You are a retarded simpleton - if you spent two seconds to look at the ANALYSIS of the rankings you'd get an idea that your much vaunted goals/assists are a PART of the rankings but not the only criteria.

http://www.castrolfootball.com/article/2009/10/23/THIERRY-HENRY-IS/E92BAF82-BFBE-11DE-932C-D0C6F4018AA4.php

That's the last freebie you get - I know you have the ability to navigate web pages.

debosky:

You are a retarded simpleton - if you spent two seconds to look at the ANALYSIS of the rankings you'd get an idea that your much vaunted goals/assists are a PART of the rankings but not the only criteria.

A bit of tautology there.

http://www.castrolfootball.com/article/2009/10/23/THIERRY-HENRY-IS/E92BAF82-BFBE-11DE-932C-D0C6F4018AA4.php
That's the last freebie you get - I know you have the ability to navigate web pages.

Bullshit.
I don't see how Henry's humble contribution can compare to Messi or Eto'o in that Barcelona squad.
The ranking is supposed to document football action in the last 12 months.
If you are not suffering from a creeping neurosis, you should know there were better players than Henry in the last 12 months!!!

@
Depending solely on stats could get one misled.
Just cos I've posted 10 messages on this thread doesn't translate to me writing more on the issue than ritchboy who's posted just one message(speaking hypothetically). I could have posted i line sentences adding up to a total of 10 lines against his 100 line post. Stats could be manipulated by anyone to fit their purpose.

And so on those grounds I've decided to reject your findings Krayola

~Sauron~:

A bit of tautology there.

No tautology - simply emphasis on your base level of intelligence.  

Bullshit.
I don't see how Henry's humble contribution can compare to Messi or Eto'o in that Barcelona squad.
The ranking is supposed to document football action in the last 12 months.
If you are not suffering from a creeping neurosis, you should know there were better players than Henry in the last 12 months!!!

PROVE IT - Castrol has done analysis and the results are clear. You are making an opinion-based perceptive judgment not a factual one. In essence, you are no different from Baba Suwe claiming to know who the best ice hockey player is.  

debosky:

No tautology - simply emphasis on your base level of intelligence.  

A simpleton is retarded already. There's no point belabouring the obvious.

PROVE IT - Castrol has done analysis and the results are clear. You are making an opinion-based perceptive judgment not a factual one. In essence, you are no different from Baba Suwe claiming to know who the best ice hockey player is.  

Their analysis is quack.
There are statistics that are as clear as the day in football e.g. goals, goal assists etc.
It is better to stick with those and forget ACTIM Index or Castrol Football.
When a ranking tells you O'Shea is better than Ashley Cole and you choose to accept it then you need to do something about your mental health.

U cannot manipulate those. Everyone knows Nicholas Anelka was the highest goal scorer in the EPL last season.
How do we know? He outscored all his peers in the premier league so it is as clear as the day.
But when some jobless sports analysts sit down to over-analyse the amount of oxygen, the number of smiles and the number of lip pouting players do on the pitch then it's fraudulent.

~Sauron~:

When a ranking tells you O'Shea is better than Ashley Cole and you choose to accept it then you need to do something about your mental health.

Don't be daft - this is a 12 month rolling analysis - if he was better than Cashley over the previous 12 months so what?

Being simply the 'highest' doesn't make you the 'best' - a person playing 100 games while another plays 15 games cannot be reasonably compared on the same basis just on output. Anyone with a modicum of analytical ability would realise this.

Why these rankings are useless is because they dont tell us HOW they awarded 'points' for each statistic. i.e how many 'points' is a tackle worth? a goal? An assist?
Also even if they did, it still doesnt make them more relevant than "baba suwe telling us who the best NHL player is". WHY?
Lets say they give 5 points for a tackle and 50 points for a goal, it doesnt actually mean a tackle is = 5 points and a goal = 50 points. To another analyst, a tackle is worth 10 points and a goal is worth 60. Thats why stats can NEVER be used to judge who the best players are.

Its just their opinion, nothing more.

Point of correction, There's no semantical or syntactical error in "retarded simpleton".
Retardation could be mental illness/underdevelopment while a Simpleton refers to a FOOL ! Deceived very easily .

Again,rankings are subjective.
But seriously,do people really believe Henry,at this stage of his career,is the best in the world?
Stats were never a footie thing,till recently.Why the emphasis on stats?
In 86,did you need any stat to tell you Maradona was the best in the world?
What a wack ranking.

debosky:

Don't be daft - this is a 12 month rolling analysis - if he was better than Cashley over the previous 12 months so what?  

It is not possible for O'Shea to be better than Cashley over the previous 300 years.
O'Shea is the most useless defender in the league. He cannot pass, he cannot tackle, he cannot keep possession. So on what grounds could O'Shea have been better than Hangleland, Sagna, Jaglieka, Clichy, Toure and Glen Johnson?
Something must be wrong with your brain cells, Debosky.

Being simply the 'highest' doesn't make you the 'best' - a person playing 100 games while another plays 15 games cannot be reasonably compared on the same basis just on output. Anyone with a modicum of analytical ability would realise this.

You are a goat!!!
The analysis compared em per minute so the amount of game time is no determinant here.
Go and read their spastic FAQs again. They ranked em on contribution PER MINUTE.

Eastbay:

But seriously,do people really believe Henry,at this stage of his career,is the best in the world?

The rankings are not based on what stage of his career he is in. they are based on what he did while he was on the pitch

This is a lesson to those who throw out stats for everything.

Like pass completion that proves Carrick is better than Xavi or tackles that would show Denilson is better than Song

Thierry Henry is KING!!

debosky:

In essence, you are no different from Baba Suwe claiming to know who the best ice hockey player is.  

Chei!! I go die o!

Krayola:

The rankings are not based on what stage of his career he is in. they are based on what he did while he was on the pitch

I thought it was a 12 month analysis.

I dont know what all the fuss is about really. These rankings tell us as much as a hygenic pig's fart. It's the opinion of a set of people. No different from the opinion of nairalander's or "retarded simpletons".
Its absurd to even suggest henry is the best player in the world, statistically or otherwise.

Comparative statistics are good enough for me to determine how well a players fares as against another player or how well he fares as against his earlier performances. But how do you go about comparing a striker with a defender and a midfielder and even go further by awarding marks. These are the kind of results you get.

How can Adebayor that basically just lazed about the pitch for the better part of last season be anywhere near the upper half of such a list. Bearing in mind he plays in a very physical league. There is actually a reason Italians were collectively cursing out Luca Toni last season you know. and it had nothing to do with good performance.

This kind of lists will forever be held suspect.

All your objections are based on sentiment. You guys are yet to make any argument that we can even begin to debate. Screaming at the top of your lungs that something is absurd does not make it so. You have to tell us why.

Eastbay:

I thought it was a 12 month analysis.

Yes it is. It tells us how effective he was (based on the criteria they used) while on the pitch over the last twelve months.

ARSÈNE WENGER

"The performance insights from the Castrol Index are crucial to me. I only have two eyes so I can follow the ball and see where a player is positioned but I cannot really measure what every single player’s performance is like physically. I don’t need extra help in the form of opinions, because that's not good enough for a manager. As a manager I need something secure to rely on. To be able to measure the real physical performances of the players is very important to me. With these insights from the Castrol Index I can make objective statements and judgements of the performances from all of my players."

EMILIO BUTRAGUEÑO

“Using information on an individual’s performance is useful to a coach but must always be used alongside experiences directly from the game, as some players might look good in statistics but do not always influence the game. This approach allows the coach to correct mistakes for the whole team and prepare better for the next game. That’s what I try to do with the data Castrol provide – use the information to provide my unique insight that I hope helps fans enjoy the game more.”

RONALD KOEMAN

"Castrol invests structurally in football with the Castrol Index. The most interesting part of the Castrol Index is that is that it really adds something to my own perception. There is so much going on during a game, that it is impossible to see and evaluate everything myself. The Castrol Index is for fans, coaches and commentators as it holds useful and practical information; it helps to analyse games and the individual performance of players and teams."

PIERLUIGI COLLINA

“As a referee, you need to look at player performance - knowing how a team plays, which runs players like to make - little details like this helps you perform better. It can help fans too – understanding the game better, getting that little bit of knowledge that opens your eyes to the game can only improve your enjoyment of the game.”

OTTMAR HITZFELD

"It’s clear that data and stats have radically changed football over the past 10 years. Whether it’s at club or international level, managers and their staff use statistics and insights on player performance to help improve the team and deliver the best results. Things like the Castrol Index give fans the same levels of insight as managers and help them understand what delivers a winning performance."

slimshay:


How can Adebayor that basically just lazed about the pitch for the better part of last season be anywhere near the upper half of such a list.

What data do u have to back up this claim?

I have 18765 bleeped up heartbeats plus 253664 extra audio decibels to prove it!!!! After all i'm a gunner!!

U're a gooner that hates Adebayor because he likes money. His performance has nothing to do with it. 

He had a goal every 2 games for Arsenal last season. One in 3 of his shots was on target. what data do u have to defend your claims besides how u "feel" about it? Valentines day isn't for another few months. . .no  one cares how you feel 

Krayola
the fact that u were born on the first day of april is no excuse for u to be a FOOL
I have already explained why the rankings are no more relevant than any other analyst's opinion.

Well maybe you can also post your stats on how many times he drifted to the left corner of the pitch and bleeped up attacks. That is why it is said, numbers dont lie, but trust your eyes. Or how many times he gave up the ball and decided not to chase it down a la Rooney. At the end of last season even Bendtner, the much maligned Bendtner, had an overall better contribution to team play.
If you need stats to prove that to you, then better start following chess and leave football.  . Hate Adebayor?   I laugh in Dr Kitaun.

Krayola,
If it's a 12-month analysis,then I along with a good number of people can say Henry is not the best player in the world.
That ranking is fLAwed,no matter what those coaches say.
Footie,I repeat,was NEVER a game of stats apart from goals scored per appearances.After the US hosted the World Cup stats started rolling out from nowhere.

ritchboy:

Krayola
the fact that u were born on the first day of april is no excuse for u to be a FOOL
I have already explained why the rankings are no more relevant than any other analyst's opinion.

haha. . .I wasn't born. . . I'm a prototype for the next step in human evolution  . I'm just here on a test-run  

Computers do not have opinions.

[size=14pt]How the Castrol Index is calculated[/size]

The Castrol Index tracks every touch of the ball by a player on the field and assesses whether it has a positive or negative impact on a team’s ability to score or concede a goal.

A key factor for all areas of performance in the Castrol Index is the zone on the pitch where the action takes place. Players receive points for each successful pass they complete, but the number of points awarded depends on which zones the ball is passed from and received.

The Castrol Index records the difference a pass actually makes - so a long pass from midfield into the danger area would be rewarded very highly, whereas a short pass further down the field would receive fewer points.

Similarly, misplaced or intercepted passes are penalised depending on the danger the team is placed in by the wayward pass.

The Castrol Index is also able to split up the rewards of a goal between penalising the goalkeeper for letting in a shot he should have saved and rewarding the attacker for scoring a goal.

The number of Castrol Index points awarded for tackles, interceptions and blocked shots also depends upon the zone in which they are made. Successfully taking the ball from a striker in your own penalty area will earn more points than a tackle out on the wing.

Conceding free kicks and penalties will result in point deductions.

Castrol’s team of performance analysts crunch all the data and award each player a Castrol Index score out of 10.  As we progress through the Qualifiers, a players’ mark out of ten will be cumulative based on the number of games he plays - the higher the score the better the player’s performance.

The Castrol Index rankings are not a basic measure of talent.  They are a measure of performance based on the actual contributions players make during the 2010 FIFA World CupTM European Qualifiers.
As a result, they are free from any prejudices which might lead to some players’ actions being overestimated and others underestimated.  They will simply judge players on what they’ve done and, we hope, stimulate further debate around who the form players are in the competition.

slimshay:

Well maybe you can also post your stats on how many times he drifted to the left corner of the pitch and bleeped up attacks. That is why it is said, numbers dont lie, but trust your eyes. Or how many times he gave up the ball and decided not to chase it down a la Rooney. At the end of last season even Bendtner, the much maligned Bendtner, had an overall better contribution to team play.
If you need stats to prove that to you, then better start following chess and leave football.  . Hate Adebayor?   I laugh in Dr Kitaun.

Debosky is a gooner, and he isn't dismissing the rankings.

your eyes are deceiving u. U need to know that u can't be using hand-me-down glasses. U have to get your own prescription. shior!!

How the Castrol Index is calculated

The Castrol Index tracks every touch of the ball by a player on the field and assesses whether it has a positive or negative impact on a team’s ability to score or concede a goal.

A key factor for all areas of performance in the Castrol Index is the zone on the pitch where the action takes place. Players receive points for each successful pass they complete, but the number of points awarded depends on which zones the ball is passed from and received.

The Castrol Index records the difference a pass actually makes - so a long pass from midfield into the danger area would be rewarded very highly, whereas a short pass further down the field would receive fewer points.

Similarly, misplaced or intercepted passes are penalised depending on the danger the team is placed in by the wayward pass.

The Castrol Index is also able to split up the rewards of a goal between penalising the goalkeeper for letting in a shot he should have saved and rewarding the attacker for scoring a goal.

The number of Castrol Index points awarded for tackles, interceptions and blocked shots also depends upon the zone in which they are made. Successfully taking the ball from a striker in your own penalty area will earn more points than a tackle out on the wing.

Conceding free kicks and penalties will result in point deductions.

Castrol’s team of performance analysts crunch all the data and award each player a Castrol Index score out of 10.  As we progress, a players’ mark out of ten will be cumulative based on the number of games he plays - the higher the score the better the player’s performance.


As a result, they are free from any prejudices which might lead to some players’ actions being overestimated and others underestimated.  They will simply judge players on what they’ve done and, we hope, stimulate further debate around who the form players are in the competition.

Well thats debosky's prerogative if he wants to accept a ranking that puts luca toni in top ten. Jeez guy, if they put strikers together, and we starts doing choosing like back in the days. Will you choose him?

Krayola
these chaps have successfully made a fool of you
they say they award points for every pass, tackle, etc. But they dont tell us how many points they award. Since the people who invented football never stated "a good pass is worth 10 points, a bad one is -10, a goal is 88.8 points" etc, then ultimately, THE PEOPLE WHO DECIDED HOW MANY POINTS EACH STAT IS WORTH HAVE FOOLED YOU! They've made you believe it was all ranked by unbias & accurate computers when they've actually programmed these computers to award x points to y stats, points which were conjured up by their very biased and inaccurate brains.
The rankings are a joke!

ritchboy:

Krayola
these chaps have successfully made a fool of you
they say they award points for every pass, tackle, etc. But they dont tell us how many points they award. Since the people who invented football never stated "a good pass is worth 10 points, a bad one is -10, a goal is 88.8 points" etc, then ultimately, THE PEOPLE WHO DECIDED HOW MANY POINTS EACH STAT IS WORTH HAVE FOOLED YOU! They've made you believe it was all ranked by unbias & accurate computers when they've actually programmed these computers to award x points to y stats, points which were conjured up by their very biased and inaccurate brains.
The rankings are a joke!

They have told you how the passes are weighted. How long is the pass, is it complete, etc. I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to detail how this stuff is measured. Too many variables and only a computer will be able to make sense of it. Why do u trust the other awards WPOTY or whateva and not this one? How are their methods any more credible? YOu guys are yet to make sense. . .

I understand that u disagree with it, I'm just saying imo u don't have good reason to. The rankings just make you feel uncomfortable, or insecure, or both

ritchboy:

Krayola
the fact that u were born on the first day of april is no excuse for u to be a FOOL
I have already explained why the rankings are no more relevant than any other analyst's opinion.

U are not serious.

Krayola and Debosky should tell us how John O'Shea is better than Kolo Toure, Sagna and Ashley Cole in the last 12 months.

According to krayola, a computer can tell us how many points a pass is worth. . . . U must be an even bigger fool than i initially thought. Variables to determine how good a pass is? My a$$ is laughing at you!
make no mistake about it, the amount of points each stat is worth was determined by sexually frustrated pot bellied men going through a mid life crisis and not some super computer from the future. How is that any different from another analysts opinion?
Its amazing the amount of sugar coated shit people are willing to swallow.
I understand u are desperate to be of different opinion than others. but most of the time people do that, they end up looking exactly as u do now. . . FOOLISH!