Small hill you'll die on - football discourse

Brightonian

Full Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
14,490
Location
Juanderlust
What's something about the way we discuss football, online or out and about, that drives you crazy? Let's get petty.



Mine is 'radar charts'. These feckers:

Screenshot-2026-02-22.png


They're a terrible visualisation tool for most types of data, and footballer performance is definitely one of them. The arrangement of the stats around the circular axis is arbitrary - adjacent stats not necessarily related - and so the volumes of the shapes don't correspond to any actual data. Reorder the stats on the axis and the shape and volume change completely.

They should only ever be used for two things in footballer performance data:
  • To show in a simple, general sense that two (or at most three) players are quite similar, or quite different.
  • To show in a simple, general sense that a player is all-round (fairly rounded shape created) or has clear strengths and weaknesses (spiky shape).
Any more specific analysis of a player's individual performance stats or comparison of multiple players is much better off using a normal bar chart or some other visualisation.

See here for someone who actually knows what they're talking about explaining the limitations of radar charts.


So what's your own personal football chat beef?
 
Not sure if these hills are small enough but here goes:

1. xG (and other x-stats) is shit and often says very little, even over the course of many games

2. If you don't accept risk in the form of dribbling, tricky passes or shots from outside the box, then you should watch another sport

3. There is no perfectly outlined career ladder for managers. Claiming that someone isn't good enough based on their resume alone, is stupid.

4. Players who aren't good at their primary task are useless. Goalkeepers must save, defenders must defend, creators must create and attackers must score. It's not rocket science. I don't care how brilliant the passing of your defender or goalkeeper is.

I'll think of more later.
 
Last edited:
Scandi Red said:
Not sure if these hills are small enough but here goes:

3. There is no perfectly outlined career ladder for managers. Claiming that someone isn't good enough based on their resume alone, is stupid.
Click to expand...
This, so much of this.

A good coach is a good coach, everything else is bullshit.
 
Scandi Red said:
Not sure if these hills are small enough but here goes:

1. xG (and other x-stats) is shit and often says very little, even over the course of many games

2. If you don't accept risk in the form of dribbling, tricky passes or shoots from outside the box, then you should watch another sport

3. There is no perfectly outlined career ladder for managers. Claiming that someone isn't good enough based on their resume alone, is stupid.

4. Players who aren't good at their primary task are useless. Goalkeepers must save, defenders must defend, creators must create and attackers must score. It's not rocket science. I don't care how brilliant the passing of your defender or goalkeeper is.

I'll think of more later.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard people complain about Bruno’s pass completion rate before… he’s regularly attempting 40 yard, defence splitting passes that no one else on the pitch could see. That might not always come off, but it’s vastly better than Joe Allen knocking it 10 yards sideways and backwards on repeat.

But more generally the stat-ification of football. It’s given idiots some quantifiables that they don’t really understand, yet wield them anyway. Football turned from poetry into maths.
 
Marco Reus was better than both Bale and Hazard.

Some Premier League players from the early to mid 2010's, eg: Hazard, Yaya, Kompany are overrated because the level of the EPL was at its lowest nice the 90s. It wasn't at the level of La Liga and there were years the BL was better. They are overrated because their performances in a weak EPL were great but were consistently poor in Europe.
 
hasanejaz88 said:
Marco Reus was better than both Bale and Hazard.

Some Premier League players from the early to mid 2010's, eg: Hazard, Yaya, Kompany are overrated because the level of the EPL was at its lowest nice the 90s. It wasn't at the level of La Liga and there were years the BL was better. They are overrated because their performances in a weak EPL were great but were consistently poor in Europe.
Click to expand...
Guess I’m killing you atop that hill. Bale absolutely shits all over him. And I quite liked Reus. Was always gutted when he got hurt.
 
hasanejaz88 said:
Marco Reus was better than both Bale and Hazard.

Some Premier League players from the early to mid 2010's, eg: Hazard, Yaya, Kompany are overrated because the level of the EPL was at its lowest nice the 90s. It wasn't at the level of La Liga and there were years the BL was better. They are overrated because their performances in a weak EPL were great but were consistently poor in Europe.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I really like Reus but no.
 
People who post on football forums are arrogant pricks who don't know half of what they think they know.
 
Brightonian said:
What's something about the way we discuss football, online or out and about, that drives you crazy? Let's get petty.



Mine is 'radar charts'. These feckers:

Screenshot-2026-02-22.png


They're a terrible visualisation tool for most types of data, and footballer performance is definitely one of them. The arrangement of the stats around the circular axis is arbitrary - adjacent stats not necessarily related - and so the volumes of the shapes don't correspond to any actual data. Reorder the stats on the axis and the shape and volume change completely.

They should only ever be used for two things in footballer performance data:
  • To show in a simple, general sense that two (or at most three) players are quite similar, or quite different.
  • To show in a simple, general sense that a player is all-round (fairly rounded shape created) or has clear strengths and weaknesses (spiky shape).
Any more specific analysis of a player's individual performance stats or comparison of multiple players is much better off using a normal bar chart or some other visualisation.

See here for someone who actually knows what they're talking about explaining the limitations of radar charts.


So what's your own personal football chat beef?
Click to expand...
These charts were on the Fifa Manager games if anyone ever played them.
 
IrwinwasbetterthanCarlos said:
I’ve heard people complain about Bruno’s pass completion rate before… he’s regularly attempting 40 yard, defence splitting passes that no one else on the pitch could see. That might not always come off, but it’s vastly better than Joe Allen knocking it 10 yards sideways and backwards on repeat.

But more generally the stat-ification of football. It’s given idiots some quantifiables that they don’t really understand, yet wield them anyway. Football turned from poetry into maths.
Click to expand...
Why can there be nothing in between? Why is it either Bruno Fernandes or Burnley's Josh Cullen? Can you not be a good passer without doing a 40 yard pass that works out once out of 15 times?
 
hasanejaz88 said:
Marco Reus was better than both Bale and Hazard.

Some Premier League players from the early to mid 2010's, eg: Hazard, Yaya, Kompany are overrated because the level of the EPL was at its lowest nice the 90s. It wasn't at the level of La Liga and there were years the BL was better. They are overrated because their performances in a weak EPL were great but were consistently poor in Europe.
Click to expand...
Yaya was a force in the league when United and Chelsea reached CL finals in 2011 and 2012. Same for Kompany. Do think the league went through some barren years afterwards, but both showed they're elite players while the competition was still strong
 
Chances Created is a largely pointless statistic for evaluating the actual creative impact of a player.

It is as much about the decision of the recipient of the ball to shoot, which can largely be a poor decision, than it is about the passer creating anything of actual quality. It also skews so much for corners etc where the chance created could be a header ballooning over the bar etc
 
Scandi Red said:
4. Players who aren't good at their primary task are useless. Goalkeepers must save, defenders must defend, creators must create and attackers must score. It's not rocket science. I don't care how brilliant the passing of your defender or goalkeeper is.
Click to expand...
........Trent Alexander Arnold has left the chat
 
hasanejaz88 said:
Marco Reus was better than both Bale and Hazard.

Some Premier League players from the early to mid 2010's, eg: Hazard, Yaya, Kompany are overrated because the level of the EPL was at its lowest nice the 90s. It wasn't at the level of La Liga and there were years the BL was better. They are overrated because their performances in a weak EPL were great but were consistently poor in Europe.
Click to expand...

Disagree heavily on Bale but Hazard being overrated is my hill. He always gets talked about as if he was one of the best players the Prem has ever seen. I don't think he was.
 
IrwinwasbetterthanCarlos said:
I’ve heard people complain about Bruno’s pass completion rate before… he’s regularly attempting 40 yard, defence splitting passes that no one else on the pitch could see. That might not always come off, but it’s vastly better than Joe Allen knocking it 10 yards sideways and backwards on repeat.

But more generally the stat-ification of football. It’s given idiots some quantifiables that they don’t really understand, yet wield them anyway. Football turned from poetry into maths.
Click to expand...

The nuanced take on Bruno criticises him for wasteful passing at the wrong time. Sometimes when defending a lead or under the kosh against Liverpool or City the sideways pass that keeps possession is a better choice than turning the ball over again.
 
Ou i have a few.
  1. Being a good high pressing side doesn't make you a good team and means feck all for how being able to win titles. Multiple ways to play football, multiple ways to win. It's not modern football and the other one archaic football or something. Give me normal football all day every day. Take risks in possession to make things happen, and then defend cautiously and safely. Better to watch, encourages individualism and creativity and provides true greatness with players.
  2. Point 1 ties into this - stop trying to be a genius as a manager who reinvents the game. So refreshing having Carrick now who is logically adapting to his players and giving them the right platform to shine, rather than try something crazy and stubbornly stick to that in the face of all evidence. Too many managers think they can be the next Pep, when in reality, he is a huge outlier and one of the only truly successful managers at trying to do crazy things like that.
  3. VAR is shit, though most would agree. Keep semi auto offside and goal line tech, scrap the rest
  4. As someone who used to care a lot more about xG, yeah most of it is not worth even a fraction of the attention it gets. There is use to it and good trends will show over time, but also... Large weaknesses in it. If you look shot by shot at the ratings chances get, a large amount of them are head scratching even with the most sophisticated ones. It's a model so it'll have weaknesses, but I feel like the values on headers and chances from crossing set pieces are genuinely all over the place. Nowhere near accurate and just worth throwing away. Also, chances that don't end in a shot obviously aren't represented (and those that say they do represent it are way too arbitrary and not worth paying attention to), and then also using West Ham as an example where Wilson's chance late on was clearly offside but the refs just played advantage because it was saved so the numbers count. Obviously dumb.
 
Mario Gotze was better than Ronaldo and Messi.

A lot La Liga of the players from the 2010s are overrated because of the level of a lot of the teams in that league or something
 
Early 2010s is an extremely overrated period.
 
Thread title should be changed to "Mental opinions you have about German football players".
 
More football fans enjoy supporting their team, and the sport in general, a lot less than they'd care to admit.
 
IrwinwasbetterthanCarlos said:
I’ve heard people complain about Bruno’s pass completion rate before… he’s regularly attempting 40 yard, defence splitting passes that no one else on the pitch could see. That might not always come off, but it’s vastly better than Joe Allen knocking it 10 yards sideways and backwards on repeat.

But more generally the stat-ification of football. It’s given idiots some quantifiables that they don’t really understand, yet wield them anyway. Football turned from poetry into maths.
Click to expand...
Poetry into maths. Hell yes. I want the beautiful game with mavericks please.
 
Imo toure and kompany struggled in Europe, like city was because mancini was not very good in the cl. He left inter because of this. If they had mourinho or guardiola in their prime they may have done better. I think they are great players. Pellegrini was not consistently great in Europe either. He did excellent in the league but struggled in cl at madrid too.
 
My hill to die on is that the avalanche of stats we now get give too many fans the false impression that what they contribute to discussion is interesting. It's become like that scene out of the Office where David Brent is trying to show off to that guy who said he won a few Gold Runs on Blockbusters. Just awkwardly siding over to people discussing the match like human beings based on things they seen: "Who? Him? Facts are he's got 84% passing accuracy in the previous 6 games. More assists with his left foot this season than any other player in the top 6..."

Stats are meaningless trivia. A player can be awful and get an assist. They can be terrible and get a goal. They can give away the ball with every single pass and still win 100% of aerial battles. They can cover more ground on the field than any other player on the pitch and screw up every time he gets the ball. He can score a penalty but miss 6 clear chances in open play in a game his team loses 3-1 - yet all that matters to the stat freaks is that penalty is a "goal scored, which is a stat so that's good, hummm?"

Dreadful stuff
 
Golden goal was great.

Batigol was the best all round CF ever. R9 might well have been the best ever, but his peak was too short and he only really has one good season in the hardest league of that time before he really packed in his knee.
 
A bunch of the new terms brought into football, from the NFL or something, are a load of shite.

Counter attack called something else.
Low-block (ok it existed, but it's basically everywhere now).
There's more.

I think VAR also makes the game more Americanized re stoppages and overly-tactical. In the sense of no-game-play and adjust with a "stopped clock" (well, it gets added on). I don't like it. Gary Linekar just said much the same and he's right.
 
"How Man Utd dominated Arsenal with this tactical change" tactical breakdown videos.

All the same guys with the same types of video, yet, somehow all of them with contrasting analysis to one another, thus arriving at the conclusion that none of them know why we beat Arsenal. :lol:
 
Pro Evo has always been a better football game than FIFA, except for a brief period from 2010 to 2013/4. It's criminal it doesn't get the respect it deserves
 
OL29 said:
They should bring back the away goal rule.
Click to expand...
That's a mound, and we all sit there and enjoy our picnics together. The hill is Golden Goals in international tournaments and it's got a fecking great view.
 
neverdie said:
A bunch of the new terms brought into football, from the NFL or something, are a load of shite.

Counter attack called something else.
Low-block (ok it existed, but it's basically everywhere now).
There's more.

I think VAR also makes the game more Americanized re stoppages and overly-tactical. In the sense of no-game-play and adjust with a "stopped clock" (well, it gets added on). I don't like it. Gary Linekar just said much the same and he's right.
Click to expand...
Bit of a tragic fact for you, all of the stoppages in play across the PL (and likely other leagues) have been being timed for the last couple of seasons with adverts in mind. Almost no club takes a corner in less than thirty seconds for example + there are on average ~10 corners a game = 5 mins of ads to be monetised.
 
Inverted wingers are a waste of talent and boring to watch. Having a left footed LW and a right footed RW was fine for years and years till some hipster decided to change it up.
 
Having more possession of the ball doesnt mean you're the more dominant team. It should be chances per time of possession.

And you can be the more dominant team without the ball if you stop them from creating any chances.

Last, passing the ball around just to maintain possession is defensive football. Ala LVG
 
Red Royal said:
Inverted wingers are a waste of talent and boring to watch. Having a left footed LW and a right footed RW was fine for years and years till some hipster decided to change it up.
Click to expand...
Agree. It has the highest potential I'd say, where if you have a truly great player then it's a benefit like for Ronaldo, Messi, Salah, Lamine Yamal. For too many others it forces you to play a certain way and narrows your play/slows things down for your CF which just probably isn't worth it compared to a similar level player playing on their proper side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.