Cooper - OUT

[murphy]

8 minutes ago, Mon.is.a.god said:

I raise my previous point once again. Those same stats say Arsenal are over performing by five places. Are they in big trouble too?

The key is “if”. You’re daydreaming something which hasn’t actually happened. Why do you live in fear?

 

I just find it bizarre that you can find a negative in a positive. Doom merchant!

No, it has happened.  The 'if' is if we don't improve, ie we stay the same...

 

And again, it is not remotely positive to be in an inflated position.

 

This is hard work 

[ClaphamFox]

47 minutes ago, murphy said:

Really?  Don't you understand it?

 

They call it over-performing because we are in a higher position than our performances warrant.  It is not a positive thing, it means we've been lucky and we are in a false position.   If we don't improve, when we revert to mean the stats say we will be second bottom.  

"When?!"

 

Your absolute trust in the reliability of xG/xGA stats is akin to a form of religious faith. Yet I've yet to see any evidence that they are so reliable that mean reversion is inevitable over the course of a season. Indeed, the understat data discussed above suggest that xG/xGA stats are actually pretty unreliable at predicting how many points a team will end up with (here's the link again to save you from scrolling: https://understat.com/league/EPL/2023).

 

At the risk of repeating myself, xG and xGA stats are useful in showing the quality of chances teams create and concede, but they are not even close to being a perfect predictor of outcomes over the course of a season. If they were, all teams would end up with points totals roughly in line with their xPts, but that does not typically happen. Last season the bottom five teams all significantly underperformed their xPts, which implies they were inefficient at taking their chances and defending against opposition chances. The same thing happened in our relegation season, when the x stats say that we should have ended up with 45 points (ie, comfortably mid-table) but somehow ended up with 11 points less and went down. Does that mean that poor old Brendan was just unlucky? Should we send a bunch of flowers and a crate of fake tanning lotion up to Celtic Park by way of an apology for all being so mean about him?

 

I'm genuinely not a fan of Cooper. He's a tactically limited coach who appears scarred by his first few months in the PL with Forest and now defaults to conservative team selections and tactics, which make for a pain spectacle. He's also too slow to react and when he does react, he doesn't always get it right. But our performances so far suggest that he might just be quite good at setting the team up in a way that means we always remain in games and are a bit more efficient and attacking and defending than the x stats show. 

 

Anyway, fairly soon this discussion will be settled one way or another: either this mean reversion that some folk believe in so much will kick in and we'll be in the relegation zone (in which case Cooper will be gone), or we'll carry on grinding out results that the stats suggest we don't deserve and Cooper will go nowhere. I'm not ruling out the latter.

 

[murphy]

4 minutes ago, cropstonfox said:

Well defended 2nd half.Defending  well is part of the game.

All of the back four have improved game by game..solid foundations.

Cooper in!

Disagree.  We defended well in the first half when we restricted the chances Bournemouth had by actually having threat, possession and territory ourselves.

 

All of their chances, the disallowed goal, hitting the bar and post happened etc in the second half when we invited them to attack.  They had 4 big chances 2nd half to 0 first half, double the amount of shots and their xg increased from 0.42 first half to 1.55. 

 

Our xg second half btw... 0.03!  

 

 

[cropstonfox]

Just now, murphy said:

Disagree.  We defended well in the first half when we restricted the chances Bournemouth had by actually having threat, possession and territory ourselves.

 

All of their chances, the disallowed goal, hitting the bar and post happened etc in the second half when we invited them to attack.  They had 4 big chances 2nd half to 0 first half, double the amount of shots and their xg increased from 0.42 first half to 1.55. 

 

Our xg second half btw... 0.03!  

 

 

Simple really.They didn't score though did they?

If probability stats are so reliable why are bookies still booming businesses. 

[Simonb]

I'm a massive Cooper out supporter, have been since he signed.. however, I've come to accept he's where we are as a club at the minute. Like the signings of Ayew and BDCR, he's just a 'He'll do for now guy'.

 

The club aren't going to sack him, they aren't going to bring in anyone exciting that actually costs anything at the moment.. it all hangs on the outcome of this season

 

They'll hold on to Cooper and this awful football and hope we do enough to scrape by, and then, if we do manage to stay up we may see some changes to improve the squad and ideally the manager.. although I'd imagine if he keeps us up he'll get more time.

 

The squads pretty crap when you look at it, but there are enough players to make up a decent starting 11 that could do enough in 70mins before we make changes to actually get enough goals if he'd just stop bring so negative. Vardy, Mavi, Fats and buon could score more than enough goals between them to keep us competitive.. it's not rocket science.

 

If he'd just have a go and actually play attacking football he might gain a few more fans. (Saying that, we'll spank Southampton)

[murphy]

4 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

"When?!"

 

Your absolute trust in the reliability of xG/xGA stats is akin to a form of religious faith. Yet I've yet to see any evidence that they are so reliable that mean reversion is inevitable over the course of a season. Indeed, the understat data discussed above suggest that xG/xGA stats are actually pretty unreliable at predicting how many points a team will end up with (here's the link again to save you from scrolling: https://understat.com/league/EPL/2023).

 

At the risk of repeating myself, xG and xGA stats are useful in showing the quality of chances teams create and concede, but they are not even close to being a perfect predictor of outcomes over the course of a season. If they were, all teams would end up with points totals roughly in line with their xPts, but that does not typically happen. Last season the bottom five teams all significantly underperformed their xPts, which implies they were inefficient at taking their chances and defending against opposition chances. The same thing happened in our relegation season, when the x stats say that we should have ended up with 45 points (ie, comfortably mid-table) but somehow ended up with 11 points less and went down. Does that mean that poor old Brendan was just unlucky? Should we send a bunch of flowers and a crate of fake tanning lotion up to Celtic Park by way of an apology for all being so mean about him?

 

I'm genuinely not a fan of Cooper. He's a tactically limited coach who appears scarred by his first few months in the PL with Forest and now defaults to conservative team selections and tactics, which make for a pain spectacle. He's also too slow to react and when he does react, he doesn't always get it right. But our performances so far suggest that he might just be quite good at setting the team up in a way that means we always remain in games and are a bit more efficient and attacking and defending than the x stats show. 

 

Anyway, fairly soon this discussion will be settled one way or another: either this mean reversion that some folk believe in so much will kick in and we'll be in the relegation zone (in which case Cooper will be gone), or we'll carry on grinding out results that the stats suggest we don't deserve and Cooper will go nowhere. I'm not ruling out the latter.

 

The person I was responding to seemed to think that the stats were in some way positive.   I was simply trying to point out that it wasn't but I'm not sure he got it.

 

As for xg etc, Cooper's defenders have just one thing to cling to.  Current league position.  The data suggests that this is only a temporary respite, hence why it 

is relevant.

[murphy]

6 minutes ago, cropstonfox said:

Simple really.They didn't score though did they?

If probability stats are so reliable why are bookies still booming businesses. 

Palace did though didn't they?  Twice.   The only other time we've tried to defend a lead.

 

How Bournemouth didn't is more through luck than judgement.  If you're confident we can keep doing that, great. 

 

As for your second second sentence, bookies have a booming business because stats are reliable 

 

 

[cropstonfox]

2 minutes ago, murphy said:

The person I was responding to seemed to think that the stats were in some way positive.   I was simply trying to point out that it wasn't but I'm not sure he got it.

 

As for xg etc, Cooper's defenders have just one thing to cling to.  Current league position.  The data suggests that this is only a temporary respite, hence why it 

is relevant.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics” is a well-known phrase that describes the persuasive power of statistics to support weak arguments

[Aus Fox]

8 minutes ago, Simonb said:

I'm a massive Cooper out supporter, have been since he signed.. however, I've come to accept he's where we are as a club at the minute. Like the signings of Ayew and BDCR, he's just a 'He'll do for now guy'.

 

The club aren't going to sack him, they aren't going to bring in anyone exciting that actually costs anything at the moment.. it all hangs on the outcome of this season

 

They'll hold on to Cooper and this awful football and hope we do enough to scrape by, and then, if we do manage to stay up we may see some changes to improve the squad and ideally the manager.. although I'd imagine if he keeps us up he'll get more time.

 

The squads pretty crap when you look at it, but there are enough players to make up a decent starting 11 that could do enough in 70mins before we make changes to actually get enough goals if he'd just stop bring so negative. Vardy, Mavi, Fats and buon could score more than enough goals between them to keep us competitive.. it's not rocket science.

 

If he'd just have a go and actually play attacking football he might gain a few more fans. (Saying that, we'll spank Southampton)

I think from the start Cooper was brought in to keep us up this season and that alone. At the end of this season we build, and that includes thanking Cooper for his service and playing a role, and then we move on. 
Right now, with our current financial position and the EFL waiting like a pack of hungry dogs to take us to the cleaners it’s imperative that we stay up by any means possible. And if that means a season of crappy backs to the wall football then so be it. 
At the end of the season, we survive, we then need to take the next step towards midtable - that slow build like last time with Pearson, Claudio gave us a little bonus, the Puel had a job to do, which again wasn’t pretty but served a purpose then Rodgers took us on to the next level, before the crash.

We need to follow this process and look to quickly build at the end of the season.

[Mike1983]

8 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

"When?!"

 

Your absolute trust in the reliability of xG/xGA stats is akin to a form of religious faith. Yet I've yet to see any evidence that they are so reliable that mean reversion is inevitable over the course of a season. Indeed, the understat data discussed above suggest that xG/xGA stats are actually pretty unreliable at predicting how many points a team will end up with (here's the link again to save you from scrolling: https://understat.com/league/EPL/2023).

 

At the risk of repeating myself, xG and xGA stats are useful in showing the quality of chances teams create and concede, but they are not even close to being a perfect predictor of outcomes over the course of a season. If they were, all teams would end up with points totals roughly in line with their xPts, but that does not typically happen. Last season the bottom five teams all significantly underperformed their xPts, which implies they were inefficient at taking their chances and defending against opposition chances. The same thing happened in our relegation season, when the x stats say that we should have ended up with 45 points (ie, comfortably mid-table) but somehow ended up with 11 points less and went down. Does that mean that poor old Brendan was just unlucky? Should we send a bunch of flowers and a crate of fake tanning lotion up to Celtic Park by way of an apology for all being so mean about him?

 

I'm genuinely not a fan of Cooper. He's a tactically limited coach who appears scarred by his first few months in the PL with Forest and now defaults to conservative team selections and tactics, which make for a pain spectacle. He's also too slow to react and when he does react, he doesn't always get it right. But our performances so far suggest that he might just be quite good at setting the team up in a way that means we always remain in games and are a bit more efficient and attacking and defending than the x stats show. 

 

Anyway, fairly soon this discussion will be settled one way or another: either this mean reversion that some folk believe in so much will kick in and we'll be in the relegation zone (in which case Cooper will be gone), or we'll carry on grinding out results that the stats suggest we don't deserve and Cooper will go nowhere. I'm not ruling out the latter.

 

xG doesn’t perfectly predict outcomes, it still highlights areas where teams are underperforming or getting bailed out. In our case, it’s clear we're underperforming, and without Mads saving our skins, we’d be far worse off.

 

Here’s something to consider: in our last Premier League season, the three relegated teams had the goalkeepers with the worst -PSxG. Currently, we have the keeper with the highest PSxG in the league - Mads at +4.4. 

[cropstonfox]

9 minutes ago, murphy said:

Palace did though didn't they?  Twice.   The only other time we've tried to defend a lead.

 

How Bournemouth didn't is more through luck than judgement.  If you're confident we can keep doing that, great. 

 

As for your second second sentence, bookies have a booming business because stats are reliable 

 

 

No bookies hate favourites winning.

They thrive on unbacked outsiders winning.

This is against probability.

If all the favourites or most probable outcomes happen then the bookies lose.

So in simple terms bookies are booming due to unreliable probability or losing favourites.

[FLAN]

5 hours ago, RoboFox said:

Pretty sure someone on Radio Leicester said Faes was bellowing at the bench for a good 5 minutes for them to make a change when we were getting battered. 

He was. Very visibly 

[Phenom]

5 hours ago, RoboFox said:

Pretty sure someone on Radio Leicester said Faes was bellowing at the bench for a good 5 minutes for them to make a change when we were getting battered. 

A lot of people here dislike Faes for his attitude but he’s vocal about what he sees, like most of us here. Just with a much larger platform.

[ClaphamFox]

8 hours ago, Mike1983 said:

xG doesn’t perfectly predict outcomes, it still highlights areas where teams are underperforming or getting bailed out. In our case, it’s clear we're underperforming, and without Mads saving our skins, we’d be far worse off.

 

Here’s something to consider: in our last Premier League season, the three relegated teams had the goalkeepers with the worst -PSxG. Currently, we have the keeper with the highest PSxG in the league - Mads at +4.4. 

Good example - this is exactly what I’m talking about. In our last PL season we conceded eight more goals than the xGA stats say we should have. Why? Because we allowed a very good keeper to leave, didn’t replace him and allowed a poor quality reserve keeper to step in. If we hadn’t have made that mistake, we’d probably have survived. 
 

This season it’s the opposite - we have a keeper who is a net positive rather than a net negative. This means that if our xGA is exactly the same over the course of the season as a team with a worse keeper, we’ll very likely concede fewer goals. 
 

Personally I’d extend this to the defence as a whole. We may have had better players in 2022/23, but defensively we looked all over the place. Every time the opposition got a set piece or found space on the flanks, we looked so vulnerable. While we don’t have as many high quality attackers this season, our defence looks far more robust to me than in 2022/23 (although we’re still allowing the opposition lots of shots, we’ve conceded 10 fewer goals in our first seven games this season than we did in the first seven games of the relegation season).

 

The point remains: some teams are simply more effective at one or both ends of the pitch than their rivals even if their overall play really isn’t that impressive. Those marginal differences in efficiency can persist over the course of a season and if they do, they can make a huge difference. 

 

 

 

Edited 8 October 2024 by ClaphamFox

[Kp1984]

22 hours ago, Foxmeister said:

Now we just need to work on the dummy spitters.

Another happy clapper I see 

[gurru991]

6 minutes ago, Phenom said:

A lot of people here dislike Faes for his attitude but he’s vocal about what he sees, like most of us here. Just with a much larger platform.

I like Wout Faes !!! He is passionate & top drawer when he is focussed..  If he feels he needs to scream at the bench then I'm with him 100%

[murphy]

52 minutes ago, cropstonfox said:

Lies, damned lies, and statistics” is a well-known phrase that describes the persuasive power of statistics to support weak arguments

ostrich

/ˈɒstrɪtʃ/

noun

 

1. 1.

    

   a person who refuses to face reality or recognize the truth (a reference to the popular notion that the ostrich hides from danger by burying its head in the sand)

    

[murphy]

40 minutes ago, cropstonfox said:

No bookies hate favourites winning.

They thrive on unbacked outsiders winning.

This is against probability.

If all the favourites or most probable outcomes happen then the bookies lose.

So in simple terms bookies are booming due to unreliable probability or losing favourites.

Bookies win by assessing probability and building in a margin.  They use statistical data to do that.  

[5waller5]

1 hour ago, Mon.is.a.god said:

I raise my previous point once again. Those same stats say Arsenal are over performing by five places. Are they in big trouble too?

 

No, they’re not in “big trouble” they are, however,  not likely to continue to defy the odds, which will see them slip nearer to 6th.

 

The stats for league position seem to be historically a better predictor at the bottom of the table than the top, so a bigger worry for us from a statistical accuracy perspective as well as the jeopardy involved.
 

 

[5waller5]

1 hour ago, cropstonfox said:

Lies, damned lies, and statistics” is a well-known phrase that describes the persuasive power of statistics to support weak arguments

I think empirical analysis has improved somewhat since 1894

[trooky]

We were lucky to win at the weekend with 6 shots compared to Bournemouth's 19, 15 of which were in the box. Fortunately for us they only managed 2 on target.

 

If this trend continues we'll lose a lot more games than we'll win. 

 

Cooper has to go, end off.

 

 

Edited 8 October 2024 by trooky

[Lako42]

Just to say, people are alowed to dislike him because he was a Forest manager very recently. 

 

 

You might not agree with it but that's football for **** sake, it's part of why it used to be decent. Everything else is sanitised in this game and yet the fans want the fans to sanitise themselves even further. 

 

Personally I couldn't give a shit, I want him gone (should never have been hired) because he's utterly out of his depth, but if you can't stand him because he reminds you of Notts Forest then fair play. 

Edited 8 October 2024 by Lako42

[SafewayFox]

He’s going nowhere everyone.

[UniFox21]

We're playing badly, statistically we're playing badly. Yet by a fair bit of fortune we're picking points up. 

We've won 1 game and all of a sudden people are defending the style. 

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, Lako42 said:

Just to say, people are aloud to dislike him ... 

Girls?