As I said: There is random error when you look at football over a short term due to refereeing decision, who plays who etc.
If you get 20 friends and ask them to toss coins 15 times, some people will have more than 10 heads and some people will have fewer than 5 heads. Over a larger number of throws it will balance itself out. Humans are pattern-seeking. Are brains are wired to find patterns as it's important for our survival. When we find them they are reinforced by the released of dopameine which makes us happy. It's helped our species survive by telling us which foods or animals to eat and avoid. It's how we learn. However, it's also the same physical process that gets people addicted to gambling. People beleive that they have discovered a "system" because they do certain things or press buttons in a certain order. It obviously happens in football too. People think that certain things are true but their brains are not very good at making an objective judgement. Statistical analysis helps us to serparate truth from fiction. On 20 December 2011 09:32, paul <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > What about this season? > Sent via BlackBerry® from Telstra > ------------------------------ > *From: *Steven Millward <[email protected]> > *Sender: *[email protected] > *Date: *Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:22:34 +1100 > *To: *<[email protected]> > *ReplyTo: *[email protected] > *Subject: *Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew > > Yes but Paul, a professor of economics did the analysis over 20 years and > found an even stronger relationship. The facts are there. If you have > similarly strong facts to dispute it then please share them but your gut > feel doesn't count. > > Mick outperformed resources, hence Wolves are in the top half of that > table. > > There is random error when you look at football over a short term due to > refereeing decision, who plays who etc. > > The fact that there are only two anomolies shows how strong the > relationship is > > > > On 20 December 2011 08:00, Paul Crowe <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Morning Steve,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Are you winding us up? Or do you seriously believe “There's no room to >> say that management is important and Mick is a bad manager because the >> facts don't support it”.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Even in your listed figures for last season there are some major >> anomaly’s like West Brom (difference 8) and West Ham (difference 12). The >> reason the Baggies are doing well is because they changed their Manager >> mid-last season and now have a good one. The reason West Ham went down is >> because they had a bad Manager and persevered with him.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Look at West Ham now, they changed their Manager and are doing very well >> in the Chump League with the majority of Player’s who were relegated.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> If you look at the teams around us this season, your table would read:*** >> * >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Team League Rank Wage Rank Difference**** >> >> Sunderland 16 8 8**** >> >> Wolves 17 18 1*** >> * >> >> Wigan 18 16 2* >> *** >> >> Blackburn 19 12 7**** >> >> Bolton 20 14 6* >> *** >> >> ** ** >> >> Note: I have used your wage ranking figures from last season. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Your theory just doesn’t stack up. Also if you throw in Norwich (current >> Difference 10) and Swansea (current Difference 8) for this season, who >> arguably have a lower wage structure than us, then your theory starts to >> fall apart! Granted the season still has a long way to go but I bet you a >> carton of beer both these teams will finish above us. Hope you like >> Elliott’s Toohey’s Red.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Norwich 9 19 10* >> *** >> >> Swansea 12 20 8**** >> >> ** ** >> >> My theory is that the reason teams like Norwich and Swansea are doing >> better than us is because they are trying to play attractive attacking >> football, are coached well and have a better Manager. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> The Manager is in charge of the coaching staff and determines the tactics >> for his team, to advocate this has no bearing on results and the position >> of your team in the League is pure bunkum!**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Another one to leave you with, why back in the 90’s and early 00’s, when >> we were the top wage payer’s in the Championship, did it take us so long to >> get promoted?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Regards**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Paul.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Paul Crowe**** >> >> Sales Manager - Asia Pacific**** >> >> **** >> >> ConTech (Sydney Office)**** >> >> **** >> >> PO Box 3517**** >> >> Rhodes Waterside**** >> >> Rhodes NSW 2138**** >> >> Tel: 02 97396636 Fax: 02 97396542**** >> >> Mob: 0406009562**** >> >> Email: [email protected]**** >> >> Website: www.contechengineering.com**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *Steven Millward >> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, 20 December 2011 6:31 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I've taken my points on to Molineux Mix if anyone's interested >> http://molineuxmix.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?t=66061 >> >> Here's some more interesting data in the table below. >> >> League rank is the position that the team finished in the league >> Wage rank is the position forecast by wages >> >> You'll notice that wages are a great predicitor of league position. >> 10 teams are within one position of their prediction. >> 15 teams are within two positions of their prediction >> 18 teams are within three positions of their prediction. >> >> I've sorted the table by the last column which is the difference between >> the league and wage ranking. The teams at the top are the ones that >> seemingly outperformed their resources. >> >> You'll notice all the "good" managers are near the top of the list: >> Hodgson - Pulis - Redknapp - Ferguson - *McCARTHY* >> >> The way I see if you can say that *either* management is important and >> Mick is a good manager *or* management is unimportant. >> >> There's no room to say that managment is important and Mick is a bad >> manager because the facts don't support it. >> >> Team..........League Rank...Wage Rank...Difference >> West Brom..........11..............19................8 >> Fulham................8...............11.......... ......3 >> Stoke................13...............15.......... ......2 >> Spurs..................5................7......... .......2 >> Man Utd..............1................3............... ..2 >> Wolves..............17...............18........... .....1 >> Blackpool...........19...............20........... .....1 >> Arsenal...............4.................5......... .......1 >> Everton..............7.................8.......... ......1 >> Wigan...............16...............16........... .....0 >> Newcastle..........12...............12............ ....0 >> Bolton...............14...............14.......... ......0 >> Chelsea..............2.................1.......... .....-1 >> Birmingham.........18...............17............ ..-1 >> Man City.............3.................2.............. .-1 >> Liverpool.............6.................4......... ......-2 >> Sunderland.........10................8............ ....-2 >> Aston villa...........9.................6...............-3 >> Blackburn...........15...............12........... ....-3 >> West Ham..........20................8...............-12**** >> >> On 19 December 2011 15:03, Paul Crowe <[email protected]> >> wrote:**** >> >> Hughes’s Granny would be better than MM!**** >> >> **** >> >> Maybe we should just enlist a local Gypsy as replacement for MM, as our >> teams performance depends on luck and other dubiously explained factors, >> nothing at all to do with the Manager and his coaching skills?**** >> >> **** >> >> Paul Crowe**** >> >> Sales Manager - Asia Pacific**** >> >> **** >> >> ConTech (Sydney Office)**** >> >> **** >> >> PO Box 3517**** >> >> Rhodes Waterside**** >> >> Rhodes NSW 2138**** >> >> Tel: 02 97396636 Fax: 02 97396542**** >> >> Mob: 0406009562**** >> >> Email: [email protected]**** >> >> Website: www.contechengineering.com**** >> >> **** >> >> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *Steven Millward >> *Sent:* Monday, 19 December 2011 2:52 PM**** >> >> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew**** >> >> **** >> >> Hold the front page. What a scoop!**** >> >> On 19 December 2011 11:09, Paul Hart <[email protected]> wrote:**** >> >> I spoke to my mate last night in Penn he heard Hughes was there. **** >> >> **** >> >> Well just have to wait and see. >> >> Sent from my iPhone**** >> >> >> On 19/12/2011, at 11:05 AM, Steven Millward <[email protected]> >> wrote:**** >> >> He dared to make a positive comment about Wolves and the filter kicked >> him out. I've hacked it. >> >> Where is that rumour from?**** >> >> On 19 December 2011 11:00, Paul Hart <[email protected]> wrote:**** >> >> >> Why were you bannned Matthew ? >> Did you dare to ask for the head of MM >> >> Has anybody else heard the rumour >> That Mark Hughes was at the Stoke >> game ??? >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out.**** >> >> **** >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out.**** >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out.**** >> >> **** >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out.**** >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out.**** >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out. >> > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > -- Boo! Thick Mick Out.
