Offline
Went to see Smile at the Rep and one of the jokes was about Wee Jim going off his head because even though Utd won 5-0 they weren't entertaining for the fans. Is football still entertaining for fans or has winning at all costs become more important than how you win ?
I was also reading about how England's Rugby team use coding strips and machine-learning models to analyse ( I don't know what any of that means ! ) all the data from previous games to give them a winning edge. I know they gather a lot of data on players like passes completed and how far they have ran etc but in the 100 plus years of professional football has the game really improved ? Golf , Tennis and other other sports seem to have made good use of technology but has football ?
If say a player has run 10k during a game and had 100 passes completed his statistics would look good but if out of the 10k only 0.2k were running with the ball and out of the 100 passes only 7 were forward it would maybe tell a different story.
Offline
All this analysis stuff does my nut in. I don’t need any figures to tell me who’s played well or who got in the right positions, made good decisions etc. It’s all part of the modern way that’s killed the soul of the game and none of it is improving the game.
Offline
Never thought about football being a beautiful game, but using statistical evidence can't really be a bad thing if it helps players and teams improve.
What's wasted football generally is television and by extension money, this compounded in Scotland by the inept and corrupt authorities.
Offline
What do you mean by wasted Pat ?
Was it MacLean and Utd who started this modern way with bring in a psychologist and Nutritionist to give them an edge ?
Offline
TheShed wrote:
All this analysis stuff does my nut in. I don’t need any figures to tell me who’s played well or who got in the right positions, made good decisions etc. It’s all part of the modern way that’s killed the soul of the game and none of it is improving the game.
Agree.
Offline
The bigger financial rewards mean it's taken more seriously .
Where have all the fat players gone?
Offline
TheShed wrote:
All this analysis stuff does my nut in. I don’t need any figures to tell me who’s played well or who got in the right positions, made good decisions etc. It’s all part of the modern way that’s killed the soul of the game and none of it is improving the game.
Soulless seems a good way of putting it for me. I think the last time apart from the Derby 6-2 games I left the ground talking positively about the game is when GMS was juggling the ball or Ryan Guald was in full flow . Not much sense of apprehension or anticipation something was gonna happen since then.
Offline
BMT wrote:
What do you mean by wasted Pat ?
Was it MacLean and Utd who started this modern way with bring in a psychologist and Nutritionist to give them an edge ?
PatReilly wrote:
What's wasted football generally is television and by extension money, this compounded in Scotland by the inept and corrupt authorities.
Television demands kick off times change, television insists bigger teams play each other often as a guarantee, television encourages fans to form allegiance to clubs with which they would otherwise have little to no loyalty.
Wee Jim possibly showed how television intrusions should be dealt with away back in October 2000.
Offline
Beharder wrote:
The bigger financial rewards mean it's taken more seriously .
Where have all the fat players gone?
We've got a couple, to be fair.
Offline
TheShed wrote:
All this analysis stuff does my nut in. I don’t need any figures to tell me who’s played well or who got in the right positions, made good decisions etc. It’s all part of the modern way that’s killed the soul of the game and none of it is improving the game.
100% agree. When did we start caring about the number of “assists” a player has had ffs?