Russell Martin

[egg]

22 hours ago, ErwinK1961 said:

Quite easy to spot the posters who never wanted Martin in the first place.

There was nothing wrong with being concerned before he got here, and then being concerned after Saturday/Gillingham. Frankly, I think it's madness not to be concerned, but let's hope that he's got enough about him to change the lack of discipline (effort, doing as instructed, avoiding yellows) on the pitch, the completely imbalanced shape of the team, and the renegade tactics. 

[Turkish]

15 minutes ago, egg said:

There was nothing wrong with being concerned before he got here, and then being concerned after Saturday/Gillingham. Frankly, I think it's madness not to be concerned, but let's hope that he's got enough about him to change the lack of discipline (effort, doing as instructed, avoiding yellows) on the pitch, the completely imbalanced shape of the team, and the renegade tactics. 

Particularly after the nature of the Sunderland defeat. He was undone by some pretty basic tactics by Tony Mowbray. Hopefully it was just a blip. Gillingham was poor too but I’m not too concerned about that. We weren’t going to win the competition so he did the right thing to try a few fringe players out. Sunderland thought was a real concern. He has one of the best squads in the division with players it seems he chose so let’s hope he can sort out the obvious issues

[egg]

7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Particularly after the nature of the Sunderland defeat. He was undone by some pretty basic tactics by Tony Mowbray. Hopefully it was just a blip. Gillingham was poor too but I’m not too concerned about that. We weren’t going to win the competition so he did the right thing to try a few fringe players out. Sunderland thought was a real concern. He has one of the best squads in the division with players it seems he chose so let’s hope he can sort out the obvious issues

Yep. The tactics were naive at best, but in reality they were bloody daft and we are easy to play against and pick off. My concern goes further than the shape of the team. RM seems uber relaxed and pally with his players, but that can be a dangerous thing....he's the boss, not their mate. Let's see if we see a better shape next time, and more effort/discipline.

As you say, he's got a great squad, but you can give a shit chef the best ingredients but you'll end up with a shit meal. 

[Maggie May]

28 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep. The tactics were naive at best, but in reality they were bloody daft and we are easy to play against and pick off. My concern goes further than the shape of the team. RM seems uber relaxed and pally with his players, but that can be a dangerous thing....he's the boss, not their mate. Let's see if we see a better shape next time, and more effort/discipline.

As you say, he's got a great squad, but you can give a shit chef the best ingredients but you'll end up with a shit meal. 

Wow - all this after one league defeat. This place is ridiculous.

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Maggie May said:

Wow - all this after one league defeat. This place is ridiculous.

Behave. There's no "all this". Anyone who's watched us and has even a vague understanding of football will have seen problems. As I've said though, I hope that RM has enough about him to turn it around. Let's see.

[Maggie May]

Just now, egg said:

Behave. There's no "all this". Anyone who's watched us and has even a vague understanding of football will have seen problems. As I've said though, I hope that RM has enough about him to turn it around. Let's see.

It was more in reference to this:

”RM seems uber relaxed and pally with his players, but that can be a dangerous thing....he's the boss, not their mate.”

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

Christ, surely even you can agree that the fact we have had more shots on goal and shots on target than any other team in the league shows that the style of play isn't boring and pedestrian? That it does lead to good attacking outcomes? 

I know you see statistics as devil worship but surely you can see the link between that? 

Can you not see the irony in what you have posted?

You do realise that these figures are produced primarily for the betting markets and bear no relationship to what actually happened?

[egg]

Just now, Maggie May said:

It was more in reference to this:

”RM seems uber relaxed and pally with his players, but that can be a dangerous thing....he's the boss, not their mate.”

That statement had nothing to do with one defeat. Bosses need to be bosses. Nothing controversial with that, surely.

RM has mentioned a lack of running from the players, and we've all seen it. If they ain't trying so early, that's a real issue, and it needs tough man management. 

So far RM hasn't impressed me as a coach. The lack of yards from some players, their inability to follow instructions, their poor discipline (shit loads of yellows) tells me that his management ability is being tested.

I repeat, again, let's see if he can turn it around. I haven't written him off, far from it, but warning signs are there. 

[Saint_clark]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Can you not see the irony in what you have posted?

You do realise that these figures are produced primarily for the betting markets and bear no relationship to what actually happened?

What the fuck are you talking about? The figures are produced by us having shots on goal, they're a product of the way we play.

[egg]

7 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

What the fuck are you talking about? The figures are produced by us having shots on goal, they're a product of the way we play.

I take your point, but I understand the thrust of Whitey's point.

Citing shots on goal as evidence of exciting play proves nowt. 40 passes in no man's land that results in a shot from 25 yards that lands in row Z is less exciting than a ball from the full back into the channel to a forward which ends up testing the keeper. 

Edited 8 September, 2023 by egg

[Maggie May]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

That statement had nothing to do with one defeat. Bosses need to be bosses. Nothing controversial with that, surely.

RM has mentioned a lack of running from the players, and we've all seen it. If they ain't trying so early, that's a real issue, and it needs tough man management. 

So far RM hasn't impressed me as a coach. The lack of yards from some players, their inability to follow instructions, their poor discipline (shit loads of yellows) tells me that his management ability is being tested.

I repeat, again, let's see if he can turn it around. I haven't written him off, far from it, but warning signs are there. 

Fair enough. Appreciate your perspective. I’m positive RM is going to get this team cooking with gas soon, hopefully against Leicester. And I think the “pally” nature with players is positive. It seems genuine.

[Whitey Grandad]

37 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

What the fuck are you talking about? The figures are produced by us having shots on goal, they're a product of the way we play.

That’s exactly where you are wrong. I don’t know if you saw my earlier posting about the source of these figures but if you had you would have seen that they bear no relationship to the way we play. Or any other team come to that.

They are generated for the betting industry. Not for research.

[Saint_clark]

5 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

That’s exactly where you are wrong. I don’t know if you saw my earlier posting about the source of these figures but if you had you would have seen that they bear no relationship to the way we play. Or any other team come to that.

They are generated for the betting industry. Not for research.

Right. 

So if we were having one shot on goal a game you wouldn't see that as a problem right? Just a figure for the betting companies? 

[Depressed of Shirley]

41 minutes ago, egg said:

I take your point, but I understand the thrust of Whitey's point.

Citing shots on goal as evidence of exciting play proves nowt. 40 passes in no man's land that results in a shot from 25 yards that lands in row Z is less exciting than a ball from the full back into the channel to a forward which ends up testing the keeper. 

But that isnt what we have seen is it?

[egg]

1 hour ago, Depressed of Shirley said:

But that isnt what we have seen is it?

Isn't it? I've seen a proper mixed bag. I've seen possession with no end product, possession with goals, possession with the ball given away needlessly, being picked off when we're committing when forward without proper cover, players not running back, embarrassing defeats to Gillingham and Sunderland.  Not sure what you're seeing mate. 

[Saint86]

2 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

What the fuck are you talking about? The figures are produced by us having shots on goal, they're a product of the way we play.

Whitey is absolutely spot on SC... We play the way we play purely to generate shots for the betting market... how can you not see that?..... Absolutely nothing to do with effective playstyles, generating chances, trying to score, stopping the oppo etc 😂

Edited 8 September, 2023 by Saint86

[Whitey Grandad]

19 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Whitey is absolutely spot on SC... We play the way we play purely to generate shots for the betting market... how can you not see that?..... Absolutely nothing to do with effective playstyles, generating chances, trying to score, stopping the oppo etc 😂

That's not what I'm saying at all, and well you know it.

My criticism is of the obsession with irrelevant figures in the weird belief that they actually mean something. These are subsequent on, and not the cause of our playing style, if we actually have one at the moment.

 

 

[Smirking_Saint]

4 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

That's not what I'm saying at all, and well you know it.

My criticism is of the obsession with irrelevant figures in the weird belief that they actually mean something. These are subsequent on, and not the cause of our playing style, if we actually have one at the moment.

 

 

Not really sure how xG isn’t relevant, as I explained and you ignored

[notnowcato]

4 hours ago, egg said:

There was nothing wrong with being concerned before he got here, and then being concerned after Saturday/Gillingham. Frankly, I think it's madness not to be concerned, but let's hope that he's got enough about him to change the lack of discipline (effort, doing as instructed, avoiding yellows) on the pitch, the completely imbalanced shape of the team, and the renegade tactics. 

Renegade tactics... 😂

[egg]

1 minute ago, notnowcato said:

Renegade tactics... 😂

Renegade... reckless...naive...stupid...8 players upfield against Sunderland for their first goal, with Edozie as one of the 2 back, ain't clever on any assessment. 

[manji]

On 03/09/2023 at 16:57, Saint Gifford said:

I think you have missed my point.
 

Perhaps me not communicating my understanding in the right way for you.

It’s our identity, DNA what ever you want to call it, that imo is missing. 
 

Nothing to do with yesterdays result.

We can carry on employing managers that have the latest blueprint of how to play the game, employ players, back room staff ect ect, spend loads and then let the next guy come in. 

Again forgive my tone but we will end up like countless professional clubs with a confused agenda. 

Yes I think Dragan has got an involvement now, and about time I might add.

I won’t go on about 4 managers and a relegation in the time SR has been in control.

I genuinely would like your comments on how going from Ralph to NJ, RS and now RM has any consistency in playing style, player recruitment approach to what we as a club should be trying to achieve.

Call me a Dinosaur, but I’m trying to make the point that we do not have the luxury of players and a pedigree that can allow a free thinking Pep or Klopp type managers to do what they want.

My opinion and happy to be shot down, but we have to have standards and a way that the club wants to play and any manager or player that walks through the door has to tow that line. 
 

I glad that it appears that the powers to be are trying. No it’s not one game I’ve followed the Saints long enough to feel the pain and joy. 
 

 

 

 

OK thanks for the respectful answer but we aren’t going to get our identity back unless we give Martin and the team a chance to earn some respect.

No you necessarily but dissing players who have only had a couple of training sessions with us isn’t going to help. We’ve got two weeks to prepare for the Leics game ( who incidentally lost their first game) let’s see how that pans out. 

[notnowcato]

4 hours ago, Turkish said:

Particularly after the nature of the Sunderland defeat. He was undone by some pretty basic tactics by Tony Mowbray. Hopefully it was just a blip. Gillingham was poor too but I’m not too concerned about that. We weren’t going to win the competition so he did the right thing to try a few fringe players out. Sunderland thought was a real concern. He has one of the best squads in the division with players it seems he chose so let’s hope he can sort out the obvious issues

At least it's not Baz's fault anymore.

Maybe the tactics were not quite right but I'm fairly certain the tactics didn't require Holgate to give the ball away as often as he did, some inept back stick defending, couple of goals where the keeper could've done better.  Essentially, as a manager you can set the team up in the best possible way but ultimately it is down to the players to perform.

Apologies to all the scapegoat hunters out there but Saturday's result was not one persons fault and some credit has to go to Sunderland.  I'm confident we'll beat them in the return leg.

[notnowcato]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Renegade... reckless...naive...stupid...8 players upfield against Sunderland for their first goal, with Edozie as one of the 2 back, ain't clever on any assessment. 

The goal came from the second phase of play following that break by Sunderland.  Edozie does well to hold the attack up and allow us to regain numerical advantage, in the phase that followed Edozie switches off.

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, notnowcato said:

At least it's not Baz's fault anymore.

Maybe the tactics were not quite right but I'm fairly certain the tactics didn't require Holgate to give the ball away as often as he did, some inept back stick defending, couple of goals where the keeper could've done better.  Essentially, as a manager you can set the team up in the best possible way but ultimately it is down to the players to perform.

Apologies to all the scapegoat hunters out there but Saturday's result was not one persons fault and some credit has to go to Sunderland.  I'm confident we'll beat them in the return leg.

Oh i agree with you there. Holgate had a mare, the full backs lost their man, Bazunu could have done better with 3 of them at least. But the tactic of run fast directly through the midfield into a wide open space or lump the ball into the back post isn't exactly Guardiola level.

[Saint86]

 

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

That's not what I'm saying at all, and well you know it.

My criticism is of the obsession with irrelevant figures in the weird belief that they actually mean something. These are subsequent on, and not the cause of our playing style, if we actually have one at the moment.

 

 

To be honest, i don't know what you are trying to say because you've contradicted yourself. Saint Clark was opining that having a lot of shots (more in fact that any other team in the league) means we aren't boring to watch. And your response/stance was firstly that those stats have no relevance at all to how we played (quote below)... And yet here you then are (quote above) saying that those stats are subsequent (i.e. caused by and therefore directly related) to our playing style...

There are a great many stats used in football, how they are impacted by style of play is ofc relevant to how useful they are in the discussion being used - and i haven't seen anyone say different. Personally, xG (which you seem to have been previously railing against) is a very good indicator of the quality of attacking chances sides create, and similarly most fans would argue that teams that create a lot of chances (particularly good ones) are not boring to watch.

 

8 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

Christ, surely even you can agree that the fact we have had more shots on goal and shots on target than any other team in the league shows that the style of play isn't boring and pedestrian? That it does lead to good attacking outcomes? 

I know you see statistics as devil worship but surely you can see the link between that? 

5 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

You do realise that these figures are produced primarily for the betting markets and bear no relationship to what actually happened?

 

 

Edited 8 September, 2023 by Saint86

[Bob60]

14 minutes ago, egg said:

Renegade... reckless...naive...stupid...8 players upfield against Sunderland for their first goal, with Edozie as one of the 2 back, ain't clever on any assessment. 

But the first goal wasn't a planned tactic, he said after the match that him and the new set piece coach were angry as the corner was taken quickly before people were in their set positions.

[notnowcato]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Oh i agree with you there. Holgate had a mare, the full backs lost their man, Bazunu could have done better with 3 of them at least. But the tactic of run fast directly through the midfield into a wide open space or lump the ball into the back post isn't exactly Guardiola level.

It didn't look good. we've definitely played better this season.

For me, at the moment the positives outweigh the negatives.  Few players to bed in, some youngsters in the mix, new way of playing and a losing mentality to get rid of.  I'm really looking forward to a fit Ross Stewart coming in.

[Turkish]

7 minutes ago, notnowcato said:

It didn't look good. we've definitely played better this season.

For me, at the moment the positives outweigh the negatives.  Few players to bed in, some youngsters in the mix, new way of playing and a losing mentality to get rid of.  I'm really looking forward to a fit Ross Stewart coming in.

Oh yeah, im still hugely in favour. He's done a good job in the circumstances, clear defensive issues need to be fixed, definitely away from home we should be starting Charles and Downes in midfield to make us more solid. I know he wants us to dominate the ball but teams will sit back and hit us on the break so need to make sure the back door is shut rather than everyone charging forwards like U8s

[West end Saints]

Personally I am still pretty comfortable with where we are. 

Key things for me:

I enjoyed Norwich and Sheff W performances, moving the ball around quickly and precisely. 

Sunderland game may be a bit of freak result as:

Transfer window uncertainty (albeit impacted other clubs to lesser extent) 

Injury to Stephens, Smallbone/Downes coming back from injury /illness

Che Adams unsettled, Stewart not yet fit

Holgate played early and probably not ready

We started well... For about a minute, before letting a goal in, New team, Holgate debut, intense support, put under immense pressure from start. 

Sunderland had one of those days where everything they hit was hit beautifully, they won't often do that, teams against us won't. 

With the complete reset to be this close to the top at this stage is a good start. 

We are likely the let in a lot, but reckon we will do ok

[once_bitterne]

Russell Martin would have been great for a Viz character.  The bloke who cannot avoid massively over-complicating everything.

Ep 1.  How he has to run around the house 15 times and juggle 3 apples for 5 minutes before he can turn the kettle on.

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, Smirking_Saint said:

Not really sure how xG isn’t relevant, as I explained and you ignored

Because it relies on the subjective opinion of the "tagger".

Take out the subjectivity and it becomes relevant - but xG doesn't exist without it...

[Depressed of Shirley]

2 hours ago, egg said:

Isn't it? I've seen a proper mixed bag. I've seen possession with no end product, possession with goals, possession with the ball given away needlessly, being picked off when we're committing when forward without proper cover, players not running back, embarrassing defeats to Gillingham and Sunderland.  Not sure what you're seeing mate. 

What I am seeing "mate", is a new manager faced with massive upheaval in playing squad, trying to instil some sort of football style to try and win games. He has players who are either new or beaten into submission by being part of the worst squad in the club's history and used to losing every week. It might not work, he might turn out to be terrible, although he would have to go some to beat some of the recent managers we have had to endure to be the worst.

However, what I have seen, from two home games and three televised away games, is a possession based style of football that has won three games, drawn one and lost one. Sunderland was awful, but still not as bad as the endless home defeats last season, and at least it looks like the players are trying to do something as opposed to going through the motions and being resigned to defeat after defeat.

I hope it works, because having recruited this season for this style of football, I don't think we will survive with a change to "get it forward" that a few people that sit near me at St. Mary's keep demanding.

[Osvaldorama]

8 minutes ago, Depressed of Shirley said:

What I am seeing "mate", is a new manager faced with massive upheaval in playing squad, trying to instil some sort of football style to try and win games. He has players who are either new or beaten into submission by being part of the worst squad in the club's history and used to losing every week. It might not work, he might turn out to be terrible, although he would have to go some to beat some of the recent managers we have had to endure to be the worst.

However, what I have seen, from two home games and three televised away games, is a possession based style of football that has won three games, drawn one and lost one. Sunderland was awful, but still not as bad as the endless home defeats last season, and at least it looks like the players are trying to do something as opposed to going through the motions and being resigned to defeat after defeat.

I hope it works, because having recruited this season for this style of football, I don't think we will survive with a change to "get it forward" that a few people that sit near me at St. Mary's keep demanding.

 

Exactly this, couldn’t have put it any better. 
 

He has already shown enough positives that he deserves time. This isn’t a NJ situation where you can instantly tell he’s a shocking fit. 
 

This is a guy that has a huge job on his hands trying to turn around a sinking ship. I believe he has what it takes based on the current evidence. 

I admit - he wasn’t my first choice. I would have preferred more experience and record of championship promotions.
 

But since he’s been here he has been really impressive in my opinion and l can see it being a great appointment. Or maybe it won’t work out. But he certainly needs more time and support right now. 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

While we can doubt whether Martin is a top manager at this level and whether he will get us automatic promotion, his track record at two previous clubs is solid enough. One heavy defeat against Sunderland doesn't change that. People are acting like he doesn't have a clue

[revolution saint]

32 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Because it relies on the subjective opinion of the "tagger".

Take out the subjectivity and it becomes relevant - but xG doesn't exist without it...

Apparently they use "models" that look at historic data rather than someone saying "I think that shot has a 20% chance of going in".  So what happens is that the model will look at the shot in relation to where it's been taken, proximity to goal etc etc and come back and say I've found 1000 previous instances of shots in that position and 200 resulted in a goal.  

Problem is how complex the model is - does it also include the position of goalkeeper, other defenders, the quality of the league (there must be a huge variation between leagues and shots taken from exactly the same position).  There's so many variables that it would be virtually impossible to find absolute exact replications of scoring opportunities.

It's a guideline but I wouldn't place too much emphasis on it. 

[Smirking_Saint]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Because it relies on the subjective opinion of the "tagger".

Take out the subjectivity and it becomes relevant - but xG doesn't exist without it...

Yeah I agree, but as far as stats go its certainly one of the better ones to use as a guide.

Stats like completed passes, interceptions and tackles per game are ‘ok’ but again then are only really relevant if you compare the tactics adopted and if, say you compare the pass stats from an RM system to a Warnock system etc then the comparison doesn’t fit

But at the very least xG and xGA are pretty consistent in how they are modelled, I think the ‘tagger’ is more some AI algorithm rather then some spotty oink filling in a spreadsheet… still like any stats I think needs to be backed up by the ‘eye test’ but they’re a pretty fair assessment of teams attacking/defensive output

*Ours are sat at an xG of 2.15 and actual goals are 2.. so we’re slightly underperforming that

*Rather worryingly our xGA is 1.25 (which comparatively isn’t bad) but our acual is 2.40 which is shocking, so we’ve either been slightly unlucky, or we’re letting in goals we frankly shouldn’t 

* Both per 90 stats from footystats.com

 

[richardc]

2 hours ago, Depressed of Shirley said:

What I am seeing "mate", is a new manager faced with massive upheaval in playing squad, trying to instil some sort of football style to try and win games. He has players who are either new or beaten into submission by being part of the worst squad in the club's history and used to losing every week. It might not work, he might turn out to be terrible, although he would have to go some to beat some of the recent managers we have had to endure to be the worst.

However, what I have seen, from two home games and three televised away games, is a possession based style of football that has won three games, drawn one and lost one. Sunderland was awful, but still not as bad as the endless home defeats last season, and at least it looks like the players are trying to do something as opposed to going through the motions and being resigned to defeat after defeat.

I hope it works, because having recruited this season for this style of football, I don't think we will survive with a change to "get it forward" that a few people that sit near me at St. Mary's keep demanding.

the tablets must be working this is a very up beat post compared to most

[Long Shot]

On 07/09/2023 at 13:59, Osvaldorama said:

What an absolute embarrassment of a post and I am fairly sure you aren’t a real saints fan. 
 

 

Ah the ultimate comeback when someone disagrees with you “ I am sure you aren’t a Saints fan”! 
Sorry to disappoint you but I am very much a fan of many tears standing (first game early 60s ) and I happen to think Martin, while being an excellent communicator, is simply not going to be the manager to get us promotion, primarily because he is so wedded to a flawed system and is way too stubborn to contemplate change. Now I accept that my opinion will be hard to read or accept (and I hope I’m wrong), but this is a forum where issues are expected to be aired. It is not a happy clappy ra ra club where all views must be supportive or positive just so you can sleep at night. 

Edited 9 September, 2023 by Long Shot

[Convict Colony]

16 minutes ago, Long Shot said:

Ah the ultimate comeback when someone disagrees with you “ I am sure you aren’t a Saints fan”! 
Sorry to disappoint you but I am very much a fan of many tears standing (first game early 60s ) and I happen to think Martin, while being an excellent communicator, is simply not going to be the manager to get us promotion, primarily because he is so wedded to a flawed system and is way too stubborn to contemplate change. Now I accept that my opinion will be hard to read or accept (and I hope I’m wrong), but this is a forum where issues are expected to be aired. It is not a happy clappy ra ra club where all views must be supportive or positive just so you can sleep at night. 

Surely we need to give him this break and probably until nov before we can judge the system and his flexibility with it better, too early to call it flawed at present.

[Whitey Grandad]

16 hours ago, Smirking_Saint said:

Yeah I agree, but as far as stats go its certainly one of the better ones to use as a guide.

Stats like completed passes, interceptions and tackles per game are ‘ok’ but again then are only really relevant if you compare the tactics adopted and if, say you compare the pass stats from an RM system to a Warnock system etc then the comparison doesn’t fit

But at the very least xG and xGA are pretty consistent in how they are modelled, I think the ‘tagger’ is more some AI algorithm rather then some spotty oink filling in a spreadsheet… still like any stats I think needs to be backed up by the ‘eye test’ but they’re a pretty fair assessment of teams attacking/defensive output

*Ours are sat at an xG of 2.15 and actual goals are 2.. so we’re slightly underperforming that

*Rather worryingly our xGA is 1.25 (which comparatively isn’t bad) but our acual is 2.40 which is shocking, so we’ve either been slightly unlucky, or we’re letting in goals we frankly shouldn’t 

* Both per 90 stats from footystats.com

 

The alternative view up is that xG and xGA are rarely anywhere close to what actually happened and therefore must be flawed.

[Whitey Grandad]

19 hours ago, Saint86 said:

 

To be honest, i don't know what you are trying to say because you've contradicted yourself. Saint Clark was opining that having a lot of shots (more in fact that any other team in the league) means we aren't boring to watch. And your response/stance was firstly that those stats have no relevance at all to how we played (quote below)... And yet here you then are (quote above) saying that those stats are subsequent (i.e. caused by and therefore directly related) to our playing style...

There are a great many stats used in football, how they are impacted by style of play is ofc relevant to how useful they are in the discussion being used - and i haven't seen anyone say different. Personally, xG (which you seem to have been previously railing against) is a very good indicator of the quality of attacking chances sides create, and similarly most fans would argue that teams that create a lot of chances (particularly good ones) are not boring to watch.

 

 

 

No contradiction at all. 
 

We have a playing style (allegedly).

Someone or something concocts some figures that are suppose to relate to what actually happened.

That does not mean that there is a correlation between what happened at the game and some numbers that were produced afterwards. As far as the betting world goes football is just a random number generator for them.

 

[derry]

There is a saying, "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics". This is a phrase describing the persuasive power of statistics to bolster weak arguments. One of the best and best known critiques of applied statistics. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point. People using statistics seem to cherry pick the most convenient statistics  whilst ignoring other statistics that are available that cast doubt on their arguments. I personally favour the big picture approach over the devil is in the detail.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

21 minutes ago, derry said:

There is a saying, "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics". This is a phrase describing the persuasive power of statistics to bolster weak arguments. One of the best and best known critiques of applied statistics. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point. People using statistics seem to cherry pick the most convenient statistics  whilst ignoring other statistics that are available that cast doubt on their arguments. I personally favour the big picture approach over the devil is in the detail.

If only there was a way of knowing just how often such practices were used, by how many people and in what areas of life...some way of capturing the data... 🙂

[revolution saint]

34 minutes ago, derry said:

There is a saying, "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics". This is a phrase describing the persuasive power of statistics to bolster weak arguments. One of the best and best known critiques of applied statistics. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point. People using statistics seem to cherry pick the most convenient statistics  whilst ignoring other statistics that are available that cast doubt on their arguments. I personally favour the big picture approach over the devil is in the detail.

The radio 4 programme and podcast "More or Less" is excellent if you have any kind of interest in statistics.

[Saint Gifford]

Never been in the RM camp tbf.

Nothing to do the bloke, he absolutely had to take the job, why wouldn’t you take the Saints hot seat.

I just cannot understand why we haven’t learnt our lesson with allowing “Maverick” managers to dictate and keep changing the style of play. Jeezzz it reminds me of grass roots kids football.

These are professional football players  that understand how to kick a ball, no wonder they don’t know if they are coming or going.
 

 We just seem to be lurching from one managerial style to another in a campaign that unless we get a sniff of promotion, we could end up in this league for a long time.

Tottenham seem to have landed on their feet with a great man Manager with a few changes to their squad.

We just need to find our right man Manager who ever that might be, and not another experiment. 
 

 

 

[Osvaldorama]

3 hours ago, Long Shot said:

Ah the ultimate comeback when someone disagrees with you “ I am sure you aren’t a Saints fan”! 
Sorry to disappoint you but I am very much a fan of many tears standing (first game early 60s ) and I happen to think Martin, while being an excellent communicator, is simply not going to be the manager to get us promotion, primarily because he is so wedded to a flawed system and is way too stubborn to contemplate change. Now I accept that my opinion will be hard to read or accept (and I hope I’m wrong), but this is a forum where issues are expected to be aired. It is not a happy clappy ra ra club where all views must be supportive or positive just so you can sleep at night. 

Ok so you’re a real saints fan but just a completely unreasonable one. Makes sense. 
 

It’s absolutely outrageous to be saying that martin’s system is no good. He’s had 5 - FIVE - games with a constantly changing line up due to transfers in & out. And we looked good in 4 of them!
 

I think it’s remarkable that he’s already stamped a new style on the team in such a short time - something our previous managers failed to do.  
 

If we lose the next ten games then you may have a point. But why don’t you wait and see what happens FFS

Edited 9 September, 2023 by Osvaldorama

[Charlie Wayman]

⭕

[derry]

1 hour ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

If only there was a way of knowing just how often such practices were used, by how many people and in what areas of life...some way of capturing the data... 🙂

It appears to me nearly always, unless full warts and all studies are published in full. I will go so far to say that I have never ever seen an argument made with statistics that wasn't selective picking a few from many. I've heard it said that statistics can be used to prove or alternatively using the same set of statistics to disprove whatever the author chooses to focus on. That is why I always look at the big picture.

[Fabrice29]

1 hour ago, Saint Gifford said:

We just need to find our right man Manager who ever that might be, and not another experiment. 
 

 

 

Don't need another experiment but lets get another manager in. Perfectly normal post.

[revolution saint]

20 minutes ago, derry said:

It appears to me nearly always, unless full warts and all studies are published in full. I will go so far to say that I have never ever seen an argument made with statistics that wasn't selective picking a few from many. I've heard it said that statistics can be used to prove or alternatively using the same set of statistics to disprove whatever the author chooses to focus on. That is why I always look at the big picture.

Thing is that you can also apply that to arguments based on qualitative reasoning too.  Often how people feel about a certain thing is at direct odds to the reality and politicians have exploited this since forever.  Trump and Boris are prime examples but everyone does it so you need quantitative data to prove or disprove it.  Ultimately it's up to the audience to be as informed as possible or independent fact checking services to be more prominent.

Anyway, um, I'm looking forward to the Leicester game.  When you think we've still got KWP, Smallbone, Alcaraz, Sulemana, Adams plus quality like Fraser, Charles, Downes then we've got a really strong squad.  Oh and I hate international breaks.