Manchester United vs. FC Bayern München - Champions League Q/Final 2nd Leg

Mitch Connor

Ush1 wrote: »

Yep, which is correct by definition. I never mentioned ability or anything.

Could it not also show an improvement in other sides? A team doesn't have to be in decline to be bypassed.

Ush1

keane2097 wrote: »

*Sigh*

You don't know what you're talking about and refuse to be corrected so good luck to you.

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1485367

Go back to school with your statistics knowledge. Avoid correcting someone who's already saying the right things.

keane2097

Ush1 wrote: »

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1485367

Go back to school with your statistics knowledge. Avoid correcting someone who's already saying the right things.

lol at that link

Trend lines are sometimes used in business analytics to show changes in data over time. This has the advantage of being simple. Trend lines are often used to argue that a particular action or event (such as training, or an advertising campaign) caused observed changes at a point in time. This is a simple technique, and does not require a control group, experimental design, or a sophisticated analysis technique. However, it suffers from a lack of scientific validity in cases where other potential changes can affect the data.

Ush1

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Could it not also show an improvement in other sides? A team doesn't have to be in decline to be bypassed.

I could yeah. But for relative decline you have a reference point, which is why trophies help but aren't the be all and end all. You could take a few things into consideration, as the op did.

But as I will say again, by definition, if you haven't done as well as last year that's a relative decline.

Boskowski

Pro. F wrote: »

Arsenal when they're fully fit have much better strikers (RVP) an equally good midfield and slightly better defence imo.
Maybe I would be wrong to speak of Lyon so highly, i don't know, they just appear to me to be a very blanced team who can really move the ball around and have no obvious weaknesses.

Just as an example lets take Arsenal.

Arsenal have ONE better striker, not as good a midfield with the exception of Fabregas and with the exception of Sagna I don't see a good defense there either. Goalie, well we don't even need to go there.
Arsenal flatter to deceive but have no stability no oompf cant stick the boot in at all. Looks nice against Wigan but gettin a spanking from every solid side in the EPL and Europe.
I'd fancy Bayern over Arsenal every day of the week to be honest.

Ush1

keane2097 wrote: »

lol at that link

:rolleyes:
I can draw a quick jpeg if that makes it easier for you, with 2 points, lets call them data points. One higher and left, the other lower and to the right. Draw a line between, and voila, we have a decline!

keane2097

Boskowski wrote: »

Just as an example lets take Arsenal.

Arsenal have ONE better striker, not as good a midfield with the exception of Fabregas and with the exception of Sagna I don't see a good defense there either. Goalie, well we don't even need to go there.
Arsenal flatter to deceive but have no stability no oompf cant stick the boot in at all. Looks nice against Wigan but gettin a spanking from every solid side in the EPL and Europe.
I'd fancy Bayern over Arsenal every day of the week to be honest.

The full strength Arsenal defense is top class, Sagna-Vermaelen-Gallas-Clichy.

steps_3314

Anyone else notice that Messi's goals were as follows:

First one went to Almunia's left
Second to his right
Third over his head
And 4th under his legs

Just about perfect

:D:D

SlickRic

Ush1 wrote: »

:rolleyes:
I can draw a quick jpeg if that makes it easier for you, with 2 points, lets call them data points. One higher and left, the other lower and to the right. Draw a line between, and voila, we have a decline!

would you not agree, surely, that in the case of a football team you need longer than a year to diagnose a decline, and in saying that, should it not also see fortunes significantly change?

utd have been top for 3 years straight, and the worst they'll do this year is 3rd, possibly top, and either way will be very close to the top points-wise.

no decline, blip maybe, but to call it a decline is ludicrous.

and you know it full well too.

Headshot

slick

iv a new nickname for you

"the voice of reason"

keane2097

SlickRic wrote: »

would you not agree, surely, that in the case of a football team you need longer than a year to diagnose a decline, and in saying that, should it not also see fortunes significantly change?

utd have been top for 3 years straight, and the worst they'll do this year is 3rd, possibly top, and either way will be very close to the top points-wise.

no decline, blip maybe, but to call it a decline is ludicrous.

and you know it full well too.

This sums it up pretty well:

"It is a deplorable misconception, based on ignorance or disregard of elementary statistical facts, that small [numbers of] samples are sufficient to obtain satisfactory estimates of variability."
John Mandel, The Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data [1]

Ush1

SlickRic wrote: »

would you not agree, surely, that in the case of a football team you need longer than a year to diagnose a decline, and in saying that, should it not also see fortunes significantly change?

utd have been top for 3 years straight, and the worst they'll do this year is 3rd, possibly top, and either way will be very close to the top points-wise.

no decline, blip maybe, but to call it a decline is ludicrous.

and you know it full well too.

I do know full well, but a decline is indeed what it is. Fact.
If they do better the next year, it'll be an incline.

Boskowski

keane2097 wrote: »

The full strength Arsenal defense is top class, Sagna-Vermaelen-Gallas-Clichy.

Ye now that u mention it... Doesn't sound too shabby. Always liked Clichy. But Gallas is shaky at times and the goalie, seriously.

But my point is overall they're not really better than Bayern.
Chelsea yes, Arsenal no.

Ush1

keane2097 wrote: »

This sums it up pretty well:

"It is a deplorable misconception, based on ignorance or disregard of elementary statistical facts, that small [numbers of] samples are sufficient to obtain satisfactory estimates of variability."
John Mandel, The Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data [1]

Still don't think 2 data points are enough to show a decline?:pac:

Is this a Maths thread or a Soccer thread? Jesus H. Christ

keane2097

Boskowski wrote: »

Ye now that u mention it... Doesn't sound too shabby. Always liked Clichy. But Gallas is shaky at times and the goalie, seriously.

But my point is overall they're not really better than Bayern.
Chelsea yes, Arsenal no.

IMO, Bayern have a better keeper, Arsenal have a better everything else.

Fabregas and Song would walk into the Bayern team, Nasri probably would too.

Van Persie is on a different planet to anything Bayern have I would have thought as well.

Mitch Connor

Ush1 wrote: »

Still don't think 2 data points are enough to show a decline?:pac:

2 datapoints are enough. But scientifically flawed and mistrusted. It wouldn't get past peer-review in a research paper. You need to show a consistent trend over time, and one instance is not enough for that.

Mitch Connor

Deleted User wrote: »

Is this a Maths thread or a Soccer thread? Jesus H. Christ

This the maths thread, the soccer thread or the religion thread? Hubert. J. Farnsworth.

Ush1

Mitch Connor wrote: »

2 datapoints are enough. But scientifically flawed and mistrusted. It wouldn't get past peer-review in a research paper. You need to show a consistent trend over time, and one instance is not enough for that.

Again, irrelevant. I simply said it was a decline. A decline is what it is, I don't know what I can do to make it any clearer?

Boskowski

keane2097 wrote: »

IMO, Bayern have a better keeper, Arsenal have a better everything else.

Fabregas and Song would walk into the Bayern team, Nasri probably would too.

Van Persie is on a different planet to anything Bayern have I would have thought as well.

How are Song and Nasri going to walk past Ribery, Robben or Schweinsteiger? Don't get me wrong I like Nasri.

van Persie yes. I agree with that one.

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1485367

Go back to school with your statistics knowledge. Avoid correcting someone who's already saying the right things.

Holy fùck, I can't believe you are using that as evidence.

The simple fact is, you are using two data points to indicate a trend, in this context like in most, that is idiotic and shows you have no understanding of what your talking about. As you said yesterday, we are measuring fine margins - if you knew even the slightest bit about statistics you would know that the finer the margins, the larger the sample data you need to establish a trend. As you said yesterday, this type of evidence (a very slight difference between two years) is often used as evidence of a trend in football - this is true and it is idiotic and only shows the lack of understanding of statistics in the football world generally.

If you wanted to prove that you know as little about statistics as most pundits, chairmen, managers and fans in football, then well done you have proved it. If you wanted to prove that there is evidence of real or comparative decline at Manchester United then you have failed, miserably.

Mitch Connor

Boskowski wrote: »

How are Song and Nasri going to walk past Ribery, Robben or Schweinsteiger? Don't get me wrong I like Nasri.

van Persie yes. I agree with that one.

well song is a right back so isn't in competition with any of them!:P

keane2097

Mitch Connor wrote: »

2 datapoints are enough.

This is incorrect.

Two datapoints can suggest a trend that may be a decline but are not enough to say conclusively.

This is my last post on the matter, I have added Ush1 to my ignore list for the next few hours.

Headshot

ill tell what has truely declined, this thread

my bs radar is off the charts

keane2097

Boskowski wrote: »

How are Song and Nasri going to walk past Ribery, Robben or Schweinsteiger? Don't get me wrong I like Nasri.

van Persie yes. I agree with that one.

Song is a defnesive midfielder and has probably been the best player in the EPL in that position this year.

I think he'd easily make the Bayern team. Maybe he wouldn't though, in fairness you probably know more about it than me.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Holy fùck, I can't believe you are using that as evidence.

The simple fact is, you are using two data points to indicate a trend, in this context like in most, that is idiotic and shows you have no understanding of what your talking about. As you said yesterday, we are measuring fine margins - if you knew even the slightest bit about statistics you would know that the finer the margins, the larger the sample data you need to establish a trend. As you said yesterday, this type of evidence (a very slight difference between two years) is often used as evidence of a trend in football - this is true and it is idiotic and only shows the lack of understanding of statistics in the football world generally.

If you wanted to prove that you know as little about statistics as most pundits, chairmen, managers and fans in football, then well done you have proved it. If you wanted to prove that there is evidence of real or comparative decline at Manchester United then you have failed, miserably.

As evidence for what? Winning less trophies one year than the next doesn't show a relative decline?

Are you saying that's wrong? Please tell me what else it is in terms of trophies won, does it show? An incline?

SlickRic

Ush1 wrote: »

If they do better the next year, it'll be an incline.

1) i think you're continuing to use the word 'decline' because you know it's going to get Utd fans a little wound up. if you'd just called it a blip, there'd have been no problem. this is basically a semantics issue now.

2) i think if the rest of us just, in our heads, substitute your use of 'decline' and 'incline', with 'blip' and 'good patch', we'll all be ok.

:P

Ush1

keane2097 wrote: »

This is incorrect.

Two datapoints can suggest a trend that may be a decline but are not enough to say conclusively.

This is my last post on the matter, I have added Ush1 to my ignore list for the next few hours.

I never heard something so stupid and incorrect. Honestly needs to find out what a decline is.

SantryRed

Ush1 wrote: »

Again, irrelevant. I simply said it was a decline. A decline is what it is, I don't know what I can do to make it any clearer?

I get it. So lets take Liverpool, they win a game after losing one. So they're on a incline as a team. But then they lose a game. Jesus, poor side, decline.

Your logic is ridiculous.

Ush1

SlickRic wrote: »

1) i think you're continuing to use the word 'decline' because you know it's going to get Utd fans a little wound up. if you'd just called it a blip, there'd have been no problem. this is basically a semantics issue now.

2) i think if the rest of us just, in our heads, substitute your use of 'decline' and 'incline', with 'blip' and 'good patch', we'll all be ok.

:P

Damn you!!!:p:pac:

Mitch Connor

keane2097 wrote: »

Song is a defnesive midfielder and has probably been the best player in the EPL in that position this year.

I think he'd easily make the Bayern team. Maybe he wouldn't though, in fairness you probably know more about it than me.

before anyone pulls me up on this (may have done so already) I read song and thought Sagna.

Ush1

SantryRed wrote: »

I get it. So lets take Liverpool, they win a game after losing one. So they're on a incline as a team. But then they lose a game. Jesus, poor side, decline.

Your logic is ridiculous.

No it isn't, that's not my logic, that's relative statistical fact.

Ever hear someone say when a team wins 2 or 3 games they're "on the up"? (totally different thing but funny anyway)
Or losing many games being on a "downward spiral"?

Ush1

Boskowski wrote: »

How are Song and Nasri going to walk past Ribery, Robben or Schweinsteiger? Don't get me wrong I like Nasri.

van Persie yes. I agree with that one.

Song is argueable but I'd defo have Robben and Ribery ahead of Arsenals wingers.

Headshot

Ush1 wrote: »

Damn you!!!:p:pac:

so you were intentionally try to wind up utd fans ?

Ush1

Headshot wrote: »

so you were intentionally try to wind up utd fans ?

Nope, I was using correct terminalogy, not my fault if people don't understand the meaning of a word. Why, were you wound up by it?

Boskowski

keane2097 wrote: »

Song is a defnesive midfielder and has probably been the best player in the EPL in that position this year.

I think he'd easily make the Bayern team. Maybe he wouldn't though, in fairness you probably know more about it than me.

Well he'd have to get past van Bommel, the Bayern captain. He'd get past Pranjic I guess, but he's not a regular starter. Not in the CL anyway.

but maybe Song is better than I give him credit for. Not watching many Arsenal games full time I admit.

Headshot

Ush1 wrote: »

Nope, I was using correct terminalogy, not my fault if people don't understand the meaning of a word.

Catenaccio!

Tbh, it ain't hard to wind up United fans.

newballsplease

Is the team announced?

Id go with:

.........................VDS
Raf(or fully fit JOS) Ferdinand Vidic Evra

.............Carrick Scholes Fletcher
......Valencia...............................Nani
........................Berbatov

Boskowski

Catenaccio! wrote: »

Tbh, it ain't hard to wind up United fans.

Football's not a matter of life and death ... it's more important than that.

keane2097

newballsplease wrote: »

Is the team announced?

Id go with:

.........................VDS
Raf(or fully fit JOS) Ferdinand Vidic Evra

.............Carrick Scholes Fletcher
......Valencia...............................Nani
........................Berbatov

There aren't really too many other options than that are there...

Park to play at the top of a midfield three instead of Scholes or Carrick maybe...

Ush1

Catenaccio! wrote: »

Tbh, it ain't hard to wind up United fans.

Seemingly not, just using the English language!

partyguinness

Boskowski wrote: »

Football's not a matter of life and death ... it's more important than that.

I doubt if anyone over the age of 20 seriously believes that...

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

As evidence for what?

As evidence that using two data points is sufficient to show a real or relative decline.

Ush1 wrote: »

Winning less trophies one year than the next doesn't show a relative decline?

No. It doesn't show anything. In this case the margins of difference between the data points are less than the margins you could expect from random variance.

Ush1 wrote: »

Are you saying that's wrong?

Yes

Ush1 wrote: »

Please tell me what else it is in terms of trophies won, does it show?

It shows nothing in terms of a trend. The different number of trophies won between two years do not show an incline or a decline if you are using statisitics to try and discern a trend. The fine margins that mean winning or coming second or third in the league, for example, are not enough to show a trend if you only consider two seasons.

You are making the common mistake of trying to infer real trends from very short term results. The whole field of statistics was invented to overcome this problem. If you refuse to acknowledge the basic principles of statistics then there is not much any of us can do. It does make you a very tedious annoying person to have on the thread though.

herbieflowers

Enough with the data points! It has nothing to do with tonight's match! It's taken up enough space already! Arrrgggh!

newballsplease

keane2097 wrote: »

There aren't really too many other options than that are there...

Park to play at the top of a midfield three instead of Scholes or Carrick maybe...

I would be fearful if we see Neville in at RB tonight.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

As evidence that using two data points is sufficient to show a real or relative decline.


No. It doesn't show anything. In this case the margins of difference between the data points are less than the margins you could expect from random variance.

Yes

It shows nothing in terms of a trend. The different number of trophies won between two years do not show an incline or a decline if you are using statisitics to try and discern a trend. The fine margins that mean winning or coming second or third in the league, for example, are not enough to show a trend if you only consider two seasons.

You are making the common mistake of trying to infer real trends from very short term results. The whole field of statistics was invented to overcome this problem. If you refuse to acknowledge the basic principals of statistics then there is not much any of us can do. It does make you a very tedious annoying person to have on the thread though.

Random variance would depend on the timeframe so it will still show a decline so you're wrong there. In fact, any number of other variables.

You're confusing trend and decline I see.

No I'm not making that mistake, you're making the mistake of reading into that. The point I illustrated shows a decline, plain as day. The fact that you don't seem to understand the term is much more annoying.

keane2097

newballsplease wrote: »

I would be fearful if we see Neville in at RB tonight.

I don't see any real difference between Neville and Rafael tbh, JOS being back would be huge.

Catenaccio!

Ribery would like JOS to play too me thinks.

Headshot

Ush1 wrote: »

Random variance would depend on the timeframe so it will still show a decline so you're wrong there.

You're confusing trend and decline I see.

No I'm not making that mistake, you're making the mistake of reading into that. The point I illustrated shows a decline, plain as day. The fact that you don't seem to understand the term is much more annoying.

how old are you ?