Minority Report v Derby County

People have told you, over and over again. You've presented these indexes as though they're infallible and without prejudice. But they're devised by you. I"m not knocking you doing them, and I always enjoy reading your opinions on games. But this is not a performance index, or entertainment index. It's a Red Rain index. Nowt wrong with that. Just own it.

As I pointed out last season when you introduced the entertainment index (to prove that big Val ball was ****), you're giving points for possession. I don't see how that's relevant, or makes a team any more entertaining. You take points away (a lot) for bookings and red cards. For me, these add to the entertainment of a game. And even fouls see you taking a point off. A shot off target gets a team five points?

Where are the points for successful tackles, dribbles or aerial duels? What about saves? Don't a handful of saves from Brad on Wednesday night amount to entertainment?

I won't be coming up with my own system or index. I don't feel the need for one. But if you've gone to the lengths you have to create one, take ownership of it and accept that others will disagree.

I personally thought we played just as well at Bristol as we did on Wednesday at Oakwell. We could arguably have won/lost/drawn both games. There's been very little between us and the opposition in pretty much every game I've watched this season, barring Bournemouth and perhaps Boro, although we should have been ahead on Teesside early on. The rest of the games have been pretty equal for my money, but you don't get unlucky over 15 games. So something was amiss. But yeah. Not seen one side - Bournemouth apart - that frightens me. It's not a stronger league than last season. In my opinion. I'd be massively surprised and saddened were we to get relegated all that considered.

There's an opinion, without any index or points system. Folk will agree, disagree or ignore. Which is how it should be.

 

My apologies then re head down in note book comments...
To me statistics fail to acknowledge that at times the amount of greater possession that teams have is down to possession of retaining the ball in their own half...when having no outlet and being pressed...they fail to show the dominance of the opposition playing the press correctly ...hence they fall short of the bigger picture..football as we all are aware is a result based game....
Yes you want to see a good game and be entertained but a win is a win...the opposition can have 99.5% of the game but as long as .05 % gets you the winning goal and 3 points that's all that matters at the end of the day ....yes it makes interesting reading and the statisticians amongst us marvel at the results they highlight but they are worthless and mean nothing in reality if you lose

 

My Index Index rates the Index Index at 37, and the Performance Index at -2.

I'm 39 points in front, based on Wednesday night, and I reckon it'll be similar tomorrow.

(The Index Index takes its numbers from the Index Index - don't blame me if you don't like them, because the spreadsheet is pre-filled.)

 

It's like banging your head against a brick wall, Whitey. I've given up.

 

I have taken ownership of the figures. They are mine and no-one else's. Should that stop me from using the figures in Minority Report, which is also mine? Do I need to identify within Minority Report that the figures that I am using are mine... again? I simply do not understand why everyone has a bee in their bonnets about these figures. Is it the name that I use for them, because I can call them anything you like. Just say the words, and provided those words bear some relationship to what the figures are, I will do it.

If you want the figures to include the things you mention, then I am happy to have that discussion. If it would make the numbers more acceptable to all, then I am willing to have a group discussion about what should be included and what should not. The problem is that my critics do not want any numbers. They want any description of the game to be proscribed by opinion only. There is nothing wrong with opinions. I just believe that opinions can be more valid when they include more information.

Our PI score for the Bournemouth game was -154, and for the Middlesbrough game -123. They are comfortably our worst scores of the season. I did not attend either game, so I have no personal opinion about the way that we played, but I take comfort that you agree with the PI.

I also think that there is plenty of time left in the season for us to recover from our poor start. However, I do think that there is a need to change the way that we play the game.

 

To be fair, I started to have a discussion with you about trying to make it less subjective and you closed it down, pretty flat. That's fine, they are your stats. But given they are purely your subjective opinion of what you value, they don't take account of the wider audience and what they perceive to be of importance and worthy of measurement.

Happy to have dialogue with you about what may be more representative, and I'm sure others will too. But you can't say nobody wants to give input, because when people have, you've not engaged with it.

 

I don't want you to do anything with it. I just think myself and others are trying to understand why shots off target for example, earn five points. But there's nothing for a tackle. You get a point per percentage of possession, but nothing for interceptions, or goalkeepers making a save. It's a bit confusing. It seems like the stats you've chosen to work with, are suiting your own view of the beautiful game.

You mention me agreeing with your index regards Bournemouth and Boro. But your index told me we were **** under Val. When I actually enjoyed seeing us win 23 out of 46 games.

As I said earlier, there was little to differentiate between Bristol and Wednesday night. Just that we won. Which colours opinion. So I'm on your side there I suppose.

But just moving the wider centre backs five yards outside as starting positions was a big change. As was Cauley in the 10.

And no, I don't care what football is played. I like winning football, however it comes.

 

The point about possession is a valid one. The final game of last season was a huge contrast in styles. Norwich wanted to pass, pass, pass and we wanted to get the ball forward quickly even if it went out of play and apply a forward press to try to win it back. I was not a fan of our tactics last season and have described them as anti-football. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the Norwich tactics even less. They had better players than us, but they wasted that talent by playing their football in their own half. The game finished 2-2 with Barnsley ahead 77 v 53 in the Entertainment Index.but behind by 34 points in the possession stats However, as a direct result of that game, I resolved to change the system slightly. This season, I have included territory, that is, time spent in the opposition final third. In my opinion, it has taken that anomaly out of the figures.

I quite agree that the only statistic that matters at the end of the day is the final score, and these numbers are not trying to change that. What these numbers do is they attempt to identify the better team on the day based upon the selected statistics. In my opinion, the selected statistics are the important ones that we unconsciously focus on when we are analysing who dominated the game, us or them. Others disagree, but others simply want me to drop the figures and never mention them again, which I am not willing to do.

 

You say that my index told you that we were **** under Val, but it didn't actually. I agree, that I hoped it would show that, but it didn't. I had to eat humble pie. I despised the football, but I had to accept that it was both successful and Entertaining. The Entertainment index did not justify my opinion, and I had to find other reasons for doing so. It is interesting that your boss recently provided me with just such a reason. We could not sell our players because no-one else plays that way, and the market place decides on player value based upon the way that it is thought that the player will fit in at their prospective new clubs. Do you disagree with him?

 

To be honest, I cannot remember the conversation. It is my age. I forget so much these days.

I would rather have such a discussion under its own thread. If you are serious about having a discussion, please start a new thread.

 

Completely different topic, and a whole other argument/debate that one. But no, I don't disagree entirely. I've long been an advocate of our club living within its means, generating its own revenue, not spending more than we have. To do so, we need to develop footballers, and the more the player can do on the pitch, the more valuable he'll be.

 

I'm not telling you what's wrong, I'm saying they're not 'The Statistics'. They're just some arbitrary numbers you made up. You took some statistics from a couple of sources and applied formulas to certain ones, disregarding others. Therefore, they're no longer statistics, they're just numbers you made up. I don't understand why you don't get that. I'm about the 20th person to point it out.

I'm not interested in your statistics or making up my own. I'm interested in your match reports, they're a good read, I agree with some and not others, but when you claim they're backed up by the statistics, that's just nonsense. You decided the weighting to give to each number you grabbed, added your formula to it and decided that's what a game can be judged on. It's nonsense, it's as accurate as giving us the numbers on your ASDA receipt. Your match reports are well written and usually controversial, so they're interesting, but your numbers aren't controversial, they're multiplying by zero, coordinates to Atlantis, the square root of a diagonal on a 1 by 1 square expressed as an integer, they're not worth examining or offering alternatives because they're just meaningless.

 

If you genuinely want input from others to your process, I’ll let you invite comment and I’ll gladly chip in, again.

 

Do you believe that the way that we played under VI allowed his players to develop in the way that you have described.

 

I do not agree, and I can go into great detail about why I chose those particular statistics and rejected others if you want me to.

 

OK, but I really am not convinced that the reaction would be in any way helpful to the process. I will decide later, but thanks for your interest.

 

I'm OK thank you. I prefer it when you talk about football not numbers, you write very well on that subject (and a number of others). I'm not doubting your skill at maths either by the way, but of the many skills you undoubtedly have I do not believe statistician to be amongst your best.

 

Have you ever thought of working in customer services? ;-)

 

I'm interested in everyone's view:

http://bbs.barnsleyfc.org.uk/threads/entertainment-index.309443/