The actual number is $6,000. You have to contact them directly. That gives you up to three leagues of data within 48 hours of a completed match.

As for extrapolating via FFS, their numbers change all the time. They claim it's Opta and I see no reason to believe otherwise. You will see BC and CC numbers change for matches a month back on a fairly regular basis. Because of this, I run the full season numbers every single week rather than simply add on the current gameweek to the previous tally. My guess is that Opta is using somewhat of a FootballOutsiders game charter approach and is tweaking things after the powers that be get a chance to review. There's absolutely no way one could expect consistency and quality when the company is offering detailed stats for nearly every major European league. That's a #### ton of games to chart and one should expect major discrepancies when it comes to subjective measures.

@ MCoA -

I see you have started using Big Chances in your metrics as I am. When did this begin? I ask as I recall you were using SOT + hit WW previously. I am presuming you found the increased correlation using Big Chances to be quite appealing.

In theory, yes. FPH is right that you'd see significant sample size issues - the "-" sample for Gareth Bale is not going to be particularly useful - but I think it could be useful for some players and some problems.

I've always felt +/- would be useful for football at the component level (i.e. +5.1 passes/90m or -2.6 tackles/90m) and/or using groupings (i.e. one back four is +4.2 interceptions/90m, another back four is -0.8 interceptions/90m), but we don't have the data, so it's stayed a theory.

I usually don't like to make fun of the mentally disabled...

But what the hell!

I see you have started using Big Chances in your metrics as I am. When did this begin? I ask as I recall you were using SOT + hit WW previously. I am presuming you found the increased correlation using Big Chances to be quite appealing.

I think you mentioned big chances back when I first posted by team ratings, and I changed it then. The Monte Carlo thing has always been based off SoT/BC numbers for team quality, since I first posted it in February. So, thanks.

As for extrapolating via FFS, their numbers change all the time. They claim it's Opta and I see no reason to believe otherwise. You will see BC and CC numbers change for matches a month back on a fairly regular basis. Because of this, I run the full season numbers every single week rather than simply add on the current gameweek to the previous tally.

So, this kind of freaked me out. I have the team ratings run on a match-by-match basis, which means I need to collect weekly data and then input separate numbers for double gameweeks by hand. (How do you re-run full season numbers every week? Do you have a spider for the data?) But I went back through all my data, and I only found changes at the team-match level in week 15 and week 28. That was worth fixing, but it wasn't the data disaster I expected.

West Ham's win over Stoke has been underrated as a result, as it put them just about entirely clear from relegation.

Huzzah!

On the other hand, my CPWHFPS* still sees them scoring just six points the rest of the way (at home to Wigan and Reading, if you're wondering) which would give them 39 points. I suppose that puts them above the drop, but not by much.

*Crazy Paranoid West Ham Fan Projection System

I know it's subjective, but jeez. RB will surely vouch for the fact that the Shooty/Mattbert demographic felt very strongly that the Bale chance was "a subjectively classified situation where a player 'should' score, either one-on-one with the keeper or otherwise in excellent scoring position."

This is true. In fact, I know it was quite such a chance, because that was when I was about at my crankiest regarding the slow food delivery, and I still remember it.

I don't think there will be many Newcastle fans in Russia tonight--evidently it costs 200 quid just to get a visa to go to the game, on top of all the travel expenses. Of course, there may not be many fans at all since Anzhi had the game moved to Moscow. Maybe some Spartak fans will show up out of curiosity.

Anzhi Makhachkala: Gabulov, Yeschenko, Joao Carlos, Ewerton, Zhirkov, Jucilei, Diarra, Ahmedov, Willian, Shatov, Eto'o.

Subs: Pomazan, Gadzhibekov, Tagirbekov, Logashov, Carcela-Gonzalez, Traore, Smolov.

Newcastle: Elliot, Simpson, Yanga-Mbiwa, Perch, Haidara, Cabaye, Anita, Ben Arfa, Marveaux, Obertan, Sissoko.

Subs: Alnwick, Santon, Bigirimana, Tiote, Steven Taylor, Ameobi, Campbell.

A false 9 for Newcastle?

I only just got back from work, so I missed the first half, but it looks like Newcastle were really going for it. 27% possession and no shots on goal.

It looks like I mixed that up, but your point stands. It was indeed Bale's hilarious twenty-yards-over-the-bar miss that was the third big chance**, not Siggy's one-pass-too-many. But the point still stands, that I would have intuitively considered both Siggy and Giroud to be big chances - maybe the fact that neither got off a shot is what prevented them from being "big chances"? That's got to be it.

I don't think that's right. Going back to the LFC-Wigan game, Liverpool were only credited with two "clear-cut" chances, despite IMO having three -- Downing's opener, Suarez's first and third. I say this not to nitpick, but just would be curious to know if this is a systemic issue -- after all, most teams average fewer than three(*) clear-cut chances, so being off by even one per game would seem to throw a wrench in things. I'm pretty sure certain hockey stats suffer from a similar issue of certain stats (hits, scoring chances) being judged differently depending on if the team is home/away. I don't know if the same thing is going on here.

(*)This is just a guess. Liverpool are at about 2.50 clear cut chances per game this season, and I'm guessing they're in the upper quartile of the EPL, although I have no data to confirm that.

(Also, just a general note, I'm using "clear-cut chances" interchangeably with "big chances", in case that wasn't clear.)

I only just got back from work, so I missed the first half, but it looks like Newcastle were really going for it. 27% possession and no shots on goal.

I believe the adjective is "dire".

Laser pointers all over the place when it comes to spot kicks and corner kicks in Bucharest.

Laser pointers all over the place when it comes to spot kicks and corner kicks in Bucharest.

Steua Bucuresti are not exactly a lovable underdog.

Steua Bucuresti are not exactly a lovable underdog.

My Romanian friend, who is a die-hard Dinamo fan, would agree very strongly with that sentiment.

Penalty for Steaua and they score.

The announcers for the Chelsea/Steaua match are talking about "controversial circumstances", but how is that anything but a penalty? Bertrand wrapped his arm over the guy's shoulder and pulled him away from the ball right as the cross came through.

Not a great game, but a good result for Newcastle considering the long trip, the tough conditions and that Anzhi are pretty damned good. 0-0 is the final.

(*)This is just a guess. Liverpool are at about 2.50 clear cut chances per game this season, and I'm guessing they're in the upper quartile of the EPL, although I have no data to confirm that.

Yup. Here's a chart for all clubs - big chances, big chances converted, and conversion rate. There is a very good correlation between attacking quality at big chances created, while there is close to zero correlation between attacking quality and rate of big chance conversion.

Spurs are heading into a very heavy schedule, but AVB is not rotating much for the game in Milan - Gallas and Friedel the only changes from the weekend. I worry about guys like Dembele, Parker, and Lennon holding up. And Lloris is so important to this side that rotating him for the Europa League (though I can understand it on man-management terms) hurts the club a lot more than almost any other single change to the side.

XI: Friedel, Walker, Vertonghen, Gallas, Assou-Ekotto, Dembele, Parker, Lennon, Sigurdsson, Bale & Defoe
Subs: Lloris, Caulker, Naughton, Dawson, Livermore, Carroll & Holtby

Zzzzzzzzzz.... Is it over?

Very, very defensive team from Inter.

Weird uniforms as well.

This is getting boring.

By which I mean totally amazing. Nice cross from Sigurdsson.

Pfft, they shouldn't cross it wastes goals.

The way Sigurdsson created the space for himself before the cross was really clever. He played the ball for himself a good five yards back up the pitch because he was being harried by two defenders and the saw the space they'd opened up.

Are you shitting me ref? There was contact and Bale went down. Never a penalty, but that doesn't make it a ####### yellow card.

There was only contact because Bale dragged his foot to make sure there was some contact as he dove.

There was only contact because Bale dragged his foot to make sure there was some contact as he dove.

Yeah, at first I thought it was a harsh yellow but after seeing the replay I can understand it.

Spurs goal involving four players, none of which are Bale!

Yeah, at first I thought it was a harsh yellow but after seeing the replay I can understand it.

Yup. Bale is on his way down, under his own power, before the contact.

The attacking front four of Gylfi-Bale-Lennon behind Defoe looks insanely good.

There was just a hilarious shot of Defoe standing next to Handanovic. Defoe is at least a head shorter.

The attacking front four of Gylfi-Bale-Lennon behind Defoe looks insanely good.

They're moving around a lot. Defoe keeps showing up on the left wing with Sigurdsson and Bale in the middle.

Inter really don't give a #### about this game, do they? The ease with which Spurs are able to go past people and win the ball back is kind of shocking.

Inter really don't give a #### about this game, do they? The ease with which Spurs are able to go past people and win the ball back is kind of shocking.

I was about to make the same comment. It's hard to say how much of this domination is Spurs playing really well and how much is Inter not being arsed about it.

And as I type this, Inter almost got one back.

That was what I believe the eggheads call a "big chance".

Big chance for Super Jan there.

Spurs are really pressing well. Inter look totally clueless.

Hey, that was fun. So weird to watch Spurs play Inter ####### Milan and not feel any real tension. At the risk of sounding ungrateful, I do daydream about how good this team with a player like Soldado leading the line.

It was almost weirdly disappointing to watch Inter totally sleepwalk through most of the 90 minutes. They were a bit more competitive once they brought on more of the usual first teamers, but still.

So, so easy. AVB has an interesting task now, I think, to temper the enthusiasm after this game and get everyone focused for Liverpool without undercutting the positives too much.

Southampton Think Factory!

Southampton Think Factory!

I always use a ball winner in Football Manager. Does that give me hipster credential?

Southampton Think Factory!

Based on the URL, I'm assuming this is about Schneiderlin, who has indeed been fantastic for the Saints this season. Okay, clicking through now...

EDIT: Haha! I am super genius. Kneel before Zod. Southampton has some nice young pieces in their squad. Schneiderlin's still in his early 20's, I think. Luke Shaw, a teenager, has been mentioned in the soccer threads a few times before. He looks like real talent. I also like James Ward-Prowse, another teenager. Reminds me of Tom Carroll.

We thought he was Superman, but he's Batman. Tim Howard has two fractured bones in his back.

That's good stuff. I had not really noticed Schneiderlin too much in the Southampton games I watched, probably because I'm dumb.

So, this is sort of cross-post spamming, and I apologize. But I've been playing around with my team stats, and I've gotten into posting some of the material at CFC - one thing you can say for SB Nation, that is one super easy publishing interface. Feels weird to write up something that long for a post here. Anyway, all that is to say, I looked at Liverpool's numbers and the "flat-track bully" thing, and there wasn't that much in the numbers to confirm. Doesn't mean it isn't a real effect, but at least this one method didn't identify much. (On Liverpool and flat-track bullying).

In practice, unless someone has a rich aunt, we don't have the data. I'm getting my numbers from Fantasy Football Scout, which already costs £15, but they only provide a subset of the Opta database, and it doesn't allow for in-game splits based on which players were on the pitch at the time. The full Opta database is like the old stats database from back in the day, it runs like ten grand or something.

Are the shots/big chances associated with game time in the data you have? If so, it might be possible to scrape ESPN game logs to generate the lineups at any given time. Not sure if it's worth the hassle, but if I manage to free up some time in the next month or so I could give it a try.

We thought he was Superman, but he's Batman. Tim Howard has two fractured bones in his back.

This is disappointing, but I'm looking forward to see Guzan start in goal for the US. He's deserved a starting spot considering his play with AV this year.

Does this make Sean Johnson the number 2 keeper? And I guess Rimando will get called in for the March games.

I figure Rimando is the #2 and Johnson is the #3.

From MCOA's SB Nation post:

This is a useful note, that a kind of flat-track bullying is entirely necessary to Premier League success. Everton have nice 2-3-2 record against top opponents, but a very mediocre 9-9-3 against the rest of the league. If you can't whomp on the mediocre and bad clubs, it doesn't matter how brilliantly you step up your game in Manchester.

Yes! I remember debating this endlessly with other Spurs fans back in the pre-Harry days when the main knock on the team's seemingly ingrained inability to make the leap from upper-mid table obscurity and qualify for the Champions League was that they couldn't beat the then Big Four (United, Chelsea, Arsenal, and Liverpool).

That hegemony at the top of the table looked as unshakable as anything at the time, and Spurs indeed had an utterly abysmal record against those clubs. But I always maintained that the reason Tottenham came up short was not that they were shrinking violets in the big games but rather that they routinely dropped points to crap teams in the bottom half of the table. Taking a big scalp is nice, but the Big Four were only dangling 24 points out of a possible 114. That left 90 points available to be wrested from the teams that, during the Martin Jol era when Spurs finished 5th in back-to-back seasons, were theoretically no better than equal to Tottenham in quality. Most would have been considered significantly worse.

Now, obviously no one realistically expects a top four team (or even a title winner) to run the table against everyone outside the top four. But the point remains: you can get yourself a long, long way towards where you want to be simply by taking care of business against clubs that are mediocre to poor (and occasionally abject). Win most of the games you "should" win, and everything else is gravy.

I hate to admit this but Schalke is looking very good today. There's a really good chance the Bundesliga will have 3 teams in the CL quarterfinals.

Are the shots/big chances associated with game time in the data you have? If so, it might be possible to scrape ESPN game logs to generate the lineups at any given time. Not sure if it's worth the hassle, but if I manage to free up some time in the next month or so I could give it a try.

So, first answer, no. I have no way of connecting the FFS game data to in-game situations.

On the second, though, the ESPN game logs do have SoT data, if I'm remembering correctly. If you could find differentiation in SoT conversion based on game situation, that would be a really useful finding. And the ESPN game logs would allow for a sort of +/- stat as well. It's almost enough to make me want to get my programming skills back and try it myself.

flip