English Premier Division Data [Discussion]

On 31/10/2023 at 15:00, Pete Sottrel said:

Thanks for that, @mrdorf, and apologies for this issue.

The choices from the database "skin tone indicator" do not always correspond as desired to the appearance of characters in the match engine.  This has been exacerbated by match engine lighting improvements, made this year. We will make sure that there is improved liaison between the Art and Database teams to make sure researchers are able to better reflect reality with the tools available, as this disconnect is the most likely source of any issues we’re seeing in the game.

Hey, no worries. All good just thought I’d point it out.

8 hours ago, Pete Sottrel said:

Hello @ajw10 - I am really sorry.  The duplicate clauses issue has been logged and has been worked on as a high priority item by our coding team.  Again, I apologise that a fix for this has not been ready for the release.

The club records issue has also been logged, and is being looked at.

Have you seen the follow up post as Odegaard's clause has been inputted twice in the editor. 

4 minutes ago, robterrace said:

In the database, it appears once, I've just checked this myself (£20m by yearly instalments over 4 years) . The issue is with something within the game. The relevant people are aware, and as far as I'm aware, this will be sorted ASAP.

in the editor it appears twice and if I delete one of them, it shows just one in the game.

So it seems like it's a graphical AND a coding issue.

I know people cannot reveal a time frame, but ASAP could mean tomorrow or March. Would be nice to have a rough idea because if it's going to take months then I will try and get a refund.

Not sure if this is the right place or has already been raised but I started a new save and saw Richarlison is a natural CB at Tottenham

8 hours ago, Gilberto Silva said:

Not sure if this is the right place or has already been raised but I started a new save and saw Richarlison is a natural CB at Tottenham

Thanks for this, @Gilberto Silva - we have had no other similar reports of this disconcerting issue.  Please will you upload the save so that we can investigate further?  Thanks again.

EPL Owners

Resources

 

I still feel like some attention is needed to help have some sort of reasoning behind resources. As it would appear some researchers are going off total wealth available and others are going from how much of that wealth a person would actually use towards the club. From what I remember, depending on the mixture of Ambition and Business would help determine just how much an owner would invest into a club, unsure if that's changed. 

A good example of this is Stan Kroenke, while he's a multi-billionare he doesn't invest heavily into Arsenal, so the data on this looks right. His investments are split between different projects, which I feel like is represented well within the data as much as it can be. So, while Shahid Khan is super wealthy, similar to Kroenke his wealth is split between Fulham, an NFL franchise and a wrestling promotion. 

While Man U's Glazers data doesn't look correct and should probably be similar to Kroenke. Todd Boehly at Chelsea could be a similar case, he's already looking for extra investment for future transfer budgets, or perhaps the other members of the consortium should have resource information added?

Further on the Glazers, every member of the family has a similar resource rating even though it is a shared wealth. This could lead to issues in longterm games where the Glazers have left Man U and individually takeover different clubs. The game will think they have an individual wealth pool, when in truth they don't. Do they all have equal access to this money or is one member of the famiy the key stakeholder? Or perhaps they all have a different percent of the pot? 

Ambition

Wolves' owner should probably have a value added for patience and interference, given the last few years high turnover of managers. Is the Wolves owner also the most ambitious owner in the Premier League?

Based on my understanding that ambition has a deciding factor in how Owners operate in-game, it's a little disappointing to see random seed entries. It's also strange that there's only 1 owner in the entire league that has an ambition less than 10. Are the Glazers ambitious, do they really want to push Man U to the next level towards being the greatest football club? Or are they happy for things to tickalong and treat the club as a business? 

I appreciate that successful people are often ambitious and determined, yet I feel these values are perhaps slightly too top heavy? Is John Henry the most ambitous (19) and determined (19) owner in the Premier League? 

I've included Mike Ashley for my own comparison, but it might help others understand where I'm coming from too, as that was Mike Ashley's motive. 

Does the game use the Judging Staff Ability when Owners hire a manager? If so, there's a lot of '0' random seeds for this. 

There's also some strangely high working with youngsters rating dotted amongst owners. Is this a hangover from how the game used to determine if an owner had a philosphy towards producing young players?

Edited November 8, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

I'm 

2 hours ago, ChrisNUFC said:

EPL Owners

Resources

 

I still feel like some attention is needed to help have some sort of reasoning behind resources. As it would appear some researchers are going off total wealth available and others are going from how much of that wealth a person would actually use towards the club. From what I remember, depending on the mixture of Ambition and Business would help determine just how much an owner would invest into a club, unsure if that's changed. 

A good example of this is Stan Kroenke, while he's a multi-billionare he doesn't invest heavily into Arsenal, so the data on this looks right. His investments are split between different projects, which I feel like is represented well within the data as much as it can be. So, while Shahid Khan is super wealthy, similar to Kroenke his wealth is split between Fulham, an NFL franchise and a wrestling promotion. 

While Man U's Glazers data doesn't look correct and should probably be similar to Kroenke. Todd Boehly at Chelsea could be a similar case, he's already looking for extra investment for future transfer budgets, or perhaps the other members of the consortium should have resource information added?

Further on the Glazers, every member of the family has a similar resource rating even though it is a shared wealth. This could lead to issues in longterm games where the Glazers have left Man U and individually takeover different clubs. The game will think they have an individual wealth pool, when in truth they don't. Do they all have equal access to this money or is one member of the famiy the key stakeholder? Or perhaps they all have a different percent of the pot? 

Ambition

Wolves' owner should probably have a value added for patience and interference, given the last few years high turnover of managers. Is the Wolves owner also the most ambitious owner in the Premier League?

Based on my understanding that ambition has a deciding factor in how Owners operate in-game, it's a little disappointing to see random seed entries. It's also strange that there's only 1 owner in the entire league that has an ambition less than 10. Are the Glazers ambitious, do they really want to push Man U to the next level towards being the greatest football club? Or are they happy for things to tickalong and treat the club as a business? 

I appreciate that successful people are often ambitious and determined, yet I feel these values are perhaps slightly too top heavy? Is John Henry the most ambitous (19) and determined (19) owner in the Premier League? 

I've included Mike Ashley for my own comparison, but it might help others understand where I'm coming from too, as that was Mike Ashley's motive. 

Does the game use the Judging Staff Ability when Owners hire a manager? If so, there's a lot of '0' random seeds for this. 

There's also some strangely high working with youngsters rating dotted amongst owners. Is this a hangover from how the game used to determine if an owner had a philosphy towards producing young players?

The Forest ownership is a bit of a complex issue, and something which I'm looking at over the next research period.

The game has Socrates Kominakis as Owner, even though he is the minority owner, as the majority owner, Evangelos Marinakis, owns Olympiacos in Greece. We don't have the same board or ownership structure (so to speak), however, Marinakis and his son are the visible owners of Forest, with Kominakis being in Greece a fair amount.

Its difficult, as Marinakis is ambitious and has said that he wants to bring Forest back to being a very competitive team in the PL (something which has been reflected by our spending), but, I can't use him as the benchmark, despite everything being that way.

Yeah, it would be nice if SI added something in the future to support consortiums and multiple club owners. 

On 06/11/2023 at 00:01, ChrisNUFC said:

Hi @Pete Sottrel did you see this? 

Hi @ChrisNUFC - I did see it, and thank you very much for taking the time and effort to post it.  There are lots of interesting points made, and I'm currently working through them with our Newcastle researcher.  Thanks again!

Club Morale

 

Based on the top 30 clubs (reputation), some of the starting morale looks very inaccurate. 

Understandably, Man City should be buzzing after the treble, however Man U with a starting morale of 14 looks entirely wrong. They just managed to finish 3rd and saw their rivals achieve the treble, plus from what we know and see about the ongoing fan protests, behaviour of players and general malaise within Man U this shouldn't be seen as a very happy camp. 

Tottenham at 14 feels slightly high too, missed out on Europe and had another summer of Harry Kane transfer saga. Certainly if you compare the starting morale of Man U and Spurs to Liverpool something feels off. 

Luton 1st season back in the top flight for 30 years could possibly be higher? 

West Ham won the Europa Conference, so would have felt they'd have been slightly more than average (if 10 is a neutral state). 

Edited November 9, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

Club Infrastructure

 

Things might have changed a lot on this, so my initial thoughts could be outdated. 

It really looks like there's a very strong belief that the majority of top English clubs have some of the best infastructure in the game:

Training Facilities

20 - Aston Villa, Chelsea, Leicester, Liverpool, Man City, Tottenham
19 - Arsenal, Southampton
18 - Brighton, Everton, Leeds, M'boro, Sunderland, Watford
17 - Man U, Wolves
16 - Burnley, Fulham, Norwich
15 - Blackburn, Crystal Palace, West Borm
14 - Luton, West Ham
13 - Bournemouth, Nottm Forest, Sheff U
11 - Newcastle
10 - Brentford

Based on my understanding that 20 would be the best facilities in the world, which I'd consider to have integrated gym, physio, sports science & analyst suit and equipment (cameras, drones, hydrosuit, cryosuit, medical facilities, etc.), multiple indoor and outdoor training pitches, welfare suit, kitchen staff, integration officers and support staff, etc. of good quality, size and availability of use. The Premier League (and Championship) have 5 clubs at 20, 2 clubs at 19 and 6 clubs at 18. 

I know in-game facilities degrade in rating over time if they haven't been upgraded, so I wonder if perhaps researchers haven't kept on eye on how long ago training facilities were constructed, or if operations were scaled back upon relegations, for example. I get it might be difficult to make comparisons too, and there could be a lot of guess work going on. 

From personal experience, Chelsea, City and Brighton are the ones I've been most impressed with (although I haven't had a chance to see Spurs or Liverpool). 

Digital Ad Hoarding

Every Premier League stadium should have this ticked unless there are mitigating circumstances.

Stadium State

 

I'm also very surprised to see how highly regarded the general state of stadiums are, too. There are stadiums that according to the database are over 100 years old, never had a rebuild, and are considered to be in a Good-Very Good state and have a High End Environment. 

Stadium Environment

Again without knowing what guidelines go into a stadium's environment, I can only go off what I think this might consider: fanzones, parking, access, general layout inside and outside of the stadium (small corridors v large open spaces), sensory rooms, the number of toilets and kiosks inside, contactless payment, working wifi, the number and size of screens inside the concourse and pitchsize, shuttle service, general location of the stadium, public transport links, how 'welcoming' the stadium is to visit, etc. and the biggest one for me the general layout of seats and stands. An opener for me in terms of Stadium Environment was visiting American Sports Stadiums, not just football, but baseball too. While I'm not say THAT is how a stadium should be, the environment was amazing with all the above offered plus more. The fan experience was immense. 

So I found it surprising to discovering that there are only 3 clubs in the database out of the 30 with the highest reputation that have Standard (no team rated their Stadium Environment lower than this). For example, Goodison Park (Everton) is rated as High End, yet it doesn't fit any of the above things I'd be looking for in a modern, easy accessible, come spend your money here, type of stadium. It's a wonderful old school stadium, cramped and with lots of obscure views! Again, could be wide of the mark on how its actually being rated. 

But with that in mind, I do feel like English researchers might have over evaluated just how dated some of our stadiums are in terms of fan experience and comfort. They could be surprised to find out just how far behind some of our training facilities are in comparison to Europe and America too. 

Advice for researchers: Do your coaching badges/attend your local county FA CPD events, chat to the tutors and coaches, network and you'll be surprised how open and easy it is to go along to training sessions at various facilities around the country. 

 

Edited November 9, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

The stadium environment field (only head researchers have the ability to amend this I believe) is described as -

the standard of environments where press conferences/interviews/team talks might take place.

Premier League guidelines set a pretty high bar for these afaik, I imagine with an allowance for teams with older, smaller stadia like Luton to bring theirs in to line within a few years.

Ah right then. I was thinking too grand a scale  thanks for that 

On 07/11/2023 at 19:44, ajw10 said:

in the editor it appears twice and if I delete one of them, it shows just one in the game.

So it seems like it's a graphical AND a coding issue.

I know people cannot reveal a time frame, but ASAP could mean tomorrow or March. Would be nice to have a rough idea because if it's going to take months then I will try and get a refund.

The lack of answer speaks volumes to me. This isn't getting fixed any time soon. 

On 09/11/2023 at 10:48, ChrisNUFC said:

Club Morale

 

Based on the top 30 clubs (reputation), some of the starting morale looks very inaccurate. 

Understandably, Man City should be buzzing after the treble, however Man U with a starting morale of 14 looks entirely wrong. They just managed to finish 3rd and saw their rivals achieve the treble, plus from what we know and see about the ongoing fan protests, behaviour of players and general malaise within Man U this shouldn't be seen as a very happy camp. 

Tottenham at 14 feels slightly high too, missed out on Europe and had another summer of Harry Kane transfer saga. Certainly if you compare the starting morale of Man U and Spurs to Liverpool something feels off. 

Luton 1st season back in the top flight for 30 years could possibly be higher? 

West Ham won the Europa Conference, so would have felt they'd have been slightly more than average (if 10 is a neutral state). 

Entirely disagree with some of this. Manchester United didn’t “just” finish 3rd. They finished 3rd with the highest point total for 3rd in 5 years and considering they finished 6th the year before, it is an improvement. They also reached both cup finals and won one. Qualification for the champions league also meant an increase in the players wages. As you stated this is starting morale so refers to a date in July, a lot of the unhappiness in the camp has mainly unfolded in the last 3 months. To have them below 14 morale would just be bizarre. 

15 minutes ago, Kilmarnock said:

Entirely disagree with some of this. Manchester United didn’t “just” finish 3rd. They finished 3rd with the highest point total for 3rd in 5 years and considering they finished 6th the year before, it is an improvement. They also reached both cup finals and won one. Qualification for the champions league also meant an increase in the players wages. As you stated this is starting morale so refers to a date in July, a lot of the unhappiness in the camp has mainly unfolded in the last 3 months. To have them below 14 morale would just be bizarre. 

If you believe that, that should mean Ten Hag's Player Management (17) and Motivation (16) attributes are poor (which they're not in-game). 

Edited November 10, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

1 hour ago, ChrisNUFC said:

If you believe that, that should mean Ten Hag's Player Management (17) and Motivation (16) attributes are poor (which they're not in-game). 

I think you are letting your own bias influence your own judgement. It could be argued that Newcastle having a higher morale than a team that beat them in a cup final, finished above them in the league and progressed much further than they did in the FA Cup, is wrong. Although I can understand why a smaller club would be delighted with their achievements last year and therefore I am not going to argue that point.

On 08/11/2023 at 10:42, ChrisNUFC said:

EPL Owners

Resources

 

I still feel like some attention is needed to help have some sort of reasoning behind resources. As it would appear some researchers are going off total wealth available and others are going from how much of that wealth a person would actually use towards the club. From what I remember, depending on the mixture of Ambition and Business would help determine just how much an owner would invest into a club, unsure if that's changed. 

A good example of this is Stan Kroenke, while he's a multi-billionare he doesn't invest heavily into Arsenal, so the data on this looks right. His investments are split between different projects, which I feel like is represented well within the data as much as it can be. So, while Shahid Khan is super wealthy, similar to Kroenke his wealth is split between Fulham, an NFL franchise and a wrestling promotion. 

While Man U's Glazers data doesn't look correct and should probably be similar to Kroenke. Todd Boehly at Chelsea could be a similar case, he's already looking for extra investment for future transfer budgets, or perhaps the other members of the consortium should have resource information added?

Further on the Glazers, every member of the family has a similar resource rating even though it is a shared wealth. This could lead to issues in longterm games where the Glazers have left Man U and individually takeover different clubs. The game will think they have an individual wealth pool, when in truth they don't. Do they all have equal access to this money or is one member of the famiy the key stakeholder? Or perhaps they all have a different percent of the pot? 

Ambition

Wolves' owner should probably have a value added for patience and interference, given the last few years high turnover of managers. Is the Wolves owner also the most ambitious owner in the Premier League?

Based on my understanding that ambition has a deciding factor in how Owners operate in-game, it's a little disappointing to see random seed entries. It's also strange that there's only 1 owner in the entire league that has an ambition less than 10. Are the Glazers ambitious, do they really want to push Man U to the next level towards being the greatest football club? Or are they happy for things to tickalong and treat the club as a business? 

I appreciate that successful people are often ambitious and determined, yet I feel these values are perhaps slightly too top heavy? Is John Henry the most ambitous (19) and determined (19) owner in the Premier League? 

I've included Mike Ashley for my own comparison, but it might help others understand where I'm coming from too, as that was Mike Ashley's motive. 

Does the game use the Judging Staff Ability when Owners hire a manager? If so, there's a lot of '0' random seeds for this. 

There's also some strangely high working with youngsters rating dotted amongst owners. Is this a hangover from how the game used to determine if an owner had a philosphy towards producing young players?

Concerning for me that the Everton owners basically got blank for everything going by that screen shot (Will check when i'm home).

No wonder they've not done anything in my 3 year save. We've had zero investment, zero new sponsorship (despite finishing 2nd twice in the premierleague, and are current european champions).

Who is the Everton researcher this year btw?

24 minutes ago, evertonmarc said:

Concerning for me that the Everton owners basically got blank for everything going by that screen shot (Will check when i'm home).

No wonder they've not done anything in my 3 year save. We've had zero investment, zero new sponsorship (despite finishing 2nd twice in the premierleague, and are current european champions).

Who is the Everton researcher this year btw?

 Blank due to an editor issue. Same has with Man U. Think it’s due to Bobby Charlton and Bill Kenwright passing away recently and their profiles creating a broken table. 

Edited November 10, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

St. James' Park

Away fans are sitting in the Gallowgate End, which is like a major no. 

 

Anfield should have 'Not Used in Continental Finals' selected due to being unable to reach the desired Field of play size to be considered a Cat 4 stadium.
I believe Old Trafford should also have 'Not Used in Continental Finals' selected, due to the position of their tunnel (as required from 2011) to be on the halfway line

Anfield, Craven Cottage, Goodison Park, St. James' Park, Tottenham Hotspurs Stadium, London Stadium, Shelhurt Park, Emirates and Molynuex all need digital hordings ticked. 

Edited November 12, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

Goalkeepers

 

I haven't looked through this in great detail yet, but really confused by how highly rated Caomin Kelleher is. 24 years old with a total of 27 senior appearances, yet they're 15th best GK in PL. based on CA of 141. Some questions over composure 14, first touch 14,  heading 10, passing 14, technique 13. Appreciate he's at Liverpool at might be learning from Alisson, yet it feels very high and if certainly if he was so highly regarded in those areas I can imagine Liverpool would have had several offers for the player given the current trend towards GK being a true outfield player when in possession. Especially considering his concentration and consistency is also 14, along with decisons 13. 

 

Agility

On initial inspection, it looks like there could be some coordination between researchers, or perhaps suggested guidelines to help get a structured approach on agility. There are some very tall and also some heavy goalkeepers who have been rated surprisingly agile. I'd consider agility to be more than a person's ability to simply dive, but also what kind of save they're making. A low down save with hands or feet requires more agility than a top corner dive, another example would be single hand scoop pulling the ball back from behind the GK requires a lot of agility. While its not always the case, GKs with a slight frame tend to be more agile than taller or bulkier GKs. You could also consider a person's age and injury history (certainly if they've had a torn rotator cuff for example). 

So seeing the likes of 36 year old Darren Randolph (188cm/98kg) with an agility of 14, which is similar to Jose Sa (192cm/84gk) doesn't look right out in the pure data sense, and makes me think one should be lower and another should be higher. 

I'd also take into consideration a GK's bodyshape when looking at things like balance too, especially their set stance and and footwork. Do they have a straight back or are their sticking their backside out when set. Can they move their feet in quick shuffles sideways to help launch themselves into a dive or do they push/flop from a set position? 

Cross Claiming and dealing with Corners

This is a major issue for GKs at the moment, and I think the above attributes should be grouped together to help deterimine if a GK is good at claiming crosses in open play and during set peices. 

Aggression - I feel this should be used and judged on how confident the GK is at attacking the ball while it is in flight
Bravery - Key to the above when dealing with a congested penalty area
Strength - How well they can move through a crowded penalty area (linked to balance above for footwork)
Anticipation - Recognising where the location of the highest point they (GK) can catch the ball (Do they often move under a ball when coming to claim?)
Decisions - Absolute key attribute for GKs, which should be modified by aggression and bravery. For example: Do they come and claim? Do they catch or punch? Is it a single handed punch for extended reach or a double fist puch for security at the expense of reach? Do they recognise they're inability to claim crosses and instead call for the defenders to clear it? Do they spot if it is an outswinger or inswinging cross and change on they'll attack the ball
Eccentricity - I feel like this is a difficult one for people to come to an agreed decision upon. But for me I'll always think of it as how well does the GK inspire confidence in the rest of the team during a game. Are they consistent with their decision making, technique, secure handling, etc. or is every cross/shot a new experience with parries and fisted saves pushing the ball wildly into the unknown. Similar for GKs who play out from the back, do they stick to the pattern of play or do they scramble and play wild passes into players who wouldn't normally receive a pass when playing out from the back. 

Jumping Reach and Areial Abiltiy being the GKs overall ability to jump and reach to their highest point
Command of Area and Communication organisation of the defensive unit, stop the cross, defending the 6 yard, pen spot, 18 yard, push out, etc. 

With that in mind, if we add up the attributes and minus eccentricity we should get an idea of who the best GKs are with cross claiming:

If we compare this with: https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/total_high_claim you can start to see a picture of who might be better than others at deal with crosses. Of course a TOTAL stat doesn't show you success rate. Sky Sports ran this at the start of the season: https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12933578/best-goalkeeper-in-the-premier-league-revealed-andre-onana-david-raya-and-robert-sanchez-transfers-analysed showing the best GKs at claiming crosses were: 

Goalkeeper.com data vs (SI)

1. Martinez (Alisson)
2. Pope (Ederson)
3. Alisson (Raya)
4. Ederson (Onana)
5. Raya (Vicario)
6. Leno (Martinez)
7. Kepa (Neto)
8. Ramsdale (Areola)* Omitted Dubravka as Sky Sports only used primary GKs from the 22/23 season

Which suggests that Martinez, Pope, Leno, and Ramsdale have perhaps been slightly undervalued at cross claiming, although, I could have easily overthought how much the attributes matter for cross claiming. 

If we look at it in a simpler sense:

This is how goalkeeper.com's data ranked the GKs last season based on 6 factors: Shotstopping and parries; Sweeping and Cross Claiming; Shot Prevention and Distribution.

The above are the top 20 GKs in the PL based on CA. 

goalkeeper.com vs (SI)

1. Martinez (Ederson)
2. Alisson (Alisson)
3. Leno (Martinez)
4. Raya (Raya)
5 Pope (Onana)
6. Kepa (Pickford)
7. Ramsdale (Vicario)
8. Guaita (Kepa)
9. De Gea (Pope)
10. Ederson (Neto)
11. Fabianksi (Ramsdale)
12. Neto (Leno)
13. Pickford (Sanchez)
14. Henderson (Steele)
15. Sa (Kelleher)
16. Sanchez (Areola)
17. Mslier (Turner)
18. Ward (Flekken)
19. Lloris (Sa)
20. Bazunu (Johnstone)

Again this is only one dataset comparison, so hardly conclusive, but it does show that perhaps a few GKs have been undervalued and perhaps some have been overvalued in their worth. 

So let's check: https://fbref.com/en/comps/9/2022-2023/keepersadv/2022-2023-Premier-League-Stats which provides a little more detail

Their Top 5 is:

1. Martinez
2. Raya
3. Pope
4. Sa
5. Bazunu

 

GK - fbref - SI

1. Martinez  - Martinez - Alisson
2. Pope - Raya - Ederson
3. Alisson - Pope -  Raya
4. Ederson - Sa - Onana**
5. Raya - Bazunu - Vicario***
6. Leno - Meslier - Martinez
7. Kepa - Steele - Neto
8. Guaita  - Leno - Areola* Omitted Dubravka as Sky Sports only used primary GKs from the 22/23 season
9 Ramsdale - Sanchez - Flekken
10 Sanchez - Henderson - Ramsdale*Omitted Lloris as Vicario is now 1st choice at Tottenham

The noticable name here is Martinez, who seems to have had his ability to deal with crosses overlooked.

**Onana ranked 11th in Serie A last season for crosses stopped % with 5.3%, which would have had him ranked 20th overall in the 22/23 EPL season.
***Vicario ranked 9th in Serie A last season for crosses stopped with 5.6%, which would have had him ranked 18th overall in the 22/23 EPL season. 

I'm sure the same could be done for distribution, sweeping, held shots vs parries, etc. but I've only had time to look at cross claiming. In short, EPL GKs, from what I can see, need some consistency to their ratings and look either overvalued or undervalued perhaps due to CA guidelines. 

 

Below are the GK cross stats so far this season. 

Edited November 13, 2023 by ChrisNUFC

Shouldn't Manchester UFC be a new club to the extinct club Newton Heath? And Birmingham City new club to Small Heath?

10 hours ago, ChrisNUFC said:

Goalkeepers

 

I haven't looked through this in great detail yet, but really confused by how highly rated Caomin Kelleher is. 24 years old with a total of 27 senior appearances, yet they're 15th best GK in PL. based on CA of 141. Some questions over composure 14, first touch 14,  heading 10, passing 14, technique 13. Appreciate he's at Liverpool at might be learning from Alisson, yet it feels very high and if certainly if he was so highly regarded in those areas I can imagine Liverpool would have had several offers for the player given the current trend towards GK being a true outfield player when in possession. Especially considering his concentration and consistency is also 14, along with decisons 13. 

 

Agility

On initial inspection, it looks like there could be some coordination between researchers, or perhaps suggested guidelines to help get a structured approach on agility. There are some very tall and also some heavy goalkeepers who have been rated surprisingly agile. I'd consider agility to be more than a person's ability to simply dive, but also what kind of save they're making. A low down save with hands or feet requires more agility than a top corner dive, another example would be single hand scoop pulling the ball back from behind the GK requires a lot of agility. While its not always the case, GKs with a slight frame tend to be more agile than taller or bulkier GKs. You could also consider a person's age and injury history (certainly if they've had a torn rotator cuff for example). 

So seeing the likes of 36 year old Darren Randolph (188cm/98kg) with an agility of 14, which is similar to Jose Sa (192cm/84gk) doesn't look right out in the pure data sense, and makes me think one should be lower and another should be higher. 

I'd also take into consideration a GK's bodyshape when looking at things like balance too, especially their set stance and and footwork. Do they have a straight back or are their sticking their backside out when set. Can they move their feet in quick shuffles sideways to help launch themselves into a dive or do they push/flop from a set position? 

Cross Claiming and dealing with Corners

This is a major issue for GKs at the moment, and I think the above attributes should be grouped together to help deterimine if a GK is good at claiming crosses in open play and during set peices. 

Aggression - I feel this should be used and judged on how confident the GK is at attacking the ball while it is in flight
Bravery - Key to the above when dealing with a congested penalty area
Strength - How well they can move through a crowded penalty area (linked to balance above for footwork)
Anticipation - Recognising where the location of the highest point they (GK) can catch the ball (Do they often move under a ball when coming to claim?)
Decisions - Absolute key attribute for GKs, which should be modified by aggression and bravery. For example: Do they come and claim? Do they catch or punch? Is it a single handed punch for extended reach or a double fist puch for security at the expense of reach? Do they recognise they're inability to claim crosses and instead call for the defenders to clear it? Do they spot if it is an outswinger or inswinging cross and change on they'll attack the ball
Eccentricity - I feel like this is a difficult one for people to come to an agreed decision upon. But for me I'll always think of it as how well does the GK inspire confidence in the rest of the team during a game. Are they consistent with their decision making, technique, secure handling, etc. or is every cross/shot a new experience with parries and fisted saves pushing the ball wildly into the unknown. Similar for GKs who play out from the back, do they stick to the pattern of play or do they scramble and play wild passes into players who wouldn't normally receive a pass when playing out from the back. 

Jumping Reach and Areial Abiltiy being the GKs overall ability to jump and reach to their highest point
Command of Area and Communication organisation of the defensive unit, stop the cross, defending the 6 yard, pen spot, 18 yard, push out, etc. 

With that in mind, if we add up the attributes and minus eccentricity we should get an idea of who the best GKs are with cross claiming:

If we compare this with: https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/total_high_claim you can start to see a picture of who might be better than others at deal with crosses. Of course a TOTAL stat doesn't show you success rate. Sky Sports ran this at the start of the season: https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12933578/best-goalkeeper-in-the-premier-league-revealed-andre-onana-david-raya-and-robert-sanchez-transfers-analysed showing the best GKs at claiming crosses were: 

Goalkeeper.com data vs (SI)

1. Martinez (Alisson)
2. Pope (Ederson)
3. Alisson (Raya)
4. Ederson (Onana)
5. Raya (Vicario)
6. Leno (Martinez)
7. Kepa (Neto)
8. Ramsdale (Areola)* Omitted Dubravka as Sky Sports only used primary GKs from the 22/23 season

Which suggests that Martinez, Pope, Leno, and Ramsdale have perhaps been slightly undervalued at cross claiming, although, I could have easily overthought how much the attributes matter for cross claiming. 

If we look at it in a simpler sense:

This is how goalkeeper.com's data ranked the GKs last season based on 6 factors: Shotstopping and parries; Sweeping and Cross Claiming; Shot Prevention and Distribution.

The above are the top 20 GKs in the PL based on CA. 

goalkeeper.com vs (SI)

1. Martinez (Ederson)
2. Alisson (Alisson)
3. Leno (Martinez)
4. Raya (Raya)
5 Pope (Onana)
6. Kepa (Pickford)
7. Ramsdale (Vicario)
8. Guaita (Kepa)
9. De Gea (Pope)
10. Ederson (Neto)
11. Fabianksi (Ramsdale)
12. Neto (Leno)
13. Pickford (Sanchez)
14. Henderson (Steele)
15. Sa (Kelleher)
16. Sanchez (Areola)
17. Mslier (Turner)
18. Ward (Flekken)
19. Lloris (Sa)
20. Bazunu (Johnstone)

Again this is only one dataset comparison, so hardly conclusive, but it does show that perhaps a few GKs have been undervalued and perhaps some have been overvalued in their worth. 

So let's check: https://fbref.com/en/comps/9/2022-2023/keepersadv/2022-2023-Premier-League-Stats which provides a little more detail

Their Top 5 is:

1. Martinez
2. Raya
3. Pope
4. Sa
5. Bazunu

 

GK - fbref - SI

1. Martinez  - Martinez - Alisson
2. Pope - Raya - Ederson
3. Alisson - Pope -  Raya
4. Ederson - Sa - Onana**
5. Raya - Bazunu - Vicario***
6. Leno - Meslier - Martinez
7. Kepa - Steele - Neto
8. Guaita  - Leno - Areola* Omitted Dubravka as Sky Sports only used primary GKs from the 22/23 season
9 Ramsdale - Sanchez - Flekken
10 Sanchez - Henderson - Ramsdale*Omitted Lloris as Vicario is now 1st choice at Tottenham

The noticable name here is Martinez, who seems to have had his ability to deal with crosses overlooked.

**Onana ranked 11th in Serie A last season for crosses stopped % with 5.3%, which would have had him ranked 20th overall in the 22/23 EPL season.
***Vicario ranked 9th in Serie A last season for crosses stopped with 5.6%, which would have had him ranked 18th overall in the 22/23 EPL season. 

I'm sure the same could be done for distribution, sweeping, held shots vs parries, etc. but I've only had time to look at cross claiming. In short, EPL GKs, from what I can see, need some consistency to their ratings and look either overvalued or undervalued perhaps due to CA guidelines. 

 

Below are the GK cross stats so far this season. 

It's nice for a neutral to point out how good Emi Martinez is. Most neutrals seem to hate him, and the idea an elite player could play for Aston Villa is a difficult one for many, despite in this case, the player winning literally every individual and collective international allocate he can. Thank you.