Artetasgirl Posted January 16, 2009 Author Visiting Supporter Share Posted January 16, 2009 Speaking of shots on target, does anyone know the record for the lowest number of shots on target in a game? The recent Hull v Villa game must have come pretty close. At the end of the game I could only recall 1 shot on target for us (a rather weak effort by Barry) and none for them. If that is correct, it could only be beaten by a game with no shots on target at all. Not quite what you were asking but there was a stat on Talksport a while back where a team (think it was Man Utd) won a game without having a single shot on goal, the goal was obviously an Og. EDIT - Thinking about it they might have said there were no shots on target and the goal was scored in off the post ;-) They beat us a few years back 1 nil at Old Trafford with no shots on target because it was an own goal.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarjei Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 It's on target for me. I think Pelle has a good point. Whether it's on or off is only relevant to match stats, and to reflect a more true image of what has happened a shot that hit the woodwork should be counted as on target. I.e. in our 2-2 game against Arsenal shots on goal was 6-3, but that doesn't reflect what actually happened in the game unless you include the shots that hit the woodwork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 It's on target for me. I think Pelle has a good point. Whether it's on or off is only relevant to match stats, and to reflect a more true image of what has happened a shot that hit the woodwork should be counted as on target. I.e. in our 2-2 game against Arsenal shots on goal was 6-3, but that doesn't reflect what actually happened in the game unless you include the shots that hit the woodwork. :? the objective of the game is to get the ball between the 3 white sticks, not hit them. The "target" being to score a goal in the net, not hit the 3 white sticks. Quite simply therefore, hitting the white stciks is Off Target, unless you are specifically playing a different game, as on Soccer AM, such as the crossbar challenge. It's a complete no brainer, IMHO. The only grey are comes when you hit a white stick and in, but again this is clear, as the ball has eventually hit the target (the net) unimpeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddy Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Surely off target. An on target shot would go in if nobody intervenes. How a shot that isn't saved but doesn't go in can be classed as on target I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artetasgirl Posted January 16, 2009 Author Visiting Supporter Share Posted January 16, 2009 It's a complete no brainer, IMHO. That's your opinion, other people have theres and they say on target and they have given their reasons why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nath182 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 In my eyes the target is to score, if the ball is not deflected but hits the post or bar then its clearly not on target as it didnt hit the back of the net! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarjei Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 It's on target for me. I think Pelle has a good point. Whether it's on or off is only relevant to match stats, and to reflect a more true image of what has happened a shot that hit the woodwork should be counted as on target. I.e. in our 2-2 game against Arsenal shots on goal was 6-3, but that doesn't reflect what actually happened in the game unless you include the shots that hit the woodwork. :? the objective of the game is to get the ball between the 3 white sticks, not hit them. The "target" being to score a goal in the net, not hit the 3 white sticks. Quite simply therefore, hitting the white stciks is Off Target, unless you are specifically playing a different game, as on Soccer AM, such as the crossbar challenge. It's a complete no brainer, IMHO. The only grey are comes when you hit a white stick and in, but again this is clear, as the ball has eventually hit the target (the net) unimpeded. Of course, I agree with everything you said. I'm not arguing any of that, but you clearly didn't consider the point I was making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 It's a complete no brainer, IMHO. That's your opinion, other people have theres and they say on target and they have given their reasons why. as i said earlier. This thread could easily drive me insane. and as Rev points out: Off target. If it was on target then it would be a goal. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a bit of a numpty. You need to start a "does 1+1 = 2?" poll tomorrow hence my no brainer comment, which i stand by. I simply cannot comprehend how anyone can think otherwise. It's a bit like saying "Elephants are orange". But clearly a handful of people think hitting a post/bar is on target, so i'll just shake my head and move on .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artetasgirl Posted January 16, 2009 Author Visiting Supporter Share Posted January 16, 2009 hence my no brainer comment, which i stand by. I simply cannot comprehend how anyone can think otherwise. It's a bit like saying "Elephants are orange". But clearly a handful of people think hitting a post/bar is on target, so i'll just shake my head and move on .... It's not though. It's a matter of opinion as to what you deem as the target? Some people would say the target was the goal and the posts and bar make up the goal even though it's not scoring they count it as the target, other people (like you and me and most others) see the aim as to actually score a goal or at least make a keeper save it if it's going in. It's just a matter of opinion, you can't just dismiss someone elses if they are making fair points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarjei Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Sure if it's right then and there. You hit the ball and it bounces of the post. Of course it's not on target, but that is not relevant in my opinion. Match stats and shots on/off goal are reported to give people a fair idea of what has happened in the game. If you count shots that hit the woodwork as off target then the data will not reflect what actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artetasgirl Posted January 16, 2009 Author Visiting Supporter Share Posted January 16, 2009 In conclusion, news papers and the media should include (inc. hitting woodwork) on all stats from now on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Sure if it's right then and there. You hit the ball and it bounces of the post. Of course it's not on target, but that is not relevant in my opinion. Match stats and shots on/off goal are reported to give people a fair idea of what has happened in the game. If you count shots that hit the woodwork as off target then the data will not reflect what actually happened.Lets count shots that are just wide of the post as on target as well then! How can a shot not being on target being classed as off target not reflect what happened? That it was an inch away from the target is irrelevant, it was still off target. If you start counting shots as on target because they were close then you'll end up with vastly wrong ideas of what happened. Shots on target shows how many saves or blocks had to be made, adding hitting the post in there makes it a useless stat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkr Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Blatantly on target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomb2233 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 How the hell has this reached 7 pages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Off target, it has to be. You aim to get it in the back of the net, not hit the posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Sure if it's right then and there. You hit the ball and it bounces of the post. Of course it's not on target, but that is not relevant in my opinion. Match stats and shots on/off goal are reported to give people a fair idea of what has happened in the game. If you count shots that hit the woodwork as off target then the data will not reflect what actually happened.Lets count shots that are just wide of the post as on target as well then! How can a shot not being on target being classed as off target not reflect what happened? That it was an inch away from the target is irrelevant, it was still off target. If you start counting shots as on target because they were close then you'll end up with vastly wrong ideas of what happened. Shots on target shows how many saves or blocks had to be made, adding hitting the post in there makes it a useless stat. I absolutely agree. Counting the post as 'on target' makes no sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Sure if it's right then and there. You hit the ball and it bounces of the post. Of course it's not on target, but that is not relevant in my opinion. Match stats and shots on/off goal are reported to give people a fair idea of what has happened in the game. If you count shots that hit the woodwork as off target then the data will not reflect what actually happened.Lets count shots that are just wide of the post as on target as well then! How can a shot not being on target being classed as off target not reflect what happened? That it was an inch away from the target is irrelevant, it was still off target. If you start counting shots as on target because they were close then you'll end up with vastly wrong ideas of what happened. Shots on target shows how many saves or blocks had to be made, adding hitting the post in there makes it a useless stat. Absolutely wrong, IMO. Off target can be anything from, well, IYO, hitting the post from close range to having a shot from 30 yards hitting row Z above the corner flag. So when you read the stats from a game and read off target you really don't know how close a team was to score, do you? There is never an exact way to measure that but if you put the posts and bars as on target the picture gets a bit more accurate. They are at least a part of the goal. The goal is the target and if I hit the post I hit the goal so on target. If I hit the keeper it's on target but not a goal anyway so really doesn't matter. What matters are the goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanky Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Off target for me if it hasn't gone in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Absolutely wrong, IMO. Off target can be anything from, well, IYO, hitting the post from close range to having a shot from 30 yards hitting row Z above the corner flag. So when you read the stats from a game and read off target you really don't know how close a team was to score, do you? There is never an exact way to measure that but if you put the posts and bars as on target the picture gets a bit more accurate. They are at least a part of the goal. The goal is the target and if I hit the post I hit the goal so on target. If I hit the keeper it's on target but not a goal anyway so really doesn't matter. What matters are the goals. There's an old phrase we use, "a miss is as good as a mile". It doesn't matter if you missed by an inch, a mile, or 10km, you still missed. Classing any miss (even if it hit the post) as on target doesn't tell you how close they came to scoring either, it just makes the stat wrong. Stats aren't meant to give an indication of what exactly happened, they're meant to give a summary in some FACTS, why anyone would wants to take these facts and add wrong information into them so they cease to be facts I don't know. The goal posts are not part of the goal, they are part of the goal structure, two different things. As has been said before, the target is not to hit them, but to get the ball between them, if you hit them you missed the target, just like if you're aiming for treble twenty in darts and somehow manage to embed the dart in the wire you missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I can't believe 26 people believe hitting the woodwork is on target..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts