Why "STATS" are a load of bollox !!! Leicester V Man city

[BLUETIT]

Leicester 22% possession

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38193109

It's what you do with the ball when you got it, not how long you pi$$ed about with it in your own half.

[GRUMPYS DEN]

Leicester 22% possession

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38193109

It's what you do with the ball when you got it, not how long you pi$$ed about with it in your own half.

Absolutely-only one stat counts.

[lardy]

Leicester 22% possession

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38193109

It's what you do with the ball when you got it, not how long you pi$$ed about with it in your own half.

Maybe someone should correct your grammar, the same way you do to everyone else...

[Packerman]

Maybe someone should correct your grammar, the same way you do to everyone else...

touche :xmashehe:

[top gun chippys]

Leicester 22% possession

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38193109

It's what you do with the ball when you got it, not how long you pi$$ed about with it in your own half.

Possession stats are pretty meaningless. Some stats aren't "bollox" though.

[lardy]

Possession stats are pretty meaningless. Some stats aren't "bollox" though.

Agree. Stats can tell you lots about little things that the eye misses when watching a game - there's a famous story about Wenger always subbing Bergkamp on 70 mins and Bergkamp getting pissed off about it. Wenger could show him how his impact rapidly tailed off at the end of a game.

But you can't just look at possessions stats and say who was the better team, or "we had 56% so we should have won".

[surge]

"4-4-2 is the only thing!" was replaced by "4-4-2 is always going to be beaten in the biggest games/over the course of a season" was replaced by "maybe there is something to 4-4-2 afterall if done well", when the first and second opinion were too fixed to represent the complexity of the game.

Think we're on stage two with stats now.