Shane Long

[Wizard]

I was impressed with Shane at Sheffield Weds when he came on. Thought he looked lively and deserved his goal. I couldn't make Plymouth (work got in the way of that) but from what I have heard he played well, and so I hope he is able to keep his place tonight. It can only do wonders for his confidence to get a bit of a run in the side. Can see him scoring tonight too.

[papereyes]

He's got to turn it up a gear now that we've got a proper striker in as competition

[Royal Rother]

Reading (and quoting) cmonurz's whole sentence would have been a decent start.

You mean: If you look at the distribution of all of our goals, I'm sure the majority are scored in the last 20 minutes (the analysis must surely be on one of these threads somewhere). And that's not surprising. It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game.


That is TOTALLY clear IMO, and the analysis had already been done by me
and had shown that we DIDN"T score more foals per minute in the last 15+

Perhaps cmonurz and yourself don't know what "majority" means

It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game.

IF it is easier to score towards the end of the game, then we should expect more goals towards the end of the game.

Reading do NOT get more goals towards the end of the game (per minute). The difference is because of extra time. .80 v .83 is a tiny difference.

Now a difference like .8 v .4 (the 15 minutes before half-time is relatively goal-free) THAT is something real, at least in reading games

Snowball, I suspect it was perfectly obvious to 95% of readers what cmonurz meant, even if, as you rightly point out, the construction of the sentence was a little flawed.

Your stats on distribution of goals stack up perfectly on this, but deliberate misinterpretation of posts does you no credit. If, having read cmonurz's post, your brain doesn't send a little message to your consciousness telling you it is pretty unlikely that he really believes we score more goals in the last 18 minutes of a game than during the first 72+ minutes and that it's probably worth reading it again, then I think there is something a little flawed in the old grey matter, chap.

Loving the stats - bit bored with the attitude.

[cmonurz]

As others have pointed out, it's fairly obvious what point I was making.

Thank you for breaking the stats down, and I'm genuinely surprised that the distribution isn't more skewed towards the last half hour. It's certainly the perception I've got this season. Although to be pedantic, the stats do show that we have scored more in the last 15, than in the first 15.

My point re your data stands - that our subs haven't generally come on and scored shows only that. Not necessarily that it isn't easier to score towards the end of the game.

I thought the distribution of goals scored towards the end of the game was one of football's more accepted stats.

[Snowball]

Reading (and quoting) cmonurz's whole sentence would have been a decent start.

You mean: If you look at the distribution of all of our goals, I'm sure the majority are scored in the last 20 minutes (the analysis must surely be on one of these threads somewhere). And that's not surprising. It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game.
That is TOTALLY clear IMO, and the analysis had already been done by me
and had shown that we DIDN"T score more foals per minute in the last 15+
Perhaps cmonurz and yourself don't know what "majority" means

It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game.

IF it is easier to score towards the end of the game, then we should expect more goals towards the end of the game.
Reading do NOT get more goals towards the end of the game (per minute). The difference is because of extra time. .80 v .83 is a tiny difference.
Now a difference like .8 v .4 (the 15 minutes before half-time is relatively goal-free) THAT is something real, at least in reading games

Snowball, I suspect it was perfectly obvious to 95% of readers what cmonurz meant, even if, as you rightly point out, the construction of the sentence was a little flawed.
Your stats on distribution of goals stack up perfectly on this, but deliberate misinterpretation of posts does you no credit. If, having read cmonurz's post, your brain doesn't send a little message to your consciousness telling you it is pretty unlikely that he really believes we score more goals in the last 18 minutes of a game than during the first 72+ minutes and that it's probably worth reading it again, then I think there is something a little flawed in the old grey matter, chap.

Loving the stats - bit bored with the attitude.

PLEASE EXPLAIN (in English) what "If you look at the distribution of all of our goals, I'm sure the majority are scored in the last 20 minutes (the analysis must surely be on one of these threads somewhere). And that's not surprising. It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game." means.

[Snowball]

As others have pointed out, it's fairly obvious what point I was making.

Thank you for breaking the stats down, and I'm genuinely surprised that the distribution isn't more skewed towards the last half hour. It's certainly the perception I've got this season. Although to be pedantic, the stats do show that we have scored more in the last 15, than in the first 15.

No they DON'T. They show we've scored more in the last 15 PLUS EXTRA-TIME.

Fedders scored in the NINETY-SIXTH minute. That means that particular "15" was twenty-one minutes, FORTY-PER CENT LONGER

I thought the distribution of goals scored towards the end of the game was one of football's more accepted stats.

I thought it too. BUT I went and checked

And my POINT (as with most of these things is, most people PRESUME and never check. The myths are perpetuated because "everybody knows"

Hell it's not hard. The stats are in every home programme.

[Snowball]

I think we should remember that my stats are FOR READING, and we know that Reading go all out for early goals.

That might explain why we score freely in the first half-hour then "take a breather"

And that might also explain why OUR stats do not show a significant increase in goal-scoring in the last 15 minutes

I found a stat for the Premiership and THERE there is a definite late-goal tendency

(I added 1 minute to the 3rd 15 and 3 mins to the last 15. For all I know extra time might average 5 minutes
but even then there'd be a significant difference)


So the point is, IN A PREMIERSHIP SEASON, ALL TEAMS, THERE IS A LATE-GOAL TENDENCY, but for Reading, this season, there ISN'T

05.7
06.7
06.1

HT

06.6
07.7
10.3

[CMRoyal]

I think we should remember that my stats are FOR READING, and we know that Reading go all out for early goals.

That might explain why we score freely in the first half-hour then "take a breather"

There's also the fact that against weaker clubs, if we don't score early they tend to gain in confidence, and so far this season we've struggled to then find a way of breaking them down.

[cmonurz]

I don't think this season, for one club, should be taken as conclusive proof that a general distribution of goals to the end of the match is a myth.

In fact, earlier this season, I recall comments being made on this board at how we had found a habit of starting games so well, and scoring early goals. I think in the majority of our early wins, we scored before the 20th minute, or something like that.

On our goal distribution, and re your last post, it's worth noting that the constraints chosen, first and last 15 minutes, provide very different results than if you use first and last 10 minutes.

On the hypothesis that it gets easier to score as you get to the end of a game, we have scored 6 goals in the first 10 minutes of games this season, and 13 goals in the final 10 minutes.

Another stat that stands out is our goals conceded. Just 12 in the first half of games this season and 26 in the second half. And for comparison, just 2 in the firsst 10 minutes of games, and 9 in the final 10 minutes.

Finally - stop being so hostile to anyone who raises a point about your stats. As RR has pointed out, its getting a bit wearying. I'm not being hostile, or facetious, just giving my opinion.

[Royal Rother]

PLEASE EXPLAIN (in English) what "If you look at the distribution of all of our goals, I'm sure the majority are scored in the last 20 minutes (the analysis must surely be on one of these threads somewhere). And that's not surprising. It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game." means.

You don't see it now, you won't see it later. It was a poorly constructed sentence - maybe I just know cmonurz well enough to know that he doesn't think we score more goals in the last 15 minutes than in the rest of the game. Whatever... move on.

[cmonurz]

Ok, I did some statting.

Diustribution of goals for Championship sides in 08-09. Note this includes cup games, as that's how the stats are shown on football365.com. These numbers do not include injury time.

First 10 minutes: 96
Last 10 minutes: 190

First 15 minutes: 129
Last 15 minutes: 230

It seems fairly clear that Reading are an exception to the rule this season. I have got this all broken down by team, and will post if anyone is interested.

FTR, the teams that have scored more at the start of a game than at the end are Wolves, Birmingham (incredibly!), and Doncaster, whilst Sheffield Weds have scored 7 goals in each segment. All other sides have scored more towards the end of a game, some markedly.

Preston have 3 in the first 15 minutes, and 12 in the last 15 minutes. Derby have 7 and 18, Burnley 13 and 21, Bristol City 4 and 14.

[Snowball]

I don't think this season, for one club, should be taken as conclusive proof that a general distribution of goals to the end of the match is a myth.

Why do you post such a statement immediately after I posted stats to show that late-goals ARE a phenomenon, at least in the Premiership.

In fact, earlier this season, I recall comments being made on this board at how we had found a habit of starting games so well, and scoring early goals. I think in the majority of our early wins, we scored before the 20th minute, or something like that.

On our goal distribution, and re your last post, it's worth noting that the constraints chosen, first and last 15 minutes, provide very different results than if you use first and last 10 minutes.

Well that's because the programme gives a quick-look stat based on 15 minutes

However realise that if you compare first-ten versus last-ten it's actually 10 minutes versus THIRTEEN
so if the last ten total goals exceeds the first ten by 30% that's what you should expect.

[Snowball]

PLEASE EXPLAIN (in English) what "If you look at the distribution of all of our goals, I'm sure the majority are scored in the last 20 minutes (the analysis must surely be on one of these threads somewhere). And that's not surprising. It isn't flawed to suggest it is 'easier' to score towards the end of the game." means.

You don't see it now, you won't see it later. It was a poorly constructed sentence - maybe I just know cmonurz well enough to know that he doesn't think we score more goals in the last 15 minutes than in the rest of the game. Whatever... move on.

It wasn't poorly-constructed it was WRONG

Hence you won't explain it.

[CMRoyal]

However realise that if you compare first-ten versus last-ten it's actually 10 minutes versus THIRTEEN
so if the last ten total goals exceeds the first ten by 30% that's what you should expect.

Looking at cmonurz's stats for this season's Championship, it's more like >200%.

[Snowball]

I've looked up the overall stats for the Prem and when you break them down
it shows that the overall, lumping all the clubs together, is a meaningless statistic

Just look at Fulham here, they score 21-17-13-17-21-13 (all rounded up)
and if you allow for the fact that we play an average of 3 minutes over-time the figures are

21-17-13-17-21 and TEN, so in Fulham's case the last segment is their LOWEST-scoring

As the last segment should see 16.67% of the goals, you can see that

Fulham, West Ham, Chelsea and Manchester United actually score LESS than expected in the last 15/18

West Brom, Bolton, Hull, Pompey all score marginally higher than the 17%

But look at BORO! An incredible FORTY-THREE PER CENT of their goals
come after the 75th minutes (36% when the overtime is factored in)


What this tells me is that the average statistic is a pointless one, that we have to look
on a club-by-club basis. As I've said, Reading have been going "all-out" early on, and
it looks like the rest before half-time and then do the same second-half.

But, I say again, READING (this season) do NOT show a significant increase in goals scored per minute in the last 15/18

20.83% 16.67% 12.50% 16.67% 20.83% 12.50% 10% Fulham
14.71% 17.65% 20.59% 14.71% 17.65% 14.71% 12% West Ham Utd
12.50% 20.83% 18.75% 18.75% 12.50% 16.67% 14% Chelsea
12.50% 20.83% 14.58% 14.58% 18.75% 18.75% 16% Manchester Utd

15.38% 00.00% 11.54% 26.92% 23.08% 23.08% 19% West Bromwich
26.67% 13.33% 23.33% 10.00% 03.33% 23.33% 19% Bolton
08.82% 17.65% 11.76% 14.71% 23.53% 23.53% 20% Hull City
06.90% 10.34% 06.90% 24.14% 27.59% 24.14% 20% Portsmouth

17.39% 17.39% 13.04% 15.22% 10.87% 26.09% 22% Arsenal
15.56% 15.56% 13.33% 17.78% 11.11% 26.67% 22% Manchester City
04.76% 19.05% 14.29% 11.90% 21.43% 28.57% 24% Aston Villa
17.65% 11.76% 14.71% 14.71% 11.76% 29.41% 25% Newcastle Utd
06.67% 20.00% 23.33% 03.33% 16.67% 30.00% 25% Blackburn
11.11% 07.41% 00.00% 25.93% 22.22% 33.33% 28% Stoke City
15.15% 21.21% 06.06% 00.00% 24.24% 33.33% 28% Tottenham
22.22% 07.41% 14.81% 11.11% 11.11% 33.33% 28% Wigan Athletic
04.35% 10.87% 17.39% 13.04% 19.57% 34.78% 29% Liverpool
25.00% 10.71% 07.14% 14.29% 07.14% 35.71% 30% Sunderland
05.56% 11.11% 16.67% 13.89% 16.67% 36.11% 30% Everton
04.76% 09.52% 19.05% 04.76% 19.05% 42.86% 36% Middlesbrough

[Snowball]

However realise that if you compare first-ten versus last-ten it's actually 10 minutes versus THIRTEEN
so if the last ten total goals exceeds the first ten by 30% that's what you should expect.

Looking at cmonurz's stats for this season's Championship, it's more like >200%.

Point One. We are Reading FC. The post above shows that different teams have extremely different stats
and the average is pretty much meaningless

[Snowball]

A lot of the last-15 difference is due to extra minutes played

Here are games where goals were scored in overtime showing that in 29% of games there have been crucial late goals AFTER the 90-minute mark, 8 goals, 6 for and 2 against, just for Man Utd.

Yet Fulham had neither scored or conceded in overtime. These results are so massively different that averaging them is silly.

Middlesboro are even weirder. They score over 40% of their goals in the last 15 minutes, but only once have they scored after the 90-mark.

8 out of 28 28.57% 6 2 4 Manchester Utd
8 out of 28 28.57% 3 5 -2 West Ham Utd
8 out of 28 28.57% 3 6 -3 Tottenham
7 out of 27 25.93% 3 7 -4 Blackburn
7 out of 28 25.00% 5 2 3 Chelsea
7 out of 28 25.00% 5 4 1 Arsenal
6 out of 28 21.43% 4 3 1 Manchester City
6 out of 28 21.43% 4 4 0 Everton
5 out of 27 18.52% 2 3 -1 Sunderland
5 out of 28 17.86% 2 3 -1 West Bromwich
4 out of 28 14.29% 0 4 -4 Newcastle Utd
3 out of 28 10.71% 2 1 1 Wigan Athletic
3 out of 28 10.71% 2 1 1 Portsmouth
3 out of 28 10.71% 2 2 0 Aston Villa
2 out of 28 07.14% 2 0 2 Hull City
2 out of 28 07.14% 1 1 0 Liverpool
2 out of 28 07.14% 1 2 -1 Bolton
1 out of 27 03.70% 1 0 1 Middlesbrough
1 out of 28 03.57% 2 0 2 Stoke City
0 out of 27 00.00% 0 0 0 Fulham

[Hoop Blah]

Those stats do show that on the whole, most teams score more goals in the last half an hour than they do for the first hour.

A few exceptions to the rule, including Reading perhaps, doesn't make that general trend meaningless.

[CMRoyal]

However realise that if you compare first-ten versus last-ten it's actually 10 minutes versus THIRTEEN
so if the last ten total goals exceeds the first ten by 30% that's what you should expect.

Looking at cmonurz's stats for this season's Championship, it's more like >200%.

Point One. We are Reading FC. The post above shows that different teams have extremely different stats
and the average is pretty much meaningless

The average might be meaningless (actually, it isn't but we'll let that pass) but I reckon a graph/histogram and analysis of points gained will prove that they are anything but meaningless on a team by team basis. Anyway, talking of meaningless, I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve by answering my quote in that way - all I was trying to do was to add some more light to the discussion. You seem to be more keen on "winning" the argument than allowing facts like mine above stand up on their own merit.

[Snowball]

The average might be meaningless (actually, it isn't but we'll let that pass) but I reckon a graph/histogram and analysis of points gained will prove that they are anything but meaningless on a team by team basis. Anyway, talking of meaningless, I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve by answering my quote in that way - all I was trying to do was to add some more light to the discussion. You seem to be more keen on "winning" the argument than allowing facts like mine above stand up on their own merit.

CM, this "stat" came from the (as usual) attempts to hammer Shane Long.

When I showed he was scoring well per minute played I was told that was because it was so much easier to score in the last 15 minutes.

So what could be fairer than checking that FOR READING?

It's totally clear that Reading's modus operandi, (and some other clubs) is very, very different

For example, compare Boro and Fulham, they are worlds apart.


The reason, therefore, I answer your post "that way" is that I am talking about Long/Reading and was showing (PROVING) that
the team as a whole doesn't score freely in the last fifteen, but that Long is responsible (when a sub) for a high proportion of those goals)