Liverpool Captain Steven Gerrard deservedly stole the headlines with his hat-trick against Everton last night, but as good as that was, it shouldn't overshadow the performance of Martin Kelly, who had a barnstorming game at right back. Should Kelly retain his place for the rest of the season, or should Glen Johnson come straight back into the team? Whatever your view, the stats show categorically that there should only one answer.
One vital cornerstone of Liverpool's footballing philosophy is the devastatingly simple concept of merit: if you play well, you stay in the team. Well, that's the way it was in the past, but the likes of Maxi and Craig Bellamy might privately disagree that this principle has been consistently enforced this season.
Nevertheless, after his performance against Everton last night, Kelly must surely keep his place for the next game, even if Johnson returns to fitness...?
After the game, Liverpool legend Steve Nicol claimed on ESPN that Kelly 'could've had a hat-trick', and he's right; the youngster got into some great attacking positions, but - importantly - he didn't neglect his primary role: defending, which is something Johnson does on a regular basis.
With Kelly in the side, Liverpool are a more successful team, and here are the facts to back that up:
KELLY: 15 Starts
* Wins: 11
* Draws: 2
* Losses: 2
* Team goals scored: 25
* Goals conceded: 10
* Clean sheets: 6
* League points: 17
* Points-per-game (PPG): 1.8
JOHNSON: 21 Starts
* Wins: 8
* Draws: 9
* Losses: 4
* Team goals scored: 29
* Goals conceded: 19
* Clean sheets: 9
* League points: 25
* PPG: 1.3
As you can see:
- Despite Kelly making fewer starts than Johnson, Liverpool win more, and draw/lose less with him in the team.
- Liverpool also concede fewer goals with Kelly at right back.
- With Kelly, Liverpool are unbeaten in 13 out of 15 games, and have a win percentage of 73%.
- With Johnson, Liverpool are unbeaten in 17 out of 21 games, but only have a win percentage of 38%, which is a huge difference.
- Liverpool also have a higher points-per-game average with Kelly in the team (1.8 vs. 1.3 with Johnson)
- Johnson has slightly better passing/shooting accuracy than Kelly, but in the context of team results, is that vitally important?
Surely you have to pick the player who has the greater positive impact on the team, and the stats don't lie: Liverpool perform better with Kelly in the team, and that's what it's all about, isn't it?
I don't recall Kelly making mistakes that lead to opposition goals, something of which Johnson is regularly guilty.
Just look at their respective win percentages (38% vs 73%) and PPG averages (1.3 vs. 1.8) - these should be more than enough to keep Kelly in the team.
Kelly should (IMO) keep his place for the rest of the season, or at least until his performance drops, which hopefully it won't; and if he does well, Johnson should be relegated to back-up right back...or first choice right-winger.
Jaimie Kanwar
One vital cornerstone of Liverpool's footballing philosophy is the devastatingly simple concept of merit: if you play well, you stay in the team. Well, that's the way it was in the past, but the likes of Maxi and Craig Bellamy might privately disagree that this principle has been consistently enforced this season.
Nevertheless, after his performance against Everton last night, Kelly must surely keep his place for the next game, even if Johnson returns to fitness...?
After the game, Liverpool legend Steve Nicol claimed on ESPN that Kelly 'could've had a hat-trick', and he's right; the youngster got into some great attacking positions, but - importantly - he didn't neglect his primary role: defending, which is something Johnson does on a regular basis.
With Kelly in the side, Liverpool are a more successful team, and here are the facts to back that up:
KELLY: 15 Starts
* Wins: 11
* Draws: 2
* Losses: 2
* Team goals scored: 25
* Goals conceded: 10
* Clean sheets: 6
* League points: 17
* Points-per-game (PPG): 1.8
JOHNSON: 21 Starts
* Wins: 8
* Draws: 9
* Losses: 4
* Team goals scored: 29
* Goals conceded: 19
* Clean sheets: 9
* League points: 25
* PPG: 1.3
As you can see:
- Despite Kelly making fewer starts than Johnson, Liverpool win more, and draw/lose less with him in the team.
- Liverpool also concede fewer goals with Kelly at right back.
- With Kelly, Liverpool are unbeaten in 13 out of 15 games, and have a win percentage of 73%.
- With Johnson, Liverpool are unbeaten in 17 out of 21 games, but only have a win percentage of 38%, which is a huge difference.
- Liverpool also have a higher points-per-game average with Kelly in the team (1.8 vs. 1.3 with Johnson)
- Johnson has slightly better passing/shooting accuracy than Kelly, but in the context of team results, is that vitally important?
Surely you have to pick the player who has the greater positive impact on the team, and the stats don't lie: Liverpool perform better with Kelly in the team, and that's what it's all about, isn't it?
I don't recall Kelly making mistakes that lead to opposition goals, something of which Johnson is regularly guilty.
Just look at their respective win percentages (38% vs 73%) and PPG averages (1.3 vs. 1.8) - these should be more than enough to keep Kelly in the team.
Kelly should (IMO) keep his place for the rest of the season, or at least until his performance drops, which hopefully it won't; and if he does well, Johnson should be relegated to back-up right back...or first choice right-winger.
Jaimie Kanwar
Last I remembered football was a team sport. How can you just take one player into account to analyze our performance as a team? Maybe it's a combination of the defense lineup? I don't know, but I don't think you can base our team performance on one player.
ReplyDeleteKelly can defend much better than Johnson and is not bad going forward, so Kelly any day over Glen Da Johnson. £18m for a defender that actually can't defend that well. Nice one, Rafa.
ReplyDeleteYes. Kelly's better performances compared to Johnson's have been apparent for two seasons now.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with a comment he should simply replace him for the rest of the season. I think it is just great that Kenny has the option to play 2 quality full backs. For example there was a few times last night I wish Johnson was playing instead because there was so much space on the right with Piennar tucking in and Baines getting forward as well. Kelly is certainly the better defender but in other games Johnson's attacking qaulity is needed. Great options anyway...
ReplyDeleteForgetting how bad he was against Arsenal and Sunderland? God sake, Johnson is a far superior player.
ReplyDeleteIf we compare head to head Kelly is definitely a better player now. He has more strength than Johnson and is more disciplined than Johnson. Johnson may be a little bit better in attacking but he is a bit flaky defensively and has been caught out of position a number times.
ReplyDeleteive been saying this for a while now. Put Johnson at RW. He provides excellent attacking. Opens up the wing and uses the space-loves to get forward with more freedom- less responsiblity.
ReplyDeleteShld play johnson as winger...as he is totally crap when play as right back....
ReplyDeleteHow was he bad in those two games. Any specific examples? And again, this is another example of not seeing the full context. Look at how the team performs with Kelly *overall*, not just in two games. Higher win percentage, and better points per game. These are facts. Do they not matter?
ReplyDeleteKelly is not as good as Johnson, he's not in the the England squad either, but if it was up to me i'd play Kelly right back and Johnson right mid until we have a proper winger
ReplyDeleteLiverpool have a better points per game average and win ratio with Kelly in the team. It doesn't matter how that happened, it's a fact, and with those figures in mind, surely Kelly must play on?
ReplyDeleteJohnson does have the makings of a wing player and I would see him there with suitable defence cover.
ReplyDeletedefo agree with this play glen j on the right side of midfield hes great at getting forward and can supply a decent cross, release him from his defensive duties and look you've filled the right wing role..... worked for Bale and look at him now
ReplyDeleteNeither was Richards in the England squad under Capello most of the time, that makes him worse than Johnson? No, course not, as Richards is better. International team selection is a poor measurement tool in this context.
ReplyDeletenot that clean cut... I like Kelly at right back and I believe he will be playing in the position long-term for both Liverpool and England but would like to see Johnson playing in front of him on the right side of midfield.
ReplyDeleteKelly at RB, Johnson at RM instead of Henderson, who needs to stay on the bench along with Adam. bellamy to play more often instead of downing and we have a better side. sadly that means KD needs to admit his buys have been toilet...which he can't.
ReplyDeleteWhat a joke, GJ has been the mainstay of our very strong defence, Kelly's one good game makes him better now? Is hendo better than Maxi or Shevley? My opinion is that GJ can be moved up to right mid/wing and I am defo sure that he will be better that Hendo by a mile, but to say Kelly is better is a joke. Hendo has to be benched he is useless, as many say he is for the future, why is Sterling, Suso, Morgan and Coady not playing? Lets maintain some direction in our discussions, just re-watch the match and analyze Hendo's contribution, he left Charlie on the bench coz he cost less. LFC 4 life. Skartel was Man of the4 match.
ReplyDeletethat is literally the most illogical analysis I have ever read. I agree kelly had a great game, but you cant take statistics out of context like that. Firstly, who have those opponents been when kelly has played vs the opponents when johnson has played. Secondly, non contextualized stats like that dont show anything. For the first 24 games of Bales career at tottenham they didnt win a game, you wouldn't exactly pin that single handedly on bale. What perhaps would be a useful analysis is whether jonhson would be more affective at right wing with kelly at right back
ReplyDeletethe thing that's missing in d stats is that kelly has played against lower teams..mainly in FA cup and carling cup.yes its true that johnson sometimes had been a defensive liability in the past but this season he has been a consistent performer and sometimes evn the most creative attacking threat..kelly will become a centre back in future so i see no reason to change that now..
ReplyDeleteI thought Kelly's performance have been mirroring Johnson great getting forward but hasn't look that great defensively. Sunderland and
ReplyDeleteEverton targeted the our right wing.
But I would also lay some of the blame at Henderson and his wandering from the right wing when Kuyt came on last night he gave Kelly the cover he needed.
Might be worth looking at who was playing right wing as well as who is playing right back to get a picture of how well the right hand side works.
Chi Bai lu. Martin Kelly should keep his place.
ReplyDeleteJohnson has been a part of defence this season. Just because we have a good defensive record this season, doesn't make Glen Da Johnson's defending great. Its clear in games as to how error-prone he can be defensively. I don't recall JK saying last night's game alone was enough to put him ahead of Glen Da Johnson
ReplyDeleteKeep Kelly as RB and Give Johnson a run on the Wing . Case Closed
ReplyDeleteCORRECT! THE FACTS DON'T LIE DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH YOU HACK!! The facts can be manipulated to suit most purposes!! you could argue Johnson would have scored 2 last night if he were playing ahead of Kelly!
ReplyDeleteHe's a centre back by trade, not a right back, he does well there BUT isn't as quic or technically gifted as Johnson
ReplyDeleteJohnson for right winger! We don't have any pace on our right flank, Kuyt is slow and frankly can't cross. Maxi is not the fastest either and he always strays to somewhere in the center. We have no out and out winger on the right, Johnson can go past people, shoot and cross, plus he's shit at defense so Kelly for right back and Johnson on the wing. Also, Kelly is a natural CB so he's aerially and physically much better than Johnson defensively.
ReplyDeleteYou would have to say Glenn Johnson has been sound defensivley ALL season. No one was calling for his head when he scored the winner at the bridge..... Only defender at the club who can do that!
ReplyDeleteNo I dont think they do matter as they are taken out of context. I would prefer an analysis of the player's performances in those games rather than the performance of the team as a whole.
ReplyDeleteKelly's stats are better cause he plays in weaker fixtures. Games when the opposition is weaker and we are stronger. Thats why all the stats favour him. Thank god , you love stats not football.
ReplyDeletePepe has been in goal every time we've conceded this season..........silly article.
ReplyDeleteBryan, youd get more sense out of a toilet seat...Sensationalist agenda driven * what you call this* football site/blog. This website was crying tears of loss when H & G were shown the door. Championed them over rafa and the team. Always
ReplyDeleteAnd the excuses begin...
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
Agreed
ReplyDeletewhy has no one ever gave johnson a chance as a right midfielder. Either he does'nt want to play there to keep his england place or in training he's not good enough.
ReplyDeletehe's the only proper right sided player liverpool have and could make a similar impact as Bale made when he moved from full back to midfield if he gave it a go for a few matches
On that logic Pepe Reina should be dropped as he's been on the team sheet during every goal lost in a competitive game.
ReplyDelete....how may times has Suarez or Skrtel been on the losing line up??
Liverpool had a better win record with gerrard out of the time a few seasons ago and I wouldn't want him left out.
ReplyDeleteAs they say: there are lies, there are damned lies, and there are statistics. This is a classic example of that. Tell me this: if I watch the news 10 days in a row, and have 6 good days, and then don't watch the news for 10 days, and have 4 good days, does it follow that watching the news makes me a happier person? No, absolutely not. There is a distinct difference between correlation and causation.
ReplyDeleteAside from how illogical that argument is, and how you have attempted to twist statistics to make a point, you didn't include all the relevant statistics. For instance, you left out goals scored. Johnson has scored 6 goals in 71 appearances for liverpool. Kelly has 0 in 21 appearances. By your use of statistics, one could make the argument that Johnson is infinitely better. Is that true? No. Are Johnson's goals valuable? Certainly. We would have drawn with Chelsea without his composure in front of goal late on, and I think we would have gotten a goal from him had he been in the positions martin kelly was against Everton.
Lastly...did you ever think to consider who was on the pitch in those games? Has Kelly played more games with Suarez/Gerrard/Bellers than Johnson? What was the average league position of the teams we played when Johnson was on the pitch vs. kelly.
If you're going to make a statistical argument, at least look at the whole picture rather than throwing out a percentage and trying to justify your opinions with that. Kelly is a talent, no doubt. But he's different than johnson. He gives less going forward, and more defending. If you want more defending, fine: kelly is the better choice. Personally, I think Johnson provides adequate defense (We had the best defensive record in the league for a time with him playing).
Don't tell me what to post. I'll post whatever I like, and if you can't hack it, tough luck. Perhaps you should learn about the concept of different opinions. I'm not going to respond to your counter-examples as they're irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
yeah thats exactly my point..well part of it anyway
ReplyDeleteBy the logic of this argument we should Djimi Traore should have been kept at liverpool because we won the Champions League with him. I like Kelly and perhaps he should keep his place but this is a simplistic argument to say the least but an interesting topic of discussion.
ReplyDeleteOh come now. You ask people on this site to talk about the argument and the opinions, not the people. That is exactly what I did. I never told you what to post, nor what to think. But if you're going to post an opinion I disagree with, and back it up with statistics that I don't find relevant, I;m going to say why through the use of examples which are relevant and a logical argument, which I believe that I did.
ReplyDeleteExplain how my arguments are irrelevant. The first argument is simply an example of the difference between correlation and causation, albeit not my finest example ever. The second is that you left out key statistics in your argument that could tip the boat, which makes for a biased argument. And lastly, I pointed out that you're right, kelly IS a good player, he just offers something different than Johnson.
Not sure what I've done wrong here. Seems reasonable to me.
The Champions League final is one game; ive compared kelly and johnson over a whole season, so the traore analogy is not really valid.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
Ok the stats aren't showing us the full picture here but I actually agree with Jamie this time. For those with opposite views, what are your stats to disprove his theory?
ReplyDeleteKelly deserves his place at RB IMO. In fact as others have said, Kelly should play RB and Johnson should play RW. That way you play Johnson where he can use his skills better (good passer, good crosses, skillful on the ball etc.) and minimise his weak points (bad positional sense, bad in the air, can't stop crosses coming into the box etc.). You are also rewarding a young, in-form player. What's wrong with that.
Jamie I really don't think you get the hang of this statistics stuff and you should just stick to regurgitating other peoples articles and trying to put in a bit of your own analysis (basically repeating someone elses work) You seem to delight in being negative about Liverpool and call it realism you are just a bit of a sad individual.
ReplyDeleteRegards
Chris
Jaimie has spat his dummy over his redic initial post and it's scandalously weak stats to justify why a bright up coming young payer should be picked ahead of a world class international player in his prime. Kellys getting the right amount of exposue right now to aid his development. Johnsons proved time and again his quality. Joke post IMO. Jaimies to proud to look objectively at well presented arguments that embarrass his initial bias inaccurate trash post.
ReplyDeleteAgreed!
ReplyDeleteTo be honest i probably disagree with 99% of Jamie's articles but like to gauge other reds opinion on the matter.
Stats can be construed to support what evr you want it to!
Just because you think something is 'illogical' doesn't make it so. The first example you used about the news is utterly irrelevant for obvious reason; it has no correlation to what we're discussing; it's not about football, and doesn't prove anything.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, goalscoring stats are also irrelevant. We are talking about defenders here, not strikers, and the primary role of defender is to stop the team conceding goals, and create a foundation upon which the club's attacking players can build.
I've used stats that illustrate how the team performs better defensively with Kelly in the side, and the by-product of that is that Liverpool perform better overall.
Additionally, you use Johnson's goalscoring stats for his entire career at Liverpool; I have looked at this season only, so again, it's not relevant.
Then you go on about who is actually on the pitch? Seriously, if you want to do that kind of analysis then please go ahead and do it. Your response is typical of someone who doesn't agree with the conclusion reached by using the stats: you try and find any exception/excuse you can to discredit the conclusion, and each exception becomes more ludicrous that the last.
If I had drilled down to the level you require, you would've come back with something else, and on and on ad infinitum.
Conversely, if the stats supported a conclusion you agreed with, then there would be no searching for exception.
In this kind of analysis, you can always expect the following excuses:
* X played against weaker teams than Y (already been used by others on this thread)
* People argue 'Statistics can be twisted to prove anything'
* Some always chimes in with 'lies, damned lies and statistics'
* The we have the endless 'but you didn't consider X, Y Z etc etc'
As I said though, if the conclusion matches the readers expectations, suddenly the stats are watertight and absolute, and statistics are the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I didn't just 'throw out a percentage' - the percentage (73% win ratio) is a fact, and it is totally valid. I've compared Johnson and Kelly in the *same season* playing with mostly the same players, which is obviously fair.
Whatever the reason, Liverpool are most successful with Kelly in the team, and that is irrefutable. I'm not saying he's the sole reason for that, and to be honest, it doesn't matter. What matters is success: with Kelly in the team, Liverpool win more points, and win more games, and that's all that matters.
As an analogy: you have two strikers. Both have played 20 games in one season. With striker A in the team, you win 80% of games and score more goals. With Striker B in the team, you win 35% of games and score less goals. Which striker are you going to play more often?
There is only one answer: striker A. The whys and wherefores don't matter; there's no need to overcomplicate things, or even analyse why the team is more successful. The fact is, the team IS more successful, and that's what should dictate the selection decision. (IMO)
No surprise to see Uncle Tom Johnson getting voted off the Liverpool team to be honest. With Sterling leaving the club, apparently, to go to Tottenham, probably got abuse from people in Suarez masks, the club is looking like it is moving on with its cleansing, i mean clear out! We should definitely sell Johnson, Tottenham will probably buy him too!
ReplyDeleteOne 'potential' stat that i can think of is the possibility that Johnson might have scored about 3 goals in the last two home games in the positions that Kelly has found himself in. But then, at least Kelly was there to miss the chances, but i don't believe that Kelly is naturally more attacking than Johnson, so i assume a tactical change was implemented. I also suspect that Kelly might be more likely to be selected against certain, i.e. easier, teams, if Johnson is rated 50/50 to play.
Seems like a few to many of you are listening to Jeff Stelling and the boys and a Saturday.
ReplyDeleteGLENN JOHNSON HAS BEEN ONE OUR STAND OUT PERFORMERS THIS SEASON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I dont see how many of you havent noticed this!
We were also more susseful with Igor Biscan and Djimi Traore in the team!!
ReplyDeletePlease bring them back!!!!!
it seems like 9 people agree with what i've said and so far you've come up with no retort.
ReplyDeleteFirst: Argument doesn't have to be about soccer to make a point. My point was, that when statistics are taken out of context, or not fully explored, they are misleading.
ReplyDeleteSecond, goal scoring stats are not irrelevant. And even if you look at the goals scored *this season*, it's still glen johnson-1, martin kelly-0. Any anyway, you're talking about measurable impacts. I haven't seen Martin Kelly win us a single game this season, but I definitely saw Johnson win us one at Stamford Bridge, and I consider that to be a pretty important impact.
As far as your striker A and B analogy: If striker A played all those games in the carling cup, europa league, and FA cup, I might still take B if he's getting goals in the league. That's sort of beside the point though. You have to look at Sample size: you threw out 20 games, which is a bit over half a PL season. A large sample size. Let's look at Johnson and Kelly. Johnson has 18 of 21 starts coming in the league, Kelly has 9 of his 16 starts coming in the league. That means Johnson has played twice as many league games, and that close to half (7/16) of Kelly's games have been in the FA cup or Carling cup, with 5 of those 7 being in the carling cup. So in the games you cited earlier for your stats, Johnson has played the vast majority of his 21 games (18) in the league, where the competition is arguably more difficult, whereas Kelly has played 1/3 of his games in the Carling Cup and only half in the league.
You're not comparing them in the same competitions!
And as far as the arguments go about needing more stats, and that being too difficult and taking forever: If you aren't going to do it right, don't do it. The point of a statistical argument is to try and quantify all known variables so that two things can be compared side by side, while still accounting for other variability in the comparison. Thus, a statistical argument is moot if a good bit of the relevant stats have been left out. I'd REALLY like to see the average league position of the teams they played against, and it wouldn't take a huge amount of time to do. I'm not going to do it, because I'm not the person posting a webblog about my opinions. But I think it's fair of me as a Liverpool fan to make a point when I think a liverpool player is being treated unfairly. I rate Glen Johnson highly as a player and an individual, and I think he's been class for us most of the time.
I also rate Kelly, and I think he has a tremendous future at the club, but as for now, I think we should keep on giving him a fair few starts each season and letting him gain experience in small steps so that he can develop into a top quality defender. In fact, if anything, I think he should be getting starts a s a centerback, as that's his natural position.
This might be the most unscientific correlation-comparisons I've ever read on a blog. You can't compare a single player to the results of the entire team let alone say that there is a cause/effect relationship. That's like saying, "When Doni is on the bench, Liverpool can win cup finals since he has been on the bench during one cup final and they won." Makes absolutely no sense.
ReplyDeleteA better argument would have been how Johnson or Kelly could be deployed more effectively forward rather than at RB.
to be fair to glen johnson he has been playing well this season and so has kelly. IMO there is a simple answer to this question of who should play? both of them, kelly at right back and johnson on the right wing. If its a choice between johnson and henderson then johnson all day long. If johnson only has to think of going forward more than always having to think of defense first he may just produce more of them quailty runs.
ReplyDeletei completely agree flapjackcarl!..I did a bit of research myself and by jaimie's logic:
ReplyDeletecoates vs agger: with coates in the team- 6 starts, we've scored 11 and conceded 4...agger in the team- 25 starts, scored 32 and conceded 26....so in the same way 'johnson shouldnt be in the team' neither should agger...which lets face it, is ridiculous
Goalscoring and full backs in the same sentence...eh? One of the most strangest and illogical reasons I have ever come across for justifying why one full back is better than the other. Wow, just wow. Johnson and Kelly's primary responsibility is to defend and provide support to the right-sided attacking midfielder ahead of them. That is the simple but correct way of looking at it. Bringing in their goalscoring ability is just nonsense.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be hurting that Glen Da Johnson seems to get criticised but come on, that is a comical and preposterous way of justifying one full back over the other.
Nice, nice(!)
ReplyDeleteSo just because we have a different opinion, you have to belittle it by saying we're sheep that follow programme X, radio station X, pundit X, etc.
Pathetic.
Djimi Traore was complete utter poo, sorry mate, i would never mention that player, remeber against burnley oh my god!! another benitez class signing, soem of kk's signings may well be up for scruitiny, but this fella was utter crap
ReplyDeleteI don't' find it preposterous at all. Yea, defending is very important from a, well, a defender. I realize how stupid that sounds, trust me. But you've got to look at the modern fullback these days. They're judged as much on their ability to get forward and create as on their ability to defend. Defense is still their job, but being able to create and provide width has become a vital part of their game. I don't think it should be discredited. I also don't think that Glen Johnson has been a defensive liability for us this season. He's' been one of our top players, IMO, and I'll be happy to see him fit again.
ReplyDeleteI think glen should play as right wing when he comes back as even in carling cup final he had more shots than other midfielders n he gives us dat extra pace on the wings
ReplyDeleteJust because there are attacking full backs around, doesn't mean their goalscoring ability is part of their effectiveness. Not even close. Simply ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteMaicon and Dani Alves have a huge amount of attacking responsibility on their shoulders. They are used in a far more attack-minded role than Johnson and yet, they aren't used for their goalscoring ability. But they are still great at their role and it doesn't matter if they don't score much as its not a key requirement. They are used for their attacking ability to provide width, combine with the attacking player and provide crosses.
Yes, Johnson has some responsibility to help us create and so too does Kelly. Many have acknowledge that Johnson is better in that regard. But you took it too far by basically saying/implying that goalscoring ability matters too when comparing the two. It doesn't. They are full backs! Absolute madness to suggest goalscoring should be used a measurement when comparing the two. Simply irrelevant when talking about full backs. What next, Chilavert was the best keeper around because he scored goals.
glen johnson should play right wing and martin kelly in right back, but that will never happen.
ReplyDeleteOR
johnson should keep his spot at right back and start playing kelly at centreback, now that carragher's lost it and agger keeps getting injured.
Simple.....Kelly,1st choice right back,Robinson as back up......Johnson,right midfield/wing.....Kuijt as backup....and Henderson SHOULD NOT be played in the right-mid position again....he should be deployed in a more central midfield role and selected upon performance,not automatically,as KD seems to be boing at the mo.
ReplyDeleteLet it go, Gab.
ReplyDeleteSurprised you haven't slated them for wearing those Sport Relief T-shirts last night. What an utter disgrace.
The Director of pressure group Operation Sloth Vote (The Opposition of Sport and All Forms of Physical Fitness), Simon WoolleyBack was, apparently, "shocked on so many levels". Whilst the National Rotund Police Association slammed the 'cheap publicity stunt', which was obviously contrived to divert attention away from the fact that no charges had been brought against the fan who "racially abused" Oldham's Tom Adeyemi.
Spot on opion there mate.....KD,give it a go PLEASE!!!!!!!
ReplyDeletewe haven't lost a single game in which jack robinson has featured, he should be playing left back or left wing already right?
ReplyDeletei 100% agree
ReplyDeleteCorrelation is not the same as causality. Kelly may have played in more winning sides than Johnson but a more sophisticated performance analysis is needed to assess their individual merits and contributions.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Djimi Traore was signed by Benitez. It was by Houllier. Rafa just used what he had on the squad and win the Champion League with him. You should check your facts before you start to be critical on any manager.
ReplyDeleteJohnson is a better player.
ReplyDeleteHe can play at right back and left back.
He does defend better at left back than he does at right back, but he gets forward better from right back than he does from left back. He is just simply a better player at the moment. and should keep his place.
I agree with this article completely! All Kelly needs is more experience and as soon as he does, I reckon he will be a huge player for us! However I am not saying Johnson isn't good, he is, but I think Kelly needs to be played more often and be in the team on a regular basis.
ReplyDeleteOh no, god forbid a full back not being accurate in front of goal, as its the be all and end all for full backs(!)
ReplyDeletesorry, anyone who says kelly over johnson should get their heads checked, Johnsons is englands right back so i supose kelly should be instead? kelly defends better than johnson, because he so dangerous on the overlap, and link up play, with kuyt or whoever is right wing, he has to give something positionally so it stands to reason he gets caught out of position now and then, but lets have it right when he has to curb his marauding and defend i.e spurs at home, playing on the left he had walker in his back pocket. kelly is excellent but going forward he can only run in straight lines and doesnt have an eye for the one two, or diagnal run, because he is a natural centre forward, hence the defend first mentality....and as for those who want to see him on the wing, i wouldnt mind trying him there but, hes affective running from deep, and overlapping using the winger as a foil he is very clever as a forward and has quick feet, wether he can get the ball to feet and still be as affective higher up the pitch? i dont know but i would love to give it a try. YNWA
ReplyDeleteNo, Richards should be. Secondly, international team selection is no reliable measurement as to which player is better, as illustrated by Richards omission under Capello.
ReplyDeleteUnbelievable. This is an example of using Stats to prove a point...regardless of relevance.
ReplyDeleteOnly if the decisive factor in the results were the Right Back could you begin to make the point.
JK, you are wrong. End of.
keep saying and will do for ever. kelly right back johnson right wing. and i dont get payed 4mill a year to make these easy obvious choices
ReplyDeleteKelly is a better right back than Johnson and should be first choice. Johnson is a better left back that Enrique and should be first choice there. Henderson should be played in the middle, or not played. Downing should only come on when the Reds are 3 - 0 up and that is only if he is chosen for the bench.
ReplyDeleteRidiculous analysis
ReplyDeleteKelly was great the other night, here's some similar analysis
If Kelly had scored against Arsenal from 3 yards, instead of missing an open goal, we'd be within 4 points of them, so he Kelly could potentially have cost Liverpool FC £40 million!!!!
Great points flapjackcarl, really great
ReplyDeleteOver simplification of stats renders the entire exercise as totally useless
Any conclusion can be "proven" but many will not stand up to much scrutiny
kelly should play centre back not right back he is not as good as johnson going forward but at defendin he is better plus kelly started out at cb
ReplyDeletekelly is a fantastic player, defensively and attacking too.
ReplyDeletehe is naturally a centre back, but we have been using him as a right back because we lack cover in that position.
i would have him in the team any day, and he's better than GJ in that position.
Agree with the last sentiment Kelly at RB and Johnson could solve our right wing issue - hes better going forward than anyone else on the right side. Love Dirk Kuyt and his work ethic but he doesnt deliver the goods other than effort.
ReplyDeleteJK doesn't reply to arguments he can't find answers to. I think you should have known that by now. He hasn't replied to Mez Hossain either. While we are at it, can you show me stats for another right-back : Jon Flanagan ?
ReplyDeleteJamie have you looked at all the other players who were playing in those games as well? You can't just say, that he is better because Kelly played and LFC won. Id recommend you look at each particular game he played in, who else played on that night, who LFC were actually comparing and then compare it against Johnson in the same manner.
ReplyDeleteI see Jamie has not replied to KM2's posts, which plainly outline, that thsi type of analysis is bogus and wrong.
Jamie care to comment???
Why would i criticise the sport relief t shirts? Do you equate supporting pinching people on the arm and grabbing their head with sport relief? Not even close, no matter how much people try to deify Suarez!
ReplyDeleteHmmm, I wonder if those charges have been dropped, though. If so, surprised the team aren't wearing t shirts for those guys!
Operation sloth vote? I reckon they might be a major supporter of our team, based on what we've seen for most of the season!!
Don't understand it, the comments seem to suggest 50/50 but Token Johnson only has around 20% voting for him. Must be Mcgrath on the sauce, voting multiple times!
ReplyDeleteNow i understand how the Tories get elected, everyone you speak to seems to be voting labour or lib dem, but when the election comes..........
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, but have been surprised to see how many times Kelly has found himself shooting at goal in the last two home games. Reckon if Johnson had got into those positions we'd have not lost to Arsenal and would have got another goal, at least, against Everton.
ReplyDeleteBut for England, I do think Richards is the better all round player.
Johnson for right midfield, i reckon, him and Kelly could hold down that side of the pitch. I don't reckon playing there would cost him his England place. His versatility would guarantee him a spot in the squad and would probably be bad news for one of Walcott or Lennon.
With respect, you and others just don't get it. You're so desperate to discredit my view that you can't see the wood for the trees. For example: you state 'You can't just say, that he is better because Kelly played and LFC won'. This shows that you'e misunderstood my point.
ReplyDeleteWhere did I say that Kelly is better than Johnson? I didn't. That's not even the issue. My point is that Liverpool are a more successful TEAM with Kelly in the side, and this is irrefutable.
Individual ability is not relevant here, and my analysis is not supposed to be some kind of forensic examination of Kelly and Johnson's foitballing ability.
Everyone who has attacked the stats on this thread has totally missed the point, and not one person has put forward a credible counter argument (with stats) to show how my conclusion is wrong.
What we've got instead is the same old meaningless cliches, which are used every time stats arise that people disagree with.
People are so desperate to find reasons why the conclusion is invalid they neglect to come up with a proper reason *why*
The bottom line is this:
* With Kelly in the team, Liverpool win more points, win more games, lise and draw less games, and concede less goals.
Whether you or anyone else likes it or nit, these are irrefutable, absolute facts.
If someone can dispute these facts, and show - with evidence - how Liverpool are more effective with Johnson in the team, then please do so.
Focusing on anything else than addressing this point is just avoiding the issue, which is precisely what so many people on this thread have done.
Sent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
You're just being silly now, and you've missed the point.
ReplyDeletelove yr idea of Johnson playing RW and Kelly playing LB. And mind you, did you see how many times Kelly were nearly at the end of putting in goals during the everton derby. ! Kelly and Johnson both rocks. Both plseplse dont have both of them go up and no one to cover the defence.
ReplyDeleteyou are really an ass too opinionated and scared of balance
ReplyDeleteThe stats used are very misleading and dont really tell us anything about the two players as its a team game.
ReplyDeleteTo analyse the two players you need to look at things like, successful tackles, interceptions, blocks, blocked crosses, pass completition, ariel duals won etc. Win percentage is not a good measure.
Heck you could say the same about Gerrard, when Gerrard has played the full 90 mins this season our record is W1, D4 and L1 . Up until the derby we had not won a game when Gerrard had played the full 90 mins. Just something to think about.
What a pathetic article. What exactly is your major problem with Johnson. Time and again he's been outstanding for Liverpool FC and this notion that he neglects his duties in defence is a lie I'm sick of hearing. Worst of all is that stupid analysis which ignore how and when goals are conceded. If Johnson stops attacks down is flank in 10 games but the opposition score a goal in each game via attacking down the other flank is that Johnson's fault? We've seen mistakes by Enrique and Skrtel lead to goals... Johnson's fault I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteStop being a pathetic prat!
Starting 11 if all fit with current squad
ReplyDelete---------------------Reina-----------------
Kelly --------Skirtel------Ager------Enrique
Johnson------Lucas------Adam-------Downing
Suarez
Gerrard
Put Kelly on the right and Johnson on the left.
ReplyDeleteEnrique need a rest. His performance has been sub-par in recent games.
More to do with the fact that he has played consistently well as season making very few mistakes at the back.
ReplyDeleteIf we were talking last season i could see exactly were you are coming from. I can only elude that you guys haven't seen to much of LFC this season.
Exactly - Rafa as we all know was unsentimental and professional when reconstructing the team left behind by Houlier. Rafa did not buy Traore - but he certainly wasted no time in selling him and other deadwood from a team that won the CL. More importantly, he could be (and was) equally pragmatic with respect to his own signings.
ReplyDeleteI got one for you Jamie: How many matches had Kelly and Johnson played with Lucas respectively this season? If I'm not mistaken, many of Kelly's matches came earlier in the season before Lucas got hurt (and our winning percentage was high). Seeing as Johnson has played most matches since November, WHEN our winning percentage has been abysmal since we haven't had a competent DM to use, is it not possible that your stats are skewed by this simple fact?
ReplyDeleteThat said, I think the back four look more solid with Kelly in...and I've been saying this for 2 years.
So not only we listen to the media too much, now apparently we don't watch Liverpool much. All because we have a different opinion. Lovely logic(!)
ReplyDeleteAgain JK, you lay the stats on the line and think this justifies your way of thinking and this must be right.
ReplyDeleteIf you watch Martin Kelly very closely, he still has much to learn with his overall play, ball watches far too often ,3 or 4 times Arsenal played the wingers in behind him at Right back, all to do with his lack of experience and positional play.
i like the kid and high hopes for him but please don't get carried away, his build up play and ball retention is nowhere near GJ,if we want to be critical he missed an open goal against Arsenal when easier to score, missed a chance again against Everton, if that were Henderson, Downing or Carroll they would be held to account I'm sure!!!
GJ is not half as bad defensively as some people suggest(Especially the media) Same hype about this Kyle Walker at Spurs, gona replace Johnno for England etc.....(See how he was at fault for all Man Utd goals last week)
The stats tell you one thing (as I always see Maxi mentioned and fair comment his stats look good if you were playing on Championship Manager but his overall game is slow, lacks pace, lightweight, doesnt offer natural width due to lack of pace and not good enough to play central midfied or off the striker!)6 goals against Birmingham and Fulham do Not make him a good player we need in the team every week!!!
I like Maxi but he was always kept on at LFC as a Back up squad player at best and I only mention his diffencies due to your continued defence for him not being selected. Like it or not the future of LFC is players we have bought such as Henderson and at 21 needs the time to develop and progress at LFC and not 31 year olds been there and done it sitting on the bench for £80,000 a week!!!
Yes, I wish I had known that stating an opinion and backing it up with facts was so frowned upon.
ReplyDeleteWhat is this, The Twilight Zone? Of course I think the stats justify my way of thinking; why else would I use them? And yes, I think my view is right, but every football fan - including you - thinks their view is right, so what exactly is your point?
I put forward an argument backed by persuasive stats in a bid to elicit the views of fellow fans. Instead of foaming at the mouth over irrelevancies, why not just state your counter-argument and be done with it?
Difference between Carroll and Kelly is that one is a centre forward and the other is full back, hence the difference in expectations in front of goal, so of course Carroll would get more flak if he did that.
ReplyDeleteYou're reasoning is just ridiculous. What about the rest of the teams performance. Are you saying the games we won with Kelly, were solely down to him. And the games we didn't win with Johnson playing, were all down to him. A lot of the games we have lost this year have been because we simply don't score enough goals.
ReplyDeletethose stats doesn't mean anything to me, it has nothing to do with kelly and johnson, the specific stats which concerned full backs are, crosses, interventions - recovered ball, completed passes, tackles, assists..! not the ones which u have listed them
ReplyDeleteTotally agree, thats his natural postition. I dont think learning from JC would do him any harm!
ReplyDeleteYour opinion may be valid but its not in line with what Glenn Johnson has been doing this season.
ReplyDeleteFor a rather large amount of games he has been our BIGGEST threat during matches. Can you point out a few times where his defending has been bought into question..... THIS SEASON!???
Most of the forum actually disagress with you.... related to Jamie?
ReplyDeleteDear, Jaime,
ReplyDeleteYour posts are getting more and more ridiculous.
Stats like this have lots of confounding factors.
Your point from the headline is also "73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson"
ReplyDeleteWhy dun you use this method of analysis for the other players and see if this can back up your hypothesis? One sample size alone dun mean anything as there are so many confounding factors.
One of the readers has also mentioned that Kelly has been playing agst lower ranked opposing teams. Have you been able to refute this confounding factor before trumpeting your claim that Kelly must replace Johnson becos 73% ?
Jamie
ReplyDeleteMy question to you is:
What teams is Johnson playing against and what teams are Kelly playing against?
This directly can impact the percentage ratio!
I like Kelly but I also would have Johnson ahead of him as he poses a threat also!
I would like to see Kelly in the central of defense first!
Jaime, I think you are missing the point because don't we need a strong SQUAD of players. Johnson is two footed should we just dispense with one of our most versatile players? We need strong collective of players and didn't Johnson sign an extension this time last year.
ReplyDeleteYour personal vendetta's against Johnson and Suarez are frankly embarrassing.
Personal vendetta? What utter nonsense. Every fan - including you - has players they rate less than others. I always back up my views with evidence and just becahse you disagree doesn't make it a vendetta.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
You just delete posts if you dont like them JK!
ReplyDeleteNonsense. If you or anyone else can't stick to the comment policy that's not my problem.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
All i said was most the forum agrees with me and asked a question if there was a relation between yourself and Orignal Chan.
ReplyDeleteWhat rules were breached and where can i find them?
Apologies if any offense was caused
I wasn't offended (!) but your conment was totally irrelevant (i.e had nothing to xo with football) and was basically sniping.
ReplyDeleteSent from Samsung Galaxy Note
-------- Original message --------
Subject: [liverpoolkop] Re: 73% - The reason why Martin Kelly *must* replace Glen Johnson... | Liverpool-Kop.com
We have two very good right backs. Kelly and Johnno. Johnson is a very experienced player. He is also quite a universal type of a player. He can playe at either flank, he can play in the middle of the park and cause all sort of trouble to the opponent's defence.
ReplyDeleteKelly is certainly good, but he's still young. But Johnson is a world class player, and he is being hugely undervalued by some Liverpool fans. The same way Mascherano was, the same way Lucas was.
In all fairness, we've only got 5 world class players in the squad now: Gerrard, Suarez, Agger, Lucas and Johnson.
The post cleary relevant to your topic and the discussion between myself and Original Chan
ReplyDeleteif you wern't offended why delete?
Were can i find the rules and regulations?
i would have loved Johnson to play that match against Arsenal i know he would have scored that Open goal kelly missed or against sun'land he would have brought more attacking football for ourside mayb even scored i know we should just be glad that we have right back sorted out flanaggan is fine
ReplyDeleteTouche, Gab!
ReplyDeleteBit harsh, though, saying "most of the season". I can only think of Spurs away, Bolton away and City away where we have deserved nothing from the game. The defeats at Fulham and Stoke were desperately unlucky, and although we bottled it at OT, we very nearly sneaked a (undeserved admittedly) draw.
I think the 3 defeats on the bounce has crystallised fans' thinking somewhat, but if you look at the overall picture, whilst results have been hugely disappointing, performances have been pretty good.
Whilst bedding in new players, they've still won at The Emirates, The Bridge and Woodison. They've beaten the blueshite home and away, knocked United out the Cup and had a visit to Wembley.
Fans of teams like Stoke and Albion have even said Liverpool have been THE best team to visit their grounds this season! Mind you, some people will say anything for a cuppa.
I know that our home record is poor, but I still feel more entertained than I was for a lot of last season. And, but for a poacher, we could have been comfortable in the top four.
But, then again, the table never lies.
Keep the faith.
You back up your views with stats, not evidence. There's a big difference. And when you keep writing critical articles concerning our most skilful player, and a player who publicly backed him, it does begin to appear like a vendetta.
ReplyDeleteDid I miss your article on the lad from Aintree who had the charges dropped against him for the alleged abuse of Tom Adeyemi, or are you saving that one up for a weekend cup extravaganza?
Boooooo.
ReplyDeleteYou removed my post.
So I'll try again.
ReplyDeleteYour views are backed up by stats, not evidence. They are completely different.
And when you continue to write critical articles on concerning our most skilful player, and (coincidentally) the bloke who publicly supported him, it does begin to take on the appearance of a vendetta.
Again I ask, did I miss your piece regarding the LFC fan from Aintree who had the charges dropped for his alleged "racial abuse" of Tom Adeyemi, or are you saving that for a weekend FA Cup extravaganza.
I know a lot of fans were relieved that the CPS decided to drop the case; certainly in light of recent blogs and a concerted press campaign against LFC it does seem as some sort of vindication.
Your thoughts?
Boooo. You've done it again.
ReplyDeletePlease explain why.
I agree with Paul. But Jaimie keeps deleting my posts.
ReplyDeleteI agree.
ReplyDeleteWhat concerns me the most is that, regardless of the personnel, we seem to be up for the derby games and the cup games. After all the changes, the money spent, we still look like a cup game. The Sunderland performance was disappointing, because we knew we were up against a team in decent form, who would be breathing down our neck if they beat us and, after the game our manager said that we'd 'matched' Sunderland. Not sure any team with top 4 aspirations would want to match Sunderland, home or away. Coming so soon after the loss at Bolton, where Kenny said that players were playing for their futures, I did not expect to see such a lacklustre performance for some time and I wonder if Kenny is actually able to motivate the players for anything other than the big games. The performances in european competion suggests to me that the premier league is weaker than in previous years, so for us to be so far off the pace, without the distraction of european football to worry about, is very disappointing.
ReplyDeleteThere were good signs from the Everton game, Gerrard clearly made a huge difference and if he stays fit and can get Suarez and Carroll to play like they did on Tuesday, then, maybe we can start to move closer to the top 4 and still win the FA Cup. But i think Everton were very poor, the poorest team we have played since Wolves. Our two wins this year have been against very poor opposition. I don't think Stoke will be so accomodating on Sunday.
Your views are backed up by stats, not evidence. They are completely different. If Henderson started centre-mid against, say, Bolton, Wolves and Villa, and we won them all, but Gerrard started (for obvious reasons) against Everton, Utd and City, and we picked up 3 out of 9 points, then who would you start with?
ReplyDeleteAnd if you keep publishing critical articles against our most skilful player, and, coincidentally, the only player who publicly supported him, then it does manifest itself as the beginnings of certainly an agenda, if not a vendetta.
So stop deleting my posts.
And I'm still waiting for your article on the lad from Aintree who had the charges dropped against him for the alleged "racial abuse" of Tom Adeyemi. Because This was important news, but funnily didn't get the same coverage as the actual incident did. Obviously.
ReplyDeleteI would also would be interested in your views on the convenient leak of one of the Hillsborough documents by the BBC, and how this was reported for the first 6 or 7 hours until finally one paper finally used the word "slur".
Micah Richards started out as a CB and Bale at LB. Jay Spearing also started out at CB. Starting positions aren't always a player's best!
ReplyDeleteWhy do you hate Glen Johnson so much? He's so much more technically gifted then Kelly. These stats could easily be torn to shreds. For starters, Kelly has played in a lot easier games, i.e. Cup games against Championship sides, so of course the stats will be higher. And laughably, I had someone tell me that Glen Johnson's not a good defender, even though Liverpool have the 2nd best defensive record, because he's just part of a team. So how can the same be true for Kelly? He's not the sole reason either.
ReplyDeleteOh, and to your question about whether passing and shooting are vital to the team. YES. They are the fundamentals of football. Johnson is a million miles better than Kelly at both. He's one of the most gifted players on our team going forward and is nowhere near as bad a defender as he's made out to be.
I don't even know why this article's being written. There are so many more pressing concerns with our side: Carroll, Downing, Adam, Henderson for a start, our defense is perfect as it is. I wouldn't change a thing there.
Why don't you try and understand that people have different opinions to you? Just because you think Johnson is amazing doesn't mean everyone else has to. Also, you should stop trying to make out that everything is personal; I do not 'hate' Johnson, I just don't rate his defensive ability. Is that okay with you, or should I ask for your permission next time I want to have an opinion?
ReplyDeleteBest thread I've seen on here for ages! Very good debate, good points being made all round. And just when you think JK is on the ropes, he does a Balboa and gets right up again!
ReplyDeleteI do disagree with JK on this one. The stats are too basic (IN MY OPINION!) to make an informed decision, though it is an interesting question.
Please don't stop; my life is very drab and I need entertaining!
Your welcome to do a IP check.
ReplyDeleteIf your going to imply something improper, at least back it up with something conclusive.
Ochure - the idea that another poster may be 'related' to me just because he may have similar view about certain things is childish in the extreme. If you want to discuss football then go ahead; if you want to snipe then go elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteCan someone throw out glen johnson from the team??? neither he knows defending nor he is creating chances..no idea ...no vision!...he IS the loophole in the liverpool defence!...jst check how many goals have pool conceded with johnson in the defence...robinson is far better than him,..with a bunch of english players in the team u cannot expect pool to play better than england national team..there is only one man who knows the game--STEVIE G!!Get some spanish players in ...get suso/raheem in strting 11! why downing? adam?henderson?johnson?--no wonder we are losing!
ReplyDelete