Am i being nit picky but come on?

Rangers_2001

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, as for some reason many 'official ticketers' on here are, but the question is why?
I was being sarcastic yes. I assume the BBC get their stats from somewhere and don’t just pluck them out the sky. We won, who cares what they have possession wise.
 

IndianaJones

Well-Known Member
That pic of defoe’s pen - any amateur on here strike a ball where your trailing foot carries your weight? Its not just him - seen loads of pics. Never understood it - i’ve always kicked with my trailing leg turned but square to the ground. Might explain why i never made it :D
 

Jase

Well-Known Member
We were so lucky to go through.

If it wisnae for our 33 shots at goal it would have finished 0-0.
 

DavieM

Well-Known Member
Clocked that at half time - it was 68% them vs 32% us and something like 22 shots at goal from us with them not having a single shot.

We must have had a bit more of the ball in the 2nd half.
 

The_Irrepressibles

Well-Known Member
I was being sarcastic yes. I assume the BBC get their stats from somewhere and don’t just pluck them out the sky. We won, who cares what they have possession wise.
Funny. I never mentiond the BBC, but I did mention OPTA in both my posts, who actually do produce the stats in question, but you crack on with your snide comments regardless. Clearly couldn't wait to stick your neck in that you didn't even read what you were replying to.

So it's clear you don't care about the stats being wrong but you do care so much about fellow fans discussing it that you come on here and try to be a smart arse. Pity you made an absolute kunt of it eh?
 
Last edited:

Surge

Member
The way I read that. We were pretty much under the cosh but managed to hit them on the counter attack 33 times and get a shot in.

Not exactly how I saw the game.

It's a fair point by the original poster. If we don't believe it is some kind of conspiracy with someone trying to wind us up, I would genuinely be interested to hear how they calculate possession stats if you can come up with a result like that for a games where the team with 60% possession barely left their own half of the field or strung three passes together in the entire game.

We all know that possession is a relatively meaningless stat, but a result like that must mean the method of calculating it is completely flawed to the point of being useless.
 

RaoulDuke11

Well-Known Member
:D

Tonight was perhaps the most one-sided posession i've ever seen.

I genuinely think it might have slipped into the low 90% for Rangers.
 

Surge

Member
Something written about how OPTA measures possession: https://trendster.ie/sport/the-confusing-world-of-the-possession-stat/

Opta, perhaps one of the biggest football analytic companies, calculated possession simply by using passes until 2017. The method had many flaws such as not accounting for who is in possession of the ball when it was in the air and resulted in them changing their approach.

In 2017 Opta created a new “framework” called a possession. This method counts how many possessions a team has in an entire game and dividing it by the total per game.

Opta defines a possession as starting when a player takes a controlled touch, this does not include headers or tackles and ending when a player no longer has or tries to have control of the ball. This includes interceptions, shots crosses into areas and set pieces.



With that definition with it simply dividing the number of "possessions" in a game, it would mean that if we have the ball for 90 seconds making 20 passes and they win the ball take a touch pass it to some one who loses the ball to us 5 seconds later, it would by 50/50 in terms of possession because we have both had 1 posession in that 95 second spell.
 

The_Irrepressibles

Well-Known Member
Something written about how OPTA measures possession: https://trendster.ie/sport/the-confusing-world-of-the-possession-stat/

Opta, perhaps one of the biggest football analytic companies, calculated possession simply by using passes until 2017. The method had many flaws such as not accounting for who is in possession of the ball when it was in the air and resulted in them changing their approach.

In 2017 Opta created a new “framework” called a possession. This method counts how many possessions a team has in an entire game and dividing it by the total per game.

Opta defines a possession as starting when a player takes a controlled touch, this does not include headers or tackles and ending when a player no longer has or tries to have control of the ball. This includes interceptions, shots crosses into areas and set pieces.



With that definition with it simply dividing the number of "possessions" in a game, it would mean that if we have the ball for 90 seconds making 20 passes and they win the ball take a touch pass it to some one who loses the ball to us 5 seconds later, it would by 50/50 in terms of possession because we have both had 1 posession in that 95 second spell.
My reading of that is that each individual player while in control of the ball is a single 'possession' for his team and not the entire teams move as you are suggesting. That article also states that there can be up to 5% difference due to different methods being used which doesn't stack up. The 'mistakes' with Rangers stats over the past year or so are way outside that threshold. This game is out by 30% at least. Probably nearer 40. It's just plain wrong just as many other games stats involving us jave been.
 
Last edited:
Top