Stats by themselves are indeed useless, however someone has just also added how many of the passes go backwards. Rather than just condemning statistics, why not come up with a valid argument...?
I already did earlier on, that stats take very little into consideration and are part ofthe reason we have bought badly. so, for example, stats say joe allen has high pass completion let's say, this does not include:
- the direction of pass
- the pressure the player was under at the time of the pass (was the opponent pressing him, unlikely as its swansea and they were given space)
- touches taken before the pass was made
- the distance the receiving player was from Allen when pass was completed, ie length of pass
- the actually utility of the pass, was it a waste of time/lack of vision to make that pass when better options were open
I agree I would rather a pass go backward than to the opposition but I don't think saying "Allen has good passing stats" or "X has good crossing stats" mean much when assessing whether they are worth the money. I just think stats really do mean very little in footy compared to cricket


