A thread dedicated to discuss anything Euro 2016 related.

Group stage: (all times CET)
Friday 10 June, 21.00 (St-Denis): France v Romania – Group A 
Saturday 11 June, 15.00 (Lens): Albania v Switzerland – Group A 
Saturday 11 June, 18.00 (Bordeaux): Wales v Slovakia – Group B 
Saturday 11 June, 21.00 (Marseille): England v Russia – Group B 
Sunday 12 June, 15.00 (Paris): Turkey v Croatia – Group D 
Sunday 12 June, 18.00 (Nice): Poland v Northern Ireland – Group C 
Sunday 12 June, 21.00 (Lille): Germany v Ukraine – Group C
Monday 13 June, 15.00 (Toulouse): Spain v Czech Republic – Group D 
Monday 13 June, 18.00 (St-Denis): Republic of Ireland v Sweden – Group E 
Monday 13 June, 21.00 (Lyon): Belgium v Italy – Group E
Tuesday 14 June, 18.00 (Bordeaux): Austria v Hungary – Group F
Tuesday 14 June, 21.00 (St-Etienne): Portugal v Iceland – Group F

Wednesday 15 June, 15.00 (Lille): Russia v Slovakia – Group B 
Wednesday 15 June, 18.00 (Paris): Romania v Switzerland – Group A 
Wednesday 15 June, 21.00 (Marseille): France v Albania – Group A 
Thursday 16 June, 15.00 (Lens): England v Wales – Group B 
Thursday 16 June, 18.00 (Lyon): Ukraine v Northern Ireland – Group C
Thursday 16 June, 21.00 (St-Denis): Germany v Poland – Group C 
Friday 17 June, 15.00 (Toulouse): Italy v Sweden – Group E
Friday 17 June, 18.00 (St-Etienne): Czech Republic v Croatia – Group D 
Friday 17 June, 21.00 (Nice): Spain v Turkey – Group D
Saturday 18 June, 15.00 (Bordeaux): Belgium v Republic of Ireland – Group E 
Saturday 18 June, 18.00 (Marseille): Iceland v Hungary – Group F 
Saturday 18 June, 21.00 (Paris): Portugal v Austria – Group F

Sunday 19 June, 21.00 (Lille): Switzerland v France – Group A 
Sunday 19 June, 21.00 (Lyon): Romania v Albania – Group A 
Monday 20 June, 21.00 (St-Etienne): Slovakia v England – Group B 
Monday 20 June, 21.00 (Toulouse): Russia v Wales – Group B 
Tuesday 21 June, 18.00 (Paris): Northern Ireland v Germany – Group C
Tuesday 21 June, 18.00 (Marseille): Ukraine v Poland – Group C
Tuesday 21 June, 21.00 (Bordeaux): Croatia v Spain – Group D 
Tuesday 21 June, 21.00 (Lens): Czech Republic v Turkey – Group D
Wednesday 22 June, 18.00 (Lyon): Hungary v Portugal – Group F 
Wednesday 22 June, 18.00 (St-Denis): Iceland v Austria – Group F 
Wednesday 22 June, 21.00 (Nice): Sweden v Belgium – Group E 
Wednesday 22 June, 21.00 (Lille): Italy v Republic of Ireland – Group E

 

Knockout phase:
Round of 16
Saturday 25 June, 15.00 (St-Etienne): Runner-up Group A v Runner-up C – Match 1
Saturday 25 June, 18.00 (Paris): Winner B v Third-place A/C/D – Match 2
Saturday 25 June, 21.00 (Lens): Winner D v Third-place B/E/F – Match 3
Sunday 26 June, 15.00 (Lyon): Winner A v Third-place C/D/E – Match 4
Sunday 26 June, 18.00 (Lille): Winner C v Third-place A/B/F – Match 5
Sunday 26 June, 21.00 (Toulouse): Winner F v Runner-up E – Match 6
Monday 27 June, 18.00 (St-Denis): Winner E v Runner-up D – Match 7
Monday 27 June, 21.00 (Nice): Runner-up B v Runner-up F – Match 8

• For which third place team will play in each tie, see Article 17.03 of the Official Regulations

Quarter-finals
Thursday 30 June, 21.00 (Marseille): Winner Match 1 v Winner Match 3 – QF1
Friday 1 July, 21.00 (Lille): Winner Match 2 v Winner Match 6 – QF2
Saturday 2 July, 21.00 (Bordeaux): Winner Match 5 v Winner Match 7 – QF3
Sunday 3 July, 21.00 (St-Denis): Winner Match 4 v Winner Match 8 – QF4

Semi-finals
Wednesday 6 July, 21.00 (Lyon): Winner QF1 v Winner QF2 – SF1
Thursday 7 July, 21.00 (Marseille): Winner QF3 v Winner QF4 – SF2

Final
Sunday 10 July, 21.00 (St-Denis): Winner SF1 v Winner SF2

 

You forgot to add the Netherlands.....oh no, you didn't.😭

Whoever might be the favorite for winning the title - in the end coincidence and wrong decisions by referees will decide about the receiver of the trophy, as always with soccer.

Soccer is the only team "sport" where the better team does NOT necessarily win the game. Hence, I prefer to call it gambling instead of "sport".

16 minutes ago, Frank Brickowski said:

Whoever might be the favorite for winning the title - in the end coincidence and wrong decisions by referees will decide about the receiver of the trophy, as always with soccer.

Soccer is the only team "sport" where the better team does NOT necessarily win the game. Hence, I prefer to call it gambling instead of "sport".

I "bet" no one would have called the current  EPL table standings six months ago 

I seem to recall the Germans always start well in France then get distracted by Russians

1 minute ago, Will 4 said:

I seem to recall the Germans always start well in France then get distracted by Russians

Lol .. Wrong but funny

Anybody see the Payet free kick for West Ham if you haven't go look at it now.

I was like

13 hours ago, Will 4 said:

Anybody see the Payet free kick for West Ham if you haven't go look at it now.

I was like

What's his free-kick efficiency? Meaning how many does he take to make one goal?

41 minutes ago, Frank Brickowski said:

What's his free-kick efficiency? Meaning how many does he take to make one goal?

I would not know but he has scored a few and he has quite a few assists this season. He is probably the signing of the season.

11 hours ago, Will 4 said:

I would not know

Exactly.

People are being spammed with so many meaningless player statistics instead of giving them the really important ones for knowing about a players real qualities.

Edited April 4, 20169 yr by Frank Brickowski

22 hours ago, Frank Brickowski said:

Exactly.

People are being spammed with so many meaningless player statistics instead of giving them the really important ones for knowing about a players real qualities.

It is hard to say with free kicks as some are used as crosses or passes into the box also please list the pointless statistics as my football team I support Brentford sign players based on statistics.

20 hours ago, Will 4 said:

It is hard to say with free kicks as some are used as crosses or passes into the box also please list the pointless statistics as my football team I support Brentford sign players based on statistics.

The problem with soccer player statistics is there are LOADS of numbers being presented to people, but most of them only say something about quantity, not a bit about quality/efficiency - and moreover most of the statistics available are only connected very indirectly to the outcome of a game.

Pointless statistics (for making a statement about the QUALITY of a player or his influence on the OUTCOME of a game) are for example (sorry if the terminology is not 100% spot on, I am not a native English speaker:

1. Total kilometers a player ran in a game -> this really is only an information about how far he ran, but has no significance in itself for any other conclusion (WHERE did he run? WHAT did he do when he got there? Did he contribute DIRECTLY to a goal or to preventing a goal of the opponent?)

2. % of tackles won -> as long as you don't have any info WHERE those tackles were won or if they had any significance for making or preventing goals, what does this number really say?

3. Goals made -> how often are people presented with a PERCENTAGE of "goals made" out of "shots taken"? Not very often I'd say. But does it not matter quite much how many times a striker has to try to score a goal? Efficiency? That is what really matters for a striker, not how many goals he scores, but how many OF HOW MANY.

4. Goals made from direct Free Kicks -> this is why I asked you about Payet. EVERYONE on earth can SOMETIME make such a free kick - he or she just needs enough shots, one will eventually go in. But what about efficiency? It's really like efficiency stats are being withheld from people for some reason. Christiano Ronaldo, Messi and Ibrahimovic are all considered to be legendary free-kick specialists - if you find their efficiency numbers (after hours of research) you will see that all three only make between 5-8 % of their direct free-kicks into goals. Well, a player who makes 1 goal out of 20 free-kicks - is he really to be condsideres a specialist?

5. Corners a team got in a game - what is that statistic for at all? People always talk about how important standards (corners, free-kicks) are. But has anyone taken a look at the efficiency numbers? There are far more goals made out of the active game than after corners or free-kicks, so why are those situations "dangerous" in any way?

6. % of passes completed and "ball contacts" - same problem as with % of tackles won: WHERE did those passes and contacts take place? Did they CONTIRBUTE TO A GOAL in any way? You get no idea about that by this statistic.

7. Crosses made - again: How often did a striker make a GOAL out of those crosses? Where those GOOD or BAD crosses? Absolutely no idea!

8., 9. 10. ...

As I said: Many of those numbers are only about quantity not about quality/efficiency. Imagine a basketball player who averages 5 three-pointers per game. Coming from a soccer statistics point of view, you would say "Wow, FIVE per game, great!". But basketball (statistics) are - in contrast to soccer - very much about efficiency. So alongside the info about 5 three-pointers made per game, people will always be given the percentage. So, if one makes 5 threes a game but takes 20 shots, the "wow"-factor is not so big anymore. In soccer meanwhile, most people don't even ask about efficiency, hence most players' performances are simply not being analysed properly.

Edited April 6, 20169 yr by Frank Brickowski

Benzema out ( FRA)

Henderson out (ENG)

Sweini (GER) ?? - likley out 

On 04/05/2016 at 11:38 PM, Will 4 said:

It is hard to say with free kicks as some are used as crosses or passes into the box also please list the pointless statistics as my football team I support Brentford sign players based on statistics.

Do you have any comment to the points I listed? I mean, you asked and I would like to hear your opinion now. Am I right, am I wrong, what is your opinion?

On 06/04/2016 at 7:04 PM, Frank Brickowski said:

The problem with soccer player statistics is there are LOADS of numbers being presented to people, but most of them only say something about quantity, not a bit about quality/efficiency - and moreover most of the statistics available are only connected very indirectly to the outcome of a game.

Pointless statistics (for making a statement about the QUALITY of a player or his influence on the OUTCOME of a game) are for example (sorry if the terminology is not 100% spot on, I am not a native English speaker:

1. Total kilometers a player ran in a game -> this really is only an information about how far he ran, but has no significance in itself for any other conclusion (WHERE did he run? WHAT did he do when he got there? Did he contribute DIRECTLY to a goal or to preventing a goal of the opponent?)

2. % of tackles won -> as long as you don't have any info WHERE those tackles were won or if they had any significance for making or preventing goals, what does this number really say?

3. Goals made -> how often are people presented with a PERCENTAGE of "goals made" out of "shots taken"? Not very often I'd say. But does it not matter quite much how many times a striker has to try to score a goal? Efficiency? That is what really matters for a striker, not how many goals he scores, but how many OF HOW MANY.

4. Goals made from direct Free Kicks -> this is why I asked you about Payet. EVERYONE on earth can SOMETIME make such a free kick - he or she just needs enough shots, one will eventually go in. But what about efficiency? It's really like efficiency stats are being withheld from people for some reason. Christiano Ronaldo, Messi and Ibrahimovic are all considered to be legendary free-kick specialists - if you find their efficiency numbers (after hours of research) you will see that all three only make between 5-8 % of their direct free-kicks into goals. Well, a player who makes 1 goal out of 20 free-kicks - is he really to be condsideres a specialist?

5. Corners a team got in a game - what is that statistic for at all? People always talk about how important standards (corners, free-kicks) are. But has anyone taken a look at the efficiency numbers? There are far more goals made out of the active game than after corners or free-kicks, so why are those situations "dangerous" in any way?

6. % of passes completed and "ball contacts" - same problem as with % of tackles won: WHERE did those passes and contacts take place? Did they CONTIRBUTE TO A GOAL in any way? You get no idea about that by this statistic.

7. Crosses made - again: How often did a striker make a GOAL out of those crosses? Where those GOOD or BAD crosses? Absolutely no idea!

8., 9. 10. ...

As I said: Many of those numbers are only about quantity not about quality/efficiency. Imagine a basketball player who averages 5 three-pointers per game. Coming from a soccer statistics point of view, you would say "Wow, FIVE per game, great!". But basketball (statistics) are - in contrast to soccer - very much about efficiency. So alongside the info about 5 three-pointers made per game, people will always be given the percentage. So, if one makes 5 threes a game but takes 20 shots, the "wow"-factor is not so big anymore. In soccer meanwhile, most people don't even ask about efficiency, hence most players' performances are simply not being analysed properly.

Sorry for getting back late I could not find the forum until your last quote

Well to start of number 1 is actually key as it often shows what type of game they are playing for instance a high value would suggest a gegen press tactic where as a low value would suggest a possession based game. ow you may ask surely would people would see this? Well some people do not have that focus to see for instance the other nigh athletico ran 11km more than barca this lets you know their work rate qualties

2 This is a key statistic as it enables you to gauge a tacklers qualities over the season meaning that you would want a high win percentage for a defensive midfielder or a defender so that when you signed them you knew what you were receiving. Once again when you bring it with other statistics it lest you know work rate

However in the single game based scenario I would agree it is a bit idiotic as I could have 100% for 1 good tackle where as someone who did 10 had 90% you would say I was the better player even though I have done less in the game.

3 The goals per game is the one I think you are talking about here. Now this is a key statistic as strikers are sometimes inconsistent with their abilities for instance we play a counterattack one game the striker scores the one clear cut chance where as the team may play a more open game afterwards get lots of chances and the striker converts 2 now according to you he has performed better in the first scenario in terms of shot conversion rate whereas he has scored more in the second as he has had more to but got a lower rate even though the striker has performed better. In some scenarios it is even more important as the striker may be in form and it would be likely he has scored. Also many strikers are confidence based for instance up until last month are striker Vibe had not scored for a while now he is on 5 in 3 games now this shows he is in form whereas a conversion rate would struggle it also has no classing of chance

Now you talk about shots to goals I feel this is accurately covered by the shots % on target also some shots are not shots but balls in intended to cause chaos

4 As I have stated their free kicks are not always used for goals also even when a shot is taken and rebound and is then scored that for me is made by the free kick further more you do not know which routine they are doing (line out). do you class it as a miss if they pass when they have free kick for someone to do a snap shot. With this what about that penalty where Messi passed to Suarez to score your style of statistics would call it a miss when it clearly is not.

5 Corners are key as Some teams cough WBA rely on them for their goals as scoring from open play is hard when you are against say Arsenal. Now this enables you to see their set plays and potentially calculate rate it is also hints at box based action levels as high value would suggest a high concentration of in box action.

6  I would agree partially but they need something to fill the time on air. And for some people it enables them understand the style of game played but I would want statistics of pass completion of play makers.

7 Crosses made once again are used to show a style of play it also enable to see which flank was more offensive with cross numbers.

Finally I would say we need better pundits as statistics are abused  in way to try and justify position or fill gap in time which means they are not fully explained to people

Just out of curiosity how many normally mentioned stats are there in basketball as I do not watch it.

Also Judge out for the Ireland

35 minutes ago, Will 4 said:

Sorry for getting back late I could not find the forum until your last quote

Well to start of number 1 is actually key as it often shows what type of game they are playing for instance a high value would suggest a gegen press tactic where as a low value would suggest a possession based game. ow you may ask surely would people would see this? Well some people do not have that focus to see for instance the other nigh athletico ran 11km more than barca this lets you know their work rate qualties

2 This is a key statistic as it enables you to gauge a tacklers qualities over the season meaning that you would want a high win percentage for a defensive midfielder or a defender so that when you signed them you knew what you were receiving. Once again when you bring it with other statistics it lest you know work rate

However in the single game based scenario I would agree it is a bit idiotic as I could have 100% for 1 good tackle where as someone who did 10 had 90% you would say I was the better player even though I have done less in the game.

3 The goals per game is the one I think you are talking about here. Now this is a key statistic as strikers are sometimes inconsistent with their abilities for instance we play a counterattack one game the striker scores the one clear cut chance where as the team may play a more open game afterwards get lots of chances and the striker converts 2 now according to you he has performed better in the first scenario in terms of shot conversion rate whereas he has scored more in the second as he has had more to but got a lower rate even though the striker has performed better. In some scenarios it is even more important as the striker may be in form and it would be likely he has scored. Also many strikers are confidence based for instance up until last month are striker Vibe had not scored for a while now he is on 5 in 3 games now this shows he is in form whereas a conversion rate would struggle it also has no classing of chance

Now you talk about shots to goals I feel this is accurately covered by the shots % on target also some shots are not shots but balls in intended to cause chaos

4 As I have stated their free kicks are not always used for goals also even when a shot is taken and rebound and is then scored that for me is made by the free kick further more you do not know which routine they are doing (line out). do you class it as a miss if they pass when they have free kick for someone to do a snap shot. With this what about that penalty where Messi passed to Suarez to score your style of statistics would call it a miss when it clearly is not.

5 Corners are key as Some teams cough WBA rely on them for their goals as scoring from open play is hard when you are against say Arsenal. Now this enables you to see their set plays and potentially calculate rate it is also hints at box based action levels as high value would suggest a high concentration of in box action.

6  I would agree partially but they need something to fill the time on air. And for some people it enables them understand the style of game played but I would want statistics of pass completion of play makers.

7 Crosses made once again are used to show a style of play it also enable to see which flank was more offensive with cross numbers.

Finally I would say we need better pundits as statistics are abused  in way to try and justify position or fill gap in time which means they are not fully explained to people

Just out of curiosity how many normally mentioned stats are there in basketball as I do not watch it.

Also Judge out for the Ireland

I agree very much with you that a main part of the problem here are so called "experts" who take and talk about certain statistics as evidence for this or that opinion they convey. Statistics DO say something, but many times they do NOT support what people talk about. On the other hand, statistics COULD be used to judge player's performances more precisely, but oftentimes experts rely on their personal impressions instead - the creation of legends is a big problem for professional reporting about soccer.

What do you mean with "normally mentioned stats" in basketball? There are tons of statictics tracked, I'd say double or triple of what is kept track of in soccer. A big difference (with the stats) between soccer and basketball is that in basketball almost every action a player takes has a directly postive or negative outcome that IS SIGNIFICANT for the result of a game - meaning nearly every action is being rewarded or punished in regard the the team's success, hence the majority of stats contain a very specific assertion about how a player contributed to winning or losing. Whereas in soccer 95 % of what players do during a game has NOT AT ALL any significance for the result of the game because effort is not proportionally rewarded in this sport. This is also why a soccer team can lose or win "undeserved". Soccer is like the only team sport where you can lose or win "undeserved", which has to do with improportional rewarding of effort on the one hand and the big influence of coincidence as well as wrong decisions by referees. And because 95 % of everything happening on the soccer field is not directly connected to the outcome of a game, most statistics have a very limited significance, yet "experts" over-analyse everything like it had some meaning, fooling people to believe soccer was a very complex sport, which is not the case. Soccer is a bicycle that is being analysed with the methods and vocabulary of rocket science. It's like a great parody played on the (backs of the) fans.

What is also pretty overstated in soccer is the influence a coach really has in a game. Now that Liverpool beat Dortmund, all the media is talking about what great abilities Klopp has. But what did he really contribute during the game. And what would those newspapers have wirtten if the game had ended when Dortmund was leading 3:1? Seems like most of the game Klopp did something pretty WRONG because Liverpool was losing. Only in the last minutes things turned the other way - and suddenly Klopp is a genius. In reality most of what happened was coincidence created by the game itself. The game plan (if there has been one) can never beat the coincidental action going on on the field. So, to attribute a coach this and that ability because of certain events in one game, is just as wrong as attributing a player he is a good free-kicker because he hits one free-kick into a goal, while the last 20 shots on goal were misses.

I'll be a patriot and state that KDB will lead us to our first title. 

Hands down the best player in an already impressive selection. 

Go Belgium!

I got tickets for a quarterfinal in Lille btw, here's hoping for a great match.

Edited April 16, 20169 yr by BP

On 15/04/2016 at 11:31 PM, Frank Brickowski said:

I agree very much with you that a main part of the problem here are so called "experts" who take and talk about certain statistics as evidence for this or that opinion they convey. Statistics DO say something, but many times they do NOT support what people talk about. On the other hand, statistics COULD be used to judge player's performances more precisely, but oftentimes experts rely on their personal impressions instead - the creation of legends is a big problem for professional reporting about soccer.

What do you mean with "normally mentioned stats" in basketball? There are tons of statictics tracked, I'd say double or triple of what is kept track of in soccer. A big difference (with the stats) between soccer and basketball is that in basketball almost every action a player takes has a directly postive or negative outcome that IS SIGNIFICANT for the result of a game - meaning nearly every action is being rewarded or punished in regard the the team's success, hence the majority of stats contain a very specific assertion about how a player contributed to winning or losing. Whereas in soccer 95 % of what players do during a game has NOT AT ALL any significance for the result of the game because effort is not proportionally rewarded in this sport. This is also why a soccer team can lose or win "undeserved". Soccer is like the only team sport where you can lose or win "undeserved", which has to do with improportional rewarding of effort on the one hand and the big influence of coincidence as well as wrong decisions by referees. And because 95 % of everything happening on the soccer field is not directly connected to the outcome of a game, most statistics have a very limited significance, yet "experts" over-analyse everything like it had some meaning, fooling people to believe soccer was a very complex sport, which is not the case. Soccer is a bicycle that is being analysed with the methods and vocabulary of rocket science. It's like a great parody played on the (backs of the) fans.

What is also pretty overstated in soccer is the influence a coach really has in a game. Now that Liverpool beat Dortmund, all the media is talking about what great abilities Klopp has. But what did he really contribute during the game. And what would those newspapers have wirtten if the game had ended when Dortmund was leading 3:1? Seems like most of the game Klopp did something pretty WRONG because Liverpool was losing. Only in the last minutes things turned the other way - and suddenly Klopp is a genius. In reality most of what happened was coincidence created by the game itself. The game plan (if there has been one) can never beat the coincidental action going on on the field. So, to attribute a coach this and that ability because of certain events in one game, is just as wrong as attributing a player he is a good free-kicker because he hits one free-kick into a goal, while the last 20 shots on goal were misses.

We will continue this argument via direct messages so we don't spam the thread

Gotta love watching Wes Morgan lifting the BPL Cup.. What a story

I haven't read this thread in awhile but what's up with these novels? I can't read more than like 2 or 3 sentences without nodding off...

1 hour ago, Bold-Arrow said:

Gotta love watching Wes Morgan lifting the BPL Cup.. What a story

And love Burnley doing it at the first time of asking to get back to the prem (even though they took Gray and Tarks off us)

Edited May 7, 20169 yr by Will 4

On 14-4-2016 at 2:14 AM, Bold-Arrow said:

Benzema out ( FRA)

Henderson out (ENG)

Sweini (GER) ?? - likley out 

 

Kompany out (BE)

The Ox out (ENG) 

17 hours ago, BP said:

 

Kompany out (BE)

big blow. unfortunate. 

Welbeck's facial expressions are not assuring as far as his injury goes.. sucks 

At least Vertonghen and alderweireld have performed well for Spurs

At least Vertonghen and alderweireld have performed well for Spurs

True, but they have always been on the LB & RB positions in our NT and I m afraid it ll be the same during the EC, due to lack of better players on that position.