Football

WSJ coming through with shite analysis

ftfy.

what does this really tell you? there's a more interesting story to be told here; it sort of manages it, but it's hard to see. OK, so Brazil got tackled more than Bosnia & Herz and Greece and Argentina spent broadly the same time writhing on the floor.

It should have been done by average minutes spent on the floor per 'injury'.

and yes, I like stats...so I ranked by that metric.

apart from that...this:

Wow. Possibly the dumbest article I have ever had the misfortune to read.

During the first 32 games, there were 302 players who could be seen at some point rolling around in pain, crumpling into a fetal position or lying lifeless on the pitch as the referee stopped the match. These theatrical episodes ate up a total of 132 minutes of clock, a metric we have decided to call "writhing time."

But it was nice of them to add this little caveat.

To be fair, it is actually possible to get hurt playing soccer

Even if they did immediately dismiss it by adding

There were nine injuries in total that forced players to be substituted from the game and to miss, or potentially miss, a match. These were discarded. That left 293 cases of potential embellishment that collectively took up 118 minutes, 21 seconds.

So let's actually consider how many of these 293 cases were likely embellishment.
Later the article states.

The study showed one thing emphatically: The amount of histrionics your players display during a match correlates strongly to what the scoreboard says. Players on teams that were losing their games accounted for 40 "injuries" and nearly 12.5 minutes of writhing time. But players on teams that were winning—the ones who have the most incentive to run out the clock—accounted for 103 "injuries" and almost four times as much writhing.

That is actually one the only worthwhile parts of this article but two things come from it that really highlight what nonsense the article is overall.
Firstly I don't understand the discrepancy in the numbers, now we have 143 injuries yet before the article stated 293 injuries, which is it?
Secondly it is safe to assume of the 40 injuries to players on losing teams there was no embellishment for time wasting though I accept it is possible 1 or 2 may have been feigning injury trying to get a player booked.
Even so on face value that means we can deduct 40 from the possible embellishment category and then we can also extrapolate that a similar amount of real injuries occurred to winning teams players so we can take away another 40. That means only 63 of the injuries should be considered as potentially being truly embellished and who knows what the real value is there? I would say as an absolute minimum at least half would be players in real pain leaving around 30. That is a rather different number to the 293 cases the article claims should be considered as players feigning injury or potential embellishment.

On top of that the article refers to flopping and not feigning injury in the headline, they are two different things.

It never ceases to amaze me the depths some authors will go to in order to put a negative spin on soccer.

Keys, Gray, Platt, Heskey and Moyes.

Keys and Gray are the Simon and Garfunkel of punditry, but without the worldwide esteem - they just skipped right to the being privately hateful of each other part. I can remember Platt coming for dinner at a Nottingham restaurant I cooked at yonks back, but he won't as his refined right-peg consumes his Midlands brain. Heskey says too much by staying silent and Moyes is the type to find Louis Walsh inspirational. A panel with bottom-of-the-barrel aspirations.

I've been enjoying Martin O'Neill on ITV, but apart from him it's a load of tripe. Ian Wright still can't quite believe his luck at being invited again, but not as much as I can't believe he's paid to sit there in shirts as bad as his remarks. Hoddle's not yet dropped to his knees and blessed Adrian Chiles, so apart from his sunglasses and ugly knees he's OK by me. The BBC win in the panel department, as they do with their captions and graphics, which are as equally important in World Cup broadcasting as a programme's titles and theme music.

Not been a thriller this game...

Great stuff at the death from Ecuador... Shame they didn't get one in...

I'm happy they didn't... france clean sheet + messi's 2 goals push my dreamteam score up to 150

^ The whole thing is bonkers...

Not a great half of football, France not looking as sharp as they did in their previous games... Ecuador could even nick it...

Can't believe I just typed that last statement... Kerrazy World Cup...

#Cornypost

LFGSS's own Nigel Farage/Richard Littlejohn.

"You can't say anything any more without being branded a racist. We're just saying what everyone is thinking. Hanging's too good for 'em..."

I suppose I could have finished my sentence by saying that... If you don't go along with LFGSS group think then someone will accuse you of being The Daily Mail etc. But predictably, someone has done it for me.

"What are the rules about biting in the World Cup? There probably should be one."

Bruce Springsteen.

A little perspective on the Suarez thing..

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/worldcup/luis-suarez-bite-lets-move-past-the-shock-value-and-get-some-perspective-9563690.html

He's still a cunt.

Fuck perspective, let's have a lynching.

From the first para...

He did not fix a match, which strikes at the very heart of sport. He did not use performance-enhancing drugs, which is the most insidious form of cheating. He did not go over the top and break an opponent’s leg, or shatter an opponent’s nose or cheekbone with an elbow. He did not attack a referee (he has done that, head-butting an official, but that was 11 years ago when he was playing youth team football at 16 and he received a long ban).

This is a little presumptuous. He may have fixed to get sent off in the last 10 minutes (he may not). He might be on drugs if all the rumours of other teams having a bit of help from mysterious doctors are to be believed (he may not). He didn't break any bones, but he nearly broke the skin what sort of sick weirdo goes around biting people? He may be some sort of cannibal (He may not). The fact that he's had several of these run ins before and doesn't seem to learn is the worst part. The punishment shouldn't be for one event, it should be a culmination of fuck ups that he's treated us to during his career.

Tl;dr version: He's a cunt, always has been, always will be. You can't defend his actions, especially with presumptions from a kopite journo.

FIFA meeting today, hopefully he gets a lengthy ban. Across all football. Forever. And from his local pub, chippy and tesco metro.

http://www.change.org/petitions/sepp-blatter-ban-luis-suarez-from-the-world-cup-2014-for-biting-giorgio-chiellini-in-the-uruguay-vs-italy-match

What pissed me off was him biting an Italian. England pay his wages. He should have bitten an England player. Preferably at the start of the match, and been sent off to give us a chance.

^^^^^^^ What has Rugby got to do with this?
Yes, he needs psychiatric help and a long ban (hopefully including domestic). That is clear.
So we should lay off him 'cause there are worse ways of getting injured on the pitch, oh and he's South American and it's a cultural thing? Not forgetting that other people have done other things that are bad, as well as in other sports....Yawn.
The reason he's despised by everyone, except those who have a vested interest in getting him off, is that he's a nasty vicious little shit who'll think nothing of trying to get his victim blamed as soon as he's committed his latest sneaky move.
He's violent, he cheats, he bites like a spoilt toddler and there should be no place for him in the game.
Until he's had some help and sorted himself out.
As the man says, "north of his feet, there's nothing good about Suarez".

http://www.change.org/petitions/sepp-blatter-ban-luis-suarez-from-the-world-cup4-for-biting-giorgio-chiellini-in-the-uruguay-vs-italy-match

Hahahahahahaha.

• This behaviour is not acceptable. If this disgraceful behaviour goes unpunished, what kind of message is that for the millions of youngsters watching the football throughout the world?*
  
  

Like pro football players arent already a god awful influence on kids learning sport.

I'd love a long ban if only for the RAWK community to just lose it altogether.

So when's the fifa report on Qatar due?

You're more likely to be bitten by Suarez than a shark.

http://www.joe.ie/football/football-news/maths-says-you-are-more-likely-to-be-bitten-by-luis-suarez-than-a-shark/

That's too sensible a question when we've got all the WC tourists/holidaymakers visiting...

@MG: It's a fair cop... slits throat

A little perspective on the Suarez thing..

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/worldcup/luis-suarez-bite-lets-move-past-the-shock-value-and-get-some-perspective-9563690.html

perspective? christ, what a shit article from blatant kop journalist.

the cunt fucking bit someone. FOR THE THIRD TIME! i've said it before, the cunt is not human. i'd burn him in front of his family.

Nice.

Ander Herrera transfer is starrting to starting to look like Fellaini MKII.

About time those clowns are being held to ransom.

FIFA meeting today, hopefully he gets a lengthy ban. Across all football. Forever. And from his local pub, chippy and tesco metro.

That's just plain low...