Barry Bannan

[fightoffyour]

I can't be bothered reading all this, but I just thought I'd add: Bannan is crap at taking corners, and no amount of statistics is going to make be believe otherwise.

[Skruff]

How many of Bannans corners has resulted in a "shot on target" or shot at goal?

[Con]

How many of Bannans corners has resulted in a "shot on target" or shot at goal?

 

That's what a key pass is (numbers = %):

 

 

26% of Bannan's corners, 24% of Westwood's corners directly result in a shot at goal - and assist, were the chance converted. Some corners are flicked on, and nodded down for other players to shoot. This would come under "Accurate" corner, as would balls that appear to be too high and skim off player's head (or the player timed his jump wrong).

Edited May 1, 2013 by Con

[ArteSuave]

And a massively overhit corner that is collected on the opposite touchline by our player is "accurate" as is an underhit one that our player manages to get a toe on in front of the first man.

Also a floated corner that arrives into the headable zone (<8ft) 15 yards out with little horizontal velocity and is impressively won by Benteke but even he can only muster a tame header to the keeper is "key".

Where as a whipped, dipping corner that has a good amount of horizontal velocity and is flicked away by their defender on the edge of his six yard box is "failed".

[Con]

And a massively overhit corner that is collected on the opposite touchline by our player is "accurate" as is an underhit one that our player manages to get a toe on in front of the first man.

 

 

There are no "accurate" corners like that on Bannan's record. Double check yourself. If there were, I'd file it under "Fail". 

 

 

 

 

Also a floated corner that arrives into the headable zone (<8ft) 15 yards out with little horizontal velocity and is impressively won by Benteke but even he can only muster a tame header to the keeper is "key".

Where as a whipped, dipping corner that has a good amount of horizontal velocity and is flicked away by their defender on the edge of his six yard box is "failed".

 

 

Yes, and no I don't have statistics for floaters vs whipped.

 

This is an irrelevant point anyway, since the manager decides on the corner taking and they are practised on the training ground.

 

The idea all Bannan's corners were "floaters" that end with tame headers to the keeper is a myth. I can remember he whipped one in for Baker against Southampton, who hit the crossbar. He whipped one in for Benteke against Reading, who had his header cleared off the line.

 

His corners were varied.

[dudevillaisnice]

Still convinced Con is somehow related to Bannan.. or is Bannan.

[villa-revolution]

Still convinced Con is somehow related to Bannan.. or is Bannan.

 

Wasn't that Bancon on the bench the other night?

[Con]

Convinced? You guys are completely irrational.

 

You won't accept statistical evidence unless it supports your pre-held beliefs, and you can't believe anyone who posts anything that goes against your opinion is not either Bannan, related to him, or paid by him (not his agent). 

 

I'm just a fan who is posting some stats. It's hilarious. I'm not even arguing - currently - he should be in the first XI.

 

I'm as neutral as it's possible to be, saying what the stats tell us, and still you think I must have some agenda.

 

Still convinced Con is somehow related to Bannan.. or is Bannan.

 

Wasn't that Bancon on the bench the other night?

 

 

That knocks the theory Bannan wouldn't be seen again because of some supposed Instagram comment (which might have been fake) out of the ballpark.

[Dodgyknees]

Convinced? You guys are completely irrational.

 

You won't accept statistical evidence unless it supports your pre-held beliefs, and you can't believe anyone who posts anything that goes against your opinion is not either Bannan, related to him, or paid by him (not his agent). 

 

I'm just a fan who is posting some stats. It's hilarious. I'm not even arguing - currently - he should be in the first XI.

 

I'm as neutral as it's possible to be, saying what the stats tell us, and still you think I must have some agenda.

 

Still convinced Con is somehow related to Bannan.. or is Bannan.

 

Wasn't that Bancon on the bench the other night?

 

 

That knocks the theory Bannan wouldn't be seen again because of some supposed Instagram comment (which might have been fake) out of the ballpark.

 

Well it is easy to overlook him.

 

and for crying out loud Con, do I have to return and shove those stats into your ears again?

 

I'll do this so you can understand.

 

Mr Tennis player, plays it safe.

His serves are soft and simple

This means he gets 100%

His serves are never over-hit

He can put them on a dimple

 

But Mr Tennis player B

Well he really gets them in

Full of power, he wins the points

can you see him grin?

 

It's really simple, and not that hard

to hit a simple ball

But like the tennis players who play this game

they never win **** all

[villa-revolution]

 

Convinced? You guys are completely irrational.

 

You won't accept statistical evidence unless it supports your pre-held beliefs, and you can't believe anyone who posts anything that goes against your opinion is not either Bannan, related to him, or paid by him (not his agent). 

 

I'm just a fan who is posting some stats. It's hilarious. I'm not even arguing - currently - he should be in the first XI.

 

I'm as neutral as it's possible to be, saying what the stats tell us, and still you think I must have some agenda.

 

Still convinced Con is somehow related to Bannan.. or is Bannan.

 

Wasn't that Bancon on the bench the other night?

 

 

That knocks the theory Bannan wouldn't be seen again because of some supposed Instagram comment (which might have been fake) out of the ballpark.

 

Well it is easy to overlook him.

 

and for crying out loud Con, do I have to return and shove those stats into your ears again?

 

I'll do this so you can understand.

 

Mr Tennis player, plays it safe.

His serves are soft and simple

This means he gets 100%

His serves are never over-hit

He can put them on a dimple

 

But Mr Tennis player B

Well he really gets them in

Full of power, he wins the points

can you see him grin?

 

It's really simple, and not that hard

to hit a simple ball

But like the tennis players who play this game

they never win **** all

 

 

Ha ha ha! Are you Ellis in disguise dodgy knees?     & if not that's one hell of a backhander you have there.

 

Sorry Con but I make that game, set & Match To Mr Knees! New balls please.

 

Any one for Tennis? l

[Swerbs]

I'm pretty sure Bannan was on the bench because KEA was injured/ill.

[Raymond]

And a massively overhit corner that is collected on the opposite touchline by our player is "accurate" as is an underhit one that our player manages to get a toe on in front of the first man.

There are no "accurate" corners like that on Bannan's record. Double check yourself. If there were, I'd file it under "Fail".

First of all, stop talking shit Con. You did not watch all the crosses so you did not "file" it anywhere. Someone at whoscored did.

Secondly, while I disagree with Con about the validity of the key pass stat, it is probably as good as we can do but is still inherently flawed, his basic premise is correct.

Assists do not tell the story. To have an assist, two things have to happen. The first is player A has to create a chance. The second is player B has to put away the chance.

If player A creates a chance that player B then fails to convert, then no assist is given. So if you only look at assists you are penalizing player A for the inability of player B. For this reason, the idea behind the key pass stat is much more telling that assists.

And so, to Con's point, Westwood having 2 assists with fewer "good" corners than Bannan is just a statistical anomaly.

Now if the key pass stat actually reflects a good, goal scoring chance is another matter all together......

[Con]

dodgyknees, I've responded to that comment 100s of times.

 

First, not all his corners were floated. Unfortunately I don't have stats for that. My guess is, like you guys' estimate of his other stats, you're completely wrong. I remember a variety of corners. Whipped in and floated. I remember Westwood floating corners. This leads to point 2.

 

Second, corners and set pieces are practised on the training ground. The set piece taker doesn't decide "on a whim" what to do. The manager and coach decide what tactics, what kind of ball, is delivered at corners. The set piece taker is chosen not because of what kind of ball they are going to kick - that is already decided - but because they are consistent at delivering the kind of kick they want - floated, whipped, whatever.

 

This is not hard to understand. I keep repeating it. I keep getting back fancy analogies about tennis when a simple understanding of football - training, manager's role in team's play - answers the question. Maybe you don't want the question answered?

 

 

I'm guessing KEA was out due to injury/illness, but Lambert could have bought in Ireland over Bannan. He brought in Bannan, which was a statement of his support for him.

[villa-revolution]

 

 

And a massively overhit corner that is collected on the opposite touchline by our player is "accurate" as is an underhit one that our player manages to get a toe on in front of the first man.

There are no "accurate" corners like that on Bannan's record. Double check yourself. If there were, I'd file it under "Fail".

 

First of all, stop talking shit Con. You did not watch all the crosses so you did not "file" it anywhere. Someone at whoscored did.

Secondly, while I disagree with Con about the validity of the key pass stat, it is probably as good as we can do but is still inherently flawed, his basic premise is correct.

Assists do not tell the story. To have an assist, two things have to happen. The first is player A has to create a chance. The second is player B has to put away the chance.

If player A creates a chance that player B then fails to convert, then no assist is given. So if you only look at assists you are penalizing player A for the inability of player B. For this reason, the idea behind the key pass stat is much more telling that assists.

And so, to Con's point, Westwood having 2 assists with fewer "good" corners than Bannan is just a statistical anomaly.

Now if the key pass stat actually reflects a good, goal scoring chance is another matter all together......

 

 

So the majority of Bannan's corners are down to the inability of the rest of the team?

 

I'm not buying into that.

 

The only person liable to get on the end of a Bannan corner is the man on the moon & he's still busy at the moment trying to retrieve Heskeys shots from last season..

[Con]

First of all, you lot expected the statistics to show Westwood's corner kicks were much better and more reliable than Bannan's.

 

Actually, I've proven - with the Squawka.com record - that Bannan's kicks are not only more reliable they are on average better (more potential assists).

 

Now this didn't have to happen. I could have researched it and found confirmation for your thesis that Bannan was worse than Westwood. I found the opposite.

 

Now you're running around like headless chickens trying to find a reason why those stats have to be wrong.

[villa-revolution]

First of all, you lot expected the statistics to show Westwood's corner kicks were much better and more reliable than Bannan's.

 

Actually, I've proven - with the Squawka.com record - that Bannan's kicks are not only more reliable they are on average better (more potential assists).

 

Now this didn't have to happen. I could have researched it and found confirmation for your thesis that Bannan was worse than Westwood. I found the opposite.

 

Now you're running around like headless chickens trying to find a reason why those stats have to be wrong.

 

Con, why are you trying to deny the 2 goals from Westwoods corners. They are statistics. You cannot have your cake & eat it.

 

Also, the only headless chicken that I am aware of is Barry Bannan with his continual crap floaty corners.

 

I believe, though genuine, you are living in denial as surely nobody could become so obsessed or delusional about a fact that is staring them in the face.

 

Right now, Barry Bannan is a crap footballer, a crap corner taker & a total liability & until I physically see any improvement nothing will change my mind.

[AshVilla]

I'm pretty sure Bannan was on the bench because KEA was injured/ill.

 

Yes Bannan would have been at the bar getting pissed otherwise

[PauloBarnesi]

Bannan isn’t a crap footballer. Bannan’s problem is that he’s an ok footballer, who believes that he’s better than he is, and doesn’t work hard enough. For a diminutive scotsman you would think he would have looked at other diminutive Scottish players and tried to work a little harder. His good contributions are swamped by his generally couldn’t care too much attitude. He could have a reasonable career, but one fears he won’t

[Dodgyknees]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4909641/Christian-Benteke-is-the-best-header-of-a-ball-in-Europe-sat-official-statistics.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter'>So with Benteke the best target man in Europe

 

How come the best crosser in England,cannot put the ball on his head?

 

Because the stats are FLAWED and Bannan's are all about percentages (I bet he has one area, the only area he can put the ball), where-as people like Westwood (who have the gift and ability to find a player from a corner) can set up goals - because they have the ability to put the ball into dangerous areas.

[Dodgyknees]

Bannan isn’t a crap footballer. Bannan’s problem is that he’s an ok footballer, who believes that he’s better than he is, and doesn’t work hard enough. For a diminutive scotsman you would think he would have looked at other diminutive Scottish players and tried to work a little harder. His good contributions are swamped by his generally couldn’t care too much attitude. He could have a reasonable career, but one fears he won’t

 

Agreed. He is an ok footballer and based on our squad, would be good back-up. Of course, if we can buy players who have an attacking impact on a regular basis, assists etc, then Bannan is one of those I would sell. But for now he is an ok back up.