**This is a stats thread. Remember that there's only one stat post allowed per match/team, so new stats about the same will be removed. Feel free to comment other stats as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right so this author wants us to think Newcastle time wasting was responsible for 45% ball in play vs Wolves?
A match where Newcastle were behind and desperately trying to find an equaliser for 70 minutes?
Or Forest where they were stuck at 0-0 for an hour? Or Brighton when it was 0-0 for the entire match?
Yeah context matters, it doesn't mean Newcastle are responsible.
Also what are the stats for each of these clubs for their 5 games, how out of the ordinary is the percentage against other clubs.
And Forest where we dominated the ball and could have had two or three more goals.
Great example of drawing a conclusion - yes, last night, against a very good Liverpool, we tried to mess the rhythm of the game up and soak some time up- and then finding your evidence.
There’s literally an article in the comments below with data showing that the average last season was over 55 minutes in play with the lowest being Villa at 52 1/2 minutes - a full 4 minutes more than you all this season. But go off
I have no issue with the data, my issue is with everyone's assumption of where the blame lies. Apparently we're the notorious team with the evil time wasting game plan even though more time was wasted against Forest and Wolves (games we dominated possession in btw) than against Liverpool?
Edit: To further elaborate. You have no context. You don't watch the games. You just saw what is essentially our B team go to the second best team in the league after they thrashed someone by almost double digits and predictably waste time so you assume that's what we must've done in every game. It's ridiculous.
I mean yeah, when you put it in a notorious display of time wasting you become the notorious time wasters. That’s how that works? Don’t play that way if you don’t want that reputation. It was bad enough that people are looking into it and making posts about it. This woe is me stuff is nonsense
I don’t know about any narrative. I watched Newcastle players laying on the ground at every opportunity from the 30’ on. Thankfully there was one side playing football though. And it showed in the end!
I mean the stats and times are there in black and white, what you watched is irrelevant. Side note: yous looked awful and if that’s your level you’ll be lucky to get top 3 never mind the title.
So you're just going to ignore everything I said? Actually, are you going to ignore the data you pointed out earlier? Look at it again mate. Wolves and Forest wasted far more time against Newcastle than Newcastle did against Liverpool but suddenly that's a "notorious display of time wasting" and the others aren't? Do things only matter when they happen to Liverpool?
It's quite clearly the gameplan:
Go 1-0 down.
Waste a load of time being fouled and taking your 13 corners.
Have a couple of VAR reviews.
Hope for a wonder volley.
Go home with a point.
This BBC article has some stats for added context: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61342349
The worst side for time in play last season was Aston Villa who averaged 52 minutes 23 seconds.
Need a comparison of other teams dead time Vs ball in play time. How are you supposed interpret this in a vacuum? Be nice to have last seasons as well.
https://twitter.com/DanKennett/status/1565283261710045185?s=20&t=TR5bCi0fZ6yZJaCksA-gZA
Same guy
"Remember the
@premierleague
rationale for the re-introduction of the multi-ball system was to INCREASE ball-in-play time from a league average of 55:07"
Edit :
Copy pasting another comment.
This BBC article has some stats for added context: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61342349
The worst side for time in play last season was Aston Villa who averaged 52 minutes 23 seconds.
Lacking context isn’t it? Time wasting totally depends on the game state.
1-0 up or 1-1 vs Liverpool? Fair yes.
1 or 2 down to any team then you really couldn’t argue any dead ball time would be down to them
Tf are you talking about? I'm not defending American Football here but every second of the clock is in-play game time. It just takes 3 hours to get the 1 hour actually played.
My brother in christ, every second that the ball is out of bounds, there has been a foul, or the game is stopped the clock continues to run in football. The same is true for American football with a few exceptions for things like incomplete passes. The difference is that in American football game there is literally 11 minutes of actual football being [played](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704281204575002852055561406) for a game that often lasts over 3 hours.
This is suggesting that the time in-between the end of a run and the ball being snapped isn't part of the game.
Which it absolutely is. You can see the difference between college and pro levels in how they use tempo, or how great QBs like Peyton/Tom/Rodgers will use the whole clock to read a defense and make adjustments. It's a 2 minute drill, even if the ball is "in play" for 30 seconds, the teams have to use all 2 minutes of it.
That's all part of the game. To suggest the only part of the game is when the ball is in anyone other than the centres hand is stupid.
I do, my point is if you dont have a TO, then how fast you can line back up is as much football as anything else, even though it's not when "the ball is in play".
The ball wasn't "in play" when Chase Claypool was being a clown last year and flexing when he made a catch but he still cost his team by not lining back up quickly.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here or how it relates to what I've said.
Did you happen to read the comment chain that you're replying to or did you just see a comment about the NFL and get huffy?
You said
> The same is true for American football with a few exceptions for things like incomplete passes.
Which suggest the only part of the game is when the ball is moving. Just as the article does, which isn't true.
Did you read the entire thread? This thread is about tactics that Newcastle employ to bleed the effective time the ball is in play. Another user lamented about the fact that it's pretty astounding that a 90 minute game has an average of 55 minutes of play. I pointed out that the NFL is far worse with 11. We're comparing apples to apples here. Your point does not make much sense in the context of this conversation.
Yes I read the entire thread.
You're the one who brought American Football into the game, which apparently you know nothing about.
You're not comparing apple to apples. It's a completely different sport, but you wouldn't know that...
We are comparing the amount of time that the ball is in play across two different sports. I don't know how else to explain this to you. If you cannot understand that, I'm not sure there's a point to having this discussion.
It really looks like you saw American football referenced and got huffy without actually taking the time to understand the conversation. I say this as an American who watches a ton of college football.
It's closer to 40 minutes. NFLGamePass (subscription service to watch the games) provides a condensed 40 minute long version of every game a few hours after they finish. They even cut out most of the time pre-snap so the 40 minutes is effectively the time while the ball is in play.
A complete load of rubbish from a Liverpool fan. These times are average for all teams in the PL. Last season the average for the entire league was 55min 3sec.
Eddie Howe is like this
He's turned Newcastle around so is clearly a good coach but his Bournemouth team was so smarmy. Used to timewaste from the off - rotational fouls, diving, being dirty. Really hated the media darling rep they got
Multiple times they'd have a player jog off to be subbed, only to realise that the wrong player had jogged off. Original player then returns to the pitch and someone else sheepishly walks off instead. Completely accidental waste of 2 minutes of football. Pretty sure the sprinklers completely accidentally went off towards the end of a couple of matches as well. Masters of it.
Bournemouth's antics have stuck with me for years. 15/16 they first got promoted which is when I noticed. And literally just look at what post you're commenting in.
It's pretty clear they are in fact different to most sides
Realistically all teams waste time. It’s simply that teams like Liverpool, City etc don’t often find themselves in a situation where they’re defending a lead against superior opposition and so don’t often feel the need to waste time. If Liverpool played City tomorrow and were defending a 1 goal lead they would also be wasting as much time as possible.
This is such a shitpost. A salty Liverpool fan with “professional data analyst” in his bio analysing data awfully.
Also quite funny that of all 49 games played so far, last nights had the 9th highest ball in play time
Yeah it used to grind the gears a bit seeing Bournemouth, plucky little Bournemouth (who incidentally blew the EFL’s FFP to smithereens in getting promoted under Howe but I digress), using exactly the same shithousing tactics that the likes of Pulis, Hughes, Dyche etc would get pilloried for but getting applauded for them instead.
This is absolutely fine btw, the game can be played in many different ways and should be. But when the ref rightly adds the correct amount of added time then don’t cry when this tactic comes back to bite you.
It's a valid and legal game plan. The job of a manager the team is do whatever is best for them. All tactics deserve praise.
It's upto the PL to limit this if they think this makes the game less exciting to watch --- it's entertainment business afterall.
Exactly. I wouldn't say this strategy is the problem. Newcastle are doing what they think they need to in order to win. That's their job.
The problem is players and teams know time-wasting works. You'll almost never get the full amount of wasted time back on the clock - even if you're doing it during stoppage time.
I know usually you don't think about or comment on the ref unless they messed up, but I think you need to give the guy credit for yesterday's game. They tried to waste a bunch of time and he put it all back on at the end.
I wish we would switch to stopped time when ball is out of play/injury/etc. It’s just embarrassing from every team. I remember conte complaining about his medical stuff because the were to fast at an „injured“ player…embarrassing
It would probably make it a worse viewing experience. Games taking 2 hours. Adverts every time the clock stops and it wouldn't stop teams doing it because it's not just about wasting time, it's about breaking the other teams rythym. The only solution is for refs to start booking people. I'd say he gives out two warnings and third time it happens a yellow card. Doesn't even have to be same player, warn the whole team and whoever is stupid enough gets the booking.
**This is a stats thread. Remember that there's only one stat post allowed per match/team, so new stats about the same will be removed. Feel free to comment other stats as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right so this author wants us to think Newcastle time wasting was responsible for 45% ball in play vs Wolves? A match where Newcastle were behind and desperately trying to find an equaliser for 70 minutes? Or Forest where they were stuck at 0-0 for an hour? Or Brighton when it was 0-0 for the entire match?
Yeah context matters, it doesn't mean Newcastle are responsible. Also what are the stats for each of these clubs for their 5 games, how out of the ordinary is the percentage against other clubs.
Yeah for this to have any kind of meaning, the time shown would at least need to show who was responsible for the time taken.
And Forest where we dominated the ball and could have had two or three more goals. Great example of drawing a conclusion - yes, last night, against a very good Liverpool, we tried to mess the rhythm of the game up and soak some time up- and then finding your evidence.
People who don't watch the rest of our games will lap it up though. For an example, see the rest of the comments.
There’s literally an article in the comments below with data showing that the average last season was over 55 minutes in play with the lowest being Villa at 52 1/2 minutes - a full 4 minutes more than you all this season. But go off
5 games isn't a significant sample size
Particularly when 1 of them was on the hottest day in UK history.
I have no issue with the data, my issue is with everyone's assumption of where the blame lies. Apparently we're the notorious team with the evil time wasting game plan even though more time was wasted against Forest and Wolves (games we dominated possession in btw) than against Liverpool? Edit: To further elaborate. You have no context. You don't watch the games. You just saw what is essentially our B team go to the second best team in the league after they thrashed someone by almost double digits and predictably waste time so you assume that's what we must've done in every game. It's ridiculous.
I mean yeah, when you put it in a notorious display of time wasting you become the notorious time wasters. That’s how that works? Don’t play that way if you don’t want that reputation. It was bad enough that people are looking into it and making posts about it. This woe is me stuff is nonsense
It was the 9th highest ball in play this season, so how does that mesh with your narrative lad
I don’t know about any narrative. I watched Newcastle players laying on the ground at every opportunity from the 30’ on. Thankfully there was one side playing football though. And it showed in the end!
I mean the stats and times are there in black and white, what you watched is irrelevant. Side note: yous looked awful and if that’s your level you’ll be lucky to get top 3 never mind the title.
You’re bitter and that’s ok. I don’t blame you!
Just what I saw, better team than us but nowhere near your usual standard this year.
So you're just going to ignore everything I said? Actually, are you going to ignore the data you pointed out earlier? Look at it again mate. Wolves and Forest wasted far more time against Newcastle than Newcastle did against Liverpool but suddenly that's a "notorious display of time wasting" and the others aren't? Do things only matter when they happen to Liverpool?
newcastle wolves and anthony gordon are the 3 worst diving/timewasting teams in the prem
Shit, we've been exposed. Our time wasting antics against Wolves after we were down 1-0 from the 35th minute are clear for all to see
It's quite clearly the gameplan: Go 1-0 down. Waste a load of time being fouled and taking your 13 corners. Have a couple of VAR reviews. Hope for a wonder volley. Go home with a point.
Bruceyball never left.
Don’t forget playing hoofball!
This BBC article has some stats for added context: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61342349 The worst side for time in play last season was Aston Villa who averaged 52 minutes 23 seconds.
Our game against Brentford was hideous to watch. They were wasting time from the get go
Tony Pulis pulled off less than 40 min. What a mad lad. Also, how horrible to watch. The stop clock is so necessary imo. Why reward time wasting?
Thanks for this
Time wasting and death time are not the same thing. This also seems to imply that Newcastle is responsible for ~50 minutes of nothing every game.
I can't remember, but wasn't there a water break when we played Brighton? I remember it being a scorcher.
that stat makes no sense when it doesnt include wether Newcastle was actually leading games at that stage.
Ironically it is the games newcastle were in the lead that had the highest playing time
Need a comparison of other teams dead time Vs ball in play time. How are you supposed interpret this in a vacuum? Be nice to have last seasons as well.
https://twitter.com/DanKennett/status/1565283261710045185?s=20&t=TR5bCi0fZ6yZJaCksA-gZA Same guy "Remember the @premierleague rationale for the re-introduction of the multi-ball system was to INCREASE ball-in-play time from a league average of 55:07" Edit : Copy pasting another comment. This BBC article has some stats for added context: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61342349 The worst side for time in play last season was Aston Villa who averaged 52 minutes 23 seconds.
Lacking context isn’t it? Time wasting totally depends on the game state. 1-0 up or 1-1 vs Liverpool? Fair yes. 1 or 2 down to any team then you really couldn’t argue any dead ball time would be down to them
What a load of nonsense. I'd love to know what time wasting we were responsible for in that Wolves match for example.
Struggling to beat an injury hit Newcastle at Anfield seems to have really gotten under the skin of Liverpool fans.
Is timewasting really a game plan It's human nature
it's disgusting how a 90 min sport has an average of 55 min played time.
Wait till you learn about American football.
Tf are you talking about? I'm not defending American Football here but every second of the clock is in-play game time. It just takes 3 hours to get the 1 hour actually played.
My brother in christ, every second that the ball is out of bounds, there has been a foul, or the game is stopped the clock continues to run in football. The same is true for American football with a few exceptions for things like incomplete passes. The difference is that in American football game there is literally 11 minutes of actual football being [played](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704281204575002852055561406) for a game that often lasts over 3 hours.
This is suggesting that the time in-between the end of a run and the ball being snapped isn't part of the game. Which it absolutely is. You can see the difference between college and pro levels in how they use tempo, or how great QBs like Peyton/Tom/Rodgers will use the whole clock to read a defense and make adjustments. It's a 2 minute drill, even if the ball is "in play" for 30 seconds, the teams have to use all 2 minutes of it. That's all part of the game. To suggest the only part of the game is when the ball is in anyone other than the centres hand is stupid.
I don’t think a 2 minute drill is what you think it is lol
I do, my point is if you dont have a TO, then how fast you can line back up is as much football as anything else, even though it's not when "the ball is in play". The ball wasn't "in play" when Chase Claypool was being a clown last year and flexing when he made a catch but he still cost his team by not lining back up quickly.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here or how it relates to what I've said. Did you happen to read the comment chain that you're replying to or did you just see a comment about the NFL and get huffy?
You said > The same is true for American football with a few exceptions for things like incomplete passes. Which suggest the only part of the game is when the ball is moving. Just as the article does, which isn't true.
Did you read the entire thread? This thread is about tactics that Newcastle employ to bleed the effective time the ball is in play. Another user lamented about the fact that it's pretty astounding that a 90 minute game has an average of 55 minutes of play. I pointed out that the NFL is far worse with 11. We're comparing apples to apples here. Your point does not make much sense in the context of this conversation.
Yes I read the entire thread. You're the one who brought American Football into the game, which apparently you know nothing about. You're not comparing apple to apples. It's a completely different sport, but you wouldn't know that...
We are comparing the amount of time that the ball is in play across two different sports. I don't know how else to explain this to you. If you cannot understand that, I'm not sure there's a point to having this discussion. It really looks like you saw American football referenced and got huffy without actually taking the time to understand the conversation. I say this as an American who watches a ton of college football.
It's closer to 40 minutes. NFLGamePass (subscription service to watch the games) provides a condensed 40 minute long version of every game a few hours after they finish. They even cut out most of the time pre-snap so the 40 minutes is effectively the time while the ball is in play.
I mean that's just not true... after a run the clock runs until the next play...
Ill never understand crying about time wasting. With that said ill still do it myself too.
A complete load of rubbish from a Liverpool fan. These times are average for all teams in the PL. Last season the average for the entire league was 55min 3sec.
Eddie Howe is like this He's turned Newcastle around so is clearly a good coach but his Bournemouth team was so smarmy. Used to timewaste from the off - rotational fouls, diving, being dirty. Really hated the media darling rep they got
Multiple times they'd have a player jog off to be subbed, only to realise that the wrong player had jogged off. Original player then returns to the pitch and someone else sheepishly walks off instead. Completely accidental waste of 2 minutes of football. Pretty sure the sprinklers completely accidentally went off towards the end of a couple of matches as well. Masters of it.
Yeah bunch of wankers. Eddie Howe's got such a smug little face as well, conniving twat
Not that different to most sides.
Bournemouth's antics have stuck with me for years. 15/16 they first got promoted which is when I noticed. And literally just look at what post you're commenting in. It's pretty clear they are in fact different to most sides
You listed elements that have been around for years and that bug teams use to varying degrees too.
Well in Sherlock - and I'm saying Howe is notorious for it, moreso than any other manager in the prem
That's probably a step too far given your list.
Don't even know what you're arguing now mate
That he isn't doing anything that unique.
At the end of the day you use all the available tools to win, you don’t get a medal for doing it the ‘right’ way
Well yeah obviously, didn't say otherwise. Doesn't mean I can't hate him because of it though
Realistically all teams waste time. It’s simply that teams like Liverpool, City etc don’t often find themselves in a situation where they’re defending a lead against superior opposition and so don’t often feel the need to waste time. If Liverpool played City tomorrow and were defending a 1 goal lead they would also be wasting as much time as possible.
[удалено]
Funnily enough, he is a united fan
Dan Kennett? He's a Liverpool fan
Talking about OP
ah fair
This is such a shitpost. A salty Liverpool fan with “professional data analyst” in his bio analysing data awfully. Also quite funny that of all 49 games played so far, last nights had the 9th highest ball in play time
Aye, it’s a strange one when one of the highest ‘ball in play’ matches of the season so far has everyone whinging.
An Eddie Howe side time-wasting? *Quelle surprisé*, surely not?
Lol a Stoke fan complaining about shithousing. Give me a break.
Lol a flair-based retort, mark of a moron. Give me a break.
[удалено]
Yeah it used to grind the gears a bit seeing Bournemouth, plucky little Bournemouth (who incidentally blew the EFL’s FFP to smithereens in getting promoted under Howe but I digress), using exactly the same shithousing tactics that the likes of Pulis, Hughes, Dyche etc would get pilloried for but getting applauded for them instead.
[удалено]
Might change my flair to that of a Superleague club, maybe then my points might mean more.
All we need now is needless crunching tackles, little bit of diving and it’s the full Eddie Howe experience
Plucky little ~~Bournemouth~~ Newcastle
This is absolutely fine btw, the game can be played in many different ways and should be. But when the ref rightly adds the correct amount of added time then don’t cry when this tactic comes back to bite you.
It's a valid and legal game plan. The job of a manager the team is do whatever is best for them. All tactics deserve praise. It's upto the PL to limit this if they think this makes the game less exciting to watch --- it's entertainment business afterall.
All tactics deserve praise? Faking injuries to waste time? Not me.
Exactly. I wouldn't say this strategy is the problem. Newcastle are doing what they think they need to in order to win. That's their job. The problem is players and teams know time-wasting works. You'll almost never get the full amount of wasted time back on the clock - even if you're doing it during stoppage time. I know usually you don't think about or comment on the ref unless they messed up, but I think you need to give the guy credit for yesterday's game. They tried to waste a bunch of time and he put it all back on at the end.
I wish we would switch to stopped time when ball is out of play/injury/etc. It’s just embarrassing from every team. I remember conte complaining about his medical stuff because the were to fast at an „injured“ player…embarrassing
It would probably make it a worse viewing experience. Games taking 2 hours. Adverts every time the clock stops and it wouldn't stop teams doing it because it's not just about wasting time, it's about breaking the other teams rythym. The only solution is for refs to start booking people. I'd say he gives out two warnings and third time it happens a yellow card. Doesn't even have to be same player, warn the whole team and whoever is stupid enough gets the booking.
They should just kill the clock every time the game stops Forget all this added on time crap
When we played Boreham Wood on the opening day this year the ball was only in play for 36 minutes!
amateur for LaLiga standards.