Match Day Thread +++++Saints v Man City 1st May 2016 4:30pm+++++

Attending anger management classes I hope

 

Clasie averages 2 tackles a game. Wanyama averages 3. Do you really think teams are sooo afraid of Clasie that they are avoiding him to challenge Wanyama instead? I highly doubt it.

 

No I don't.

Not sure where you're going with that, sorry.

 

So, if the opposition is not avoiding Clasie, he will have the same opportunities to make tackles just like everyone else. Therefore, if he's good, he'll have a lot of tackles. And if he's not, he won't. So his stats will capture his play fairly accurately, even if they don't capture every element of his play.

 

On previous match day threads I have criticised Martina for what I saw as a tendency to follow his opponent too far, ending up out of position, leaving a massive gap to be exploited, which in turn dragged the CBs out of position.

In recent games he seems not to be doing that, so much. Second half yesterday, I noticed Sterling frequently coming short for the ball, with Cuco following him, only on these occasions he only went so far before communicating with a midfielder to take over, and returned to his holding position. This for me is an improvement in his play, and all credit to him.
Regarding the first City goal, it was just one of those things. The deflection off of Fonte didn't give him time to readjust his position, and had luck been on his side, the ball would have cleared Iheanacho's head and landed in acres of space, and been cleared.

 

I know what you are saying and I agree. All I was wondering was about his alleged fitness deficiencies. Some are saying that he is unfit, others that he runs himself into the ground. I was just asking if there were any stats to back up either opinion.

My view, rightly or wrongly, was that he doesn't appear to show as much as Davis (or Romeu) for example. So, are there any stats to indicate whether I am right or wrong?

 

I can only think you've missed Fats point entirely? It's not about being 'scared' of an opponent, it's about the speed at which he's on you (amongst other things), meaning that you are forced to play backwards, stopping an attacking momentum. He might not make a tackle, but he's stopped an attack. Vic is better at that with his strength, and as a result will be more likely to attempt a tackle. Clasie's speed and reading of a game is better so he'll stop attacks building.

 

So you're saying that Clasie's presence will cause an attacker to pull up short. Whereas they are more likely to take on Wanyama and risk a tackle. Have you seen Victor Wanyama? I find that unlikely.

The question is, does Clasie slow up attacks without making a tackle/interception more than other DM's? If he doesn't, it's not relevant and it doesn't matter if they don't measure it as a stat.

 

Look, you have completely missed my point. Laces tried to point it out, but you just won't read or see it. Best leave it. I will now.

 

Your point is that Clasie sometimes slows down attacks, but it doesn't show up in the stat sheet. My point is that all defenders do this. Unless there's some reason to believe that Clasie does this more often than other DM's, then who cares?

 

I'm saying that Wanyama is a lot less likely to be there as his speed and reading of the game isn't up with Clasie's. So Clasie is a lot more likely to stop an attack progressing by harrying players further up the pitch. If they get round that, VW is there as a shield.

 

In that particular sense, Clasie is a lot more like Reed than he is like Wanyama. Just better than Reed.

 

That play against Stoke where he followed Arnautovic to the far post... Koeman was on Monday Night Football or something and specifically broke down that play. Martina was exactly where he was supposed to be.

 

Still missed the key point from me ... but you often do this and this time I just can't be arsed to point it out. And your continual reference to the stat sheet makes me think you watch more US sport than football.

 

Shane talking about running about

 

.

 

Okay, look. It's not about how the Saints run their double pivot. Wanyama and Clasie have slightly different roles. I get it.

It's about the role and usage of statistics. FLT was saying that there is no stat that measure attacks delayed/broken off. My question is, does there need to be? Is this an actual thing, or is this really just some kind of squishy BS that we assign to players we like, and not those we don't?

When a midfielder looks up the pitch and decides to play it back to the fullbacks or slows down the attack (which eventually bogs down)... how do we know if it was because Clasie was harrying the player with the ball or if Wanyama had marked out his intended pass target? Or how do we know it wasn't Long who was harrying the player and Clasie who was marking the target? After all, we do love giving Long credit for being the World's greatest forechecker.

Some things are just not knowable... by either the computers OR by people. In statistics, you don't need to measure everything. In fact, most of the time the point is to boil things down into the one or two things that best serve as a proxy for everything else. And so things that aren't clear and can be subjective are purposely left out.

 

I know there have been comment about the good refereeing but has anyone previously seen a ref blow for half time while a team was setting up for a corner? Can't say I remember it happening before.

Vin

 

I disagree. If you understand the game truly, you can see. Some maybe questionable, but the number of times Clasie closed down the CB so he had no time to get his head up and look forward was, for me, so simple to see what he had done. Maybe I can just see some things you haven't been able to. He reads the pass, makes the burst/run to close the space and the player goes backwards. That is great, unquantifiable play.

You have focused on looking for a stat or not a stat. I am just trying to say that Clasie is a bloody good player and a lot of his work won't show in a stat.

 

Our fault for taking so long over it. Don't blame him for blowing up.