Henry's goals/assists

Long RANT!

Sorry to go off on you, but this is one piece that I really hate about the "modern" game! Stats other than goal scoring or saves are really not meaningful. I know that Opta makes a big deal about compiling tons of stats such as passes completed and others. However, this really fails to tell the actual story of the game.

Let's take two "assists" and look at them to see they are not all equal.

1) Arsenal vs. Manchester City. Henry takes the ball along the goal line before cutting it back to Pires, who has a wide open goal to shoot at. Henry gets the "assist" and Pires the goal.

2) Arsenal vs. Newcastle United last season. Pires threads to ball through several Newcastle defenders to find Bergkamp at the top of the box with Dabizas (sp?) on his back. His turn loses the defender and allows him a shot on a very surprised Shea Given. Pires gets the "assist" but Dennis made that goal and did most of the hard work.

I see it all the time, a ball gets played to Henry who then beats one or two players on the dribble before slotting past the keeper. Now does the player that sent Henry the ball really deserve an "assist." They just passed Thierry the ball into space, they didn't make a "seeing eye pass" like Bergkamp did for Ljungberg last season.

Again, a pass can be spot on but if the striker misses or flubs it then the passer doesn't get their "assist" although they couldn't have made it any easier. Witness the Beckham ball to Giggs in the FA Cup (where Giggs sent it back out to the right touchline for an Arsenal throw!).

I say leave the stats to Baseball, where they have enough games and few enough outcomes for any play, to make meaningful statistical analysis. Football (soccer) to me is about the beauty of the game and one of those things is that it cannot be broken down into statistics!

</RANT>

 

I'll make a short version of what rev said:

One of the things I love about football is that stats are pretty much meaningless(except for the scoreline). If you want to actually know how good a player is, watch him play.

 

I believe assists are an integral part of the game and deserve a mention. In fact Ive noticed that fantasy football games dont mention assists; I think the assist is a lost art in a way. Now I believe football should keep it simple and does, but assists are one stat that needs a mention.

You can give scenario after scenario where a player doesnt deserve an assist and I can fire back as many where a player was served the goal on a platter.

 

Re: Long RANT!

Nor are the quality of all goals or all saves equal. A PK goal to pad a 3-goal lead counts the same as a brilliant golden-goal winner.

This is a problem of not just soccer, but of most sports. Soccer is fortunate that there are few stats for people to try and make quantitative analysis.

Football has it a lot worse. Stats in football seldom tell the story of the game, but there are a lot more of those to compare. How many times do we hear that teams win because they run the ball a lot? Of course, teams run the ball because they're winning -- but the stats can't differentiate.

 

Re: Long RANT!

I agree with your conclusion. Stats aren't very meaningful: not even goals and saves, in my opinion. (The goals and saves themselves are important, of course.) HOWEVER, I could not disagree more with your choice of example...

Pires was simply awesome on this goal, and absolutely earned the assist. If you remember, Pires got the ball passed out to him midway through his own half after a great challenge from Vieira to win the ball. Pires broke quickly up the wing on the counter, drawing four Newcastle players to him. Then, from just inside the Newcastle half, he threaded a perfect 30 yard pass on the ground right through them onto DB's foot at the edge of the box, in the only place DB could control the ball without it being poked away by the defender who was marking him. DB, of course, made an unbelievable play to earn the goal; that's undisputed. But he simply could not have done so without Pires's perfect pass. That's the point of an assist.

It seems as though you're saying an assist is only an assist if it results in a tap-in. But I believe that both the person making the assist AND the person scoring the goal can make necessary contributions to the goal, as in DB's wonder goal aginst Newcastle. Or consider Pires's wondergoal against Aston Villa last season. Vieira saw Pires cutting and aired that LOOOOONG bomb to him right at the edge of the box. Pires took one touch to round his defender and then a second to chip the keeper. Beautiful goal, and brilliant individual play from Pires. But without Vieira's pass, it would not have happened. Two meaningful plays, resulting in two meaningless stats.

 

Asfoolasiam, you make a good point that my second example perhaps is not the best. I just couldn't think of a specific example of a player receiving a ball at midfield and making their own goal. It happens all the time but I can't point to one in particular.

As for "giving assists only when it results in a tap-in." No. I'm actually not willing to give an "assist" period! It is nice to see who set up a goal and I remember often who makes a great pass. I also notice if a player makes a good off the ball run to open space for a goal, which is never captured in statistics but matters much more!

I just recently went to a hockey game and I get a big laugh out of the "second assist" usually from a player who really had nothing to do with the goal scoring play.

Azabache, you are correct in people read what they want and choose to care about what they give credence to. I just took this opportunity to say that I don't like the assist stat and that anyone trying to prove a player's quality based on that stat has a screw loose in my book.

 

The PFA voted Pires MVP last year based on his incredible assist record he set in only a few games. Though the PFA ,and for that matter the FA, seem to have a screw loose on occasion I believe they were spot on with their choice.

As for hockey and the second assist.....It is strange but hockey is so fast and so confined that it is hard to string multiple passes in a single play. I played hockey for a couple of years and found this to be true, than again I wasnt very good and that may have had something to do with it.

 

For an example of a player making his own goal from midfield and even his side of midfield...just refer to Henry's 2/3 field run against Tottenham for the goal in the game at Highbury this year.

It's always fun to think of that goal!

 

Re: Long RANT!

I agree that the game itself is far greater than the sum of it's parts. Using stats to tell the "story" of a game would be like looking at a very long string of "0's" and "1's" and trying to describe the picture encoded therein. However, I do think that statistical analysis is an important part of player evaluation.

There is more to the game than scoring and saving. The natures of the various positions or roles on a team are such that some players should rarely (if ever) participate in either of those events. If you want to evaluate a defender, shouldn't you look at his numbers of fouls conceded, tackles won, cards earned, or balls given away? When you're looking at a winger, do you consider his crossing ability? Wouldn't you like to see some numbers to give your opinion more strength?

Of course, satistics taken by themsleves aren't terribbly useful and they must be taken in context. Just look at the Wiltord debate around here. One side quotes his goal-scoring record and the other says it doesn't like the way he plays. Neither side has conceded defeat because both sides have valid points.

I pick my favorite players based on subjective qualities such as style and heart, but I love playing with statistics when I'm picking my fantasy team. I also use stats when one of the teams I support is rumored to be buying someone I don't know. Though they may not tell the whole story of the game, statistics certainly reveal important parts of it.

 

what about dummies. In the Arsenal Man city match, the first goal was scored by Bergkamp from a pass by Lauren. But, both Pires and Henry ran over the pass, drawing defenders and leaving Bergkamp wide open.
The same apply to Man Utd's game at Southampton, both of those goals had dummy runs.

 

What about them? There are scores of events within a game that either aren't or can't be counted. It doesn't mean that those events aren't important and it doesn't mean that the events which can be counted are less meaningful either. If you want to count dummies or backpasses or dives, feel free.

 

In the NHL it's one point for both a goal and an assist. In MLS, though, I think it's the way you described.

Henry will win the Player of the Year award hands down, regardless of how goals and assists as scored.

Assists are extremely important to track, as are some other statistics. revelation, I can tell you're really passionate about this, but I couldn't disagree with you more.

 

Re: Re: Henry's goals/assists

Why do you say they are "extremely important"? How do you answer the issues of who actually gets an assist? I'm interested in your side of the arguement.

 

Re: Re: Re: Henry's goals/assists

Soccer's a team game, that's why I think it's important to credit the player who helped make the goal. Thierry Henry-esque solo runs 3/4 the length of the field aren't very common (unless you're playing a weak opponent like, oh, Sp*rs, for example). Usually, when a goal is scored, there is one final telling ball that leads to the goal. And I understand that all assists aren't created equal, but all goals and all saves aren't, either.

As far as who gets the assist, it isn't rocket science. I agree that in the NHL that second assist is sometimes ridiculous (but sometimes not), so in soccer I'm all for just giving the assist to the guy who passed the ball to the guy who scored the goal. Yeah, some are going to be more worthy than others, but so what?

rev, I'm sure I'm not going to convince you, which is why I didn't try to in my original message.

(Full disclosure: When I used to watch baseball I was definitely a Bill James/sabermetric stats geek. I truly believe that analyzing stats intelligently leads to a more profound understanding of the game. So, obviously, I'm biased in that area.)

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Henry's goals/assists

Baseball is vastly different than football. Because of the way baseball is, the statement holds more true. I don't feel there are stats that can measure how good a football player is, especially when talking about mids and defenders. How do you account for a midfielder with good vision? Assists? Thats not a good stat if he is the person the starts the flow of attack and another 2 or 3 passes are made before a strike on goal is taken. How do you judge a good defender? By the number of tackles or a ratio of tackles to fouls? What if he is so good that he marks his man out of the game and the opposition doesn't really try to attack his side of the field? Yes, I know you said that "analyzing stats intelligently leads to a more profound understanding" but personally I think you miss the beauty and some other aspects of the game.

 

Lies, damn lies and statistics eh? As anyone who has witnessed my rants about certain Arsenal players on these boards (mainly the Wiltord debate alluded to above) I place absolutely no faith in statistics to tell me anything, except one, the number of goals scored. Ally this with the number of games played (if a player plays 2 games, you can't expect him to score 20 goals!!) and you have all the stats you need.

I don't need stats to tell me that Ryan Giggs can't cross a ball very well, I just have to look at him. And who might make more tackles, Tomas Repka or Sol Campbell? Campbell is playing in a top team and therefore won't have to make as many tackles because of the players in front and around him. So who's a better player? I know Beckham is a great crosser of the ball, I don't need his assist statistic to tell me that. So if I know all this without looking at reams of statistics, where is the value in them?

 

I think Stats are much more an North American way of looking at things. Most of us here are fans of other sports whether it is football (of the NFL kind), baseball, basketball or hockey - the big 4 N. American Sports. All of these are riddled with stats of every kind! I find that stats glorify the individual player and not the team aspect of the game which is why I love that football/soccer doesn't have much stats. Stats typically are used by the player agents who just love to get more money for their client based on his stats e.g. Barry Bonds should get more money than whoever b/c Bonds hits more home runs. Really, stats don't take account of the intangible aspects of the players game which can make a huge difference in a game. This becomes a problem when the players cares more about his stats b/c it will enable him to get more money when his contract is up. I remember when there was a story in hockey about Mario Lemieux (superstar for Pittsburgh) was pissed off when after a loss, one of his teammates didn't care about the loss and went straight to the stat sheet to check how many hits he had that game (I forget the player's name). Afterwards, Lemieux told the staff not to put up the stats and they got rid of that player soon afterwards. Hockey used to keep stats on Hits but they have dropped this and a few other stats. I think if you add more stats to football, you just reduce the beauty of the game and may even affect the game . . . I don't want to see players not passing or not staying in their role e.g. defensive midfielder b/c they want to score goals or make offensive plays. I don't even want to argue who's a better player based on stats (it's just a way to compare players on the lowest common denominator). Just b/c one scores more goals than another or one has more assists or tackles doesn't make him a better player. I remember reading an argument about who's the better striker Owen, Van Nisterlrooy or Henry and it was a fantastic argument b/c they didn't even touch upon how many goals they scored. The article didn't put the final say on who's better - it was left for us to decide based on the arguments - each player had his pros and cons.

Most North Americans don't like soccer/football b/c it's low scoring - that's just too bad b/c soccer/football is much more than that. Great Goals and plays are remembered even years have passed b/c they are precious. Can you remember and describe a great hockey, football or baseball play/homerun from year's past? You talk about Bergkamp's goal at NewCastle or his Holland goal at the 98 WC - everyone knows what you are talking about even if you aren't an Arsenal or Holland fan. You probably know who made the brilliant passes to get him the ball and stats didn't help you to remember that. I'm glad the rest of world hasn't decided to change soccer/football to cater to North American tastes. I have had footballitis since the mid'90s and that's b/c I watched lots of games and found that a lot of the games I watched provided me a difference experience. I enjoyed some 0-0 games as much as the 5-1 shellackings! Of course, I would rather see a goal but man, I think I pulled out a lot of hair during those close games . . .

 

Dwinkler, I appreciate you answering my question. Thanks. I agree that we will disagree on this topic but it was good to hear you arguements.

 

Michaec and Gooner, you guys make some good points. You are sure right about Giggs, he's a great dribbler, but his crosses are lousy. There are a few stats that I would like to see....

There are few stats that I think would tell a bit more about..On the Barcley Premiership Site they show minutes played/per goal. I think that is a very telling stat in it shows how many minutes a player is on the pitch before he scores. For example, the much maligned Diego Forlan is 9th in the league. I would dismiss the first 6 players, because they have not scored enough goals for this stat to matter, however for as much heat Forlan has taken, his strike rate is very good for the number of minutes played. I'd also like to see how many goals come from penalties versus open play. Penalties should be counted as a TEAM goal in my opinion and not awarded to the guy taking them. 75% of PK's are scored and often times because of the nature of the infractions, they never would have come close to resulting in a goal anyway.

Here's another one I'd like to see....how many free kicks a player scores on, versus how many free kick attempts (shots at the goal) that a player takes. I sometimes wonder how Carlos, even with his booming shot, would fare on this stat. He takes so many of the free kicks, but I would bet is scoring percentage is very ordinary.

minutes per goal
1 Aliadiere (Arsenal) 32
2 Riggott (Middlesbrough) 95
3 Facey (Bolton) 102
4 McBride (Everton) 123
5 Christie (Middlesbrough) 124
6 Cole (Chelsea) 126
7 Pires (Arsenal) 130
8 Henry (Arsenal) 133
9 Forlan (Man Utd) 145
10 Beattie (Southampton) 147

 

But even this stat can be misleading. Yeah, Henry, Pires, Forlan are up there, but look at the amount of chances they in a game because they're playing in great sides. Then think about someone like Malcolm Christie at Middlesbrough. He's not in the best team in the world and therefore won't get as many chances created for him. He won't score as many goals and his minutes per goal won't be as good. But when things aren't going his way, he doesn't sulk and give up, a la Henry last night against Ajax, he works his nuts off for the team. Now I'm not saying he's neccessarily as good a striker as Henry, but it just shows how statistics can misinterpret a player's value to the team.