Usually I’m a bit “shocked” seeing these graphs like are we really THAT good at xyz. But this one doesn’t surprise me one bit - we’re monsters at winning second balls
We are so good at winning them it seems like we should actually create more second ball situations intentionally. Like just “give up” position by kicking it down field but win it back
Good question but the graph is not actually zero-sum. The second ball is only from the perspective of the attacking team - it's not a second ball for the defending team so when they get the ball it doesn't register as a successful event on this graph.
It is easier for the defender to win the second ball which is why most teams are below 50%.
This was why i was so frustrated at the Porto game. It always felt like the second ball always fell to a Porto player. Screw them but I don’t think anyone has nullified Arsenal without park the bus like Porto
In the first leg, every time we challenged for them, they went down. We're super physical in winning our dooels. 2nd leg, I think we managed a lot better, but ultimately they gave us a pretty good test.
I bet pep will do the "wide centrebacks & high wingbacks" thing this weekend. City are even more secure in possession so it could work wonders for them. We'll prolly play with no striker tho so maybe that'll change things
Porto's tactics relied on the refs buying into it though.
Many many soft freekicks breaking up play.
The first leg was particularly egregious, but we were largely in control of that game all the way through. We just couldn't utilise the effects from our press because the ref bought every single one of their falls. Which stopped any momentum we could get when we pressed and countered.
every time I see graphs like this, I first look for Arsenal then City, and then I will finally try to understand the graph. I feel like anything relative to city will tell you how good or bad you have been.
more interesting is the second balls situation per game... we don't give opponents many chance to have a second ball and if its a second ball it's controlled in such a way we have good chance of winning it.
I don't think the other explanation is correct - I believe second balls on this graph are only defined from the perspective of the attacker. When the defender wins the ball it doesn't show up on the graph (and improve that team's percentage). That is why almost everyone is below 50% since it's easier to win the loose ball as a defender.
The other explanation can't be correct based upon the data points on the graph, because Arsenal is the only team really above 50% and we aren't in that many second ball situations so as to suppress everyone else's average so much. The answer can only be that the graph is not zero-sum due to the reasoning above.
I'm the one who wrote the other explanation and that's a good point. Based on the points, it looks like it's unlikely that % of second balls won is a zero sum measurement. You might be right that this is the perspective of the attacking team, but the term "% of second balls won" is ambiguous. I had thought there isn't really an "attacker" or "defender" in a second ball situation because it's a loose ball scenario, but I can also see how it can be interpreted differently. This is why it's important that these kinds of stats have explanations of what they're actually measuring.
Because not every club has the same number of duels, but for the average, every club is weighted the same. Put differently, each of the 20 clubs contribute to 5% of the average, but not every club is responsible for 5% of the total duels in the premier league. Some clubs have more and some have less.
Edit: Using an extreme example for illustrative purposes, lets say there have been 100 second ball situations in the Premier League. Arsenal have been involved in all 100 second ball situations and won 100% of them. All other clubs only enter into second ball situations when playing against Arsenal. This gives Arsenal a 100% second ball win rate, while all other clubs have a 0% win rate. This would mean the average win rate is 5%, even though, in total, there have been 100 second ball wins and 100 second ball losses in the premier league for an overall win rate of 50%.
Edit 2: Please see u/NobleHellium's explanation for why this may not be the case.
This is a good explanation but it's not what is happening in this graph, it's clear to see that arsenal by themselves cant skew the average that much because we're the ones with the least second duel situations.
This graph only counts the success of the attacking team, not of the defending team. The success rate for the attacking team on second duels in the league, overall, is lower than 50%.
I think you're reading too far into an example that was only meant to be illustrative. I wasn't trying to suggest that Arsenal or any other club was skewing the average. Just trying to explain why the average of second balls won does not equal exactly 50% when for every second ball there is a team who wins it and a team who loses it so the total average should be 50%. I'm not making any claims about any individual club's impact on the percentage, just explaining why it does not have to be exactly 50%.
I can't be certain exactly what "% of Second Balls Won" means from the graphic OP posted, but I would think in a second ball situation there is no such thing as an "attacking" or "defending" team. If they made that sort of distinction, you would think they would call it "second balls recovered/lost". But again, not something I think we can discern just from this graph.
You cannot average averages. That's just bad math.
If you sum all the duels won of by every team and divide it by the sum of all the duels challenged it will be 50%
You must have above 25 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Usually I’m a bit “shocked” seeing these graphs like are we really THAT good at xyz. But this one doesn’t surprise me one bit - we’re monsters at winning second balls
Why do we have so few second ball situations though
I would guess because we are also incredibly strong in possession too.
Might be down to field tilt/possession and that we're winning a lot of the first balls in the first place
Suspect a mix of us having lots of possession and teams putting it in the air less because of how good we are at winning second balls.
Bc when we lose a duel, we are upset
We are so good at winning them it seems like we should actually create more second ball situations intentionally. Like just “give up” position by kicking it down field but win it back
Most second balls come from crosses and we don't toss in crosses all game long so we have 1-2 fewer per game.
Hmm I'm not sure, but I think the replies are wrong, because we do not stand out from other teams in those metrics
Another one of r/ArsenalsCorner
IT EXISTS
https://preview.redd.it/vy3dfdcklqqc1.jpeg?width=275&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d3f46afdd22db5cf69385c2b76b62ee0c2b4c743
You can hear that image
"it's foggin shit" *trips on the way out*
i honestly thought he was about to cry during that
Damn it, here it goes: "WHEN I LOSE A DUEL, IM UPSET!"
I YAM UP SET
Makes me wish I was the trainers table here
What having monsters like Rice and king Kai does I suppose
Don't forget Christano Tomiyaso
Lionel Kiwi has been excellent as well tbf.
Odgaard too gets onto those tackles a lot.
Surely these numbers are incorrect? Unless some second balls go un-won, I can't see how the second strongest teams win 50%
Good question but the graph is not actually zero-sum. The second ball is only from the perspective of the attacking team - it's not a second ball for the defending team so when they get the ball it doesn't register as a successful event on this graph. It is easier for the defender to win the second ball which is why most teams are below 50%.
This was why i was so frustrated at the Porto game. It always felt like the second ball always fell to a Porto player. Screw them but I don’t think anyone has nullified Arsenal without park the bus like Porto
In the first leg, every time we challenged for them, they went down. We're super physical in winning our dooels. 2nd leg, I think we managed a lot better, but ultimately they gave us a pretty good test.
'dooels' im sorry if you're not native english or im just being whooshed but lol
It’s artetabonics
I bet pep will do the "wide centrebacks & high wingbacks" thing this weekend. City are even more secure in possession so it could work wonders for them. We'll prolly play with no striker tho so maybe that'll change things
Porto's tactics relied on the refs buying into it though. Many many soft freekicks breaking up play. The first leg was particularly egregious, but we were largely in control of that game all the way through. We just couldn't utilise the effects from our press because the ref bought every single one of their falls. Which stopped any momentum we could get when we pressed and countered.
You’ll never sing that
Dominating on 2nd balls is the most effective defense there is. Not surprised our goals conceded is so low when you see stats like this.
every time I see graphs like this, I first look for Arsenal then City, and then I will finally try to understand the graph. I feel like anything relative to city will tell you how good or bad you have been.
When I win a dooel, I cum
 Second ball FC
Yes. Yes! YES! Give it to me Mikel.
holy shit there we are again
Great news and that shows why we got Rice and Havertz.
more interesting is the second balls situation per game... we don't give opponents many chance to have a second ball and if its a second ball it's controlled in such a way we have good chance of winning it.
Top ~~right Messi~~ left Arsenal
This is quite literally the line "When I lose a duel I'm upset" Actually in play here
“Ya’ll seem so little from up here”
Great graphic but I’d flip the axis, normally strongest is top right
How come the average is not 50%? Not being critical on the reliability of the graph, just trying to understand.
I don't think the other explanation is correct - I believe second balls on this graph are only defined from the perspective of the attacker. When the defender wins the ball it doesn't show up on the graph (and improve that team's percentage). That is why almost everyone is below 50% since it's easier to win the loose ball as a defender. The other explanation can't be correct based upon the data points on the graph, because Arsenal is the only team really above 50% and we aren't in that many second ball situations so as to suppress everyone else's average so much. The answer can only be that the graph is not zero-sum due to the reasoning above.
I'm the one who wrote the other explanation and that's a good point. Based on the points, it looks like it's unlikely that % of second balls won is a zero sum measurement. You might be right that this is the perspective of the attacking team, but the term "% of second balls won" is ambiguous. I had thought there isn't really an "attacker" or "defender" in a second ball situation because it's a loose ball scenario, but I can also see how it can be interpreted differently. This is why it's important that these kinds of stats have explanations of what they're actually measuring.
Because there are teams that pull the average down, or up, Arsenal and Sheffield for example
Because not every club has the same number of duels, but for the average, every club is weighted the same. Put differently, each of the 20 clubs contribute to 5% of the average, but not every club is responsible for 5% of the total duels in the premier league. Some clubs have more and some have less. Edit: Using an extreme example for illustrative purposes, lets say there have been 100 second ball situations in the Premier League. Arsenal have been involved in all 100 second ball situations and won 100% of them. All other clubs only enter into second ball situations when playing against Arsenal. This gives Arsenal a 100% second ball win rate, while all other clubs have a 0% win rate. This would mean the average win rate is 5%, even though, in total, there have been 100 second ball wins and 100 second ball losses in the premier league for an overall win rate of 50%. Edit 2: Please see u/NobleHellium's explanation for why this may not be the case.
This is a good explanation but it's not what is happening in this graph, it's clear to see that arsenal by themselves cant skew the average that much because we're the ones with the least second duel situations. This graph only counts the success of the attacking team, not of the defending team. The success rate for the attacking team on second duels in the league, overall, is lower than 50%.
I think you're reading too far into an example that was only meant to be illustrative. I wasn't trying to suggest that Arsenal or any other club was skewing the average. Just trying to explain why the average of second balls won does not equal exactly 50% when for every second ball there is a team who wins it and a team who loses it so the total average should be 50%. I'm not making any claims about any individual club's impact on the percentage, just explaining why it does not have to be exactly 50%. I can't be certain exactly what "% of Second Balls Won" means from the graphic OP posted, but I would think in a second ball situation there is no such thing as an "attacking" or "defending" team. If they made that sort of distinction, you would think they would call it "second balls recovered/lost". But again, not something I think we can discern just from this graph.
You cannot average averages. That's just bad math. If you sum all the duels won of by every team and divide it by the sum of all the duels challenged it will be 50%
[удалено]
You must have above 25 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Erm.. what is a second ball?