Statistics from Crewe game

[Greebosan]

Hello all,

not intending to bring up unhappy memories from our final game of the season, but I have recently re-watched the game and done some stats on players performances. No idea if this will be of interest to anyone but I love this sort of thing. This is entirely my take on the game (together with the Mrs) and it took a while to do, pausing every few seconds. It won't be 100% accurate because the TV station I recorded it from sometimes overran live play with action replays so some stuff wasn't recorded but I think it gives a reasonable idea. Anyway, enjoy or not as the case may be.

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Player[/TD]
[TD]Passes
attempted[/TD]
[TD]Passes
completed[/TD]
[TD]%age[/TD]
[TD]Tackles
attempted[/TD]
[TD]Tackles
successful[/TD]
[TD]%age[/TD]
[TD]Headers
attempted[/TD]
[TD]Headers
won[/TD]
[TD]%age[/TD]
[TD]Shots
(on target)[/TD]
[TD]Crosses[/TD]
[TD]Clearances[/TD]
[TD]lost
the
ball[/TD]
[TD]Interceptions[/TD]
[TD]Blocks[/TD]
[TD]Fouls
conceded[/TD]
[TD]Free
kicks
won[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Clohessy[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]66[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]88[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]1 (0)[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Prosser
[/TD]
[TD]34[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]65[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]17[/TD]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]88[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Barker[/TD]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]77[/TD]
[TD]1 (1)[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gilbert[/TD]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]93[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]75[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Grant[/TD]
[TD]45[/TD]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]73[/TD]
[TD]18[/TD]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]78[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hall[/TD]
[TD]17[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]59[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]75[/TD]
[TD]1 (0)[/TD]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Timlin[/TD]
[TD]39[/TD]
[TD]28[/TD]
[TD]72[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]86[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]1 (1)[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mohsni[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]19[/TD]
[TD]70[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]80[/TD]
[TD]39[/TD]
[TD]31[/TD]
[TD]79[/TD]
[TD]3 (3)[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Eastwood[/TD]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]57[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]69[/TD]
[TD]5 (5)[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Benyon[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]91[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]1 (1)[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hills (31)[/TD]
[TD]19[/TD]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]74[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]57[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Harris (53)[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]100[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[TD]1 (1)[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Just a few points in summary - the main launcher of the ball without really aiming was Prosser, not Gilbert who passed on the floor to Mohsni all the time, Grant and Timlin were tireless in midfield and Mohsni went virtually the whole match without losing a contested header. Barker had a great game, did the simple things well.

Anyway, that's more then enough from me, I'm off for a beer.

 

[dannypav]

Good effort ( if only for being brave enough to watch the game again ).
Freddies pass completion stands out from your stats.
I know it's a simplistic view , but the strikers passes should in theory be over a shorter distance , and could therefore be assumed that the 'completed' percentage should be fairly high ( as Benyon and Harris show ).

Anyway , all water under the bridge etc , but interesting stats

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Shome mishtake shurely in your analysis as it was firmly established on SZ after the event that it was all Timlin's fault and his passing was abysmal, yet he appears to have a higher pass completion percentage than either Hall or Eastwood and lost the ball far fewer times than the likes of Hall and Grant.

 

[Crawliano]

Yeah but does Timlin's stats also include his horrendously short balls that his other players had to chase down with two Crewe players constantly breathing down their necks?

Timlin was ****, he wasn't alone but he was very poor.

I still stand by it, when he's firing on cylinders we're unplayable, if he's cack it's like keystone kops in midfield.

 

[Greebosan]

Shome mishtake shurely in your analysis as it was firmly established on SZ after the event that it was all Timlin's fault and his passing was abysmal, yet he appears to have a higher pass completion percentage than either Hall or Eastwood and lost the ball far fewer times than the likes of Hall and Grant.

You got me, I am Michael Timlin and I claim my £5.

Looking at it again, he didn't seem to have such a bad game although Crawliano makes a valid point that the quality of pass isn't measured, nor the significance of a missed pass in the overall scheme of the game. Barker had an excellent pass rate, but virtually all his balls were flat across defence leaving either Clohessy or Prosser to try to play a more difficult ball forward. Hall had a quiet game but still managed to put more balls into the box than anyone else and amazingly I don't think Grant managed to win a free kick apart from when Powell was absurdly booked for Crewe which was a very odd decision.

Having been there on the night, it was interesting to watch it back in the cold light of day.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Stats have a use, that Barks kept it simple and didn't fling the ball forward to lose it is relevant, if he passed it sideways why didn't the reciever see what was available and do a similar ball if there was nothing immediately on?
As pointed out Freddy didn't have the best of stats; sometimes you pass to where a player is/should be going to and maybe there were too few runs/movement for his play?

 

[Mick]

Wow, Barker made every single pass count, won all of his tackles, nearly all of his headers and his only shot was on target. And there was me thinking he was becoming a liability.

In fact most of the players completed the vast majority of their passes, won most of their headers (bar Benyon) and won nearly all their tackles (although just 5 attempted between Barker and Gilbert might be an issue). How come we didn't win. Perhaps you need to repeat the process with Crewe's players?

Lies, damned lies .....

 

[Greebosan]

It is difficult (impossible really) to give a full account of a game from these basic stats. I did think about doing the same for Crewe but as I don't know their players or numbers by sight, this would have taken very much longer to do.

It's worth noting that a lot of our complete passes were short balls that didn't develop play particularly, and although headers may have been won (or completed successfully), the final destination of the ball is not noted. Mohsni won virtually everything that came near him in the air, but not many of the following lose balls were picked up on by us - the number of flick-ons he won in the box towards the end of the game was immense, but no one was able to capitalise for us.

I would do this again, even if only for my personal use, and I think I would change how the data was recorded so that a header that went to the opposition would count as an incomplete pass for example. For each action, I only recorded one outcome to prevent my eyes bleeding and brain melting.

The clearances recorded here were all made under pressure (so as to count as a clearance rather than a measured pass) and were unlikely to be completed to a Southend player. Factor in goal kicks (not recorded), incomplete passes, missed contested headers, times players lost the ball or missed tackles and the Crewe side of things does start to mount up. A lot of our play was bobbly stuff where the stats don't really tell the story of the flow of the game - Crewe scored twice from 2 pretty incisive moves and we didn't match them there.

The next time I do this (next televised game) I will improve the recording, thanks for all the feedback so far :-)

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

It is difficult (impossible really) to give a full account of a game from these basic stats. I did think about doing the same for Crewe but as I don't know their players or numbers by sight, this would have taken very much longer to do.

It's worth noting that a lot of our complete passes were short balls that didn't develop play particularly, and although headers may have been won (or completed successfully), the final destination of the ball is not noted. Mohsni won virtually everything that came near him in the air, but not many of the following lose balls were picked up on by us - the number of flick-ons he won in the box towards the end of the game was immense, but no one was able to capitalise for us.

I would do this again, even if only for my personal use, and I think I would change how the data was recorded so that a header that went to the opposition would count as an incomplete pass for example. For each action, I only recorded one outcome to prevent my eyes bleeding and brain melting.

The clearances recorded here were all made under pressure (so as to count as a clearance rather than a measured pass) and were unlikely to be completed to a Southend player. Factor in goal kicks (not recorded), incomplete passes, missed contested headers, times players lost the ball or missed tackles and the Crewe side of things does start to mount up. A lot of our play was bobbly stuff where the stats don't really tell the story of the flow of the game - Crewe scored twice from 2 pretty incisive moves and we didn't match them there.

The next time I do this (next televised game) I will improve the recording, thanks for all the feedback so far :-)

Good point on the headers. "Winning" a header isn't about getting your head on the ball, it's about getting the ball to go where you want it to. My guess would be far more goals come about from stray defensive headers from defenders under pressure from attackers, than came from an attacker getting his head onto the ball marginally before the defender.

Not sure losing a contested header is the same as a misplaced place though.

 

[united we stand]

how did we loose?

 

[Fish]

they scored more than we did.

 

[Greebosan]

how did we loose?

We didn't, we drew. :-) This only relates to the home game.

Thanks for the feedback Yorkshire Blue, I would like any input on how to make future excursions into the world of games stats more meaningful.

 

[Smiffy]

Good work mate.

If you want to get into it in a big way then I would suggest adding phases & possession & yardage into your stats. This is the sort of stuff the pro analysts do and relay on to Sturrock etc. Massive, massive task though!!

Phase 1 - Possession gained - Pass - 20 yards
Phase 2 - Possession gained - Pass - 17 yards
Phase 3 - Possession Lost - Pass - 12 yard loss

 

[haveaguiness]

I always find stats pretty interesting as although they don't tell the whole story, things like passing stats can really tell you a lot.

For instance, the above stats suggest we completed 205 passes, this equates to just 2.3 passes a minute. If you look at the possession stats however we had 42% possession over the 95 minutes, so effectively had 40 minutes worth of the ball. This makes the number of passes go up to 5 per minute. JUST 5 per minute! No wonder we look so tired at times this season, having to A. chase the ball down all the time and B. trying to win back possession all game.

Also one other thing for your stats, shots that hit the post don't count as on target :) Timlin and Eastwood both hit the post yet they both have 100% accuracy with their shooting.

 

[sufc_dave]

Also one other thing for your stats, shots that hit the post don't count as on target :) Timlin and Eastwood both hit the post yet they both have 100% accuracy with their shooting.

I always thought that hitting the woodwork counted for a shot on target, but the more I think about it, it seems more logical to count it as a shot off target. Is there any genuine 'rule' for this? I.e, if the shot is deflected and goes onto the post, it is counted as a shot on target?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I always find stats pretty interesting as although they don't tell the whole story, things like passing stats can really tell you a lot.

For instance, the above stats suggest we completed 205 passes, this equates to just 2.3 passes a minute. If you look at the possession stats however we had 42% possession over the 95 minutes, so effectively had 40 minutes worth of the ball. This makes the number of passes go up to 5 per minute. JUST 5 per minute! No wonder we look so tired at times this season, having to A. chase the ball down all the time and B. trying to win back possession all game.

Also one other thing for your stats, shots that hit the post don't count as on target :) Timlin and Eastwood both hit the post yet they both have 100% accuracy with their shooting.

That's a nominal 95 minutes.

Given Crewe's chronic timewasting and the referee's indifference to it, I think the ball was "in play" for maybe as little 20 minutes second half.

I always thought that hitting the woodwork counted for a shot on target, but the more I think about it, it seems more logical to count it as a shot off target. Is there any genuine 'rule' for this? I.e, if the shot is deflected and goes onto the post, it is counted as a shot on target?

Count it as a third category of hit woodwork.

 

[Greebosan]

The official FA line is that shots that hit the post count as off target, but i included them as on target because this made more sense to me at the time. Its a tricky one as shots that come off the inside of the post should be on target and only dont go in through 'bad luck'. Thats just the call i made at the time.

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

Fantastic bit of work ........... not my cup of tea/idea of fun ............ but all credit to you for taking the time and effort. :smile:

 

[BaileytheQuitter]

Freddy hit the post, that isn't on target.

 

[Greebosan]

Freddy hit the post, that isn't on target.

I know, so did Timlin. I know this doesn't count officially as on target as mentioned above and I'll probably include a separate section in future.