'The Bristol Post clarified with Johnson that he was happy with his squad after three incomings and is done in the transfer market regarding bringing in new recruits. "Yeah, I'm done. I'm happy with my squad. Like I say, we've got depth now but obviously disappointed that Baker's got suspended but we've got players who can play different positions who can fill in." http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/lee-johnson-discusses-6m-aden-112911 No more 'In's', maybe some 'out's' but our business on transfers is mainly done, LJ & co are happy, so let's get ready for the big finish, Steve Lansdown is off to Africa, so all is well. What a difference a year makes. Except Rumour has it...
Except rumour has it - Jordan Jones ~ Bristol City have made enquiries for Kilmarnock winger Jordan Jones. 'The Northern Ireland international, who started out at Middlesbrough, has been the subject of an offer from Rangers. The 23-year-old, who has 18 months left on contract, was a former target for Burnley. Bristol City, meanwhile, are braced for offers from Everton for 24-year-old left-back Joe Bryan.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-Galatasarays-Badou-Ndiaye.html#ixzz55Tn6xvNB Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook Except rumour has it - Adam Webster ~ 'Ipswich Town defender Webster linked with £4million Bristol City move as potential Flint replacement.' http://www.greenun24.co.uk/ipswich-...stol-city-as-aden-flint-replacement-1-5372061
Said this on OTIB the other day, I’ve no doubt that we’ve got the replacements already lined up ready for when the other clubs give us the money required for Flint, Bryan and Reid. Who’d would of thought last season, we would be expecting over a million and a lot more for Bobby Reid. I’ve always been a big supporter of Bobby but would of never thought of playing him forward like LJ and team have.
Not really true, yes there was injuries but in pre season there was plenty of time to buy someone. It helped Bobby the injuries but it was far from needs must.
Freddie Hinds, Engvall, McClousky. Even Jamie Paterson has played behind the forward So yes there was others, so it was far from “needs must”
It definitely wasn't 'needs must'. He was smashing them in in pre-season (think he scored in nearly every game), and LJ said himself that using the statistical software they have, their search for a striker kept throwing up a player we already had (obviously Reid). Funny how recollection changes over time!
I got coated off for saying football is becoming scientific. Bobby Reid is a case of where data has influenced decisions. Our own confirmation bias (it affects us all) sometimes does not allow us to see things as lucidly as we like. It is why metrics are so valuable. People state A,B, C is this. One swipe of a screen, and a cursory look at detail complied by the clubs analysts, and Lee Johnson can see to a close % what a player really is.
Blimey this thread has got interesting, I really am learning something here, detailed analyst, scientific football detail, screen percentage compilation, being from a pre computerised football age my blinckers are genuinely falling off. Keep them coming lads, my keyboard is sweating.
Data?? Just a substitute for eyes surely.....Data isn't everything......you can have 80% possession in a game but still lose....You can have more shots on target, you can have more corners etc.....A player can have 5000 touches, but it may only take one to contribute to winning a game.... Can't rely on just science and data...
Lee Johnson recently said he would sit down with coaches and analysts to decide tactics. Metrics are a tool which can aid decision making. Aid, influence ... Not take over.
80% possession is useless though if it's not good possession. It doesn't mean the data lies, it just means we interpret that data wrongly. If you dig further you can see whether that possession is just passing around the defence with no benefit, or if it is genuinely tiring out opposition players and crafting gaps for the right moment. Similarly, we all look at shots and shots on target, and more often than not they are probably indicative of a match, but not always. QPR had more shots than us on Saturday but no one would say they dominated or were even the better team. You need to dig deeper to see the real reasons, at which point the data (probably) rarely lies.
There are five teams who create more chances in the EPL than Man City. You need to dig deeper to see the real reasons = Man City score more because they create more big chances via their monopoly of possession - They shoot closer to goal - Their conversion rate is far superior to all - They are outscoring anybody else.
data is what is put in, miss one lttle bit and it becomes inaccurate ...... during the game even with 10 men city had by far the most possession, around 60% until about the last 10 - 15 mins? at 2 goals up they needed to concede 2 or worse 3 ... at this point the tables turned and they went defensive, QPR had about 80-85% of the possession in that time, but were an unbalanced team, Hollowhead at half time had brought on an extra attacker, Smith for a defender, whereas city stayed as they were a defender down! at one point the QPR shots total was like a pin ball machine ! The final table shows... POSSESSION Home45% Away55% Shots Home11 Away15 Shots on Target Home 4 Away 2 Corners Home6 Away7 Fouls Home12 Away16 Data, first look is City were the underdogs throughout but they had 60% of the possession for more than 2/3rds of the match! shots City shots were throughout most of the game first 75 minutes QPR was a flurry at the end. NOTE ... as POSTED PREVIOUSLY... I monitored from the text and on 2 occasions from text and audio the games. It is not an exact science putting shots up on the board! In 1 game there was a disparity of 3 shots for 1 team and 1 for the other....
I would prefer to base a game on observation than i would Data.. A player gets sent off, data goes out the window. Wenger has always used data and so say it worked well for him in the Arsenal glory days and also so say changed the English game along with diet etc......when was the last time they won the premiership, not to do with data, more to do with players not being good enough? I'm not saying data lies, just that there is more to the game of football than just data......As Clifton says, it's ok to use as a tool, because that's exactly what it is.
I agree - 'Metrics are a tool which can aid decision making. Aid, influence ... Not take over'. I also agree with 1 For's - about 'eyes'. 'Fluence' is very important. You can't put words to it, but some days it doesn't matter what you do, you don't score. The Ref is another factor, the Ref sometimes has a huge influence. Don't give me it evens itself up over a season either. ps - In today's game I understand why Baker was sent off. I know he might have been given a yellow but for crying out loud don't give a Ref a decision to make.
I would prefer to base a game on observation than I would Data ... Most people would want to know they are 100% right, or close. Data can be fact. "You are not running as much as you did last season, playing as many penetrative passes, closing down as you did " ... All backed up by unequivocal fact gathered over matches / seasons. There is the tool. There will be a model for virtually any eventuality to study. The team winning the Premier League this season have an approach that focuses heavily on analytics to shape training, tactics and signings ... No doubt those getting relegated will have done similar.
No doubt that the teams relegated are not so good as the team that wins the league. Results are fact, data is only a tool for indication of what the players do in 90 mins movement etc....it would be impossible to use data produced by players to create the result... Slight injury to ones player or Error by the opposition would not be in the data. We both agree it's just a tool.....no more.
