PRIOR NOTE: First of all read http : / / futbolisticametrica.blogspot.com/2010/03/un-poco-de-metodologia.html. This is not about to tell the exact time with hours, minutes and seconds. It is admitted that said "between 5 and 5:05 is more accurate to say the" 5-plus ", this in turn is more accurate to say" between 4 and 6, and this in turn is more accurate to say "afternoon", ACCURACY NO. BUT YOUR SEARCH us closer to objectivity, that the abandonment of that performance.
How many times have we felt a contradictory feeling inside when we see a team that has seemed to play better and control the game ends up losing? Sometimes cause is an unfortunate play, one or more erroneous arbitration awards or critical injuries when the result is about to settle. But not always the case. In fact, most of the time that assails us that feeling is often due to focus our attention on some aspects of the game and forget others, colorful above the less visible, the individual over the group, strategic and over the tactical, beautiful above the important ...
Commentators sports, especially on television, tend to glorify those aspects of the game on which a preference, either as former players or spectators. Commentators often this only broadcast your favorite team on a few occasions, forcing in most cases to describe or interpret the events of football teams for not have to feel sympathy. And that leads to finding a desirable aesthetic ideal for the neutral spectator, which leaves it up continuously when we want to convince that football has to be beautiful before useful, being forgotten that the real reason a sport is overcoming personnel, competition, victory, and for the fans, the success of your team. Sometimes when we see a party that is roughly neutral in our eye that we regret this or that team "played well" or "play ugly" and we forget that the sole purpose of that guy who tries to chat in the bar bar is not entertaining the crowd, but taking the girl into the garden and enjoy it. If they both enjoy, all other envelopes.
Thinking about all this happened to me a numerical disquisition about something that could be called domain factor, and whose object is framed in a percentage figure the value of what has been done by both teams during the aprtido once already completed. It would, how could it be otherwise, of an exercise in realism football above the subjective idealism, a figure that in most cases do justice to the final result. Although not always. Well, go there.
FIRST GOAL
Let's be honest for once. You play football to win, and getting goals wins. And in most games the score is often low. In what it would have the ball, make passes, hanging ball into the area, making metiesen auction if no goals? On a scale they have to weigh the other factors together, as though these are consequential (ie, are a means to an end), that is immediate (ie, an end in itself.) That's why the score in a match should weigh 51% in that domain factor
...... UUUUY GOOO!
What is the closest to a goal? That shot is about to get on the scoreboard. Now, are no differences.
"On the one hand, those shots would have covered all necessary but not sufficient: There are those shots that rejects goalkeeper or if that day is not can be inspired goals, and striker can not do more to foster this situation. Among these I would distinguish between reject falling back on the pitch, which can lead to a second play, and going out. Within the latter, one must distinguish between those who favor a corner, we could consider a second play), and those going out of bounds, that exceptions favored by particularly powerful punches, no more than a return of possession.
"Secondly there are the sticks. Tend to overestimate a lot, considering them little more than half a goal. It is certainly merit to the suit required by the front (and an attacker who fired 3 times in the bottom will have more merit than if the commands out), but as Don Alfredo "the club is for something." Again I would distinguish between those who re-enter the field and going out. The former have as much merit as if they were reject the goalie, because although, strictly speaking have gone outside the framework, it is also true that the more elusive area for a goalkeeper is the inner span next to posts and rails, to the point that if bounces back in, it is almost impossible to stop. The latter are balls that have gone straight out, while for the same reason must be evaluated with special merit, later nuance to what extent or to what extent.
"In third place are the stops of the goalkeeper. Has merit by the striker fired into the net, but I always have more if it prevents the goalkeeper can hold the ball, because it encourages second play, allowing a situation to break the spherical domain. And the doorman also plays: If the shot is very very good, and the doorman for, you'd better stop shooting.
-Finally the balls to go out. I hereby make three distinctions. On the one hand the balls to go out after hitting the bat, they deserve to be valued in a special way inferior to those balls that have gone between the posts or have led to reject these, but higher than those coming out cleanly. On the other hand the balls would go out in an area close to the goal that by convention could define as the imaginary area that would form the small area you get up in the air (about 18.3 x 5.5 meters, or about 100 square meters, which models would be occupied by about 18 goals and poles), these balls are directed clearly a goal but was deflected by a lack of definition, by an effect on the beating, sometimes with the wind (especially if the shot is far away) or by pressure or even the touch of a hand. These should be valued albeit considerably less than the previous. Finally, going beyond even the six-yard lines (ie, more than 5.5 meters on each side or more than 3 meters over the bar pro) which I would appreciate not in any way, any professional footballer can send the ball into the area shooting from the midfield.
How do we value? We propose:
-Balls outside the imaginary 0.
"Balls in the imaginary area, but outside the goal and sticks X
-balls goalkeeper saves, 2X
-Balls that hit the sticks and go out 3X
; Up here the less valuable, those who lost possession of the ball. Let:
-Balls that go into the net, rejects the goalkeeper and go outside or out of the area, 4X
-Balls that hit the clubs but fall within the field of play but outside the area, 5X
"Balls that go between the sticks, goalkeeper rejects and go to corner or fall within the area (by defining a danger zone), 10X
, "Balls that hit the sticks and come into the area 11X.
latter are the most dangerous, as in past years, I always worthwhile plus the fact that touch bats, because the player good setter tends to set the shots to avoid the goalie. This fast and soon, has more merit to the stick to shoot the doll.
Once the abstract value can be concrete. If we gave 51% of importance to goals, that is, more than half the attempts being the foundation for success would be given more than half of the remainder, ie 25%. If we apply the abstract formulation of this amount we would have to divide out by weighting each type of shooting between the two equipment, while respecting the importance we gave to everyone. The total of "X" have been distributed 36. There are only three rules out: If the total of shots account for 25% of the estate factor, every kind of shot should contribute ; X · (25/36).
For example, the balls in the bottom that have entered the scoring area 11 ° (0.6944) = 7.6389. If a team has shot 4 times and has stopped all the other team goalkeeper and 1, the first amount 1.11% to FD and another 0.28. Or what is the same as the equivalent to 1.3889 2X is shared with 4-fifths to one and the remaining for the other.
As not all parties are given the entire collection was calculated separately in the first instance and then again to the rule of three for the total sum and its parts (eg 15, with 10 for one and 5 for another) were adjusted to 25% (in this case 10 • [25/15] and 5 • [25/15], ie 8.33 to 16.67 for one another).
WHAT IS? POSSESSION, THAT FACT MISTAKEN
What is best dating or not having them? It's easy: Have Them
Does having many appointments or have few appointments? It's easy too: Better many few.
But what is better to have 5 appointments and not take any appointment or have 1
success? Going back to the mediate and immediate. If we forget the goal, it is best to have the ball, because you can build plays, look for holes to define and in any case, you deprive him of that factor to rival. But is it always the same possession? Obviously not, because the possession serves the goal, and thus is more valuable the more you easy that goal and it is most difficult to reverse. Let distinctions:
-On one side is the possession in his own half. Since the vast majority of goals are produced by stepping the opponent, and since the vast majority of moves that lead to goal and are gestated in the field of rivals, I would regard as 0, this possession. The longer you are on your own terrain run the clock on you.
"On the other is the possession in the opposite field, but I would establish an important distinction if the possession occurs within or outside the penalty area. Possession of the ball outside the penalty area has the utility that lets you stay close to the land where the movements, uncheck, dribbles or shots are dangerous, but the distance or the progressive loss angle makes it much less important than when the ball rolls over the area. The shots or moves within that rectangle usually involve a charge of danger or a much higher effectiveness, not to mention the violations in this area involve the release of penalty which, in most of occasions, resulting in a goal. I therefore X should be to assess how the former and the latter as 2X.
After 51% of the goals and 25% of cases, the remainder to be distributed for possession 24%, a rate of 8% for the opposite field possession outside the area and 16% for remaining within the area.
SUMMARY OF FACTOR DOMAIN OF A PARTY (IN PERCENTAGES)
A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE (A BRING THEM SOME MEMORIES BUT IS FICTION)
Bad match between Inter Milan and FC Bonito.
Bad had possession 32% (19 in own grounds, 11 on the contrary, 2 penalty area), the beautiful 68% (24/41/3)
Inter. shot 3 times out, one small area in the Boni 1 time, within the small area.
Inter. shot 5 times on goal, scoring 3 goals, stopping a the porter and the other being rejected was a corner. Bonito shot 7 times on goal, 1 goal, 3 reject and 3 stops.
Domain Factor Inter. Bad: 53.08
; Goals 38,25
Disparos 2,43
Ajustado 6,73
Tenure 8.10
Factor Domain FC Bonito: 46.92
Goals ; 12.75 6.60
Shooting
; Adjusted
18.27 15.90 Ownership
in all a very balanced game decided by the greater effectiveness of one of the two teams.
0 comments:
Post a Comment