Xavi Hernández

[footyfan]

I'm of course arguing that this pass fits both descriptions.

Arguing that a play can only have one denomination does not seem too smart, for eg. a shot on goal that is saved by the keeper is a shot, a shot on target and a save. In the case of Messi's pass, both definitions fit equally well as they are both undeniable. What about a situation where Alves crosses to Messi who scores a header? The pass is a cross, a key pass and an assist. If it is true that whoscored only assigns one denomination for each play, then I'm going to discount the quality of their stats from now on. Because in this case, they would not count it as a cross but just as an assist?

 

[Hamzah]

Who gives a shit?

 

[footyfan]

Actually there are a lot of people arguing on the basis of whoscored stats and ratings nowadays.

 

[Hamzah]

Yeah. I think it's better to have a more general view of the game though don't you think? You can easily get bogged down in stats

 

[Sumlit]

I'm of course arguing that this pass fits both descriptions.

Arguing that a play can only have one denomination does not seem too smart, for eg. a shot on goal that is saved by the keeper is a shot, a shot on target and a save. In the case of Messi's pass, both definitions fit equally well as they are both undeniable. What about a situation where Alves crosses to Messi who scores a header? The pass is a cross, a key pass and an assist. If it is true that whoscored only assigns one denomination for each play, then I'm going to discount the quality of their stats from now on. Because in this case, they would not count it as a cross but just as an assist?

You cheapen the stat if you count it multiple times. For instance, if that shot had ended in goal, under your reasoning, it could have been counted as a through ball, a key pass, and an assist. Three stats for one play cheapens each individual stat because someone looking at a stat sheet could infer those three stats resulted from three separate plays instead of just one.

Instead, you apply an upgrade system, as it were. If pass beats defender, it is a through ball. If that pass also results in a shot, then it gets upgraded to a key pass. If that shot results in a goal, then that key pass gets upgraded to an assist. Keeps it simple and easy to discern.

 

[footyfan]

You cheapen the stat if you count it multiple times. For instance, if that shot had ended in goal, under your reasoning, it could have been counted as a through ball, a key pass, and an assist. Three stats for one play cheapens each individual stat because someone looking at a stat sheet could infer those three stats resulted from three separate plays instead of just one.

Instead, you apply an upgrade system, as it were. If pass beats defender, it is a through ball. If that pass also results in a shot, then it gets upgraded to a key pass. If that shot results in a goal, then that key pass gets upgraded to an assist. Keeps it simple and easy to discern.

I don't agree that it cheapens the stat at all? Does counting something as a shot as well as a shot on target cheapen the value? There's nothing wrong in counting an assist as a key pass and a through ball, because it's the actual truth.

Counting as just one attribute gives an incorrect view of the game. Say someone was trying to figure out how many through passes Barca has been playing on average per game. If every single one of their through passes ended in a goal, the person would infer from whoscored stats that Barca infact make 0 through passes per game, which is completely incorrect.

Yeah. I think it's better to have a more general view of the game though don't you think? You can easily get bogged down in stats

I don't disagree, but it still has become an unignorable part of the game nowadays, and if the validity of these stats is in question, then lol. It's like those pictures of players with stats stuck on top of them, stats which are blatantly made up.

 

[Sumlit]

I don't agree that it cheapens the stat at all? Does counting something as a shot as well as a shot on target cheapen the value? There's nothing wrong in counting an assist as a key pass and a through ball, because it's the actual truth.

Counting as just one attribute gives an incorrect view of the game. Say someone was trying to figure out how many through passes Barca has been playing on average per game. If every single one of their through passes ended in a goal, the person would infer from whoscored stats that Barca infact make 0 through passes per game, which is completely incorrect.

Shots vs shots on target vs goals are easier to discern, they are straight forward and not subject to interpretation.

Pass stats are more open to the interpretation and observation of the stats keeper. To do the same with the pass stats would be to create a lot more confusion as to which through ball was actually a through ball only; which was a through ball and a key pass only; and which was a through ball, a key pass and an assist.

It is done in the interest of simplification, both for the stat's keeper and the reader. I'm sure other more in depth stat's keeper further sub-divides them.

 

[barcanuck]

He can't deliver anything to us in the final 3rd anymore. Tries a weak shot, slow passes to the wingers. Cesc comes on for 10 mins and scores a goal in his position, nuff said.

 

[KhaledBarca]

He can't deliver anything to us in the final 3rd anymore. Tries a weak shot, slow passes to the wingers. Cesc comes on for 10 mins and scores a goal in his position, nuff said.

You need XAVi to control games, without him we would concede even more chances!!

He played a very good game today, although he did make an awful decision in the 1st half with that useless shot when he should have passed the ball...

 

[BerkeleyBernie]

You need XAVi to control games, without him we would concede even more chances!!

He played a very good game today, although he did make an awful decision in the 1st half with that useless shot when he should have passed the ball...

Well, it was actually a decent decision, given the position, but, as usual, a weak shot (though I agree, it would have likely been more productive to lay it off to a better finisher). I suppose because they've always focused on team goals, Xavi and Iniesta never have put much effort into improving their shooting. It's a shame, really- especially Iniesta, who can so easily get himself into good positions, but almost always looks for the best place to lay off the ball rather than shoot for goal himself.

 

[Elite-BkD]

Just through re-watching. Xavi was both very closely watched by Sevilla and absolutely superb all match - a lot of the critical comments of him are insane, really. Just a bunch of scripted, insipid, nonsense comments that have been getting passed around for ages and have absolutely nothing to do with what happens on the pitch.
Per usual, he was everywhere and his passing, touch, awareness, focus, and cool head were out of this world. Couldn't begin to count the number of times he moved the ball forward and offered positive contributions to the attack, nevermind the fantastic play both protecting the ball in Barca's third and helping win it back as well. Can't for the life of me figure out why anyone in their right mind would think he should be increasingly sat on the bench.

 

[BerkeleyBernie]

Just through re-watching. Xavi was both very closely watched by Sevilla and absolutely superb all match - a lot of the critical comments of him are insane, really. Just a bunch of scripted, insipid, nonsense comments that have been getting passed around for ages and have absolutely nothing to do with what happens on the pitch.
Per usual, he was everywhere and his passing, touch, awareness, focus, and cool head were out of this world. Couldn't begin to count the number of times he moved the ball forward and offered positive contributions to the attack, nevermind the fantastic play both protecting the ball in Barca's third and helping win it back as well. Can't for the life of me figure out why anyone in their right mind would think he should be increasingly sat on the bench.

E-XACT-ly. Couldn't have said it any better.

I can see where a different energy might be useful in a match where the other team sits entirely behind the ball in their box, as Xavi's control isn't really needed in that situation; the other team essentially has given up the midfield, except on the rare counterattack. That's where Thiago would have come in handy; able to penetrate on the dribble in attack, and with outside shooting; but also able to get back quickly on the counterattack, and control the ball out of the back if necessary.

 

[raedkuwait]

this guy just dont know how to score or how to shoot, that second half chance when he had the goal at his mercy yet
he choose to side pass the ball with an awful pass somes up this guy performance.

 

[barcanuck]

Just through re-watching. Xavi was both very closely watched by Sevilla and absolutely superb all match - a lot of the critical comments of him are insane, really. Just a bunch of scripted, insipid, nonsense comments that have been getting passed around for ages and have absolutely nothing to do with what happens on the pitch.
Per usual, he was everywhere and his passing, touch, awareness, focus, and cool head were out of this world. Couldn't begin to count the number of times he moved the ball forward and offered positive contributions to the attack, nevermind the fantastic play both protecting the ball in Barca's third and helping win it back as well. Can't for the life of me figure out why anyone in their right mind would think he should be increasingly sat on the bench.

He doesn't produce results though in the final 3rd. He used to provide 20 assists a year and that's my main worry. His control passing and decisions are always great but lost his killer instinct unfortunately.

 

[kostasgtc]

He doesn't produce results though in the final 3rd. He used to provide 20 assists a year and that's my main worry. His control passing and decisions are always great but lost his killer instinct unfortunately.

without xavi we cant compete in big games.
maybe not even WITH him but without him im sure.