Ross Barkley

[andym]

11 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

That has made me actually laugh. Barkley is being singled out because he has been our worst performer in every game since he has back. In that period we have been dominated in the middle of the park every game. We can't keep the ball on the floor. We have conceded more goals through this period than any other in the season despite only playing 1 really good team in city. Newcastle dominated possession against us ffs. 

With him on the pitch we look like a clueless Bruce side where we pass around the back and make stupid decisions around the box but when it actually comes to advancing the ball we have to hoof it.

And traore being the bigger liability. I don't think we have conceded a single goal down the right hand side of the pitch in this run I think they have all come in from players getting free running through the middle. I suppose you could maybe say one of Lingards goals but that was because barkley didn't sprint back properly and didn't try to challenge on the edge of the six yard box. 

Both BBC and Sky have possession against Newcastle as 59/41 to us.

2 of Burnley's goals came down our right hand side

I agree about Barkley btw

Edited February 14, 2021 by andym

[MotoMkali]

4 minutes ago, andym said:

Both BBC and Sky have it as 59/41 to us.

2

Newcastle had 60% possession from 60 minutes on. They created a lot of decent chances. And barkley was non existent in that game. But either way 4 of the last 7 games opponents have had 59%+ possession which is not good enough really. 

2/8 is evidently not the issue then is it. 

Edited February 14, 2021 by MotoMkali

[andym]

1 minute ago, MotoMkali said:

Newcastle had 60% possession from 60 minutes on. They created a lot of decent chances. And barkley was non existent in that game. 

Moving the goal posts (as usual). 

Suddenly it's gone from 'Newcastle dominated us', to 'well they had more of the ball for one third of the game' (when we were 2-0 and comfortable).

And as for lots of decent chances -  they had 3 shots from 60 minutes onward (2 in the last minute), none of them were on target.

 

[Indigo]

15 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

Newcastle had 60% possession from 60 minutes on.

This has made me actually laugh. 

[KentVillan]

3 minutes ago, andym said:

Moving the goal posts (as usual). 

Suddenly it's gone from 'Newcastle dominated us', to 'well they had more of the ball for one third of the game' (when we were 2-0 and comfortable).

And as for lots of decent chances -  they had 3 shots from 60 minutes onward (2 in the last minute), none of them were on target.

 

It all makes sense if you imagine it's Anwar El Ghazi's younger brother or agent.

[Thug]

4 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Very interesting stat about Watkins goals. 

I would still say that even playing poorly, the opposition still have to think about him because of who he is. 

Yes very interesting indeed.

I say we test it out again by leaving Barkley out of the team for the next 10 matches and see how many Watkins gets.

[Zatman]

4 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Very interesting stat about Watkins goals. 

I would still say that even playing poorly, the opposition still have to think about him because of who he is. 

I think the Watkins stat is just a coincidence, Barkley has contributed to maybe one of them goals

[Thug]

Ok, so I was actually interested in this whole Watkins Barkley stat, so (yes very sad of me) I took the time to go through all the WhoScored? Stats to see whether there was any logic to this.

Here is a very interesting xcel sheet of our stats with and without Ross in the team.

Conclusions:

We score 8% more with him, but concede a whopping 160% more. 

We take 37.2% more shots, and concede 34.5% fewer shots WITHOUT him

We are in the opposition third 8% MORE and in our own third 13% LESS WITHOUT him.  

Ollie watkins has 31% MORE shots per game WITHOUT RB in the team.  

The final column shows the WhoScored team rating.  Again, we play better as a team (statistically) WITHOUT RB in the team, by a considerable margin.

We average 52.51% possession without him, and 45.93% with him (14% MORE)

We average 1.89 points per game without him, and 1.46 points per game with him.

Projected Season totals

RB Starts:       P 38  F 64  A 55  GD +9     Pts 55

RB is Out:       P 38  F 59  A 21  GD +38   Pts 71

 

 

Edited February 15, 2021 by Thug
Corrected an error on the table

[Tomaszk]

4 hours ago, MotoMkali said:

Newcastle dominated possession against us ffs.

[Villan_of_oz]

7 hours ago, Zatman said:

I think the Watkins stat is just a coincidence, Barkley has contributed to maybe one of them goals

Exactly, and the stats are there to prove that over a decent run of games we did fine without him.

[DCJonah]

6 hours ago, Thug said:

Ok, so I was actually interested in this whole Watkins Barkley stat, so (yes very sad of me) I took the time to go through all the WhoScored? Stats to see whether there was any logic to this.

Here is a very interesting xcel sheet of our stats with and without Ross in the team.

Conclusions:

We score 8% more with him, but concede a whopping 160% more. 

We take 37.2% more shots, and concede 34.5% fewer shots WITHOUT him

We are in the opposition third 8% MORE and in our own third 13% LESS WITHOUT him.  

Ollie watkins has 31% MORE shots per game WITHOUT RB in the team.  

The final column shows the WhoScored team rating.  Again, we play better as a team (statistically) WITHOUT RB in the team, by a considerable margin.

We average 52.51% possession without him, and 45.93% with him (14% MORE)

We average 1.89 points per game without him, and 1.46 points per game with him.

Projected Season totals

RB Starts:       P 38  F 64  A 55  GD +9     Pts 55

RB is Out:       P 38  F 59  A 21  GD +38   Pts 71

 

 

Appreciate the effort going into this but there are so many variables involved in each game to focus everything on Ross Barkley. 

[Thug]

7 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Appreciate the effort going into this but there are so many variables involved in each game to focus everything on Ross Barkley. 

Lol.

 

’so many variables involved in each game’ yet you are the one who posted that ‘interesting’ stat about all of Watkins goals coming when Barkley was on the pitch.

 

Make up your mind dude.

[jimmygreaves]

8 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Appreciate the effort going into this but there are so many variables involved in each game to focus everything on Ross Barkley. 

Ross Barkley is the crux of the conversation in this, the Ross Barkley thread..... and people are trying to demonstrate that we'd be better off without him in the starting line up.

[Demitri_C]

Im still on fence with him. One week can look excellent next he can look really poor.

Have to say the 30-40m being quoted is ridiculously over priced. 

At 20m i would take him as he can get better. But anything more no thanks

[DCJonah]

9 minutes ago, Thug said:

Lol.

 

’so many variables involved in each game’ yet you are the one who posted that ‘interesting’ stat about all of Watkins goals coming when Barkley was on the pitch.

 

Make up your mind dude.

I didn't spend hours researching it, I just shared the tweet and said it was interesting. I didn't say Ross Barkley is the sole reason that Ollie Watkins scored goals. 

[DCJonah]

10 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said:

Ross Barkley is the crux of the conversation in this, the Ross Barkley thread..... and people are trying to demonstrate that we'd be better off without him in the starting line up.

Yes I know its the Barkley thread. My point was in regards to all that research. To say its all about Ross Barkley in all those different areas that was mentioned ignores a lot of variables. 

I don't think Barkley is playing well and I think he will be dropped next game.  

[DCJonah]

3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Im still on fence with him. One week can look excellent next he can look really poor.

Have to say the 30-40m being quoted is ridiculously over priced. 

At 20m i would take him as he can get better. But anything more no thanks

He certainly hasn't done enough for Chelsea to demand big money. 

For the right price I'd still be interested. 

[Thug]

2 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I didn't spend hours researching it, I just shared the tweet and said it was interesting. I didn't say Ross Barkley is the sole reason that Ollie Watkins scored goals. 

No you didn’t.

But I find it interesting that you don’t find these stats interesting, whereas you find the other one interesting enough to post here.

[useless]

Since he joined I think our win/lose ratio is pretty similar with him in and out of the side. One thing he does have in his favor though is that our best wins of the season have come with him starting, those win being the ones against Liverpool, Leicester, and Arsenal home and away, as well as that he also scored the match winning goals against Leicester and Southampton.

 

[DCJonah]

Just now, Thug said:

No you didn’t.

But I find it interesting that you don’t find these stats interesting, whereas you find the other one interesting enough to post here.

I do, I literally thanked you for the effort you put in. 

I just think there are so many other variables involved to just say Barkley is the problem and the sole cause for all these negative stats. 

I'm in agreement though, that at this point he shouldn't be starting.