Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
 Badger

Robert Snodgrass

Recommended Posts

I have never understood the minority of supporters who sometimes give him a hard time and was very pleased to stumble upon this. Good evidence for why he is picked so consistently.http://bwinbetting.com/leagues/premier-league/meet-underrated-premier-league-creator-man-utd-sign,50859.html

"Chortle if you will, but in terms of key passes (those that

create chances) only David Silva, Mesut Ozil and Luis Suarez average

more per game than Snodgrass
in the Premier League this term."It recommends him for Man U and says "Snodgrass’ average of 2.6 accurate centres a game is the best in the English top flight and dwarfs the 1.4 Wayne Rooney looses off as the Red Devils’ most prolific crosser."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user=" Badger"]I have never understood the minority of supporters who sometimes give him a hard time and was very pleased to stumble upon this. Good evidence for why he is picked so consistently.http://bwinbetting.com/leagues/premier-league/meet-underrated-premier-league-creator-man-utd-sign,50859.html

"Chortle if you will, but in terms of key passes (those that

create chances) only David Silva, Mesut Ozil and Luis Suarez average

more per game than Snodgrass
in the Premier League this term."It recommends him for Man U and says "Snodgrass’ average of 2.6 accurate centres a game is the best in the English top flight and dwarfs the 1.4 Wayne Rooney looses off as the Red Devils’ most prolific crosser."
[/quote]

More accurate crosses in a game than Redmond and Murphy have supplied all season. There''s a bit more to wing play than running up and down and looking tricky. Still, both are young and will learn in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately the stat may be true, but the dolly drop crosses that Snpdgrass usually puts in are into a full penalty box when the defence is organised because he and the rest have taken so long to get around to putting the crosses in, in the first place.Stats mean little without a context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user=" Badger"]It recommends him for Man U and says "Snodgrass’ average of 2.6 accurate centres a game is the best in the English top flight and dwarfs the 1.4 Wayne Rooney looses off as the Red Devils’ most prolific crosser."[/quote]Just a real shame that they don''t understand how to correctly interpret the stats...Snodgrass comes top of this because of the amount of crosses he''s managing in a game, but his crossing ACCURACY is not the highest by any means.Across 14 games he''s attempted 133 crosses and succeeded 36 times, meaning his crossing accuracy is 27%Stewart Downing on the other hand has played 15 games and attempted 118 crosses and succeeded 33 times, meaning his crossing accuracy is 28% - 1% better than SnoddySo in other words, Downing crosses less than Snoddy does in general, but is more accurate when he does cross the ball.David Silva manages a 42% cross accuracy (25 out of 59 across 12 games)!This is not to criticise Snoddy by the way, but the stats have to be understood and put into their full context to be truly relevant and clearly half the point was being missed here...All that aside, he''s still better than Rooney in this aspect (both accuracy and amount of accurate crosses), but again maybe this would mean more if Rooney was actually an out and out winger, rather than primarily being a forward/support striker who can also play attacking midfielder/wide forward as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course, statistics can be misleading but equally they can give a very good indication of what is going on: I don''t think that it is fair to denigrate quantitative information that are the basis of informed judgement simply because some people misinterpret them. I accept that context is important, which is why it is always sensible to look for supporting evidenceIn the end its obviously a matter of opinion to us "ordinary fans", but

Snodgrass consistently creates more real threat than the more exciting

alternatives that everyone loves so much who promise much but have currently delivered far less - as Ricardo says - they are still young though, so hope for the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
" I don''t think that it is fair to denigrate quantitative information that are the basis of informed judgement"

absolute nonsenseas this meaningless twaddle is not set in context and so presumes that you can compare like for like with there being no other variablesthere are ............. that is the hole beauty of the game to try and quantify football with this sh ite is absurdand something you would not expect or want in virtually every other walk of your lifewatch the game ..... that will tell you all you need to know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It does not surprise me that you find that

"quantitative information (is) the basis of informed judgement" is

"absolute nonsense." Nor would I recommend trying to quantify football

(or anything else) without a healthy awareness of the context and

limitation of the data collected. However, the problem is not the

technique as such but its misapplication, confusion of correlation  with

causation and, often, over-interpretation of the limited data

available. Of course, watch the game that''s the fun bit afterall, but statistics can sometimes enhance the understanding of sport as it can many other areas of life. Do you think that it is just coincidence that the three players with most key passes are Silva, Ozil and Saurez?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your point is logical Hampstead. The article suggests that is because of the poor quality of our finishing but ...I think the other point to make that Snodgrass is more than a crosser of the ball in the traditional "winger" sense. He plays inside and passes a lot as well. IMO, some of the difficulty some fans have with him is that they regard him as "a winger" when the role he fulfils is more fluid than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user=" Badger"]It does not surprise me that you find that

"quantitative information (is) the basis of informed judgement" is

"absolute nonsense." Nor would I recommend trying to quantify football

(or anything else) without a healthy awareness of the context and

limitation of the data collected. However, the problem is not the

technique as such but its misapplication, confusion of correlation  with

causation and, often, over-interpretation of the limited data

available. Of course, watch the game that''s the fun bit afterall, but statistics can sometimes enhance the understanding of sport as it can many other areas of life. Do you think that it is just coincidence that the three players with most key passes are Silva, Ozil and Saurez?
[/quote]the coincidence that doesn''t surprise is that you looked up such drivel to check how good they aremaybe you even checked which teams they are playing for as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You would also need to take into consideration the fact that Snoddy takes most set pieces in the opposition half! Why is it you can see the chances the main 3 mentioned make but not Snodgrass?

Because in truth he is not that accurate and does not actually create that much! (Maybe for himself?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent''s point."

If Snoddy went down the wing, beat six men in a dazzling run and laid the ball to Hooper who was two yards out but he lifted it over the bar that is not an assist.

If Snoddy went down the wing, beat six men and shot and ball ball hit Hooper''s arse and fell to Redmond to put into an empty goal, is that an assist for Hooper?

Completed passes are easier in your own half than the last third. Do the statistics take this into account?

Teams that keep the ball for long periods intheir own half obviously have a better possession rate. Is it really that meaningful?

Can someone explain to me how statistics in football work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So stats do lie.He has been poor this season, simples.If I threw 100 darts at treble 20 I would be lucky to hit it once. If Phil Taylor thew 20 darts at treble 20 how many times would he hit it. I have thrown more, who would you rather hav in your team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics." Benjamin Disraeli. Two other quotations from him:1. "Damn your principles; stick to the party."  (Ironic really, as he split the Tory party for even longer than Mrs Thatcher!)2. "If all else fails, abuse your opponent and deny the facts." (Advice to a young parliamentary candidate.) Disraeli''s oft quoted epigram about statistics was a witty reply from a master of communication; a "spin doctor" if you like. I am sure that it would amuse him that it was being used to mislead people more than 150 years later! Just because statistics can be misused, it does not suggest that they cannot be a valuable source of understanding: the problem is that because many do not understand how statistics are misused and cannot recognise it, they tend to reject the quantitative approach altogether.The example that you cite, re Snodgrass, Hooper and Redmond is fully covered by the "laws" of statistics - the important factors in the case you quote would be sample size, statistical significance and regression to the mean. I am sure that we could both name a whole load of football statistics which we both agreed were positively and negatively correlated. With regards the observation part of the process ("using our eyes"), which is also valid but less reliable (more room for disagreement) I think that the statistics provide some evidence for a belief that I have held for some while about our "wingers:" namely, that whilst Redmond may be a more exciting player, we tend to get more outcome from Snodgrass. In my opinion, Snodgrass is a creative and unappreciated player. This article provides some evidence to support this but yes,  as always with statistics, one needs to be aware of their limitations as well as what they could reveal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user=" Badger"]In my opinion, Snodgrass is a creative and unappreciated player. This article provides some evidence to support this but yes,  as always with statistics, one needs to be aware of their limitations as well as what they could reveal.[/quote]I agree with this to a reasonable extent, but I''m not going to sit back whilst an article uses a single part of the statistic as a whole to make wild statements, particularly when the comparison is ridiculous to begin with.Snoddy and Rooney play completely different roles at completely different clubs with completely different styles of play, Rooney is NOT an inverted winger (or whatever term you want to use about Snoddy), neither is Snoddy a centre forward or support striker - so why the hell are they being compared in an area that one of those players is meant to perform well in - and the other isn''t?????It''s just as pointless and irrelevant as comparing them on shots per game, when clearly Rooney is far more likely to have more chances to do this, which is also boosted by the role he plays which enables this!Ideally they should have compared Snoddy with someone like Ashley Young, similarly you''d compare Rooney with a player like Aguero or Suarez.The whole basis of their argument was a flawed comparison that tried to support an irrelevant point whilst ignoring other factors that show many other players are better in this respect than our player is. This isn''t to say that Snoddy is doing a poor job (although he hasn''t looked good on the pitch for most of the season), but let''s call a spade a spade instead of comparing apples to oranges...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that Badger.

I think you really sum football up in your last paragraph........ In my opinion, Snodgrass is a creative and unappreciated player.........

Football is, and always has been, a matter of opinion.

Mine? I feel the opposite. I feel his slowing down of attacks and meaningless slow crosses from a right wing position with his left foot to the centre of an opposing defence is almost a gift for opposition centre backs.

I do not totally blame him as I detest the inverted winger system we use on both flanks that create nothing. So many of Manchester City''s 99 goals this season come from wide position crosses in behind an opposition defence and we seldom try this.

We need change!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think Snodgrass is a good player but I don''t think he''s played particularly well for the best part of a year now.

 

For me, as I''ve said before, he is too prone to taking more touches than he needs or just generally hanging on to the ball too long.

 

There was a very good example in the Fulham reply. He made a very good run between two defenders and got himself into the box. However, with a bit of space and under no pressure he took another touch. That touch took him very close to the line and then he found it difficult to get his right foot around the ball enough to provide a good cut back. His attempted cut back came to nothing at the near post.

 

Without that extra touch he could have still put the ball into a dangerous area or even had a shot but he took that extra touch and made it more difficult for himself.

 

And I think that''s something he does far too much of, in attacking areas and further away from goal. Extra or sloppy touches that f*ck things up.

 

It was in his game at Leeds and it is still in his game now.

 

If he learns to release the ball quicker I think he''ll start to hurt the opposition more than he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...