I know you said nothing to see here, but as a sports scientist I have so many problems with this.
After one game, it is useless. Distance covered okay, but at what intensity? What areas of the pitch was the distance covered? Who covered them? Was it in or out of possession? What was the work-rest ratio?
The amount of stats used on TV and the media to back up points which are completely useless without any substance behind them is astonishing.
not going to argue with a sports scientist... would you say there is nothing suspect in there being such a big relative gap between the top and the rest though?
not going to argue with a sports scientist... would you say there is nothing suspect in there being such a big relative gap between the top and the rest though?
Oh there almost certainly is. I’m not going to deny or hide the fact that cheating goes on all the time, be it performance enhancers or what, Russian’s are known for it.
But at the same time, it could just be that they’re much more hyped up for it and willing to cover the extra distance. You could ask the same question as to why is there such a big gap between Germany and Brazil.
not going to argue with a sports scientist... would you say there is nothing suspect in there being such a big relative gap between the top and the rest though?
Oh there almost certainly is. I’m not going to deny or hide the fact that cheating goes on all the time, be it performance enhancers or what, Russian’s are known for it.
But at the same time, it could just be that they’re much more hyped up for it and willing to cover the extra distance. You could ask the same question as to why is there such a big gap between Germany and Brazil.
Take your point but Germany were chasing the game from very early on, and it was a high tempo game, bourne out by the high placing of Mexico on the same chart. Brazil have a far more relaxed style and let the ball do the work. That would be my answer.
It could have been adrenaline I suppose but Russia are quite an aging team aren't they so it is quite a surprising stat even without the other factors you mentioned previously.
What I find interesting is England / Tunisia / Brazil / Switzerland / Portugal / Spain / Belgium / Panama are all mainly in the bottom half and all played in the most Southerly Stadiums in the first round of Group games...
Be interesting to see if its similar sort of running for those who play in those Stadiums in the second set of Group games
Iranians making Suarez look like an amateur in the feigning injury awards. Loved that moment from the ref asking the player if he wanted to go off after a tackle. Gave him a big cup of shut the f up.
Imagine when there is 48 teams in the World Cup. Togo playing 11 men behind the ball up against giants Slovenia in hope of a 0-0 draw. Makes the tournament so boring to watch. Coupled with the constant play acting, rolling about and time wasting, doesn't make it good to watch . Iran doing all the above so far
not going to argue with a sports scientist... would you say there is nothing suspect in there being such a big relative gap between the top and the rest though?
Oh there almost certainly is. I’m not going to deny or hide the fact that cheating goes on all the time, be it performance enhancers or what, Russian’s are known for it.
But at the same time, it could just be that they’re much more hyped up for it and willing to cover the extra distance. You could ask the same question as to why is there such a big gap between Germany and Brazil.
Take your point but Germany were chasing the game from very early on, and it was a high tempo game, bourne out by the high placing of Mexico on the same chart. Brazil have a far more relaxed style and let the ball do the work. That would be my answer.
It could have been adrenaline I suppose but Russia are quite an aging team aren't they so it is quite a surprising stat even without the other factors you mentioned previously.
That was just one example I used between Germany and Brazil as you mentioned the difference between the top two in that graph. There can be many other examples that you can pull apart to look at a stat differently. For example, you mentioned the style of play, and Germany chasing the game etc, but there was only an average of 3 meters p/m between them and Mexico.
@ForeverAddickted made an interesting point about the location of the games. Climate, humidity and temperatures all will have its own factoring. The tempo of the games being played, the tactical play and decisions made prior to the game will influence how much distance is covered. But the thing with this stat is it is so generic you can’t assume anything without more variable data.
It would be more valid at the end of the tournament and produced as an average to fairly distribute the data.
Right now, I don’t think you can read anything into what it says. But of course as I have mentioned, there could well be some form of cheating/enhancement happening, but right now that isn’t a conclusion I would be looking to.
not going to argue with a sports scientist... would you say there is nothing suspect in there being such a big relative gap between the top and the rest though?
Oh there almost certainly is. I’m not going to deny or hide the fact that cheating goes on all the time, be it performance enhancers or what, Russian’s are known for it.
But at the same time, it could just be that they’re much more hyped up for it and willing to cover the extra distance. You could ask the same question as to why is there such a big gap between Germany and Brazil.
Take your point but Germany were chasing the game from very early on, and it was a high tempo game, bourne out by the high placing of Mexico on the same chart. Brazil have a far more relaxed style and let the ball do the work. That would be my answer.
It could have been adrenaline I suppose but Russia are quite an aging team aren't they so it is quite a surprising stat even without the other factors you mentioned previously.
That was just one example I used between Germany and Brazil as you mentioned the difference between the top two in that graph. There can be many other examples that you can pull apart to look at a stat differently.
@ForeverAddickted made an interesting point about the location of the games. Climate, humidity and temperatures all will have its own factoring. The tempo of the games being played, the tactical play and decisions made prior to the game will influence how much distance is covered. But the thing with this stat is it is so generic you can’t assume anything without more variable data.
It would be more valid at the end of the tournament and produced as an average to fairly distribute the data.
Right now, I don’t think you can read anything into what it says. But of course as I have mentioned, there could well be some form of cheating/enhancement happening, but right now that isn’t a conclusion I would be looking to.
Yeah I hadn't even considered the climate/temperature which mitigates things massively. As I say i'm not going to argue with a sports scientist you know a hell of a lot more than I do!
not going to argue with a sports scientist... would you say there is nothing suspect in there being such a big relative gap between the top and the rest though?
Oh there almost certainly is. I’m not going to deny or hide the fact that cheating goes on all the time, be it performance enhancers or what, Russian’s are known for it.
But at the same time, it could just be that they’re much more hyped up for it and willing to cover the extra distance. You could ask the same question as to why is there such a big gap between Germany and Brazil.
Take your point but Germany were chasing the game from very early on, and it was a high tempo game, bourne out by the high placing of Mexico on the same chart. Brazil have a far more relaxed style and let the ball do the work. That would be my answer.
It could have been adrenaline I suppose but Russia are quite an aging team aren't they so it is quite a surprising stat even without the other factors you mentioned previously.
That was just one example I used between Germany and Brazil as you mentioned the difference between the top two in that graph. There can be many other examples that you can pull apart to look at a stat differently.
@ForeverAddickted made an interesting point about the location of the games. Climate, humidity and temperatures all will have its own factoring. The tempo of the games being played, the tactical play and decisions made prior to the game will influence how much distance is covered. But the thing with this stat is it is so generic you can’t assume anything without more variable data.
It would be more valid at the end of the tournament and produced as an average to fairly distribute the data.
Right now, I don’t think you can read anything into what it says. But of course as I have mentioned, there could well be some form of cheating/enhancement happening, but right now that isn’t a conclusion I would be looking to.
Yeah I hadn't even considered the climate/temperature which mitigates things massively. As I say i'm not going to argue with a sports scientist you know a hell of a lot more than I do!
It’s not an argument but a very valid discussion. It is not often I can have these kind of conversations with people other than my peers but that isn’t too often either. It is good.
Comments
After one game, it is useless. Distance covered okay, but at what intensity? What areas of the pitch was the distance covered? Who covered them? Was it in or out of possession? What was the work-rest ratio?
The amount of stats used on TV and the media to back up points which are completely useless without any substance behind them is astonishing.
Sorry, just does my head in.
Gareth Southgate has dislocated his shoulder out running. Could it be on a Russian banana skin ?
But at the same time, it could just be that they’re much more hyped up for it and willing to cover the extra distance. You could ask the same question as to why is there such a big gap between Germany and Brazil.
TBF when they attack they get more players forward than other lesser teams at this WC.
It could have been adrenaline I suppose but Russia are quite an aging team aren't they so it is quite a surprising stat even without the other factors you mentioned previously.
Be interesting to see if its similar sort of running for those who play in those Stadiums in the second set of Group games
They drove me mad after the novelty quickly wore off during the SA world cup
@ForeverAddickted made an interesting point about the location of the games. Climate, humidity and temperatures all will have its own factoring. The tempo of the games being played, the tactical play and decisions made prior to the game will influence how much distance is covered. But the thing with this stat is it is so generic you can’t assume anything without more variable data.
It would be more valid at the end of the tournament and produced as an average to fairly distribute the data.
Right now, I don’t think you can read anything into what it says. But of course as I have mentioned, there could well be some form of cheating/enhancement happening, but right now that isn’t a conclusion I would be looking to.
Surely thats another conflict of interest seeing that the winners of this match could end up facing Uruguay