Meaningless Stat

[Stuart W]

What is it with this obsession by the media of a manager's "win percentage"? Don't they realise that this figure only shows part of the story. An example (if indeed we should need one):-

Manager A. 20 games as manager, Won 10 Lost 10. Win % 50%.
Manager B. 20 games as manager, Won 8 Drawn 8 Lost 4. Win % 40%.

All that Mr Sky TV (amongst others) will furnish you with is their respective win percentages.

Ah, you say, that shows Manager A to have the best record. But you would be wrong. Manager A gains 30 points whilst Manager B obtains 32.

Yet another example of mainstream media spinning statistics to demonstrate a point of view they want you to support.

 

[GNH]

It's just another example of the mainstream media trying to become more 'Americanised' and giving stats on everything they can think of.

I expect stats to be released soon showing player ratings and how many times they tie their shoelaces during the season.

It's not needed, incredibly tedious and shows SS's contempt for their coverage of the British (English :happy:) game

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

The issue isn't the use of stats but the poor use of stats.

And it's not as if the time taken up by feeding us statistics is depriving us from quality analytical insight.

So the wider problem is that the quality of punditry is terrible. Pundits are chosen on the basis of their name rather than their insight. The few decent pundits - such as Slipperduke, formerly of this parish - don't seem to have this trouble.

 

[RobM]

Statistics are fiddled to make a point, the most in football!

A team that has DDWDD is unbeaten in 5 games :smile:
A team that has WDDDD has gone 4 without a win! :sad: