displays of skill. It is totally subjective like art. It is like asking what type of car or film you like. It cannot be measured objectively really without a massive sample size, so even if you liked the exact same things as me it still doesn't mean we are in the right.

 

Thank you for explaining why you so disliked last season's winning "anti-football". A season that provided our 5th highest ever league finish, with untold records broken.

I enjoyed last season, due to the Head Coach showing great passion and belief, in his methods and systems, which was transferred to the players. They responded in kind by buying into the philosophy, resulting in the high press. Playing with 10 outfield players in the opponents half of the pitch was a sight to behold.

Valerien set high standards and demanded they were met by everyone. Results benefited and we shot up the league table - however, this wasn't the sole reason why I enjoyed it. We played with an identity which I've never seen us do before. Football can be played in many different ways. It may have not suited all, yourself and others included, but I found it very enjoyable

 

Fair enough

 

Unless that managers name starts with a V then you definitely know more than him