@@AfoxTheOne messi is not best not even top 5 . only tap ins no long shots no air ability rigged and supported by fifa refs . overratted by fifa and fans
Thomas Muller segment was good. Many fans do not understand what technical ability actually means. Technical ability is more than just how easy you make it. It is also based on decision making too. Rene meulensteen spoke about this
@@yusavelli0448 if your view of the game is elite, having good technical ability amplifies it 10x, cause you can use your vision to make creative decisions. so i think they are both equally important, one enables the other to work
One time i decided to watch the entire game where Ronaldinho got a standing ovation at the Bernabeu. A few minutes into the game he gets a pass with no pressure on him and it trickles under his foot out of bounds and that caught me by surprise . I was so used to Ronaldinho perfect highlights where every pass was accurate and every shot was a goal that I forgot he could make mistakes. Watching the full game made me realize he was even better than in the highlights. Goes to show in order to really know how good a player is you have to watch his games.
Yeah! It was the same for me, he tried things I haven't seen anyone try, but he missed and lost the ball a lot, and the next time he got the ball he had the same confidence to try again and eventually doing something out of this world
I got into football because of Ronaldinho, and my conclusion is different. I think you're romanticizing things. He wasn't as good as the highlights show. Nobody is, but especially players like him or Zidane who everyone remembers by moments and not consistency. Flashy players benefit from huge double standards. People remember Dinho as a better player than Xavi because Dinho had more impressive individual moments, but Xavi was consistency personified. And that's what every manager actually wants from their players, no matter the style of manager. Ferguson, Pep, Ancelotti, Mourinho, Sean Dyche, all want their players to be consistent. No manager wants to field a player with a 10% chance of being a 10/10 and a 90% chance of being a 4-5/10. It's an old cliche which I believe Ferguson said: the best players are a 7/10 every game.
agreed... and this is why the whole "Palmer is a pen merchant" stuff, is nonsense... he got locked down against Liverpool (triple-marked at times) and people are calling him trash. It really is weird. The eye test of consistent brilliance, never lies... in that game against Liverpool, he still managed 2 shots at goal, created 2-3 key chances and completed a few dribbles. And I believe that was his worst game in a Chelsea shirt in a VERY LONG time
@@vespasiancloscan7077 It's only double standards if you don't apply any context to it. The reason flashy players get more notice is because they try things which are harder and more magical. It's easier to be a 8/10 player if all you do is the safe option, it's harder to be a flair player and be consistent, but high risk high rewards. That being said, I am NOT saying that flair players automatically become better than non-flashy players, and your point is definitely valid in that consistency is important, but we need to add the context of what the role and their purpose on the field is and then see how consistency is maintained in that equation. A player who constantly tries flashy non-constructive things is much more of a negative than a player who does his role with no fuss and properly, and that's what separates the R10s (in his prime), Zidanes (who was NOT inconsistent, that is a myth I have repeatedly debunked in other forums) and Maradonas from the rest of the pack, they were able to combine that magical flair with relative consistency and big game performances
great point about drogba. He was also a hold up play striker who created space which people tend to overlook. He still managed to score over 350 goals in his career and had one of the best individual seasons prem s ever seen
another thing about Drogba the stats won't tell you is that where another striker would give the ball away, he wouldn't before dragging a player or two out of position... a thing that will hugely benefit the team
@@kedrprao in terms of ability, hes just as good if not better than each of those dudes. in terms of output then yeah ill give it to those guys but youre extremely wrong, be quiet please
@@nameless.0190 nothing against talking about football but stats and analysis were clearly created by professionals. The average person on social media uses stats to look like a "professional" so he can "prove" that he is better than the other.
I watched Busquets live when he came to the MLS and he was insane. His first touch always glued to his foot, perfect positioning, and just controlled the game. Seeing a talent like that in front of your eyes makes you appreciate it a lot more.
I know the exact feeling. For me it was when Nigeria came to play against my country Namibia. Watching Obi Mikel in the flesh just put into context the definition of "head and shoulders above the rest". It was the simple stuff that was so impressive, how it seemed like he had more time than everyone else. he was playing the game on his own terms. Everyone in the stadium was stunned at just how good this guy was, despite the fact that we watched him week in week out on TV.
Busquets isn't underrated, Barca and some others will say he is the greatest DM of all time(look at ESPN's recent list), Xabi Alonso is the one who is criminally underrated.
I think we’re all missing the bigger picture. It’s not about which method is 'better,' but about combining both to get a fuller, richer understanding of the game. Stats provide objectivity and show trends we might miss, while the eye test reveals the nuances stats can’t capture, like a player’s influence on team morale, or those subtle movements that don’t show up in numbers. Imagine trying to enjoy a painting by just counting the brush strokes or colors used-you’re missing the experience! Football’s the same: it’s both science and art. Instead of arguing, let’s embrace how both methods give us a deeper love for the game.
In statistics there's a saying "All models are wrong, but some are useful." Yes there's no one stat that can tell everything about how good a player is, but completely ignoring all stats isn't the way either. Some stats are useful and they help with getting closer to the truth. Ultimately the best approach is a mixture of both an eye test to catch things that can't be seen by stats but also using stats as data points to make an overall picture of what a player is. Stats isn't the end point, it's a start. Personally though, I believe that eventually the stats will evolve in the future such that it will be able to catch things seen by the eye test that are not yet captured by the current analytics.
No,no,no You watch them and if they are of similar skill level you used stats like foden and Palmer That's when you use stats if a footballer can't do the basics right its a big flaw
@@timmyjoshua276 problem is, a player like Busquets probably wouldn't pass the eye test for a lot of people. We've all seen his highlights, but the rest of the game is almost boring. Sideways and backward passes, maybe an "easy" interception. That doesn't paint the whole picture, because Busquets is always in a perfect position, understands the game like no one else and controls the rhythm perfectly. A lot of Barca fans wanted him out during his last season, but his absence was probably the biggest blow for Barca during the Xavi era. As was said, you need to know what to look for, and stats help a lot with that
@@eduardosancho8605 Again ball knowledge, why do you think this quote come from a player, when you watch busquet you see the game, fans generally don't care about football just want the win to brag for 2-3 days, that's the reason football today is also dead, no talent, because now everyone is following the best way to give their fans a power trip, that's why busuqet same with kroos were never appreciated early in their career, they didnt give much they could brag about to the average fan, but anyone that as some interest in how it works is wax lyrical about busquet
Crazy how Messi prevails in normal stats , advanced stats and also in the eye test crazyy a player like this is even debatable to be best ever with anyone else
Olivier Giroud is a curious case. Good numbers. Great career. Wonderful highlights. He passed eye tests and stats tests. But we do grieve when he play.
Average numbers, not good. His most goals in a premier season was 16 which is awfully mid for a lone striker who played for a top 6 team most of his career.
Only reason you would say he had a "great" career is the world cup and champions league for Chelsea. In that Champions league he only scored 1 goal in the knockouts. He also didn't score a single goal in the 2018 world cup, just 1 assist in the whole tournament. Giroud is the definition of a bang average player that was just fortunate with some of the situations he found himself in his career.
I am more on the eye test side, but stats is the future. If you know how to interpret data with context (most don't) then you'll be fooled. You must begin with eyetest & then use stats to backup the claim as well as what you've seen with your eyes
Thats true, the eye test is backed up by the correct stats. A player looks like they never give the ball away, well we can see that in pass completed or how many times they get dispossessed Player has huge passing variety, we can see that with how good the short, medium and longer passes completion rate. How frequently they do it The player always does something with the ball, we can see if passing forward stats, how many players they beat with dribbles etc. We can always have a stat to measure what a player does and it will match the eye test. If we record the correct stats and use them properly
So instead of first using logic (stats) you develop an opinion (emotion) first? That can cause you to misread the Stats (logic) by cherry picking data to match your opinion (emotion)
@@grsafranbecause stats will never be able to capture the full picture. It’s not emotion but induction. No player that’s actually good will look bad consistently; they make things look easy. Most people don’t know how statistical models work or how to correctly apply stats so they’re largely useless. Stats are only useful for scouts and clubs.
The eye test tells you how good a player is and the statistics give you context to support or contradict that opinion. The most importantly thing is understanding the role of the player in a team and how good of a job they are doing at it.
nah, I'd put Scholes, or Carrick above Lamps. He's great at anything dont get me wrong, but call him Maestro is quite over the top and dont bring assists stat in this case cause if you bring that that means Giggsy, Rooney, or Ozil is one of the best passing maestro like Kroos, KDB, Pirlo, Busi, or Xavi.
I’ve seen lampard play. There’s this narrative about him being so good & lamps was boring to watch honestly. He was a good player with great numbers & great players around him. He was on all the free kicks and pens, come to think of it, Mount is literally his regen 😂. He not that good, just had numbers & PR! KDB is BETTER than him!!! The 1st time I saw KDB in Chelsea I said this kid is better than lampard but because lampard is English he couldn’t get in & they’ll never admit it! KDB is the same player haunting the premier league today
The Messi and Ronaldo debate is a good example as well, for me messi is the better player not solely on stats, but mainly bc of the eye test, he didn’t need to score or assist to control and dictate the entire game
Messi could have had Iniesta's stats, and the eye test would still have me arguing that he was better than Ronaldo. The fact that the debate raged throughout their entire careers despite Messi also having similar numbers of goals and assists is solely down to how valuable a rivalry is to the media, and how ignorant many casual fans are about anything beyond goals.
@@korganrocks3995 That's what happens when the people keeping the debate alive watch football through highlights. No one apart from United and Madrid fans are on Ronaldo's side, literally no one, yet the debate lives on. I can't comprehend how someone could sit down, watch both of them play and still argue about it.
Stats are so important. I think people need to use BETTER stats, not only goals and assists because goals and assists are just more easily contable. But if you include progression passes, opportunity creation numbers, and the speed of the game (yes, adjusting for speed is also important, in some games the attacking phases are slower than others), you have a better understanding of a players value. This type of stats are common and very easily available in the NBA related websites. We just need more information available for fans, but I think the clubs have better models and better stats and don't want other clubs to copy their evaluation models. The fans just need to search for better information and not only use basic stats.
But what happened to "I don't know." People will spend an hour arguing about a player's performance when they could've easily just spent that watching the game for themselves. People just want to have opinions on everything when they clearly don't have enough information. If you haven't watched iniesta play, don't offer opinions on him. It's really that simple.
@@totsh2056 But if you just watch it you have a higher chance of it being an opinion because of bias. Stats are just eye test with more proof. Like without stats, how are you gonna prove that one is better? Like for example, if you're eye test is so good but you still have very bad chance creating then you're not that good. Or that you're not a good striker if you have little goals
Completely agree. People use the argument "G + A alone don't illustrate who's the best player" to say "stats in general are bad" and it's as frustrating as it is illogical
i came here to say that, people low ball maguire a lot when he does a lot of heavy lifting. Biggest maguire problems are lack of self confidence and mobility, both of them that can be helped by a competent manager. Which is not the story for man utd.
The answer is stats used right - and I mean professionally, by clubs, the kind of stats that the public don’t have access to, is the best way. But most stats used on social media are cherry picked and don’t mean anything.
That's a terrifically well made video. You do mention that Salah was signed based off of stats, but many players are signed on stats (like Darwin Nunez) and flop. You can sign players on stats and it's going to be a roulette. I agree with what you said earlier in the video the most: Stats can show you the profile, but not the skill level.
Also other factors I remember klopp brought immobile to bvb and on paper it made sense but in reality he was an southern Italian boy with a completely different culture and never made friends with anyone at bvb and also had language barrier problems ended up feeling lonely and also from a football philosophy POV couldn't understand how bvb was trying to play with quick precise passes
There are a lot of criminally underrated players, it took Kroos winning 4 UCLs before people started appreciating how gargantuan a player Kroos was. Same with Busquests. Muller, Greizman, Jordi Alba, Kroos, Carvajal and Busquests and so many others are some criminally underrated players despite them having the stats to prove their importance. I am a big fan of using stats to evaluate players because I know for a fact that many people don't understand what they watch with their eyes. Last season and the previous season, people's gripe with Raphinha was that he couldn't beat his man, and because of that they felt that Raphinha was not a good winger, but I kept explaining to many of them that a player can influence a game without dribbling one soul and thanks to Flick, my theory on Raphinha's excellence has come to fruition. I appreciate your content and I am definitely a subscriber and cheers to more content like this.
@@anthrazit9474 beyond Muller's goals and assists, he is underrated. A lot of people don't understand how excellent Muller was. More excellent than other volume creators like KDB, Fabregas, David Silva and Ozil
@@ikennaonwunli5072 KDB and Silva were far better than Müller. It is not even close. I do not care about goals and assists. I care about what I see on the field. And Müller is a good scorer, but if he not score it is like playing with one player less.
@@anthrazit9474 the exact display of ignorance I expected to see and it's alright. KDB and Silva far better than Muller based on what? Muller has more goals than either of them, has more assists than either of them, has more trophies than either of them, played more matches than either of them. Contributed to the success of his teams than either of them but they are better than him. How? Simple, you don't understand what you watch. And it's alright.
Zidane, Ronaldinho, Cantona... 3 great examples of players with all the ability in the world to score more goals than they did. What they gave their team was a unique aura. Opposition would've been less confident going into the games because of the ability they had and the extra belief they gave their own teammates. That's something no spreadsheet can possibly show
@ochoymedio78 that's true for Cantona and Zidane, but less so for Ronaldinho. Apart from the free-kick against England and his 2 goals to earn a standing ovation at the Bernabéu... I can't think of too many winning goals in the biggest games from Ronaldinho.
Really enjoyed this video man. I especially agree with the comments about Zidane. People use his somewhat middling stats as a lazy crutch to beat him over the head and say that he can never and should never be considered as a GOAT candidate, which I personally think is wrong. I also feel that his inconsistency and tendency to go missing are overstated somewhat. Anyway, amazing effort on the vid 😀
Two problems with stats: 1 the quality of the opposition. 2 the quality or performance of your teammates. You have countless examples of players whos stats looked like gold against poor opposition, and then you have others whos stats weren’t great at low level but out of nowhere they’re blooming at high level.
@@9snagaNot necessarily, in the first example you’d see players killing it against players who are barely able to walk in a straight line and falling over. If you have half a brain it would be possible to make the leap to that they may struggle to do the same against players who run and work defensively as a team. In the second example anyone with a decent understanding of the game can see someone who is placed correctly and make smart passes that go straight to the opponent because their teammate didn’t want to run, or make clever runs that are ignored because the player on the ball doesn’t see them. The biggest problem with the eye test is that most football fans aren’t able to read the game properly. And fail to see that a midfielder who has had 3 sideways passes during a game actually had a 10/10 defensive performance because they denied the opponents creative midfielder the space to operate successfully.
@@cfcfan72Actually, I'd argue that the biggest disadvantage of the eye test is the fact that we're all just human, and can never see everything. Even if you have a high understanding of the game and know what to look for when watching, you're never gonna be able to see everything and notice every little detail, and that is where the eye test fails and stats succeed. Ultimately, asking which is the better method betrays a bad understanding of the sport, because the truth is that combining both the eye test and the stats will give you a much fuller understanding of a player's ability, than simply using one over the other.
i typically watch football without commentary. when i talk about a game with someone else, i sometimes think we did watch different games. i think the eye test depends largely on the eyes. as someone who is very interested in defense and structure and tactics, i do watch games differently than "normies" that just watch, lets say, finals and worldcups.
ye but dont forget you can get too bogged down in that. no matter how well a cdm like rodri runs the game, his passing, movement, dribbling, tackling, everything he does.... none of it matters if the genius upfront doesnt do the hardest part which is to beat the goalkeeper and score a goal.
@@NeilLewis77 but what do you mean "none of it matters"? Do you mean in the broader context of the match or in the evaluation of the player's performance?
@@totsh2056 I just mean don't fall the trap of thinking the reason Barcelona were so good is because they had busquets. I suppose I'm projecting onto you sorry, but I hear too many hipster fans thinking it's easy to do what haaland does but rodri is a genius and should win the balon dor.
@@NeilLewis77 Inversely(and what I see far more commonly) those details matter to put “the genius upfront” in a situation where he can score. Also, anyone who says that the success of a team comes down to a single player is just incorrect.
@@BlackFang_XIII obviously its a team game, but so many times the game can be nicely balanced and then aguero or benzema or rooney or some rediculous player does something special and wins the game. the genius upfront is what really decides if you team wins or loses. take leicester for example. the reason they won the league is because vardy kept scoring every week. but then someone tries to be clever and say "well the only reason vardy keeps scoring is because mahrez keeps playing amazing and getting him the ball in great scoring positions". then someone tries to be even more clever and says "but mahrez only gets the ball so much because kante is so good at winning it back and getting it to him" and it carries on like that. eventually someone is trying to be super clever and hipster and claiming its kasper schmiechel that was the difference maker. all great players and obviously it takes a team to win. but the hardest thing to do is score goals. thats why guys who can score 30 a season are the ones who get the most money/fame/credit/awards/transfer fees etc etc. i just feel some folk are so keen to recognise the brilliance of pirlo/kante/rodri, that they sometimes forget the reason these guys won so much is because they had del piero/mbappe/haaland banging in stacks of goals at the business end of the pitch. goals win games, everything else is just a stat.
Stats sometimes really makes things out of the way because of lack of context but stats with right context can make can really tell which player is better
Such a well made video. This is a topic I'm always having discourse on because it can be so divisive. I believe both of them shouldn't be used independently of each other but to complement each other. Sometimes the eye test may not be accurate because people are biased and sometimes amplify what they expect to see and discard or dont pay attention to other stuff and also the stats can show you the things you missed to give you an even clearer picture. Even apart from the stats, there are many intangibles that stats don't even take account of but can be very vital. For example, a player may be very skillful and technically sound and have the ability to make a killer pass but if the player's confidence is low you'll see a totally different player. Sometimes even change of environment can make a player doubt himself or if they are mentally unstable it will affect their game. If they are not strong mentally and the fans are on his back after a misplaced pass, he starts to become more safe and stops attempting the killer passes which he can pull off. Or other attributes like leadership e.t.c. That's another reason why the eye test is sooo important. You can't see all that on a stat sheet but they definitely play a role in understanding players and the importance they bring to a team.
This is the GREATEST Football Video I've ever seen to explain why World Class or GOAT players aren't just decided by STATS. I've had this argument so many times but this is the best I've seen. THANK YOU MATE! I'll be sending them this video😎. Another thing left out is player camping where your at the game and YOU WATCH THAT 1 PLAYER. You can't do that on TV cuz of the fact that the TV only shows where the ball and action is but if your at the game you can. You can see all the off the ball movements. That's why as a United Fan I was always terrified of Hazard cuz I've seen this man win games BY HIMSELF and STATS only showed him having 1 single goal. But if you watched him for a full 90, you would see, HE WON THE GAME not cuz of the Goal but everything else along with it. This is also why I hated Messi vs Ronaldo debates when THEY HAD COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ROLES in their teams. Messi's ROLE after Xavi and Iniesta left was to create, whether he scored himself or not wasn't that important, for RONALDO He was the one scoring not creating himself. That's why Messi has far greater ASSIST Numbers and RONALDO has more goals. Messi had ways to set up plays to finish the way he wanted, Ronaldo had to finish regardless of the play. So before you Messi fan boys come in talking about how Messi had more Goals to Match Ratio than Ronaldo, that is the reason. When Messi sets up a Goal its far more likely to happen cuz its his Idea, when Ronaldo is scoring, its less likely to happen cuz his idea isn't the one that started the play. Yes I WILL ALSO ADMIT MESSI is the GOAT cuz I've watched him. BUT I WILL ALWAYS GIVE MY FAVORITE PLAYER TO RONALDO. As a kid growing up, seeing Ronaldo at my club back then and even recently was a dream. So he will ALWAYS BE MY FAVORITE. But at the same time I've watched Messi dribble past almost an entire team to score. lol. Love them Both tho as players.
I agree with with everything you said as another united fan, I knew cr7 would come back one day since 2013 and yh Messi post Xavi and Iniesta done both the build up and finish pretty much. Messi since he left barca has been a pure creator
Messi can Perform both roles perfectly that's why the coach tells him to do so. Same can't be be said about Cr7. CR7 is pure finisher now. BTW not every goal came from messi,s idea. Team has 11 players dude.
This is probably one of the best Football TH-cam videos I have watched. The difference in stats between the great players was shocking. Thanks for this. I have subscribed!
This is why attackers win more awards, the ones voting don't know enough about football to recognize what is truly difficult to master. If Vinicius wins the ballon d'Or over Rodri that'll just be confirming this further.
Vinicius is literally the best player in the world and this video is the perfect example for people who don‘t get it. „People don‘t watch games, they just check out the stats“
@@a-manthegeneral I watched every spain game at the euros & a few city games but Rodri should not be in this debate. Should’ve been last year with Haaland but he was never debated. Now that the 2 favorites are Madrid players, funnily Rodri comes into the conversation.😆
Yeah, right. He even showed clips where he was effortlessly dribbling to beat the press like a GOAT. Busquets is one of the most esthetic CDM of all time.
I like these type of videos it helps me clarify some things when thinking about it. Most stats are counting stats which when taken out of context can be misleading. On the other side evolving stats like xG take the subjective judgments of the "eye test" and try and better correlate with effectiveness. For them to work they need to be constantly updated and worked on as the game evolves. They eye test is full of biases, while counting stats lack context. Quite fascinating and a great way to help me finally understand this amazing game :)
He was a box to box midfielder who passsed like prime Pirlo. He was a freak. I think he was very different from traditional wingers like Lennon who were super fast but technically rubbish. His lack of burning pace made him look average. I didn't watch him much at United and thought a young fast Ronaldo was a great replacement until I started looking for pinpoint passes, assists from corners and freekicks that Ronaldo didnt have lol
@@thomashelbas2929 Search Beckham's assist to Ronakdo (R9) against Real Zaragoza. You'll change your mind...Beckham's long range passing and shooting ability is criminally underrated. He could place that ball wherever he wanted, not even a lot of power.
This is such a brilliant video. The reason why I was not mad for Rodri winning the Balon was because I've watched him so many times. that award was a long time coming for him. So many times was he compared with other CDM's in the EPL and the top 5 leagues however, watching him made me realise that he is such a complete CDM. As a Chelsea fan, I love Kante with all my heart and enjoyed everytime he did what he did best however I had to admit it myself that Rodri was the better DCM. As much as Vini Jr is a great player, I felt, many of those who complained, only watched his highlights. yes, he scored a number of clutch goals, however in the first "post" Messi & CR7 era, Rodri deserved it more for me.
12:04 finally someone who gets it. People really underestimate griezman's impact for france in the wc. Everyone just thinks it was mbappe who did all the work and carried the team. It just frustates me every time
Also Olivier Giroud in 2018. Some would say any CF who does not score goals is a bum. I saw that he and Griezmann were genuine generals on the pitch, who communicated how and when to change up the pace of the game.
FACTS!! i remember during the world cup i was telling my friends that griezmann was france's best player. he was consistent throughout the world cup. people who actually understand football and watched france play will clearly recognize he was crucial to their success
This is crazy. I literallllly paused the video on 12:04 to write exactly what you wrote. Then I open the comments and the 1st one is yours. What a coincidence 😂
People really forgot how good Griezman was at the 2022 WC. He was France's best player in the tournament, but Mbappe stole the spotlight after the final. And that final performance of Mbappe is sooo overrated, he ghosted the whole game and gets praised for a hattrick of 2 pens & 1 good volley
I'm really impressed on this deep analysis on stats in football. Just stumbled upon your video, and was completely stunned by the quality. Keep it up, you deserve way more views and subs !
Man i loved this video. I prefer team stats before player stats, cz that shows you exactly why each players stats are high or low. 1) Context is key and the team stats provide the broader context as you will understand how his team setup and use all the abilities, compare with a similar player in a team with a similar setup and you can get a good feel of why they would differ or be similar by going through the eye test. 2) Eye test from highlights are good if you already understand the level of profile you dealing with. Eye test is mostly for technicals for attacking players. (Dribbling + Shooting + Passing) Always watch 2 players of the same level otherwise you might not really know what level you dealing with. Example dribbling stats of a player in the championship can never be similar to that of the EPL so its key to be fair in comparisons.
To follow up on your point that stats need to be understood in context, the eye test is part of that context. A combination of the two, when utilized well, is always going to provide more/better information than either one by itself.
Nope, stats should be used when either comparing teams of similar qualities or players of the same skill level, we can compare busquet and rodri but not busquets and casemiro, Ball knowledge comes into play, else stats can compare cas and busquets, eye test would watch them play the same position but ball knowledge is really what makes the difference As I said before you can compare rodri and busquets but not casemiro and busquets As people would say: "two different players"
Nowadays people don’t take into account different play styles. I always use Drogba as the prime example, there were plenty of strikers who scored more goals than him but outside of maybe Henry no striker scared me more than Drogba. Was one of the few strikers who could be man of the match without even scoring. Your defenders would be knackered from trying to deal with him that they’d have forgotten about Lampard/Malouda etc who’d come out of nowhere to score
the mutants are in the comments, saying he didn't have a first touch and didn't score that many goals... man came to the league at 27, late development in football... left and came back in his 30s and got into the Premier League 100 goals club. It's pure insanity for anybody to think he was mediocre or average
@@gt131970 don't try to gaslight me... i watched Chelsea since 1997. I watched every game Drogba played in... name the small teams he didn't score against, consistently. why do people lie on the internet? it's amazing to witness
@@gt131970 don't gaslight us... i've watched Chelsea since 1997, and saw EVERY Drogba game... he scored against amost every team in the league, including promoted and relegated teams; so do tell us, which teams did he fail to score against "consistently"?
This is what makes Messi the GOAT and a freak of football - he passes the eye test, stats, impact, team trophies, individual trophies, vision, intelligence, and fair play tests.
With longevity too. He’s won the last 3 consecutive major international tournaments, winning the golden boot in the first, silver boot in the second, the golden ball in the first two, and he was one of the best players in the third. I know players who don’t have a single intl pott in their entire career while messi almost threepeated them since 2021 😂 that’s why they have to bring up tiny competitions
@@thomashelbas2929literally missed the entire point.. most of these ronaldo fans just come to a conclusion and find evidence after instead of being open to other opinions 😂😂
@@johnsepulvedacruz6428messi has been the most important player on every team he’s ever played on, something past both the eye test and stats and you have to watch interviews of coaches and his past teammates
this is the most perfect video i have ever watched. i've been arguing this for YEARS. combo of eye test + stats is the most balanced way to judge a player, otherwise your opinion is imbalanced. i hate it when people judge a player when they have never even watched them (this is how most agendas happen)
Banger of a vid Eye test has its place but you can't keep track of every single thing that happens such as the total amount of passes to and where for every single second of the game
Stats aren’t all encompassing. Stats help capture things that we might miss based on bias or simple human error. But stats can’t quantify everything like how important was that off-ball runner that didn’t even receive the ball or how many times a defender was in the correct angle to prevent a forward pass. Those come from the eye test and are qualitative evaluations rather than quantitative.
The issue with the stat test is that a lot of people don't know how to use the stats to judge a player's ability or what stats to even look at while the eye test is very opinion based so a lot of very good players can go underrated because their style of play isn't very appealing to the fans
Eye test is still best way, it's just ball knowledge, if you remove bias the only thing that hinders eye test is ball knowledge Look at cdms You could compare busquets and rodri but not busquets and casemiro Stats would give the numbers, eye test watches the play, ball knowledge decides
Ball knowledge is also the difference between most people and a low tier manager, how much do you actually understand players, their roles and football itself
@@timmyjoshua276 without stats, the eye test isn't reliable as it's still very opinion based. Bias would always be there as people have different things they look at to judge players. Some would look at a midfielder that prioritizes retaining possession and think he isn't good because he doesn't constantly attempt to create chances out of nothing and other people might watch him and think he's great cos his dribbling ability and ball retention is good. Stats help us understand the roles players play and what they're actually good at. Just like you mentioned Busquets and Rodri are more comparable than Busquets and Casemiro. That's easy because Casemiro doesn't have the ability to retain possession and progress the ball as well as Busquets and Rodri. His progressive passes, dribble success rate, pass completion...etc. are not as good as them. It doesn't mean Casemiro isn't good, it just means that they both offer more than him.
I love the statistical side of football and getting into makes you realise how many stats are used incorrectly. Great to see someone finally addressing it
You know the most victim of this and most controversial will be Ronaldo. His stats are out of this world. But his Gameplay since 2015 especially is literally non-existing. Even most people who like Ronaldo know that the 2008 version was the complete Ronaldo. Despite that he never scored like 50/60 Goals that season.
This is using the eye test wrong tbf. Ronaldo streamlining his game and becoming less aesthetic does not matter if he remains just as effective, if not moreso. Ronaldo managing to reinvent himself to suit his physical realities instead of just declining after 30 is not a knock against him.
Young Simba that is easily the most accurate description of how football is watched and judged today. Stats are stats but the eye test is about not playing with the ball but playing the game of football. I've said for years to people some of the best through balls are played by midfielders on the edge of their own area but because it wasn't an assist is forgotten not even witnessed. Rodri kante essien Carrick are overlooked in terms of ability contribution by stat focused people but are probably more important than the rest . Brilliant mate brilliant video.
This is actually perfectly correct, many people base a players skill of off just short highlights or things they have heard about that player. That is also why some people may say Ronaldinho was the best player they have ever SEEN even though Messi and Ronaldo had better stats. Because to them Ronaldinho's playstyle is more appealing and out of this world. Zidane may play a SIMPLE LOOKING pass to his teammates that was extremely effective and efficient but another player may do some meaningless tricks and get put in a highlight reel even though Zidane's pass was more USEFUL TO THE TEAMS SUCCESS
That is also why when you see player like Taarabt and Ben Arfa you watch their highlights and they might look like one of the best players of all time even though they had problems of the pitch that affected their careers.
My opinion is that the eye test is going to be different depending on how much you UNDERSTAND football because when I watch matches, somebody passes the eye test for me when they play smart and efficient not flashy, but that doesn't mean they can't be flashy or skillfully.
I think this is a really important point. It’s like music taste, or favourite cuisine or people you find attractive. We all have things we like the most and it can be different to the next person. Stats can be a way of describing that difference more precisely but what I find BETTER might not be what YOU find to be BETTER
Very impressive analysis. I would argue that the only truly effective quantitative measure of a player's performance is to look at how many goals the team scores and how many goals the team concedes when that player is in the team compared with when he's not playing. This can be a difficult thing to measure as some players will play nearly every minute of a season while others will barely get a five minutes.
@@argenisjrg The one he got for the 07/08 season, sure, and I'll even say that he deserved one the year before that, but I don't remember any time after that where Messi wasn't the superior player. When Real won the CL or Messi spent two months out injured they got an excuse to give it to Ronaldo and keep up the rivalry narrative, but I never thought anyone but Messi deserved that award until he started to decline.
I bet that 90% of these genius people in comments section can't even play football. If you hate Ronaldo or always stay blind to his gameplay then it simply means you yourself don't know football and even you have played football you were a terrible player. This eye test and all non impactful or effective things are brought by delusional fans who are below terrible sports players.
that's a really unique type of video my bro i loved it, i wish so many people are at least aware of this important factor before judging players, i really was amazed by your video ty
@@thierryhenry674 no they were not and you know that very well. stop lying to yourself. the only argument that can be made is that dinho had more fun than messi while playing at top level - if dinho had proper work ethics... who knows, but he was a partyboy and this is what his style of play reflected 1:1. and cristiano is inarguably not even the best ronaldo.
Instantly subscribed! This is a video I've been waiting for cause its EXACTLY what I've been saying but more!! It's so annoying seeing all these comparisons with goals and assists and determine who's better purely on stats that actually watching HOW a player plays doesn't matter anymore and you managed to convey (that's the actual first time I've ever used this word 😂) it perfectly! 👏🔥
You are half wrong Messi is the goat because he and Ronaldo pass the eye test so you only have stats left, use stats when you feel these two players are pretty good, If anyone brings up stats first for a player the player is most likely a bum, when they don't assist or score That's why mbappe is on fraud watch, haaland is already a fraud but respect his goals and movement Both these guys are straight awful on the eye test, they don't do the basics well at all,
Pretty good video! Loved your storytelling, how versatile your analogies and information is. Also loved the throwback to Einstein and how important it is to watch someone play, to actually enjoy the game. That's why we play football, that's why we are fans, to enjoy
@@imo098765I’m a bit agree with you. But usually photos don’t show the true beauty or hiding something else. Some girls on photos look fantastic but in reality they are ugly. I did experience that so many times
My dad was a professional football player and he has an eye that impresses me, even when I played for a very long time, I watched a lot of football on the stadium (tv is not good to appreciate subtle things), and I try to never stop learning. He tells me sometimes details I cannot notice, but he is almost right. Sometimes he mentions some guy in the Premier League or Spanish League that I haven't heard of, praising some skill, and when I watch it closely I notice the guy is a genius.
As Chelsea fan I've always been a little miffed with people who overly rely on stats alone. I Remember watching Drogba play and as you said, he's a player with stats are misleading. He wasn't an out and out goal machine but he was the player for the big moments, the one guy you'd know will come through when you're a goal done in the last 10 minutes of the game. He'd clutch up with consistency, it was pretty much inevitable and absolutely incredible every single time it happened. He was also big and imposing and able to bully the defense to open up space and opportunities for more prolific goal scorers like Lampard. That isn't shown in the stats either. He was one of those strikers that would create chances for his team, not necessarily with passing finesse but with physicality.
everyone forgets the pass before the assist. and I've always appreciated players like seamus coleman or darren fletcher for the years 08-10. random under the radar lads who blow my mind with their quiet quality
Thats because people arent looking at the correct stats. You can measure how many times someone does exactly what you said. So the stats are still 100% accurate but people are using the wrong ones to measure players
Darren Fletcher was immense in 08-09, United really missed him the UCL final. His tackle in the Arsenal game was perfect, VAR would have overturned it. Football IQ was incredible! Shame about his bowel condition.
This is the reason why i create videos to show EVERY TOUCH made by a certain player to show how good they actually performed in that specific match. Not by selecting good moments of them and show it to people. The only downside is, you cannot see the movement of the player off the ball. But still better than showing good moments only and make people think that player is good when he’s actually horrible most of the times.
The eye test shows that Messi is a level above Ronaldo at passing, dribbling and playmaking though. The "GOAT debate" was manufactured by the media for profit, not because they all genuinely thought it was impossible to decide which was better.
@isaacfestus235 I'm a Manchester United fan, so I watched him from basically the start of his career. I too am tired of people judging him on just goals, because that's the only reason they can compare him to Messi. Even at his peak he lacked Messi's passing and playmaking, though his dribbling was a couple of levels above what it became later on. He never could have gotten better than Messi, but I definitely think he could have been a better and more complete player if he wasn't so obsessed with scoring goals. I've always said that if you want to see Ronaldo at his very best, you need to watch him toward the end of knockout-games when his team is behind, because that's when he gets desperate enough to set his ego aside and actually play for the team. If he played like that all the time he'd have racked up way more assists at the cost of some goals, but unfortunately he's not enough of a team player to do so.
@@korganrocks3995 well I get you, but I think he actually has a pretty good assists, but and Messi has better play making abilities because of his roles, if Messi plays Rw u mostly see him in the middle of the pitch same as cf (false 9) but Ronaldo is more of a normal winger (cross the ball) but also playmake sometimes, but he change eventually and starts being a box winger around 16 17 18 and then eventually be a ST
@isaacfestus235 But that's my point; he's got decent assist stats despite his obsession with goals, so imagine how many more he could have gotten if he'd actually focused more on creating than scoring! I genuinely don't understand the obsession with goals by people who actually know football, because having someone who can create chances is far rarer than someone that can finish them. It always made me laugh to see Ronaldo starved of service and getting frustrated up front, when he had the skills to be the guy to beat the other team's disciplined defensive system and force them onto the backfoot, which leads to chaos, and chaos leads to goals. Hell, even when I played on a team where our striker scored literally three quarters of all our goals, he wasn't our most important player; that was our playmaker who could pass and dribble, and would move us from being under pressure in our own half to charging toward their penalty area in seconds.
One good thing to come out of more advanced stats is actually to educate our eyes while watching a match. We all know how we used to watch football as a kid: our eyes glued to the ball, oblivious to the things happening to the side of the screen. With good analysis we can give more focus to the efforts of individual players while they're trying to regain possession or someone trying to create space when all the attention is on the player's teammate on the other side of the field. Of course this is a very optimistic perspective but we all know the average football fan has a much better understanding than what instagram reel comments lead us to believe.
For Zidane, he has bad stats because he only had two seasons to be on that level: second season at Juventus and second season at Madrid. There were few other good seasons too, like first & last season at Juventus & Madrid. But those seasons were far from the level we expect from the name 'zidane'. He was never a consistent player. Zidane's best international performance was in Euro 2000, and around those years in Juventus, Zidane was very inconsistent.
Here are some indisputable stats for you. Zidane was French footballer of the year 91195-96), Serie A player of the year twice (1996-97 & 2000-01), La liga player of the year, (2001-02), UCL player of the year (2002), FifPro world XI(05,06), not including "player of the tournament "World cup (2006) , Euro 2000. and Ballon D'or So your claims that Zidane was inconsistent or at a low level or is baseless and just revisionist nonsense .
@kevdeeA Awards do not matter. I can logically explain season by season from his juventus days to madrid. Is Owen better than Henry because he won the ballondor? These people who doesn't know how inconsistent Zidane was use dumb methods to prove that he was consistent, which he wasn't.
@@grogubunny Those awards are based on match performances, day-in and day-out and judged by seasoned football journalist and coaches at the time.The same awards used to rate Ronaldo and Messi and used to rate top players today. Your comment just shows you are completely clueless about the game . Awards show who was the better player at the time the time the award was given , so your Owen-Henry comparison is red herring fallacy . Those awards show that your claims about inconsistency is BS. No legendary coach, ex-player or journalist has ever called Zidane inconsistent so why should we take the claims of a non-entity like you seriously.
@kevdeeA Then why use awards to judge his consistency? Awards have no use in judging players. As i said, Henry and Owen. The fact that Owen won a ballondor doesn't mean he has higher peak than Henry. It is literally same logic. Zidane was inconsistent, season by season he performed differently. That is simple truth. Learn to watch the game. Not use false methods to judge.
@@grogubunny I showed that Zidane won awards over multiple years from 1995 to 2006 ,in the most important tournaments indicating how consistent he was in different leagues and national competitions .its to bad you cant understand basic logic.
I am glad I 1 one of those who understand football entirely because I been watching football for too long . Your video is spot on and I understand every detail you’re telling. Even the players that always have big impact but not talked much are in this list. Very good video. But then I met some people who been watching football their whole life but still don’t really understand football
There is another aspect to this: game-test. A lot of fans rate players based on their Fifa or PES rating, and not real worlds. It often very wrong. Unless it's Football Manager, then it's a little bit more accurate. I still use FM rating to judge players for my FPL team.
Listen ofc you needa watch the players play to determine how good they are but when Arsenal fans come with the “Ozil is better then Kdb cause he was funner to watch🤓” it just pisses me off man
@@bendivmukeba he is perhaps the worst elite player ive ever seen on the eyetest over the past 4 years. For every through ball he gets right he misplaces atleast 5, anytime he's in a congested area he doesnt know how to control a football and moves like a donkey. Some of the passes he misplaces I wouldn't expect from a league 2 player and so on. Over 90 minutes when you specifically focus on watching de bruyne it's an eyesore, guy just makes too many pathetic mistakes and lacks creativity (notice in most games against where city need a goal he spams 15 - 20 of the same cross hoping one lands to his player). Hes a highlight player and theres maybe a moment of brilliance or 2 where he affects the game with g/a otherwise city may aswell play with 10 men because outside of that he offers nothing in any phase of play. Obviously for city this works since they are so well structured they win the ball back in an instant so it doesn't matter if you have 30 turnovers but for Belgium those 30 turnovers a game show. The ultimate stats player, there is nothing he offers outside of g/a. Ozil is better not cause he's funner to watch, hes just better. De Bruyne has his qualities in the right system but watching him for 90 minutes in a match will shatter the fantasy you built up after watching youtube comps
@@Guestownedu What! De bruyne an eye sore? that's a horrific take I watch De bruyne in no way is he an eye sore. Kevin De bruyne cannot be measured on that's or G/A that's why I know he one the best passers in football history,De bruyne dribbles with effective skills but people like you would prefer him to do a rainbow flick or a step over to say that he can dribble, his driving runs and ball carrying are exceptional not even forgeting his long range shooting you can't measure any of these on stats alone.For Belgium De bruyne has more freedom to do anything than at city and he still performs good.I don't know which Kevin De Bruyne you were watching
@@GuestowneduI agree kdb is probably overrated if he is truly just on Ozil tier This idea that kdb is world class and the new Iniesta or Pirlo is ridiculous Only Modric from this generation reached that height and we are still waiting for the next guy I mean Jude is probably going to be that guy but maybe it's a little soon
Really good video, bro. You pretty much hit the nail on the head at the end of the video. Someone who only relies on stats will never truly understand football. But, if you take the time to watch the game and listen to expert coaches and players and combine that with stats, you will have better tools to analyse the game.
I feel bad for Cr7 tbh i think he gets the short end of the stick as it relates to eye test, nowadays fans only saw ronaldo from 2016 onwards, but never knew what ronaldo was like up to 2014, like out of those 900+ goals as a result people only talk about the tap-ins most times, but ronaldo atleast has like 200+ goals that are absolute bangers, but the newer fans only see the older ronaldo and the stats only showed a goal scored, its a trade off honestly
200+ goals bangers? stop this bullshit. and even if it was true that doesnt mean he was entertaining...WATCH THE VIDEO AGAIN....lol you fanboys are fukin weird, he was never on top.....he was statpadding goal poacher, thats why his numbers are great. his passed the eye test only for 2/3 seasons before madrid and even that doesnt mean he was the most enjoyable
@AdrienRonerbro he never said Ronaldo was a better dribbler than messi, am a Ronaldo fan and thinks messi can dribble more, but saying cr7 can’t dribble, shows u just started watching football
@isaacfestus235 now where did I say Ronaldo wasn’t elite dribble? U cr7 fans get pressed when ppl don’t glaze him 24/7 I didn’t not say he not elite ofc he is lol. I’m not a new fan u muppet
Stats are great to support your observations but like you said they can be very misleading because most people don't use them in the correct context. If I have to choose between the two, I will take the eye test over stats every day, all day. I was a college basketball coach for 15 years. One of the best PGs that I ever coached was not statistically our best player. But the moment he stepped on the floor, we were a better team. He hardly ever ended up with steals himself but because of his IQ and work ethic, he immediately made our team defense elite. He averaged maybe 10 ppg and 5 apg but he did so many little things that made his teammates better that don't show up in the stats it is hard to quantify his effect on the team.
A great example of a player who is victim of "bad eye test" and "bad stats" at the same time is Jack Grealish. He is a lot less flashy and more disciplined, and has a lot of impact for city. His numbers were much better at Villa because he had a different role and was one of the final targets of any play. He is now a much better player for his teams success than he was, but all I hear is people complaining that Pep ruined him
Jack is not a better player lets real here, what made Jack so special was the freedom he was allowed to have while at villa, which lead to City signing him, since then he has been almost a shadow of the player he was. Consistently inconsistent in terms of starts and performances, all which made him get omitted from the England euros squad
We live in a social media driven society. It disturbs me that only stats are mentioned, only stats are generating clicks and views. Football Twitter for instance went downhill since Elon has started paying per likes and views
The absolute best video I’ve watched about this topic, thank you for making it, I’ve been telling these things to my friends for years and no one listens, they just keep looking at the stats. The eye test will always be better, the Zidane comparison is so accurate, Hazard and Salah should also be compared because stats wise Hazard looks shit compared to Salah but in reality(that’s my opinion) Hazard is the better player by far. Salah just has a better output.
The eye test and stat test if used correctly is a good metric I mean liverpool under slott really scores but they actually play worse than in The Klopp era but stats will tell you they are ok
Nonsense lol. Unless ur talking about the Klopp era as a whole, ever since the 21/22 season Klopps styles of play leaked chances and goals for fun despite having the most talented CB pairing on the planet.
mainly due to the infamous Mane-Firmino-Salah attack. of course their current attack won't come close to that but slots team doing alright, just as good as klopp's team in the prime.
5:03 I really don't like that argument. For me, the eye can lie to you, the stats would never. They are just numbers. It's not the context that needs to be added, it's the interpretation of statistics that needs to be bettered
For football the eye test doesn't lie, players who can't do the basics consistently use stats and once does stats dry up they disappear that's why a Bruno Fernandez is very good when he is assists or scores and very bad when he is bad because he can't contribute to the team anymore, While a modric may not assist but everything else the basics are spot on He should have included ball knowledge in the video which is what assists the eye test, everyone knows Muller is very good but guess what when you want to compare him to similar players who does the same thing you need stats but no one really does it like Muller, so you can't hype him up over anyone
In football stats can lie to and context is need more than different interpretation. For example let say A and B completed 10 pass between each other in the back line without pressure and then you have C and D also completed 10 pass between each other but with pressure from the opposition. In stats they may have the same passes completion 10 passes but the situational difference is the context that put them apart.
This is an argument that's relevant to every sport. In basketball there's a retired player named Jason Williams or white chocolate. He was a fantastic playmaker, but he played most of his career on a team that wasn't very good, so his teaamates didn't score, even when the ball reached their hands. I once got into and argument with someone who said because Jason Williams had low assist numbers he wasn't that good, yet when you watched his games you'd see his passes and dribbling were amazing. The pros loved him, yet fans didn't think much of him.
There are players who help players around them play better, while their own stats are not remarkable. Olivier Giroud for France in 2018. Jordan Henderson was such a player for Liverpool and England. Best bang average player to ever put on a pair of boots. Average speed. Below average dribbling. Average shooter. Above average passer. I watched that winning Spanish goal go into the net at the Euros final this summer and I thought "that goal would never happen if Jordan Henderson were 3-4 years younger and on this team".
Either way could be useful if done correctly.
1. Eye test isn't just dribble
2. Stats isn't just G/A
while messi is the best in all
True. They can't handle it.@@AfoxTheOne
Thats matters over a role of player in a team.
@@AfoxTheOne messi is not best not even top 5 . only tap ins no long shots no air ability rigged and supported by fifa refs . overratted by fifa and fans
This
Thomas Muller segment was good. Many fans do not understand what technical ability actually means. Technical ability is more than just how easy you make it. It is also based on decision making too. Rene meulensteen spoke about this
no that's mental ability
Decision making is mental capacity and tactical understanding.
Imo mental + tactical > technical ability > physicality.
@@MISSINGSITTERS technical ability is king
@@yusavelli0448 if your view of the game is elite, having good technical ability amplifies it 10x, cause you can use your vision to make creative decisions. so i think they are both equally important, one enables the other to work
Facts the man even has a position name after him he is so so so so good it’s unreal
One time i decided to watch the entire game where Ronaldinho got a standing ovation at the Bernabeu. A few minutes into the game he gets a pass with no pressure on him and it trickles under his foot out of bounds and that caught me by surprise . I was so used to Ronaldinho perfect highlights where every pass was accurate and every shot was a goal that I forgot he could make mistakes. Watching the full game made me realize he was even better than in the highlights. Goes to show in order to really know how good a player is you have to watch his games.
Yeah! It was the same for me, he tried things I haven't seen anyone try, but he missed and lost the ball a lot, and the next time he got the ball he had the same confidence to try again and eventually doing something out of this world
Now that’s just on TV, watch them up close and u realize how what we see on camera is different from up close
I got into football because of Ronaldinho, and my conclusion is different. I think you're romanticizing things. He wasn't as good as the highlights show. Nobody is, but especially players like him or Zidane who everyone remembers by moments and not consistency. Flashy players benefit from huge double standards. People remember Dinho as a better player than Xavi because Dinho had more impressive individual moments, but Xavi was consistency personified.
And that's what every manager actually wants from their players, no matter the style of manager. Ferguson, Pep, Ancelotti, Mourinho, Sean Dyche, all want their players to be consistent. No manager wants to field a player with a 10% chance of being a 10/10 and a 90% chance of being a 4-5/10. It's an old cliche which I believe Ferguson said: the best players are a 7/10 every game.
agreed... and this is why the whole "Palmer is a pen merchant" stuff, is nonsense... he got locked down against Liverpool (triple-marked at times) and people are calling him trash. It really is weird. The eye test of consistent brilliance, never lies... in that game against Liverpool, he still managed 2 shots at goal, created 2-3 key chances and completed a few dribbles. And I believe that was his worst game in a Chelsea shirt in a VERY LONG time
@@vespasiancloscan7077 It's only double standards if you don't apply any context to it. The reason flashy players get more notice is because they try things which are harder and more magical. It's easier to be a 8/10 player if all you do is the safe option, it's harder to be a flair player and be consistent, but high risk high rewards.
That being said, I am NOT saying that flair players automatically become better than non-flashy players, and your point is definitely valid in that consistency is important, but we need to add the context of what the role and their purpose on the field is and then see how consistency is maintained in that equation. A player who constantly tries flashy non-constructive things is much more of a negative than a player who does his role with no fuss and properly, and that's what separates the R10s (in his prime), Zidanes (who was NOT inconsistent, that is a myth I have repeatedly debunked in other forums) and Maradonas from the rest of the pack, they were able to combine that magical flair with relative consistency and big game performances
great point about drogba. He was also a hold up play striker who created space which people tend to overlook. He still managed to score over 350 goals in his career and had one of the best individual seasons prem s ever seen
another thing about Drogba the stats won't tell you is that where another striker would give the ball away, he wouldn't before dragging a player or two out of position... a thing that will hugely benefit the team
Cool but still he's nowhere near the level of Haaland Aguero or Salah
@@kedrpraocap lol
@@kedrpraoI watched him nearly every match. He was an amazing player to watch play
@@kedrprao in terms of ability, hes just as good if not better than each of those dudes. in terms of output then yeah ill give it to those guys but youre extremely wrong, be quiet please
Stats were made for scouts to find players not for unemployed people to debate on Twitter
By that logic unemployed people on twitter shouldn't talk about football at all lol
@@nameless.0190yeah, they should be looking for a job lmao
Not everybody on twitter is unemployed
@@chilledcokeI bet that more than half of the people tweeting bs on X is probably a. A child or b. Living paycheck to paycheck
@@nameless.0190 nothing against talking about football but stats and analysis were clearly created by professionals. The average person on social media uses stats to look like a "professional" so he can "prove" that he is better than the other.
I watched Busquets live when he came to the MLS and he was insane. His first touch always glued to his foot, perfect positioning, and just controlled the game. Seeing a talent like that in front of your eyes makes you appreciate it a lot more.
I know the exact feeling. For me it was when Nigeria came to play against my country Namibia. Watching Obi Mikel in the flesh just put into context the definition of "head and shoulders above the rest".
It was the simple stuff that was so impressive, how it seemed like he had more time than everyone else. he was playing the game on his own terms. Everyone in the stadium was stunned at just how good this guy was, despite the fact that we watched him week in week out on TV.
Busquets isn't underrated, Barca and some others will say he is the greatest DM of all time(look at ESPN's recent list), Xabi Alonso is the one who is criminally underrated.
Well he was playing in minor league soccer (MLS)
@@grsafran That’s my point. He looked like a different species next to those guys.
@@grsafran 10th ranked league
I think we’re all missing the bigger picture. It’s not about which method is 'better,' but about combining both to get a fuller, richer understanding of the game. Stats provide objectivity and show trends we might miss, while the eye test reveals the nuances stats can’t capture, like a player’s influence on team morale, or those subtle movements that don’t show up in numbers. Imagine trying to enjoy a painting by just counting the brush strokes or colors used-you’re missing the experience! Football’s the same: it’s both science and art. Instead of arguing, let’s embrace how both methods give us a deeper love for the game.
Facts
I agree
EXACTLY!!!
you said it right: Maradona changes the morale of his team by just being present.
I like to see it as: "stats are the START of a conversation" and not the END. And they definitely shouldn't ever be the entire conversation
In statistics there's a saying "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
Yes there's no one stat that can tell everything about how good a player is, but completely ignoring all stats isn't the way either. Some stats are useful and they help with getting closer to the truth. Ultimately the best approach is a mixture of both an eye test to catch things that can't be seen by stats but also using stats as data points to make an overall picture of what a player is. Stats isn't the end point, it's a start.
Personally though, I believe that eventually the stats will evolve in the future such that it will be able to catch things seen by the eye test that are not yet captured by the current analytics.
No,no,no
You watch them and if they are of similar skill level you used stats like foden and Palmer
That's when you use stats if a footballer can't do the basics right its a big flaw
@@timmyjoshua276 you've missed the point. But I do agree that you start by watching and then check the stats.
@@timmyjoshua276 problem is, a player like Busquets probably wouldn't pass the eye test for a lot of people. We've all seen his highlights, but the rest of the game is almost boring. Sideways and backward passes, maybe an "easy" interception. That doesn't paint the whole picture, because Busquets is always in a perfect position, understands the game like no one else and controls the rhythm perfectly. A lot of Barca fans wanted him out during his last season, but his absence was probably the biggest blow for Barca during the Xavi era. As was said, you need to know what to look for, and stats help a lot with that
@@eduardosancho8605 Again ball knowledge, why do you think this quote come from a player, when you watch busquet you see the game, fans generally don't care about football just want the win to brag for 2-3 days, that's the reason football today is also dead, no talent, because now everyone is following the best way to give their fans a power trip, that's why busuqet same with kroos were never appreciated early in their career, they didnt give much they could brag about to the average fan, but anyone that as some interest in how it works is wax lyrical about busquet
Very true. They're nothing more than a manipulation tool with money the end game and not fan arguments in this case.
Crazy how Messi prevails in normal stats , advanced stats and also in the eye test crazyy a player like this is even debatable to be best ever with anyone else
Ronaldo better , has more followers
@@danielbarboiu2928you are just stupid 😂
@@danielbarboiu2928 everyone knows you are a messi fan trying to make Ronaldo fans look dumb
Ronaldo disappears during the game
Bro ur eyes are top notch u speak facts
Genuinely one of the best football videos I've watched this year. Great job bro
Thanks very much I appreciate it
Olivier Giroud is a curious case. Good numbers. Great career. Wonderful highlights.
He passed eye tests and stats tests. But we do grieve when he play.
the fifa stats test😂
@@animecrisis458he was average player
Average numbers, not good. His most goals in a premier season was 16 which is awfully mid for a lone striker who played for a top 6 team most of his career.
Only reason you would say he had a "great" career is the world cup and champions league for Chelsea. In that Champions league he only scored 1 goal in the knockouts. He also didn't score a single goal in the 2018 world cup, just 1 assist in the whole tournament. Giroud is the definition of a bang average player that was just fortunate with some of the situations he found himself in his career.
@@MR12AMAZINGNot at all. Giroud proved to be an elite player at Milan, being fundamental to win the Serie A title in 2022.
I am more on the eye test side, but stats is the future. If you know how to interpret data with context (most don't) then you'll be fooled. You must begin with eyetest & then use stats to backup the claim as well as what you've seen with your eyes
Thats true, the eye test is backed up by the correct stats.
A player looks like they never give the ball away, well we can see that in pass completed or how many times they get dispossessed
Player has huge passing variety, we can see that with how good the short, medium and longer passes completion rate. How frequently they do it
The player always does something with the ball, we can see if passing forward stats, how many players they beat with dribbles etc.
We can always have a stat to measure what a player does and it will match the eye test. If we record the correct stats and use them properly
So instead of first using logic (stats) you develop an opinion (emotion) first? That can cause you to misread the Stats (logic) by cherry picking data to match your opinion (emotion)
@@grsafranbecause stats will never be able to capture the full picture. It’s not emotion but induction. No player that’s actually good will look bad consistently; they make things look easy. Most people don’t know how statistical models work or how to correctly apply stats so they’re largely useless. Stats are only useful for scouts and clubs.
@@yamiscapestats are only useful for people who know exactly the limitations of those stats
@ and statistical models
The eye test tells you how good a player is and the statistics give you context to support or contradict that opinion. The most importantly thing is understanding the role of the player in a team and how good of a job they are doing at it.
BEST COMMENT
Facts💯💯💯
Lampard was not just a goal scoring monster..he was a passing maestro also with ability of ball retention
nah, I'd put Scholes, or Carrick above Lamps. He's great at anything dont get me wrong, but call him Maestro is quite over the top and dont bring assists stat in this case cause if you bring that that means Giggsy, Rooney, or Ozil is one of the best passing maestro like Kroos, KDB, Pirlo, Busi, or Xavi.
Carrick above Lampard is absurd@@bimapriambada1098
@@bimapriambada1098 typical manc
I’ve seen lampard play. There’s this narrative about him being so good & lamps was boring to watch honestly. He was a good player with great numbers & great players around him. He was on all the free kicks and pens, come to think of it, Mount is literally his regen 😂. He not that good, just had numbers & PR!
KDB is BETTER than him!!!
The 1st time I saw KDB in Chelsea I said this kid is better than lampard but because lampard is English he couldn’t get in & they’ll never admit it!
KDB is the same player haunting the premier league today
@@zman9525you just a hater lampard had good technical ability
The Messi and Ronaldo debate is a good example as well, for me messi is the better player not solely on stats, but mainly bc of the eye test, he didn’t need to score or assist to control and dictate the entire game
Messi could have had Iniesta's stats, and the eye test would still have me arguing that he was better than Ronaldo. The fact that the debate raged throughout their entire careers despite Messi also having similar numbers of goals and assists is solely down to how valuable a rivalry is to the media, and how ignorant many casual fans are about anything beyond goals.
@@korganrocks3995cr7 was good really great during those time
@@korganrocks3995 That's what happens when the people keeping the debate alive watch football through highlights. No one apart from United and Madrid fans are on Ronaldo's side, literally no one, yet the debate lives on. I can't comprehend how someone could sit down, watch both of them play and still argue about it.
@@pfft5795 "literally no one" making things up arent we
@@artyomka.1568 you're a very small minority broski
Stats are so important. I think people need to use BETTER stats, not only goals and assists because goals and assists are just more easily contable.
But if you include progression passes, opportunity creation numbers, and the speed of the game (yes, adjusting for speed is also important, in some games the attacking phases are slower than others), you have a better understanding of a players value.
This type of stats are common and very easily available in the NBA related websites. We just need more information available for fans, but I think the clubs have better models and better stats and don't want other clubs to copy their evaluation models.
The fans just need to search for better information and not only use basic stats.
But what happened to "I don't know." People will spend an hour arguing about a player's performance when they could've easily just spent that watching the game for themselves.
People just want to have opinions on everything when they clearly don't have enough information. If you haven't watched iniesta play, don't offer opinions on him. It's really that simple.
@@totsh2056Cry about it
@@totsh2056 But if you just watch it you have a higher chance of it being an opinion because of bias. Stats are just eye test with more proof. Like without stats, how are you gonna prove that one is better? Like for example, if you're eye test is so good but you still have very bad chance creating then you're not that good. Or that you're not a good striker if you have little goals
@@4days448 agree to disagree.
Completely agree. People use the argument "G + A alone don't illustrate who's the best player" to say "stats in general are bad" and it's as frustrating as it is illogical
6:00 bro VVD is not even close with the GOAT 🐐🐐🐐
i came here to say that, people low ball maguire a lot when he does a lot of heavy lifting. Biggest maguire problems are lack of self confidence and mobility, both of them that can be helped by a competent manager.
Which is not the story for man utd.
That’s the beauty of Messi vs Ronaldo debate.
Both the eye test and stats give us the same answer over and over again.
we know the answer but you just denied that😂
There are some newer fans who doesn’t believe Ronaldo was also good, in the eye test, like the one under your comment
Young Simba... 1000% ball knowledge ❤🫡🫡🫡
Nope the pogba slander was unnecessary and wrong.
Appreciate it my guy!
The answer is stats used right - and I mean professionally, by clubs, the kind of stats that the public don’t have access to, is the best way. But most stats used on social media are cherry picked and don’t mean anything.
That's a terrifically well made video. You do mention that Salah was signed based off of stats, but many players are signed on stats (like Darwin Nunez) and flop.
You can sign players on stats and it's going to be a roulette. I agree with what you said earlier in the video the most: Stats can show you the profile, but not the skill level.
Also other factors
I remember klopp brought immobile to bvb and on paper it made sense but in reality he was an southern Italian boy with a completely different culture and never made friends with anyone at bvb and also had language barrier problems ended up feeling lonely and also from a football philosophy POV couldn't understand how bvb was trying to play with quick precise passes
@@tpsamHarry Maguire of Manchester United is way better than Ciro Immobile. Rivaldo of Brazil was also not bad.
Yeah that's a very good point, sometimes it can work but it's still a massive risk to make signings purely based on stats.
Id say we still have to take some time with nunez, but ofc im a - patient - LFC fan😂
Darwin wasn't signed based on stats. Liverpool's recruiting department didn't want him, he was Klopp's personal choice.
0:15 - I play FM so both...
Literally lol. Same. Been hooked on the data center since they implemented it
Real.
There are a lot of criminally underrated players, it took Kroos winning 4 UCLs before people started appreciating how gargantuan a player Kroos was. Same with Busquests.
Muller, Greizman, Jordi Alba, Kroos, Carvajal and Busquests and so many others are some criminally underrated players despite them having the stats to prove their importance.
I am a big fan of using stats to evaluate players because I know for a fact that many people don't understand what they watch with their eyes.
Last season and the previous season, people's gripe with Raphinha was that he couldn't beat his man, and because of that they felt that Raphinha was not a good winger, but I kept explaining to many of them that a player can influence a game without dribbling one soul and thanks to Flick, my theory on Raphinha's excellence has come to fruition.
I appreciate your content and I am definitely a subscriber and cheers to more content like this.
Müller is not underrated. Busquets is one of the most underrated players just like Modric, Mousa Dembele and David Silva.
People generally only look at surface level stats. Not advanced metrics.
@@anthrazit9474 beyond Muller's goals and assists, he is underrated. A lot of people don't understand how excellent Muller was. More excellent than other volume creators like KDB, Fabregas, David Silva and Ozil
@@ikennaonwunli5072 KDB and Silva were far better than Müller. It is not even close.
I do not care about goals and assists. I care about what I see on the field. And Müller is a good scorer, but if he not score it is like playing with one player less.
@@anthrazit9474 the exact display of ignorance I expected to see and it's alright. KDB and Silva far better than Muller based on what? Muller has more goals than either of them, has more assists than either of them, has more trophies than either of them, played more matches than either of them. Contributed to the success of his teams than either of them but they are better than him. How? Simple, you don't understand what you watch. And it's alright.
Zidane, Ronaldinho, Cantona... 3 great examples of players with all the ability in the world to score more goals than they did. What they gave their team was a unique aura. Opposition would've been less confident going into the games because of the ability they had and the extra belief they gave their own teammates. That's something no spreadsheet can possibly show
Add Riquelme to that list, one of the best players I've ever seen.
and they scored when it mattered
@ochoymedio78 that's true for Cantona and Zidane, but less so for Ronaldinho. Apart from the free-kick against England and his 2 goals to earn a standing ovation at the Bernabéu... I can't think of too many winning goals in the biggest games from Ronaldinho.
Really enjoyed this video man. I especially agree with the comments about Zidane. People use his somewhat middling stats as a lazy crutch to beat him over the head and say that he can never and should never be considered as a GOAT candidate, which I personally think is wrong. I also feel that his inconsistency and tendency to go missing are overstated somewhat. Anyway, amazing effort on the vid 😀
Two problems with stats: 1 the quality of the opposition. 2 the quality or performance of your teammates. You have countless examples of players whos stats looked like gold against poor opposition, and then you have others whos stats weren’t great at low level but out of nowhere they’re blooming at high level.
This! 💯
There are no stats that take these into consideration. This why the football ratings websites are a mess and not factual at all.
The same problem can apply to the eye test
@@9snagaNot necessarily, in the first example you’d see players killing it against players who are barely able to walk in a straight line and falling over. If you have half a brain it would be possible to make the leap to that they may struggle to do the same against players who run and work defensively as a team.
In the second example anyone with a decent understanding of the game can see someone who is placed correctly and make smart passes that go straight to the opponent because their teammate didn’t want to run, or make clever runs that are ignored because the player on the ball doesn’t see them.
The biggest problem with the eye test is that most football fans aren’t able to read the game properly. And fail to see that a midfielder who has had 3 sideways passes during a game actually had a 10/10 defensive performance because they denied the opponents creative midfielder the space to operate successfully.
@@cfcfan72Actually, I'd argue that the biggest disadvantage of the eye test is the fact that we're all just human, and can never see everything. Even if you have a high understanding of the game and know what to look for when watching, you're never gonna be able to see everything and notice every little detail, and that is where the eye test fails and stats succeed. Ultimately, asking which is the better method betrays a bad understanding of the sport, because the truth is that combining both the eye test and the stats will give you a much fuller understanding of a player's ability, than simply using one over the other.
@@mobolajiade-aina8643 exactly, you said it perfectly
i typically watch football without commentary. when i talk about a game with someone else, i sometimes think we did watch different games.
i think the eye test depends largely on the eyes. as someone who is very interested in defense and structure and tactics, i do watch games differently than "normies" that just watch, lets say, finals and worldcups.
ye but dont forget you can get too bogged down in that.
no matter how well a cdm like rodri runs the game, his passing, movement, dribbling, tackling, everything he does.... none of it matters if the genius upfront doesnt do the hardest part which is to beat the goalkeeper and score a goal.
@@NeilLewis77 but what do you mean "none of it matters"?
Do you mean in the broader context of the match or in the evaluation of the player's performance?
@@totsh2056 I just mean don't fall the trap of thinking the reason Barcelona were so good is because they had busquets.
I suppose I'm projecting onto you sorry, but I hear too many hipster fans thinking it's easy to do what haaland does but rodri is a genius and should win the balon dor.
@@NeilLewis77 Inversely(and what I see far more commonly) those details matter to put “the genius upfront” in a situation where he can score.
Also, anyone who says that the success of a team comes down to a single player is just incorrect.
@@BlackFang_XIII obviously its a team game, but so many times the game can be nicely balanced and then aguero or benzema or rooney or some rediculous player does something special and wins the game.
the genius upfront is what really decides if you team wins or loses.
take leicester for example. the reason they won the league is because vardy kept scoring every week.
but then someone tries to be clever and say "well the only reason vardy keeps scoring is because mahrez keeps playing amazing and getting him the ball in great scoring positions".
then someone tries to be even more clever and says "but mahrez only gets the ball so much because kante is so good at winning it back and getting it to him"
and it carries on like that. eventually someone is trying to be super clever and hipster and claiming its kasper schmiechel that was the difference maker.
all great players and obviously it takes a team to win.
but the hardest thing to do is score goals.
thats why guys who can score 30 a season are the ones who get the most money/fame/credit/awards/transfer fees etc etc.
i just feel some folk are so keen to recognise the brilliance of pirlo/kante/rodri, that they sometimes forget the reason these guys won so much is because they had del piero/mbappe/haaland banging in stacks of goals at the business end of the pitch.
goals win games, everything else is just a stat.
this the best football youtube video that really breaks this down. I really appreciate the effort.
Stats sometimes really makes things out of the way because of lack of context but stats with right context can make can really tell which player is better
Such a well made video. This is a topic I'm always having discourse on because it can be so divisive. I believe both of them shouldn't be used independently of each other but to complement each other. Sometimes the eye test may not be accurate because people are biased and sometimes amplify what they expect to see and discard or dont pay attention to other stuff and also the stats can show you the things you missed to give you an even clearer picture.
Even apart from the stats, there are many intangibles that stats don't even take account of but can be very vital. For example, a player may be very skillful and technically sound and have the ability to make a killer pass but if the player's confidence is low you'll see a totally different player. Sometimes even change of environment can make a player doubt himself or if they are mentally unstable it will affect their game. If they are not strong mentally and the fans are on his back after a misplaced pass, he starts to become more safe and stops attempting the killer passes which he can pull off. Or other attributes like leadership e.t.c. That's another reason why the eye test is sooo important. You can't see all that on a stat sheet but they definitely play a role in understanding players and the importance they bring to a team.
This is the GREATEST Football Video I've ever seen to explain why World Class or GOAT players aren't just decided by STATS. I've had this argument so many times but this is the best I've seen. THANK YOU MATE! I'll be sending them this video😎.
Another thing left out is player camping where your at the game and YOU WATCH THAT 1 PLAYER. You can't do that on TV cuz of the fact that the TV only shows where the ball and action is but if your at the game you can. You can see all the off the ball movements.
That's why as a United Fan I was always terrified of Hazard cuz I've seen this man win games BY HIMSELF and STATS only showed him having 1 single goal. But if you watched him for a full 90, you would see, HE WON THE GAME not cuz of the Goal but everything else along with it.
This is also why I hated Messi vs Ronaldo debates when THEY HAD COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ROLES in their teams. Messi's ROLE after Xavi and Iniesta left was to create, whether he scored himself or not wasn't that important, for RONALDO He was the one scoring not creating himself. That's why Messi has far greater ASSIST Numbers and RONALDO has more goals. Messi had ways to set up plays to finish the way he wanted, Ronaldo had to finish regardless of the play.
So before you Messi fan boys come in talking about how Messi had more Goals to Match Ratio than Ronaldo, that is the reason. When Messi sets up a Goal its far more likely to happen cuz its his Idea, when Ronaldo is scoring, its less likely to happen cuz his idea isn't the one that started the play.
Yes I WILL ALSO ADMIT MESSI is the GOAT cuz I've watched him. BUT I WILL ALWAYS GIVE MY FAVORITE PLAYER TO RONALDO. As a kid growing up, seeing Ronaldo at my club back then and even recently was a dream. So he will ALWAYS BE MY FAVORITE. But at the same time I've watched Messi dribble past almost an entire team to score. lol. Love them Both tho as players.
Also I'm a United fan and we are SHIT right now😭
I agree with with everything you said as another united fan, I knew cr7 would come back one day since 2013 and yh Messi post Xavi and Iniesta done both the build up and finish pretty much. Messi since he left barca has been a pure creator
Agree with this perfectly. Messi v Ronaldo debates are tired
@@gra9 Exactly
Messi can
Perform both roles perfectly that's why the coach tells him to do so.
Same can't be be said about Cr7.
CR7 is pure finisher now.
BTW not every goal came from messi,s idea.
Team has 11 players dude.
Bros ball knowledge is out of this world thank you for helping us Instagram reel footballers
This is probably one of the best Football TH-cam videos I have watched. The difference in stats between the great players was shocking.
Thanks for this. I have subscribed!
This is why attackers win more awards, the ones voting don't know enough about football to recognize what is truly difficult to master. If Vinicius wins the ballon d'Or over Rodri that'll just be confirming this further.
Vinicius is literally the best player in the world and this video is the perfect example for people who don‘t get it. „People don‘t watch games, they just check out the stats“
@@SantosLPs Spoken like someone who hasn't watched Rodri play.
@@a-manthegeneral I watched every spain game at the euros & a few city games but Rodri should not be in this debate. Should’ve been last year with Haaland but he was never debated. Now that the 2 favorites are Madrid players, funnily Rodri comes into the conversation.😆
Rodri won
That was incredibly nuanced. Thanks, I've been thinking about this meta debate for a long time now, esp in the context of the nba
"Busquets never did anything fancy."
Come on dude, you were going so well.
Yeah, right. He even showed clips where he was effortlessly dribbling to beat the press like a GOAT. Busquets is one of the most esthetic CDM of all time.
@@elr492 yep
I meant fancy like Neymar fancy but you're right he was so effortlessly skillful.
you know damn well what he meant, you just wanted something to be mad about
@@angelo-alpha9295 lmao why u mad bro? Take a deep breath, it will be ok.
I like these type of videos it helps me clarify some things when thinking about it. Most stats are counting stats which when taken out of context can be misleading. On the other side evolving stats like xG take the subjective judgments of the "eye test" and try and better correlate with effectiveness. For them to work they need to be constantly updated and worked on as the game evolves.
They eye test is full of biases, while counting stats lack context. Quite fascinating and a great way to help me finally understand this amazing game :)
People say Beckham is overrated because of his stats but if he had a striker like CR7 or Kane, his assist would be way higher
He was a box to box midfielder who passsed like prime Pirlo.
He was a freak.
I think he was very different from traditional wingers like Lennon who were super fast but technically rubbish.
His lack of burning pace made him look average.
I didn't watch him much at United and thought a young fast Ronaldo was a great replacement until I started looking for pinpoint passes, assists from corners and freekicks that Ronaldo didnt have lol
@@Timbone07Nobody ever passed like Pirlo. Beckham is not even 20% close to him
@thomashelbas2929 Sorry, but Pirlo himself disagrees.
Beckham was Pirlo with speed and strength.
That's simply a fact.
@@thomashelbas2929 Ewww. Even Pirlo would disagree with you
@@thomashelbas2929 Search Beckham's assist to Ronakdo (R9) against Real Zaragoza. You'll change your mind...Beckham's long range passing and shooting ability is criminally underrated. He could place that ball wherever he wanted, not even a lot of power.
This is such a brilliant video. The reason why I was not mad for Rodri winning the Balon was because I've watched him so many times. that award was a long time coming for him. So many times was he compared with other CDM's in the EPL and the top 5 leagues however, watching him made me realise that he is such a complete CDM. As a Chelsea fan, I love Kante with all my heart and enjoyed everytime he did what he did best however I had to admit it myself that Rodri was the better DCM.
As much as Vini Jr is a great player, I felt, many of those who complained, only watched his highlights. yes, he scored a number of clutch goals, however in the first "post" Messi & CR7 era, Rodri deserved it more for me.
12:04 finally someone who gets it. People really underestimate griezman's impact for france in the wc. Everyone just thinks it was mbappe who did all the work and carried the team. It just frustates me every time
Also Olivier Giroud in 2018. Some would say any CF who does not score goals is a bum. I saw that he and Griezmann were genuine generals on the pitch, who communicated how and when to change up the pace of the game.
FACTS!! i remember during the world cup i was telling my friends that griezmann was france's best player. he was consistent throughout the world cup. people who actually understand football and watched france play will clearly recognize he was crucial to their success
This is crazy. I literallllly paused the video on 12:04 to write exactly what you wrote. Then I open the comments and the 1st one is yours. What a coincidence 😂
People really forgot how good Griezman was at the 2022 WC. He was France's best player in the tournament, but Mbappe stole the spotlight after the final. And that final performance of Mbappe is sooo overrated, he ghosted the whole game and gets praised for a hattrick of 2 pens & 1 good volley
I'm really impressed on this deep analysis on stats in football.
Just stumbled upon your video, and was completely stunned by the quality.
Keep it up, you deserve way more views and subs !
wow your content is actually really underrated, you've actually given me a completely different outlook on football
How old are you, if this is new to you, your either incredibly young or new to football
Man i loved this video. I prefer team stats before player stats, cz that shows you exactly why each players stats are high or low.
1) Context is key and the team stats provide the broader context as you will understand how his team setup and use all the abilities, compare with a similar player in a team with a similar setup and you can get a good feel of why they would differ or be similar by going through the eye test.
2) Eye test from highlights are good if you already understand the level of profile you dealing with. Eye test is mostly for technicals for attacking players. (Dribbling + Shooting + Passing) Always watch 2 players of the same level otherwise you might not really know what level you dealing with. Example dribbling stats of a player in the championship can never be similar to that of the EPL so its key to be fair in comparisons.
To follow up on your point that stats need to be understood in context, the eye test is part of that context. A combination of the two, when utilized well, is always going to provide more/better information than either one by itself.
Nope, stats should be used when either comparing teams of similar qualities or players of the same skill level, we can compare busquet and rodri but not busquets and casemiro,
Ball knowledge comes into play, else stats can compare cas and busquets, eye test would watch them play the same position but ball knowledge is really what makes the difference
As I said before you can compare rodri and busquets but not casemiro and busquets
As people would say: "two different players"
👏🏾 well done I haven’t seen such a well put together football knowledge video with clear explanations for a while
Nowadays people don’t take into account different play styles. I always use Drogba as the prime example, there were plenty of strikers who scored more goals than him but outside of maybe Henry no striker scared me more than Drogba. Was one of the few strikers who could be man of the match without even scoring. Your defenders would be knackered from trying to deal with him that they’d have forgotten about Lampard/Malouda etc who’d come out of nowhere to score
That's where ball knowledge comes in
the mutants are in the comments, saying he didn't have a first touch and didn't score that many goals... man came to the league at 27, late development in football... left and came back in his 30s and got into the Premier League 100 goals club. It's pure insanity for anybody to think he was mediocre or average
@MaticulousGamer He scored in big games but wasn't that effective when it came to playing against smaller sides.He was inconsistent.
@@gt131970 don't try to gaslight me... i watched Chelsea since 1997. I watched every game Drogba played in... name the small teams he didn't score against, consistently. why do people lie on the internet? it's amazing to witness
@@gt131970 don't gaslight us... i've watched Chelsea since 1997, and saw EVERY Drogba game... he scored against amost every team in the league, including promoted and relegated teams; so do tell us, which teams did he fail to score against "consistently"?
This is what makes Messi the GOAT and a freak of football - he passes the eye test, stats, impact, team trophies, individual trophies, vision, intelligence, and fair play tests.
Name his UCL win since 2015 then
Negreira, Alot of Trophies not earned.
With longevity too. He’s won the last 3 consecutive major international tournaments, winning the golden boot in the first, silver boot in the second, the golden ball in the first two, and he was one of the best players in the third. I know players who don’t have a single intl pott in their entire career while messi almost threepeated them since 2021 😂 that’s why they have to bring up tiny competitions
@@thomashelbas2929literally missed the entire point.. most of these ronaldo fans just come to a conclusion and find evidence after instead of being open to other opinions 😂😂
@@johnsepulvedacruz6428messi has been the most important player on every team he’s ever played on, something past both the eye test and stats and you have to watch interviews of coaches and his past teammates
this is the most perfect video i have ever watched. i've been arguing this for YEARS. combo of eye test + stats is the most balanced way to judge a player, otherwise your opinion is imbalanced. i hate it when people judge a player when they have never even watched them (this is how most agendas happen)
pleasantly surprised by how good this video was. i did not expect to finish it. great job bro!
Banger of a vid
Eye test has its place but you can't keep track of every single thing that happens such as the total amount of passes to and where for every single second of the game
This is such an underrated video
Stats aren’t all encompassing. Stats help capture things that we might miss based on bias or simple human error. But stats can’t quantify everything like how important was that off-ball runner that didn’t even receive the ball or how many times a defender was in the correct angle to prevent a forward pass. Those come from the eye test and are qualitative evaluations rather than quantitative.
The issue with the stat test is that a lot of people don't know how to use the stats to judge a player's ability or what stats to even look at while the eye test is very opinion based so a lot of very good players can go underrated because their style of play isn't very appealing to the fans
Eye test is still best way, it's just ball knowledge, if you remove bias the only thing that hinders eye test is ball knowledge
Look at cdms
You could compare busquets and rodri but not busquets and casemiro
Stats would give the numbers, eye test watches the play, ball knowledge decides
Ball knowledge is also the difference between most people and a low tier manager, how much do you actually understand players, their roles and football itself
@@timmyjoshua276 without stats, the eye test isn't reliable as it's still very opinion based. Bias would always be there as people have different things they look at to judge players. Some would look at a midfielder that prioritizes retaining possession and think he isn't good because he doesn't constantly attempt to create chances out of nothing and other people might watch him and think he's great cos his dribbling ability and ball retention is good.
Stats help us understand the roles players play and what they're actually good at. Just like you mentioned Busquets and Rodri are more comparable than Busquets and Casemiro. That's easy because Casemiro doesn't have the ability to retain possession and progress the ball as well as Busquets and Rodri. His progressive passes, dribble success rate, pass completion...etc. are not as good as them. It doesn't mean Casemiro isn't good, it just means that they both offer more than him.
I love the statistical side of football and getting into makes you realise how many stats are used incorrectly. Great to see someone finally addressing it
You know the most victim of this and most controversial will be Ronaldo.
His stats are out of this world.
But his Gameplay since 2015 especially is literally non-existing.
Even most people who like Ronaldo know that the 2008 version was the complete Ronaldo. Despite that he never scored like 50/60 Goals that season.
2011-14 cr7 is his peak version imo
@@skfc9525peak ronaldo is from 09 to 2014
@@sonicwithglasses13109? He ain’t rlly do nothing that year cuz he was injured
Shut it. Ronaldo was still a good player in his juve and late Madrid games
This is using the eye test wrong tbf. Ronaldo streamlining his game and becoming less aesthetic does not matter if he remains just as effective, if not moreso.
Ronaldo managing to reinvent himself to suit his physical realities instead of just declining after 30 is not a knock against him.
Young Simba that is easily the most accurate description of how football is watched and judged today. Stats are stats but the eye test is about not playing with the ball but playing the game of football. I've said for years to people some of the best through balls are played by midfielders on the edge of their own area but because it wasn't an assist is forgotten not even witnessed. Rodri kante essien Carrick are overlooked in terms of ability contribution by stat focused people but are probably more important than the rest . Brilliant mate brilliant video.
This is actually perfectly correct, many people base a players skill of off just short highlights or things they have heard about that player. That is also why some people may say Ronaldinho was the best player they have ever SEEN even though Messi and Ronaldo had better stats. Because to them Ronaldinho's playstyle is more appealing and out of this world. Zidane may play a SIMPLE LOOKING pass to his teammates that was extremely effective and efficient but another player may do some meaningless tricks and get put in a highlight reel even though Zidane's pass was more USEFUL TO THE TEAMS SUCCESS
That is also why when you see player like Taarabt and Ben Arfa you watch their highlights and they might look like one of the best players of all time even though they had problems of the pitch that affected their careers.
My opinion is that the eye test is going to be different depending on how much you UNDERSTAND football because when I watch matches, somebody passes the eye test for me when they play smart and efficient not flashy, but that doesn't mean they can't be flashy or skillfully.
messi was more enjoyable match than most of players combined, even if he had the best stats
I think this is a really important point. It’s like music taste, or favourite cuisine or people you find attractive. We all have things we like the most and it can be different to the next person. Stats can be a way of describing that difference more precisely but what I find BETTER might not be what YOU find to be BETTER
tbf zidane is also a bit of a highlight merchant, gerrard or even scholes fit the title betteror even makele
Very impressive analysis. I would argue that the only truly effective quantitative measure of a player's performance is to look at how many goals the team scores and how many goals the team concedes when that player is in the team compared with when he's not playing. This can be a difficult thing to measure as some players will play nearly every minute of a season while others will barely get a five minutes.
Messi and CR7 had both insane statistics and dazzling eye test. That's why they monopolized the Ballon D'Or for so many years.
Except the eye test shows that Messi is clearly superior, and Ronaldo should only have won it in years when Messi missed a big chunk of the season.
@@korganrocks3995 True, Messi's eye test is superior than Ronaldo's (Messi is the GOAT for a reason), but most Ronaldo's Ballon D'ors were deserved.
@@argenisjrg The one he got for the 07/08 season, sure, and I'll even say that he deserved one the year before that, but I don't remember any time after that where Messi wasn't the superior player. When Real won the CL or Messi spent two months out injured they got an excuse to give it to Ronaldo and keep up the rivalry narrative, but I never thought anyone but Messi deserved that award until he started to decline.
@@argenisjrgcamping inside the penalty box for tap ins , pass the eye test ?
@kenkaneki2842 That actually requires serious skills. But I'm a Messi fan, not a CR7 fan. To me Messi is obviously better overall.
We need both stats and the eye test,both have their own importance and that would never change
I bet that 90% of these genius people in comments section can't even play football. If you hate Ronaldo or always stay blind to his gameplay then it simply means you yourself don't know football and even you have played football you were a terrible player. This eye test and all non impactful or effective things are brought by delusional fans who are below terrible sports players.
@syedarman4172 Your argument is poor.
You're basically complaining that not everyone rates Ronaldo as highly as you do.
that's a really unique type of video my bro i loved it, i wish so many people are at least aware of this important factor before judging players, i really was amazed by your video ty
That's why Messi the GOAT weather it's Eye-Test or the Stats he's at the top in all categories.
Ronaldinho and the pre Madrid Cristiano Ronaldo are so much better than Messi on the eye test.
Pelé is the goat
@@thierryhenry674 no they were not and you know that very well. stop lying to yourself. the only argument that can be made is that dinho had more fun than messi while playing at top level - if dinho had proper work ethics... who knows, but he was a partyboy and this is what his style of play reflected 1:1. and cristiano is inarguably not even the best ronaldo.
@@thierryhenry674 You're capping bro lol
@@homerp.hendelbergenheinzel6649heavy cap lol, r7 clears r9 if you go band for band
Instantly subscribed! This is a video I've been waiting for cause its EXACTLY what I've been saying but more!! It's so annoying seeing all these comparisons with goals and assists and determine who's better purely on stats that actually watching HOW a player plays doesn't matter anymore and you managed to convey (that's the actual first time I've ever used this word 😂) it perfectly! 👏🔥
Both are right if u look at football in a eye test and stats in the same time thats why messi is the goat
You are half wrong
Messi is the goat because he and Ronaldo pass the eye test so you only have stats left, use stats when you feel these two players are pretty good,
If anyone brings up stats first for a player the player is most likely a bum, when they don't assist or score
That's why mbappe is on fraud watch, haaland is already a fraud but respect his goals and movement
Both these guys are straight awful on the eye test, they don't do the basics well at all,
This is why people like Messi and Ronaldo stand out as the goats. They prevail in both the eye and the stats test
I always rated someone on eye test but who I see is doing it consistently day in day out
Pretty good video! Loved your storytelling, how versatile your analogies and information is. Also loved the throwback to Einstein and how important it is to watch someone play, to actually enjoy the game. That's why we play football, that's why we are fans, to enjoy
For me it’s like judging the girl by photo. I prefer to see her first in real life and talk to her.
but if you see the photo its not something you like. No point checking any further right?
@@imo098765I’m a bit agree with you. But usually photos don’t show the true beauty or hiding something else. Some girls on photos look fantastic but in reality they are ugly. I did experience that so many times
@@imo098765 yup. people like to forget they only care about personality only if the looks is good enough.
My dad was a professional football player and he has an eye that impresses me, even when I played for a very long time, I watched a lot of football on the stadium (tv is not good to appreciate subtle things), and I try to never stop learning. He tells me sometimes details I cannot notice, but he is almost right. Sometimes he mentions some guy in the Premier League or Spanish League that I haven't heard of, praising some skill, and when I watch it closely I notice the guy is a genius.
That why they say R9 "el phenomenon " He was something which his stats won't tell completely
R9 is Ronaldo.
As Chelsea fan I've always been a little miffed with people who overly rely on stats alone.
I Remember watching Drogba play and as you said, he's a player with stats are misleading. He wasn't an out and out goal machine but he was the player for the big moments, the one guy you'd know will come through when you're a goal done in the last 10 minutes of the game. He'd clutch up with consistency, it was pretty much inevitable and absolutely incredible every single time it happened. He was also big and imposing and able to bully the defense to open up space and opportunities for more prolific goal scorers like Lampard. That isn't shown in the stats either. He was one of those strikers that would create chances for his team, not necessarily with passing finesse but with physicality.
everyone forgets the pass before the assist.
and I've always appreciated players like seamus coleman or darren fletcher for the years 08-10. random under the radar lads who blow my mind with their quiet quality
Thats because people arent looking at the correct stats. You can measure how many times someone does exactly what you said. So the stats are still 100% accurate but people are using the wrong ones to measure players
Darren Fletcher was immense in 08-09, United really missed him the UCL final. His tackle in the Arsenal game was perfect, VAR would have overturned it. Football IQ was incredible! Shame about his bowel condition.
@Mad_Intellect yeh the boy got ill quite bad. i hope his lads grow into smart players as well
This is the reason why i create videos to show EVERY TOUCH made by a certain player to show how good they actually performed in that specific match. Not by selecting good moments of them and show it to people. The only downside is, you cannot see the movement of the player off the ball. But still better than showing good moments only and make people think that player is good when he’s actually horrible most of the times.
Surprisingly Ronaldo & Messi has Amazing in both (eye test & stats) that's how crazy they were 🥶🥶
The eye test shows that Messi is a level above Ronaldo at passing, dribbling and playmaking though. The "GOAT debate" was manufactured by the media for profit, not because they all genuinely thought it was impossible to decide which was better.
@@korganrocks3995u watched the goal scoring era of cr7 then, am tired of people judging cr7 on just goals because he focuse on just scoring nw
@isaacfestus235 I'm a Manchester United fan, so I watched him from basically the start of his career. I too am tired of people judging him on just goals, because that's the only reason they can compare him to Messi. Even at his peak he lacked Messi's passing and playmaking, though his dribbling was a couple of levels above what it became later on.
He never could have gotten better than Messi, but I definitely think he could have been a better and more complete player if he wasn't so obsessed with scoring goals. I've always said that if you want to see Ronaldo at his very best, you need to watch him toward the end of knockout-games when his team is behind, because that's when he gets desperate enough to set his ego aside and actually play for the team. If he played like that all the time he'd have racked up way more assists at the cost of some goals, but unfortunately he's not enough of a team player to do so.
@@korganrocks3995 well I get you, but I think he actually has a pretty good assists, but and Messi has better play making abilities because of his roles, if Messi plays Rw u mostly see him in the middle of the pitch same as cf (false 9) but Ronaldo is more of a normal winger (cross the ball) but also playmake sometimes, but he change eventually and starts being a box winger around 16 17 18 and then eventually be a ST
@isaacfestus235 But that's my point; he's got decent assist stats despite his obsession with goals, so imagine how many more he could have gotten if he'd actually focused more on creating than scoring!
I genuinely don't understand the obsession with goals by people who actually know football, because having someone who can create chances is far rarer than someone that can finish them. It always made me laugh to see Ronaldo starved of service and getting frustrated up front, when he had the skills to be the guy to beat the other team's disciplined defensive system and force them onto the backfoot, which leads to chaos, and chaos leads to goals.
Hell, even when I played on a team where our striker scored literally three quarters of all our goals, he wasn't our most important player; that was our playmaker who could pass and dribble, and would move us from being under pressure in our own half to charging toward their penalty area in seconds.
One good thing to come out of more advanced stats is actually to educate our eyes while watching a match.
We all know how we used to watch football as a kid: our eyes glued to the ball, oblivious to the things happening to the side of the screen. With good analysis we can give more focus to the efforts of individual players while they're trying to regain possession or someone trying to create space when all the attention is on the player's teammate on the other side of the field.
Of course this is a very optimistic perspective but we all know the average football fan has a much better understanding than what instagram reel comments lead us to believe.
There's an overemphasis on data and statistics now.
Genuinely class video, I rarely subscribe or like a video but the quality made me log in and sub. Keep up the work man.
For Zidane, he has bad stats because he only had two seasons to be on that level: second season at Juventus and second season at Madrid. There were few other good seasons too, like first & last season at Juventus & Madrid. But those seasons were far from the level we expect from the name 'zidane'. He was never a consistent player. Zidane's best international performance was in Euro 2000, and around those years in Juventus, Zidane was very inconsistent.
Here are some indisputable stats for you. Zidane was French footballer of the year 91195-96), Serie A player of the year twice (1996-97 & 2000-01), La liga player of the year, (2001-02), UCL player of the year (2002), FifPro world XI(05,06), not including "player of the tournament "World cup (2006) , Euro 2000. and Ballon D'or So your claims that Zidane was inconsistent or at a low level or is baseless and just revisionist nonsense .
@kevdeeA Awards do not matter. I can logically explain season by season from his juventus days to madrid. Is Owen better than Henry because he won the ballondor? These people who doesn't know how inconsistent Zidane was use dumb methods to prove that he was consistent, which he wasn't.
@@grogubunny Those awards are based on match performances, day-in and day-out and judged by seasoned football journalist and coaches at the time.The same awards used to rate Ronaldo and Messi and used to rate top players today. Your comment just shows you are completely clueless about the game . Awards show who was the better player at the time the time the award was given , so your Owen-Henry comparison is red herring fallacy . Those awards show that your claims about inconsistency is BS. No legendary coach, ex-player or journalist has ever called Zidane inconsistent so why should we take the claims of a non-entity like you seriously.
@kevdeeA Then why use awards to judge his consistency? Awards have no use in judging players. As i said, Henry and Owen. The fact that Owen won a ballondor doesn't mean he has higher peak than Henry. It is literally same logic. Zidane was inconsistent, season by season he performed differently. That is simple truth. Learn to watch the game. Not use false methods to judge.
@@grogubunny I showed that Zidane won awards over multiple years from 1995 to 2006 ,in the most important tournaments indicating how consistent he was in different leagues and national competitions .its to bad you cant understand basic logic.
I am glad I 1 one of those who understand football entirely because I been watching football for too long . Your video is spot on and I understand every detail you’re telling. Even the players that always have big impact but not talked much are in this list. Very good video. But then I met some people who been watching football their whole life but still don’t really understand football
There is another aspect to this: game-test. A lot of fans rate players based on their Fifa or PES rating, and not real worlds. It often very wrong. Unless it's Football Manager, then it's a little bit more accurate. I still use FM rating to judge players for my FPL team.
the FIFA brats have infested football with their FUT player ratings
Speaking only facts. This has been bothering me about the social media arguments for a while. 1000% knowledge my guy.
Listen ofc you needa watch the players play to determine how good they are but when Arsenal fans come with the “Ozil is better then Kdb cause he was funner to watch🤓” it just pisses me off man
Ozil stats are insane too.
KDB is not bad on the eye test, people just want him to do some snakes and rabona so they can rate him which is very stupid
@@bendivmukeba he is perhaps the worst elite player ive ever seen on the eyetest over the past 4 years. For every through ball he gets right he misplaces atleast 5, anytime he's in a congested area he doesnt know how to control a football and moves like a donkey. Some of the passes he misplaces I wouldn't expect from a league 2 player and so on.
Over 90 minutes when you specifically focus on watching de bruyne it's an eyesore, guy just makes too many pathetic mistakes and lacks creativity (notice in most games against where city need a goal he spams 15 - 20 of the same cross hoping one lands to his player).
Hes a highlight player and theres maybe a moment of brilliance or 2 where he affects the game with g/a otherwise city may aswell play with 10 men because outside of that he offers nothing in any phase of play. Obviously for city this works since they are so well structured they win the ball back in an instant so it doesn't matter if you have 30 turnovers but for Belgium those 30 turnovers a game show. The ultimate stats player, there is nothing he offers outside of g/a.
Ozil is better not cause he's funner to watch, hes just better. De Bruyne has his qualities in the right system but watching him for 90 minutes in a match will shatter the fantasy you built up after watching youtube comps
@@Guestownedu What! De bruyne an eye sore? that's a horrific take I watch De bruyne in no way is he an eye sore. Kevin De bruyne cannot be measured on that's or G/A that's why I know he one the best passers in football history,De bruyne dribbles with effective skills but people like you would prefer him to do a rainbow flick or a step over to say that he can dribble, his driving runs and ball carrying are exceptional not even forgeting his long range shooting you can't measure any of these on stats alone.For Belgium De bruyne has more freedom to do anything than at city and he still performs good.I don't know which Kevin De Bruyne you were watching
@@GuestowneduI agree kdb is probably overrated if he is truly just on Ozil tier
This idea that kdb is world class and the new Iniesta or Pirlo is ridiculous
Only Modric from this generation reached that height and we are still waiting for the next guy I mean Jude is probably going to be that guy but maybe it's a little soon
Really good video, bro. You pretty much hit the nail on the head at the end of the video. Someone who only relies on stats will never truly understand football. But, if you take the time to watch the game and listen to expert coaches and players and combine that with stats, you will have better tools to analyse the game.
I feel bad for Cr7 tbh i think he gets the short end of the stick as it relates to eye test, nowadays fans only saw ronaldo from 2016 onwards, but never knew what ronaldo was like up to 2014, like out of those 900+ goals as a result people only talk about the tap-ins most times, but ronaldo atleast has like 200+ goals that are absolute bangers, but the newer fans only see the older ronaldo and the stats only showed a goal scored, its a trade off honestly
200+ goals bangers? stop this bullshit. and even if it was true that doesnt mean he was entertaining...WATCH THE VIDEO AGAIN....lol you fanboys are fukin weird, he was never on top.....he was statpadding goal poacher, thats why his numbers are great. his passed the eye test only for 2/3 seasons before madrid and even that doesnt mean he was the most enjoyable
Nah stop he was an elite dribbler ofc not as good as Messi he a freak. After his early 30s moved to ST and focus heavily on goal scoring
His fans start watching him when he left real madrid what do you talking about ???
@AdrienRonerbro he never said Ronaldo was a better dribbler than messi, am a Ronaldo fan and thinks messi can dribble more, but saying cr7 can’t dribble, shows u just started watching football
@isaacfestus235 now where did I say Ronaldo wasn’t elite dribble? U cr7 fans get pressed when ppl don’t glaze him 24/7 I didn’t not say he not elite ofc he is lol. I’m not a new fan u muppet
Stats are great to support your observations but like you said they can be very misleading because most people don't use them in the correct context. If I have to choose between the two, I will take the eye test over stats every day, all day. I was a college basketball coach for 15 years. One of the best PGs that I ever coached was not statistically our best player. But the moment he stepped on the floor, we were a better team. He hardly ever ended up with steals himself but because of his IQ and work ethic, he immediately made our team defense elite. He averaged maybe 10 ppg and 5 apg but he did so many little things that made his teammates better that don't show up in the stats it is hard to quantify his effect on the team.
A great example of a player who is victim of "bad eye test" and "bad stats" at the same time is Jack Grealish. He is a lot less flashy and more disciplined, and has a lot of impact for city. His numbers were much better at Villa because he had a different role and was one of the final targets of any play. He is now a much better player for his teams success than he was, but all I hear is people complaining that Pep ruined him
Jack is not a better player lets real here, what made Jack so special was the freedom he was allowed to have while at villa, which lead to City signing him, since then he has been almost a shadow of the player he was. Consistently inconsistent in terms of starts and performances, all which made him get omitted from the England euros squad
@@RastaMouse29Anything to avoid giving a City player credit😂 Grealish was brilliant in City's treble winning season
Excellent video, mate! Said many of the things I've long said and so much more.
Eye test is the most important. Simple as that.
This is the best analysis I've seen for a long time on this topic
We live in a social media driven society. It disturbs me that only stats are mentioned, only stats are generating clicks and views. Football Twitter for instance went downhill since Elon has started paying per likes and views
This is a video i think every football fan should watch, keep up the great work man
Wonderful analysis
The absolute best video I’ve watched about this topic, thank you for making it, I’ve been telling these things to my friends for years and no one listens, they just keep looking at the stats. The eye test will always be better, the Zidane comparison is so accurate, Hazard and Salah should also be compared because stats wise Hazard looks shit compared to Salah but in reality(that’s my opinion) Hazard is the better player by far. Salah just has a better output.
The eye test and stat test if used correctly is a good metric I mean liverpool under slott really scores but they actually play worse than in The Klopp era but stats will tell you they are ok
I thought i was the only one that saw that
Nonsense lol. Unless ur talking about the Klopp era as a whole, ever since the 21/22 season Klopps styles of play leaked chances and goals for fun despite having the most talented CB pairing on the planet.
mainly due to the infamous Mane-Firmino-Salah attack. of course their current attack won't come close to that but slots team doing alright, just as good as klopp's team in the prime.
How many time alisson and vvd saved liver during klopp era😂 bow slot use compact defense and less press from frimt three ❤
Interesting topic, solid analysis, great editing -- all around just a top-notch video. Now you've got a new sub
sub to you sir this was a good video from start to finish.
I hate the people who say jude is "only a goalscorer"
and same people doesn't talk about him when he don't score but have a great game
5:03 I really don't like that argument. For me, the eye can lie to you, the stats would never. They are just numbers.
It's not the context that needs to be added, it's the interpretation of statistics that needs to be bettered
For football the eye test doesn't lie, players who can't do the basics consistently use stats and once does stats dry up they disappear that's why a Bruno Fernandez is very good when he is assists or scores and very bad when he is bad because he can't contribute to the team anymore,
While a modric may not assist but everything else the basics are spot on
He should have included ball knowledge in the video which is what assists the eye test,
everyone knows Muller is very good but guess what when you want to compare him to similar players who does the same thing you need stats but no one really does it like Muller, so you can't hype him up over anyone
In football stats can lie to and context is need more than different interpretation. For example let say A and B completed 10 pass between each other in the back line without pressure and then you have C and D also completed 10 pass between each other but with pressure from the opposition. In stats they may have the same passes completion 10 passes but the situational difference is the context that put them apart.
This is an argument that's relevant to every sport. In basketball there's a retired player named Jason Williams or white chocolate. He was a fantastic playmaker, but he played most of his career on a team that wasn't very good, so his teaamates didn't score, even when the ball reached their hands. I once got into and argument with someone who said because Jason Williams had low assist numbers he wasn't that good, yet when you watched his games you'd see his passes and dribbling were amazing. The pros loved him, yet fans didn't think much of him.
There are players who help players around them play better, while their own stats are not remarkable.
Olivier Giroud for France in 2018.
Jordan Henderson was such a player for Liverpool and England. Best bang average player to ever put on a pair of boots. Average speed. Below average dribbling. Average shooter. Above average passer. I watched that winning Spanish goal go into the net at the Euros final this summer and I thought "that goal would never happen if Jordan Henderson were 3-4 years younger and on this team".