Jump to content

Carew... Do we miss him, with Poll added


Laursen1977

Do we miss John Carew (who I am led to believe is bigger than me or you)  

251 members have voted

  1. 1. Do we miss John Carew (who I am led to believe is bigger than me or you)

    • Yes we do
      236
    • Course we don’t, not with Mr OG being our main striker and the like
      15


Recommended Posts

at villa we have the method of scoring from anywhere and the opposition we do not relay on a single player therefore losing Carew is not a big loss but losing another would be.

Sorry Bro...

I've read your post 7 times now, and I'm still not sure what you're trying to say...

Could you paraphrase for me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 starts from Carew, 12 goals.

12 games where he didn't start, 21 goals.

9 starts from Carew. 14 points.

12 games where he didn't start. 27 points.

Can people stop saying we miss him please.

Actually your totals are wrong, we've scored 23 goals in games where Carew didn't start (even more grist to your mill, there).

However, if your point is to prove that we dont need Carew, you really shouldn't include his two substitute appearances against Wigan and Blackburn in your list of "games in which we did so well without Carew" (which is what you have done).

After all, we scored 5 goals (including one by Carew himself) in the total of 81 minutes he was on the pitch in those two games.

It would therefore be fairer to compare games in which Carew played, and games in which he did not play, which gives us:

With Carew: 11 games, 19 goals, 20 points

Without Carew: 10 games, 16 goals, 21 points.

Conclusion: the statistics don't really prove anything one way or the other.

Looking at the evidence of what I've seen on the pitch, however, it's pretty clear to me we miss him. We've been getting good results despite him not being there, not because of it.

Since he arrived, he has a striking rate of about 2 in every 5 games, which is better than Agbonlahor or probably anyone else for quite a few years. He was also looking very good this season until his injury problems.

I think we need him back - or a very good striker to come in this transfer window - if we want to have a good chance of being in the top 4 at the end of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok.. stats can be manipulated to read WHATEVER you what them to.

For example...

Liverpool:

______________PL___W__D___L___F___PTS___Gls/Game___Pts/Game

Torres Plays____10___6___4___0___13___22___1.3________2.2

No Torres______11___7___3___1___22___24___2.0________2.18

According to 'STATISTICS' Liverpool score a LOT more when FERNANDO TORRES plays NO part in the game

Therefore, TORRES is TURD.

Some people need to get a grip about how stats work - particularly how they can be manipulated to prove what you want them to.

Please can someone show me how to do a proper table? Thanks.

Torres is a good player, but I don't think Liverpool miss him nearly as much when he's out as we miss Carew.

When I watched Liverpool tearing Newcastle apart over Christmas, they looked like they were doing fine without him. There could even be a case for saying their team play is better without him, however good he is, although I haven't seen enough of them overall to judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok.. stats can be manipulated to read WHATEVER you what them to.

For example...

Liverpool:

______________PL___W__D___L___F___PTS___Gls/Game___Pts/Game

Torres Plays____10___6___4___0___13___22___1.3________2.2

No Torres______11___7___3___1___22___24___2.0________2.18

According to 'STATISTICS' Liverpool score a LOT more when FERNANDO TORRES plays NO part in the game

Therefore, TORRES is TURD.

Some people need to get a grip about how stats work - particularly how they can be manipulated to prove what you want them to.

Please can someone show me how to do a proper table? Thanks.

So what you're saying is...

Liverpool get more points when Torres plays.

How is that similar to our massive points gains when Carew doesn't play?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the same logic we haven't missed Laursen recently either.

19 games vs 2 games.

Not a fair comparison.

12 vs 9 is fair.

You can't just pick A and B randomly and say because A has happened without B then we don't need B to achieve C. There are other factors as well.

Opposition. Their form. Other players form. Do we dominate in terms of possesion more or less without Carew than with him. And prove that what you come up with is related to Carews absence and nothing else. And even if you do prove it has been true, you also have to prove it will continue to be true in the future.

By exactly the same logic as you I can say that he would have been top scorer for us had he not been injured. I am pretty sure he has a better goal per minute played ratio than Gabby. At least in the league, but I can't be bothered to look it up.

I'm sure there is no coincidence that football clubs are being managed by experienced former players and not by mathematicians.

As I said with regards to opposition...

We lost to Boro, Stoke and Newcastle with Carew.

We got 8 points from Everton away, Arsenal home/away and Man Utd without him.

So opposition critique does Carew no favours.

Possession is irrelevant. The object of the game is to score more than the opposition, not to keep the ball more.

I think it's no coincidence that all managers use pro zone, statistics are very important in football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok.. stats can be manipulated to read WHATEVER you what them to.

For example...

Liverpool:

______________PL___W__D___L___F___PTS___Gls/Game___Pts/Game

Torres Plays____10___6___4___0___13___22___1.3________2.2

No Torres______11___7___3___1___22___24___2.0________2.18

According to 'STATISTICS' Liverpool score a LOT more when FERNANDO TORRES plays NO part in the game

Therefore, TORRES is TURD.

Some people need to get a grip about how stats work - particularly how they can be manipulated to prove what you want them to.

Please can someone show me how to do a proper table? Thanks.

So what you're saying is...

Liverpool get more points when Torres plays.

How is that similar to our massive points gains when Carew doesn't play?

As I said above, if you include Carew's two substitute appearances (in which we scored five times with him on the pitch), the stats are:

With Carew: 11 games, 19 goals, 20 points

Without Carew: 10 games, 16 goals, 21 points.

How is that a "massive points gain" when he doesn't play? OK, we got one point more from one fewer games, but that's hardly "massive", and hardly a significant statistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't start those games.

Barring the game immediately after he got injured, we're unbeaten without him despite facing Everton, Arsenal x 2, Man Utd...

With him we lost to Stoke, Newcastle and Chelsea. So 75% of our losses have come with him, despite him only starting 9 out of 21.

Our results are just obviously better without him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok.. stats can be manipulated to read WHATEVER you what them to.

For example...

Liverpool:

______________PL___W__D___L___F___PTS___Gls/Game___Pts/Game

Torres Plays____10___6___4___0___13___22___1.3________2.2

No Torres______11___7___3___1___22___24___2.0________2.18

According to 'STATISTICS' Liverpool score a LOT more when FERNANDO TORRES plays NO part in the game

Therefore, TORRES is TURD.

Some people need to get a grip about how stats work - particularly how they can be manipulated to prove what you want them to.

Please can someone show me how to do a proper table? Thanks.

So what you're saying is...

Liverpool get more points when Torres plays.

How is that similar to our massive points gains when Carew doesn't play?

You've missed the point of my post.

Stats can be manipulated to say whatever you want them to say. For example, based on the above stats:

Over the course of a season, Liverpool would score ( 1.3*38 ) =49 goals in a season if Torres featured in every game

They would, however, score ( 2.0*38 ) =76 Goals in a season if Torres did NOT feature.

Conclusion: Liverpool are a MUCH more potent strike force without Fernando Torres.

Which, in my opinion, is obviously bollocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't start those games.

Barring the game immediately after he got injured, we're unbeaten without him despite facing Everton, Arsenal x 2, Man Utd...

With him we lost to Stoke, Newcastle and Chelsea. So 75% of our losses have come with him, despite him only starting 9 out of 21.

Our results are just obviously better without him.

On the other hand, he has played in half of the games we have won this season (6 out of 12), despite only starting 9 out of 21.

What fun you can have with statistics...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the most obvious point is:

Gabby trained for 10 minutes all week and was unwell - but we had noone who could replace him.

Too damn right we miss Carew.

Oh, and here's another stat for you...

Gabby.. a goal every 208 minutes.

BigJC... a goal every 170 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't start those games.

Barring the game immediately after he got injured, we're unbeaten without him despite facing Everton, Arsenal x 2, Man Utd...

With him we lost to Stoke, Newcastle and Chelsea. So 75% of our losses have come with him, despite him only starting 9 out of 21.

Our results are just obviously better without him.

This is just getting silly now. You have no way of proving that the improvement in performance was BECAUSE of Carew's absence. Nor that we wouldn't have performed even better if he had remained fit and a regular member of the side.

As "Thug" has said, you can "prove" anything with statistics.

What you're not doing in this thread is telling us anything interesting about the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We desperately miss Carew. The balls not being held up and hence the balls flying straight back at us. The reason why we're getting dominated in terms of possesion. We've got such a will to win and good attacking players that we're getting away with it at the mo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, ALL that your stats show is that we have improved since we moved to 4-5-1/4-3-3 whatever you want to call it.

You COULD argue, that with JC's better goals/minute ratio, we would be even better if we dropped Gabby and played JC upfront.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, ALL that your stats show is that we have improved since we moved to 4-5-1/4-3-3 whatever you want to call it.

You COULD argue, that with JC's better goals/minute ratio, we would be even better if we dropped Gabby and played JC upfront.

Doubt it.

Gabby makes goals out of nothing.

Carew doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't be bothered right now - but I think the Stats will show that (according to Laursen77's statistical method) James Milner or Steve Sidwell are the best Villa players ... I might check them ones up later... and then FINALLY we can close those hate-threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely miss him. He'd have had a field day vs the Baggies with all those crosses coming in from corners and free kicks, just like he scored and had two off the post the last time we met them.

And then we probably wouldn't have had to bite our fingers off towards the end there. You can't provide a proper stat based on such a poor foundation.

Looks like you're in minority here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â