West Ham Fans

The thing is Den is that Fanno is manipulating the figures to suit his argument. For a start Anton has played 5 seasons for us , not four. And as you say 5% is not really a great margin. What is more interesting is when we break Fanno's statistics down. So if we break it down into seasons the results read First season P26--W13--L6 giving a win ratio of 50% Loss Ratio=23% 2nd season P36--W17--L--9 giving a win ratio of 47% Loss Ratio=25% 3rd season P38--W14--L13 giving a win ratio of 37% LR=34% 4th season P34--W15--L9 giving a win ratio of 44% LR=26% 5th season P29--W9--L16 giving a win ratio of 31% LR=55% So here we have the magic 5% from the first two seasons which are Antons most successful spells with the club. Now why is this? Could it be anything to do with the fact that we were in the Fizzy pop league playing the likes of Rotherham and Gillingham? Could it be anything to do with the fact that in his second season we won quite a few games and got promotion? Because since we have come up to the big boys league the statistics start to decline, with the season just gone the most damning of the downfall of Anton or maybe just proof that he is nothing more than an average Fizzy league player. What the facts, show (forget the percentages game as they can be manipulated any sweet way you want) is that Anton is getting progressively worse every season. I'm quite confident that come next season there won't be a +% in Antons favour, assuming of course that we are still unfortunate enough to retain his services.

Not so. yes there was a typo where I said 4 seasons instead of five but, as I state below, the analysis is based on 206 games for the club and that clearly isn't four season's worth. The comparative analysis is based on all the games played over the five seasons by the team and the results achieved by the team when Anton is in the side. It is therefore based on Fizzy Pop and Prem, with three of the seasons in the Premiership. I will try to work out based on prem only but I'd be surprised if there is much of a difference in relative performance. As I've shown, both in terms of percentage of games won and average goals conceded per game, Anton makes a plus 5% difference (we win 5% more of our games with him in the team and we concede, on average, 5% less goals). Your attempt to attribute the plus 5% to the first two seasons doesn't work because you are not using comparative data for games that Anton plays in and those he doesn't. No wonder you are not a tax accountant, you don't seem to have the first idea about how to analyse data Dave. Your own figures show a win ratio of 44% for a season in the Premiership anyway! That is far higher than the team achieved when Anton wasn't in the team! Had we actually won 44% of our games, we would not have found ourselves in relegation mire would we Dave? You still have not accounted for the clean sheets against top 4 teams if Anton is such a liability either. So, nice try to deflect the ball away but I'm afraid it hasn't worked. You are trying to hide behind data which is, literally, only half the story! Oh wow, what a stat you have fed me Dave! How about this guys, in our near relegation season (2006/07) Anton played in EVERY game that we won. In none of the seven league game that he missed did we get a victory! Nor was he in the team that lost 3-0 to Palermo, nor was he in the team that crashed out of the cup to Watford. Dave himself calls Ferdinand's win percentage that season at 44%, and overall the team had a win ratio of just 31% for the whole season. Looked at one way, that is a net difference folks of 13% - and that was in the Premiership Dave! Looked at another way, we had a win ratio of 0% when Anton wasn't playing and of 44% when he was! That is some difference! It gets better still. Anton also played in ALL our drawn league games that season except the 3-3 home draw against Fulham, which is not really a result a defender would want to associate himself with. So EVERY point we gained except for one in that disasterous season was gained with Ferdinand IN the team! We thought it was Tevez, Neill and Noble who saved us! Well the facts show that Ferdinand was absolutely key to our survival. Had we won 44% of all our games (the ratio of victories when Ferdinand was IN the team), we would have ended the season with 50 points (one more than this season!) without drawing any games. So Dave, explain that if you can!

But Dave, you are right. 2007-08 was a bad season for Anton. Overall, the team won 34.21% of their games but with Anton in the side they won 34.48%. Still a positive difference in the Premiership you will note, but it doesn't stand comparison with the previous season! But still, I would take a positive difference over a negative one, wouldn't you? Especially as we were only in the Prem this season because of Anton as the data for 2006-07 shows!

Thanks for that little job Den, would you like your shoes polished whilst I'm about it! I think the win ratio is a fair indicator myself but I am interested to see what else is thrown up so I will accept the challenge. Before I do so, however, I would ask, if the inclusion of a guy increased your win ratio by 5%, wouldn't you pick him?

Not really. Because our win ratio is 60% with LBM in the team.

So that's why Curbs keeps picking LBM!

I never said I wouldn't pick Anton and I've made it clear that I rate him quite highly. The lad has talent but its his application that worries me. I was just interested to see if the 'background stats' back up your 'headliner'.

I'm working on it but there's a lot to work out!!!!!

Stop moaning, you sound like Curbishley! "I've had a tough season, my pen ran out of ink so many times and my calculator broke just when I'd nearly worked it out. I've struggled for material for my blog and I've had to deal with a lot of criticism from so-called supporters like davefking and WHTID. People say I should be working these stats out quicker but I've come a long way since last season - I haven't had to take my shoes and socks off once."

When Ferdinand is in the team, we concede at an average of 1.23 goals per game. Over the 206 games since he came into the team, we have conceded at an average of 1.3 goals per game, so again a positive difference when he plays. Ferdinand's five goals have all been crucial. Four have been scored in games we won by the odd goal in three, the other came in a 1-1 draw. His scoring record is better than his rivals for the shirt. He is undoubtedly our best passer at the back and the best at stepping up into midfield when we are in possession. Pretty conclusive case building here, n'est pas? And with regard to the goals conceded, amazingly, 0.07 (the difference Ferdinand makes) as a percentage of 1.3 is 5%, which illustrates why we win 5% more of our games when he is in the team. How neat is that as a proof of his worth? So Dave, argue against that!

I agree. Lets not forget than Rio had his fair share of ganga breaks in concentration whilst at West Ham!

It ain't a curve Dave its a bleedin circle.

Most things West Ham are, he will fit in well!

Square pegs and round holes springs to mind lol.

To complete the circle and bring us back to the topic, "Square pegs and round holes"? That would be your views of Ferdinand and what the stats actually show would it?

My point being was how badly he fits in. IMO

So badly that West ham win 5% more of their games when he is in the team than when he isn't. That's one hell of a bad fit! So you prefer it if we lose do you Dave, just so Ferdinand isn't in the team? Isn't that taking your vendetta a little far? Crikey, If Curbishley could get us playing a passing, West Ham style of game, I would forgive him! Your bitterness seems to extend to hating the player above loving the club!

The stats make interesting reading in that if we have a regular centre back pairing, of Gabbidon and Ferdinand, Gabbidon and Upson, Collins and Ferdinand or Upson and Ferdinand, we average around the 44% mark for victories. We hit problems when only 1 of those key 4 is in the team. No real surprise there I suppose. Davenport, Dailly, Tomkins, Neill and Spector, it would appear, are / were the big liabilities if played in the centre of defence (and any others I might have forgotten!)

Thats funny. We lose 4-0 to Chelsea, Liverpool ,Charlton, 4-1 to Sheffield Utd, 4-3 to Tottenham, 6-0 to Reading etc etc with those combinations of pairings. Spot the common denominator.

See another forum "Lest we forget". I can see another common factor in all those results, Curbishley. You forgot 4-0 to Tottenham by the way! That was Ferdinand's real mare!

I didnt forget the Spud 4-0. It didnt contain one of your quoted defensive pairings as he was playing with Spector. But youre right. He was sh1t in that game too. And the Charlton, Sheffield games were under Pards alas.

Charlton away, Davenport was in the team. I was thinking about the Charlton thumping last season under Turds, when Davenport was in the team. Are you getting confused Dave? Pardew was long gone. You could have quoted Bolton away 0-4 under Pardew when Ferdinand didn't play, or 3-3 at home to the mighty Fulham under Turds when Ferdinand did not play or 0-3 to Palermo under Pardew when Ferdinand again did not play.

Again the Bolton game didn't have one of your "successful pairings" as Dailly was there. Nor did Palermo. And yeah I did get the Charlton game wrong. I forgot that Pards was Charlton manager when he consoled Ferdinand .(or was he pissing himself laughing?)

You got the Sheffield United game wrong too Dave. It was 0-3 and it was under Curbishley too. So, Curbishley was the common factor in all the results you quoted like I said! Is that 3-0 to me now? Look, I'm getting worried, your memory has suddenly got more holes in it than a Texas brothel. Have you been to the doctor's lately? You're not buying those Viagra pills at East Ham market are you mate?

Don't know why I put Sheffield. I was looking at the Bolton and Portsmouth games in March 2006 which is why I put Pards in as manager. So theres another couple of 4 goal thumpings with those defenders and still the same common denominator. Never been to East Ham market either.

But no denial about using Viagra!

Getting desperate Dave. Portsmouth was 2 days before the Cup game against City. The team included Dailly, Katan and Clive Clarke. Walker was in goal and Carl Fletcher came on as a sub. And you are blaming Ferdinand! LOL. Squirming on that hook Dave, squirming on that hook. It is only biting deeper!

And Bolton away was just before the cup game. Eliot Ward had an absolute mare at centre back. The team also featured Newton, Hislop, Ferdinand, Konchesky, and Scaloni - and Dailly came on as sub. As I remember it, Pardew picked Ferdinand in midfield didn't he? We lost the first half 3-0, Ward came off, and we lost the second 1-0, after Ferdinand went back to centre back and Dailly went into centre midfield. a 1-0 defeat over 45 minutes with that team is a tribute to Anton's defensive qualities! Again desperation stakes to quote this one and blame it on Anton. That hook must be hurting Dave!

No desperation at all . Just picking them out of a hat. So many of em.

So many you are struggling to remember them? And so many that you have to resort to games where half a reserve team was picked to save legs for Cup games and a match where Anton was played in midfield? Desperation mate, desperation! Oh, and whilst we are talking "so many", in Bobby Moore's first 80 games we conceeded 4 goals in a game 8 times, 3 goals in a game 14 times, 5 goals in a game three times and 6 goals in a game once. Thank God you didn't have access to the internet then! "Bobby Moore, Fat Arsed Tosser"!

LOL, easy error that, Portsmouth, Sheffield United, t features in both club names!

Agree. Love to see the ststs for speed over 10 and 20 yards. Mind you, Anton's problem is with the speed of his brain!

love to see the stats fanno.....go and bloody get em then, they've gotta be out there somewhere! I know you can do it!!!

He's played at his full potential already? That doesn't sound very promising does it?

Im with DAVEFKING on this one. Mans a liability.

f*** stats, from the games ive seen, 12 home games this year, not a lot i know but considerable none the less, his positional and marking sense is awful. il base my views on what i see.

Which games? I will break down responsibility for the goals conceeded. Bet you that both Neill and Green were responsible for more than Anton! Home games? He was blamed for the goal against Fulham but I still put that one down to Green. At least 50-50 on that one in my book! Can you think of any others that Anton cost us?

Ignore the facts eh?

I'm sorry; I used my words incorrectly. What I meant to say was, we've seen lots of potential in him. If we've seen how well he could play at such a young age, then why leave him?

Your Maths are crap Dave. We don't win 56% of the games when he is in the team. Good job you don't have to use money on the bus any more, you would never get the right change once they knew you couldn't do sums! Look after that pass whatever you do!

Eh? Where did I say we won 56% of our games?

Now then, let's give you a nice cup of tea Mr King and wrap your legs in this lovely tartan blanket. You said, "that means there is a whopping 60.7% of games we didn't win with him in the team." That statistic is wrong. We win nearly 44% of games with him in the team so the figure you needed was 56%. Now then, would you like a nice biscuit with that cup of tea?

44+39.3=83.3 So where's the other 16.7%?