Another stat showing it's been a season of extremes

Managers with the highest percentage of single goal wins:

1 Trollope 100.0%
1 Ayre 100.0%
3 Morison 87.5%
4 Morgan 81.6%
5 Solskjaer 77.8%
6 O'Farrell 75.0%
6 Hudson 75.0%
8 Bulut 71.4%
9 Neal 66.7%
10 Slade 65.6%

Selected others:

12 Mackay 61.1%
15 Harris 58.3%
17 Durban 57.1%
20 Warnock 55.9%
21 May 55.6%
22 Burrows 55.0%
23 D Jones 53.8%
24 Lawrence 52.8%
30 Scoular 46.5%
33 McCarthy 42.9%
35 Lamouchi 33.3%
38 Cork 25.6%

Managers with the highest percentage of defeats by 2 or more goals:

1 Wilson 88.2%
2 Bulut 69.6%
3 Neal 68.8%
4 Watts-Jones 67.1%
5 Goodfellow 63.6%
6 Trollope 62.5%
6 Solskjaer 62.5%
8 Morris 61.0%
9 Durban 60.0%
10 Spiers 59.1%

Selected others:

12 Scoular 56.7%
15 McCarthy 53.8%
18 Mackay 51.4%
20 Lamouchi 50.0%
20 Cork 50.0%
25 Burrows 48.4%
26 May 47.6%
27 Warnock 46.4%
29 Slade 44.4%
30 D Jones 40.4%
30 Lawrence 40.4%
33 Harris 38.1%
37 Morison 33.3%
38 Hudson 28.6%

tbdnr

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToTaL ITK

tbdnr

---

dnrbbtr

I was expecting stats on the extreme amount of rainfall we've had over the Autumn and Winter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Managers with the highest percentage of single goal wins:

1 Trollope 100.0%
1 Ayre 100.0%
3 Morison 87.5%
4 Morgan 81.6%
5 Solskjaer 77.8%
6 O'Farrell 75.0%
6 Hudson 75.0%
8 Bulut 71.4%
9 Neal 66.7%
10 Slade 65.6%

Selected others:

12 Mackay 61.1%
15 Harris 58.3%
17 Durban 57.1%
20 Warnock 55.9%
21 May 55.6%
22 Burrows 55.0%
23 D Jones 53.8%
24 Lawrence 52.8%
30 Scoular 46.5%
33 McCarthy 42.9%
35 Lamouchi 33.3%
38 Cork 25.6%

Managers with the highest percentage of defeats by 2 or more goals:

1 Wilson 88.2%
2 Bulut 69.6%
3 Neal 68.8%
4 Watts-Jones 67.1%
5 Goodfellow 63.6%
6 Trollope 62.5%
6 Solskjaer 62.5%
8 Morris 61.0%
9 Durban 60.0%
10 Spiers 59.1%

Selected others:

12 Scoular 56.7%
15 McCarthy 53.8%
18 Mackay 51.4%
20 Lamouchi 50.0%
20 Cork 50.0%
25 Burrows 48.4%
26 May 47.6%
27 Warnock 46.4%
29 Slade 44.4%
30 D Jones 40.4%
30 Lawrence 40.4%
33 Harris 38.1%
37 Morison 33.3%
38 Hudson 28.6%

---

You mean "here's another detached stat", or here's a "faulty correlation stat" or even, here's some "cherry picking". valid analysis must considering the broader context in which those matches take place.

While these "stats" are statistical data points , analysing them in isolation without considering the broader context is not a valid statistical analysis. Not sure, again, what this says as a table but it's crucial to consider all relevant variables and factors that could influence the outcome being studied.

I'm sorry, but ignoring important contextual information can lead to biased or misleading conclusions (which you never do, you just leave it there for people like me to chew over and get annoyed). Great individual data points, but analysis that ignores important context would not be considered valid statistical analysis, i see no extremes... 4/10 must try harder :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OurManFlint II

You mean "here's another detached stat", or here's a "faulty correlation stat" or even, here's some "cherry picking". valid analysis must considering the broader context in which those matches take place.

... i see no extremes

---

dear god not another bulut buttkisser. Admit it, if this favoured bulutball in any sense of the word you'd have been wanking off to this post.

1/10 pathetic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OurManFlint II

Blah blah, Great individual data points, blah blah

---

And that's all they can ever be. Even any attempt at context can be misleading or interpreted alternatively depending on your viewpoint. That's football stats for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

And that's all they can ever be. Even any attempt at context can be misleading or interpreted alternatively depending on your viewpoint. That's football stats for you.

---

Well maybe that's the cue for you to jettison them into ccmb history

Flogging a dead horse springs to mind

I definitely think playing your organ at summer hippy festivals will give you more pleasure

And even a cell for the night

Everyone's winner

Spurs are a team that can claim that their lack of home draws was the product of an attacking approach which saw them possibly losing games they could comfortably have drawn. On the other hand, I wouldn’t say that was true of Warnock’s 18/19 side.Another very strange factor about this season is that our attitude was far more attacking after we had equalised to make it 1-1 than it ever was at 0-0. The Ipswich match is the most obvious example of this, but we looked the more likely winners against Southampton once Diedhiou scored and there was also the Preston and Sheffield Wednesday away games (admittedly we we were playing against ten men in the former).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

And that's all they can ever be. Even any attempt at context can be misleading or interpreted alternatively depending on your viewpoint. That's football stats for you.

---

The league table is essentially just a stat. No context.

Where are the stats on watching enjoyable attacking football ?

Surprised you included Trollope or Hudson - as they had very few games in charge.

I think I would rather lose a game 2 - 0 rather than trying to protect a 1 nil defeat. Zero points is zero points regardless of by how many goals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

blah blah

---

For someone who hates anyone being critical of the club, you don't half spend some hours being critical of everything else. There isn't a TV programme you haven't gone out of your way to slate, no band you've ridiculed etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robin Friday's Ghost

The league table is essentially just a stat. No context.

---

The only context is playing each other home and away over the course of the season. It's often said that the table is misleading early in the season; maybe it is until the last games have been played.

Even then it just says win, lose, draw, goals scored, goals conceded.

For me there's more interest in looking in more detail. How teams come back from behind or lose from being in front. How often teams fail to score or how often they keep clean sheets. How often they sneak narrow wins or how often they batter teams. When teams are likely to score winning goals.

I can understand that lots aren't interested in stuff like that, but it doesn't give them the right to be rude about it.

This is possibly an impossible question to answer (as defining what a forward is) - but has there ever been a previous season where our forwards have scored a smaller percentage of the overall goals?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blooburd

dear god not another bulut buttkisser. Admit it, if this favoured bulutball in any sense of the word you'd have been wanking off to this post.

1/10 pathetic

---

Maybe the poster is a Bulut fan, maybe he is not. I don't know or really care, but I fail to see how you can take this viewpoint from his post.

When I spotted the the OP and the thread title I thought, "here we go, another Bulut bashing stat" but I was wrong.
It was just a bunch of stats not worth posting (IMHO).

The issue is the misleading title, the stats are what they are but Trollope was the first name i saw and he never completed a season! A better subject line would not have boiled my piss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MacAdder

Maybe the poster is a Bulut fan, maybe he is not. I don't know or really care, but I fail to see how you can take this viewpoint from his post.

When I spotted the the OP and the thread title I thought, "here we go, another Bulut bashing stat" but I was wrong.
It was just a bunch of stats not worth posting (IMHO).

---

Thanks MacAdder, this is one of many multi's i have blocked, glad to see its still valid lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OurManFlint II

The issue is the misleading title, the stats are what they are but Trollope was the first name i saw and he never completed a season! A better subject line would not have boiled my piss.

---

But it was a season of extremes. 20 wins, 22 defeats is unheard of. To win so many by such a close margin then lose so many so convincingly is almost unheard of.

From November onwards it was virtually one result or another. No grey areas. I doubt we'll see another season of results like it in our lifetimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Managers with the highest percentage of single goal wins:

1 Trollope 100.0%
1 Ayre 100.0%
3 Morison 87.5%
4 Morgan 81.6%
5 Solskjaer 77.8%
6 O'Farrell 75.0%
6 Hudson 75.0%
8 Bulut 71.4%
9 Neal 66.7%
10 Slade 65.6%

Selected others:

12 Mackay 61.1%
15 Harris 58.3%
17 Durban 57.1%
20 Warnock 55.9%
21 May 55.6%
22 Burrows 55.0%
23 D Jones 53.8%
24 Lawrence 52.8%
30 Scoular 46.5%
33 McCarthy 42.9%
35 Lamouchi 33.3%
38 Cork 25.6%

Managers with the highest percentage of defeats by 2 or more goals:

1 Wilson 88.2%
2 Bulut 69.6%
3 Neal 68.8%
4 Watts-Jones 67.1%
5 Goodfellow 63.6%
6 Trollope 62.5%
6 Solskjaer 62.5%
8 Morris 61.0%
9 Durban 60.0%
10 Spiers 59.1%

Selected others:

12 Scoular 56.7%
15 McCarthy 53.8%
18 Mackay 51.4%
20 Lamouchi 50.0%
20 Cork 50.0%
25 Burrows 48.4%
26 May 47.6%
27 Warnock 46.4%
29 Slade 44.4%
30 D Jones 40.4%
30 Lawrence 40.4%
33 Harris 38.1%
37 Morison 33.3%
38 Hudson 28.6%

---

Jesus someone is bored :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

Jesus someone is bored :hehe:

---

You're back with avengeance, so I guess you must be as well.

*Bookmarked for the times when I can't fall asleep at night :biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

The only context is playing each other home and away over the course of the season. It's often said that the table is misleading early in the season; maybe it is until the last games have been played.

Even then it just says win, lose, draw, goals scored, goals conceded.

For me there's more interest in looking in more detail. How teams come back from behind or lose from being in front. How often teams fail to score or how often they keep clean sheets. How often they sneak narrow wins or how often they batter teams. When teams are likely to score winning goals.

I can understand that lots aren't interested in stuff like that, but it doesn't give them the right to be rude about it.

---

It also doesn't reveal the context of the enjoyment people might have gained from watching. It's 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss. There's a lot more to football than that. Or at least there should be.