Studying stats or trusting your eye

[reddevil 99]

How do you play the game ? Personally I don't pay too much attention to statistics, l see a lot of what look like mathematical formulas mentioned on here, expected this expected that and so on. If I needed to rely on these kinds of aids to help me pick a player I don't think I'd bother. Eye test for me but everyone to their own I guess.

[DavidLloydIsAHero]

I don't have much time to watch games so I need to rely on trusted sources for eye test and then stats to fill in the gaps.

Trying to make more time this year but I'll never be able to cover even half of it

[Bernd Leno’s Garage]

How do you play the game ? Personally I don't pay too much attention to statistics, l see a lot of what look like mathematical formulas mentioned on here, expected this expected that and so on. If I needed to rely on these kinds of aids to help me pick a player I don't think I'd bother. Eye test for me but everyone to their own I guess.

Eye test has its obvious limitations - no one can watch every game.

It's absolutely true that you can go down a rabbit hole with statistics, but working without them is only going to make life harder.

[blahblah]

If I played less flippantly then stats would lead to an eye test. (Stats would start with points and fixtures, then xG type stuff.)

My issue is going to be the fact that all matches are going to be viewable...

[jacool]

"Studying stats or trusting your eye" I did a bit of both when I saw your avatar to be fair !!
Its 90% statistics, and 10% viewing to add a bit of colour to the cold hard facts.

[reddevil 99]

Only 2 stats need studying in my avatar...

[Caf]

If I *had* to pick one, it’d be the eye test, since we’re here to enjoy football after all.

But I reject the notion that stats and eye test are ‘opposites’ - they complement each other more than they compete, I think.

I’m a huge fan of this article on how stats prepare you for the eye test (the reverse of how many of us would experience the two):

https://statsbomb.com/2019/10/seattle-s ... -eye-test/

My one big caution would be against putting too much weight in small sample sizes - whether that’s stats, events you watched on the pitch, or things you read on Twitter.
So you use all the different sources to widen your sample and back up your initial hunches

[xJosh-]

I watch pretty much every game on Tv so mines like 80% eye test 20% stats. I.E Salah played out his skin against Leeds. Likely because he was left in space by the full back a lot. The majority of games I watch Salah he’s trash yet SMASHES FPL every year. I think Mane is a much better player personally. Salah loses the ball constantly, makes the wrong passes, doesn’t win second balls bla bla bla then walks off with a goal and assist for FPL. If he does that playing badly (IMO Ofc) then when he’s on form like against Leeds he’s a must have. Yes he scored 2 pens but he also could’ve had no pens and walked off with the match ball with 8 shots in the box etc.

It’s tough not watching the games imo because at times I’ve come on here or other sites etc to read how well someone played when I myself watched the game and disagreed. Stats can be misleading. A player could have 15 touches in the box but if they’re all poor touches that lose the ball or make him lean back to take his shot and it’s flying over the bar then the only thing it tells you is that he got in the box a lot, not that he played well and is in form. But if you can’t watch them or don’t have time etc that’s all you’ve got to go on and I think you can still get a good enough insight that way.