Kenny isn't what we need

[Lee]

FFS sake, Alex, it's not rocket surgery. Stats are good if they support what you already think. If they don't they're crap.

Pretty much.

[Neil Young]

I'm sorry, Neil. It's just hard to follow on occasions. I like stats, stats make me want to believe things. I believe that with stats you can prove anything. Believe me.

We lack knowledge of how the game is played, what goes on in the dressing room and on the training pitch, how to develop players, whether any particular player is 100% fit or carrying a short term or chronic injury, whether someone is having personal problems away from the game, from alcohol use to illness in the family to an unhappy relationship to the kid keeping them awake half the night to whatever, that could be affecting their attitude or capability in training or matches, what else might be happening at the club in terms of recruitment policies, management, contractual disputes and obligations, personality clashes...

And yet statistics that suit the argument are selected and presented as clinchers before they are questioned and undermined by those whose arguments they contradict, there are speculations about the players' feelings of which them themselves are unaware, there are copious pages of in-depth analysis of tactical nuances that could be imaginary and yet are always described as definitive, and so on.

It's like watching a bunch of blind men wearing blindfolds fighting over a neutrino in an unlit, windowless bunker on the dark side side of the Moon.

But each to their own.

[Alex]

That's pretty dark

[Lecter]

We lack knowledge of how the game is played, what goes on in the dressing room and on the training pitch, how to develop players, whether any particular player is 100% fit or carrying a short term or chronic injury, whether someone is having personal problems away from the game, from alcohol use to illness in the family to an unhappy relationship to the kid keeping them awake half the night to whatever, that could be affecting their attitude or capability in training or matches, what else might be happening at the club in terms of recruitment policies, management, contractual disputes and obligations, personality clashes...

And yet statistics that suit the argument are selected and presented as clinchers before they are questioned and undermined by those whose arguments they contradict, there are speculations about the players' feelings of which them themselves are unaware, there are copious pages of in-depth analysis of tactical nuances that could be imaginary and yet are always described as definitive, and so on.

It's like watching a bunch of blind men wearing blindfolds fighting over a neutrino in an unlit, windowless bunker on the dark side side of the Moon.

But each to their own.

You should have saved time and effort and just posted a picture of a dog looking confused

Would have summed up your stance more accurately

[Neil Young]

But I'm not confused. Well, except by the sight of obviously intelligent people arguing so vociferously with so little information.

[Lecter]

But I'm not confused. Well, except by the sight of obviously intelligent people arguing so vociferously with so little information.

You clearly are confused if you believe there are intelligent people in this thread

[Neil Young]

Fair point.

[Arn]

It isn't Nani or Youngs job to make a lot of crosses. They don't play that type of striker anymore that need a lot of crosses into the box.

They cut inside a lot more than they used to do. They get into the box a lot more than Downing do.

Nasri have a big target to aim at, Dzeko or Balotelli. Both of them are better in the box than Carroll.

So the stats don't care about what type of style the team play and what type of players they play.

If Man U played with Berbatov then Nani and Young would make more crosses and probably succeed more often. If City didn't play with Dzeko or Balotelli then Nasri would probably not make as many crosses or succeed as often as he do.

[cream]

What is a 'chance created' ?

[Baracus]

Evolution Theory

[Arn]

What is a 'chance created' ?

I doubt that even the ones that do the stats know the answer. Every corner could be a cross for example. Every shot at goal could be a chance created even if it hit a player one yard away.

Who knows?

[Mattshark]

Evolution Theory

*feels like lecturing on Baracus' inaccuracy.*

[Slinky Skills]

What we need:

• Spanish midgets
• Maxi
• David Villa
• Dedication
• Andy Carroll before he gave up boozing
• A new stadium
• Rafa
• Slightly bigger goals

What we don't need:

• Headless chickens
• Downing
• Aston Villa
• Backing the manager
• Charlie Adam before he gave up charlie
• New kits every week
• Kenny
• Lists like these

Don't Neil!

[Lecter]

It isn't Nani or Youngs job to make a lot of crosses. They don't play that type of striker anymore that need a lot of crosses into the box.

They cut inside a lot more than they used to do. They get into the box a lot more than Downing do.

Nasri have a big target to aim at, Dzeko or Balotelli. Both of them are better in the box than Carroll.

So the stats don't care about what type of style the team play and what type of players they play.

If Man U played with Berbatov then Nani and Young would make more crosses and probably succeed more often. If City didn't play with Dzeko or Balotelli then Nasri would probably not make as many crosses or succeed as often as he do.

FLMAO

Seriously I dont know whether to laugh or cry at that

[Fredo]

Surely Lecter, we've all got to laugh at you as well for taking the time to try and refute all hilariously formed arguments taking a pot shot at Kenny don't you think?