The man with the spreadsheets, him say "Time for Nobby bye-bye".

	NUFC	Both	Just Dyer	Just Nobby
Won	26	15	5	6
Drawn	17	7	3	7
Lost	28	24	2	2
Total	71	46	10	15
%Won	37%	33%	50%	40%
%Drawn	24%	15%	30%	47%
%Lost	39%	52%	20%	13%
Points from 38	51	43	68	63
Avg For	1.52	1.56	1.77	1.32
Avg Against	1.37	1.54	1.00	1.11

As you can see we gain very little in goal provision and lose a lot defensively when they both play together. Nobby on his own is even less effective whilst Dyer on his own really makes us tick.

One Kieron on the wing and a Nobby to go please.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2001

Answers

Any takers?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2001

Why certainly, Sir. That will be £8 million to you.
Will that be gift-wrapped, or plain brown paper-bag?

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2001

Gift wrapped please...............in the relevant passport of the buyers choice of course.

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2001

Softie....Even standing on my head I can't figure out how you come up with your percentage figures. For example, if they won 15 games (out of 26 won) when both were playing, how does this translate into 33%? Confused aka phoenix

-- Anonymous, April 22, 2001

It was 15 games from a total of 46 that gives 33%, interesting stats. Some paper had nobby down as MOTM for macums' game but I thought he went AWOL.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Lies, damned lies and Softie's statistics. I think you'll find that the %ages are against the gamed played when both were playing - ie. 15/46 = 33% (well, really 34.88%).

But you raise an interesting (?) point Phoenix. What would be the fugures against the total games played? Somewhat less impressive!

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Absolute agreement, keep Dyer and play him on the right wing. I've been for this all season.

If any other club had Dyer they'd make him right wing and he'd be a permanent England fixture by now.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Phoenix, it's why I opted for propotional spreads on my stats: far too many of these stats sources simply count totals, so if a player plays more games he will naturally stand a higher chance of participating in more wins. Pees me off so I produced the answer.

Obviously we do better when either Solano or Dyer player, but significantly worse when both play together. Of the two we do best with just Dyer, and what with Nobby's missing 11 games next season, it should be Dyer on the right and AN Other groomed as substitute. That is going on the understanding that we are a business who need to balance the books.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Screacher, the only game without either was Aston Villa away in the cup. So adjust the figures by 1 loss and the difference is minimal :-)

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Seems to explode the myth that we are only effective when Dyer and Solano are playing together.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Well there you go the facts are staring you in the face. When we play just Solano we get a positive result i.e a draw or a win 87% of the time compared to 80 % for dyer. Statistics can prove anything. I prefer the evidence of my own eyes.

How many of the losses were the direct result of either Solano or Dyer or when both were playing. How many of the wins were as a direct result of Solano or Dyer or both.

The fact remains that according to all stats and the evidence of my own eyes, Solano has put in the crosses that get us the goals, scored more goals than Dyer, fed the balls through for Dyer to score and has played more games than Dyer, despite international commitments.

Sorry to disagree with your analysis, Softie but the statistics you have given us do not tell the whole story.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Of course they don't Bake, but they have prompted a discussion which is the whole point.

Let me ask you how many of Solano's successful crosses were intended for the eventual recipient? He has looked poor without Shearer, Ferguson, Dabizas, Speed, Goma or at least any 3 of those attacking his crosses. Anyone with a modicum of ability centering a ball to that lot should pick up a few assists just by getting it somewhere near the goal. I bet Michael Gray's figures are kept down simply by the number of times Niall Quinn misses games.

All statistics are bollocks, hence my title "An Answer" rather than "The Answer". First hand observation tells me that Dyer shirks challenges and bottles out of runs on goal or shots if he isn't sure they are going to come off; my statistics tell me otherwise. Since I am well aware that I have ludicrously biased opinions on everything under the sun I have simply gone looking for a more scientific method of deciding as we otherwise just end up reasserting our own personal prejudices.

The main thing I was intrigued by was the number of people who have maintained that the only time we look like a competent side is when both of them play. The fact that we score less goals and concede more with a reduced balance of positive results tends to lend support to the argument that they in fact leave is markedly exposed down the right (Barton vs 3) and spend so much time making pretty patterns and over-elaborating that they never get round to putting the killer pass in. Our oft-mentioned poitless posession in a nut shell with the odd 10 minute spell here and there and the Boro away game as the exceptions which prove the rule.

No doubt some will argue that it is simply that they are the only 2 on parade marching in step, however the fact that we have done much better with only one of them playing - either one - leaves you with an either/or choice for team selection. I would contend that since Dyer's Solanoless performances have been markedly better than the reverse, he should be first choice when available. If you think we can afford to keep either of them as a mere substitute (I bet they wouldn't stand for it) then you need to bear in mind that Nobby will be awol for a quarter of the season before picking up bookings and injuries.

It has been intimated that we have had offers for both of them and we can see that they ought to be mutially exclusive in the side: I would suggest that if we sell either of them it should be Nobby.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Spot on, Softie.

In statistical analysis any conclusion needs to be supported by a test of 'significance', wherein the probability of the conclusion being accurate can be predicted.
In the ritual abuse of statistics this important step is not carried out, and the significance of the conclusion being drawn is not quantified.

Sadly, I still know the theory, but can't find my 30 yr-old Uni notes to be able to qualify Softie's analysis. So, I'll just have to continue "reasserting my personal prejudices" - which fortuitously Softie's analysis has conveniently supported!

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

I just stick to the idea that you need at least 10 instances to compare before you get a worthwhile stat. Otherwise you can rest assured that I would be trumpeting the fact that Stephen Glass has an average of 1 goal/start and 3 points/game - a 100% record by anyone's standards....sadly this is because he has only started twice this season :-(

I have finished doing the breakdown for all players over the last 6 seasons and will publish a form guide over the seasons. The only fair way I can come up with to do this is to express each player's contribution as a percentage improvement or otherwise on the average performance for that season. This way a player might be seen to be 10% above average in 1995-96 but end up 7% below by 2000-01. This will automatically iron out differences in team performance so that a good player in a winning team can have his performances compared to those in a mediocre team. Not perfect, but more meaningful than saying that Shearer averaged 2.15 points/game in 1996-97 and only 1.54pts/game in 2000-01 so he has declined, when he is probably above average in both instances and so his value will decrease less markedly.

If I'm totally wrong in that assumption, please let me know :-)

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

There are many reasons why Solano has so many assists, but the main reason is that we rely on him too much too get crosses in. No I do not believe that every cross he has put in has reached the intended target just as every cross that Beckham hits does not. The art of crossing a ball is not the easiest part of the game. However he has as I pointed out before had the third most succesful crosses in the EPL. I know more statistics but they prove that we score goals when he is playing and lack goals when he is not, witness the AV game.

The real problem , it seems to me is where we play Dyer and Solano. I personally would play Dyer up front with Cort or AS or behing two strikers. If we play four across midfield then we play a diamond formation. I have always been impressed with Dyers ability to run at the back four when he has space in front of him. in the hole or dropping off a main striker would suit him down to the ground.

So keep both Solano and Dyer and play Dyer in a different position.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

To make your life complete I shall compile a series of results based on Dyer on the wing, Dyer up front and Dyer through the middle both with and without Nobby. Looking at the bare stats for when they both play in the team, however, I doubt you're going to like the answers very much. But hey, I've been wrong about so much we'll find that one of those combinations is the key.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

On your last point Softie, I very much doubt that you have enough games to make a comparison meaningful. It's a nice discussion point, I agree. However, if your figures can't provide a complete answer then they'll mislead supporters. Why create a cross for Solano's back - remember what happened to Barton when the fans booed him!

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Soft Lad - my comment related to the total of all games played - 71. If you look at that figure, we won 5/71 with just LKD, 6/71 with just Nobby and a staggering 15/71 with both. Yet we lost 24/71 with both playing and 2/71 with only one of them.

See, statitics can be use anyway you choose ;-)

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

My brain hurts looking at all these numbers and permutations - my concern is that Nobby bottled the opportunity to make himself a hero on Tyneside Saturday. Anonymous to say the least.

As a teacher might say - must do better.

They would both probably excel in a top side. Hopefully that will be the side of the 2001/02 season :-)

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Bobby's brain is not the only one hurting. Perhaps wor'Softie is a 'Logical Positivist' on the quiet. Does any of this take into account Nobby's tendency to look knackered when coming back from Peru games? I'm baffled. Gut feeling is neither of them can play well without a decent ball-winning performance in midfield and between them Lee, Speed, Acuna and Bassedas haven't been able to do that consistently enough. Put Solano in a side with a stronger spine I suspect he'd look brilliant.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

You're describing the typical 'luxury' player Stevo.
BTW, Pedro was saying much the same in the Journal this morning.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

As it happens, that table was my usual collection of good ideas and lousy execution (like Nobby a lot of the time :-)) and mistakes were made, errors compounded, screw-ups abounded. I had carefully written a series of array formulas looking for totals of starts by a player in matches with particular outcomes but had foolishly averaged the goals for Cup games as well. I have also extended NUFC's and Nobby's games on his own to include the period before Dyer arrived. Here is the proper table with no f**k ups (possibly) and including starts by one player if the other only made a substitute appearance:

	NUFC	Both	Just Dyer	Just Nobby
Won	37	13	6	14
Drawn	29	7	3	13
Lost	42	20	3	14
Total	108	40	12	41
%Won	34%	33%	50%	34%
%Drawn	27%	18%	25%	32%
%Lost	39%	50%	25%	34%
Points from 38	49	44	67	51
Avg For	1.39	1.55	1.50	1.29
Avg Against	1.43	1.75	0.83	1.32

The fact is that we score the most goals when they both play, but end up with the least points because the combination also concedes the most goals (would be fine if we scored more than we let in, but that isn't the case). Dyer on his own is still better than Nobby on his own by a long chalk and we clearly score the least goals when Nobby plays on his own.

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

To clear up some of the lingering doubts this table therefore refers to League performance only (bread and butter stuff).

Stevo, I think Nobby's knackeredness after Peru games and all round inconsistency is best summed up by the fact that he has made 104 starts and been substituted in 43 of them.....and no, I don't think he was brought off early so that he could receive a standing ovation from a wildly appreciative Gallowgate :-)

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

bobby, surely you're not suggesting we sell the pair of them to manu?

Mind you, if softie's sums add up....

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Only if they give us Van Nistelrooy in exchange.

Well....someone's gotta keep Al and Rob company on the skiing trips Dr Steadman's treatment table. ;-))

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

LoL!!

-- Anonymous, April 23, 2001

Gibbo - the only thing I'd sell to ManU is a scabby F&N infected sheep :-)

Dyer and Solano are 'luxury players' indeed. But that's ok, since I now reckon we need some inspirational talent to inspire (obviously) and attract other talent in the close season. If Taggart's Red Weevils want them they must be good.

Just a shame they're not both consistently at their finest - maybe some new blood will pressure them to do excel.

I also wonder what it must be like to have the time and patience and damn right tenacity to come up with such stats as Softie's - don't get it at all but strength to your drinking arm :-)

-- Anonymous, April 24, 2001