Certainly against a team like Saudi Arabia - they are no mugs on the ball if you give them time but when you press them they panic and play rushed balls and the quality goes out of the window. It was interesting watching them against Uruguay as they weren't pressing them at all and they looked better in that area for it. The problem was ultimately, Uruguay have great defenders and they were always going to struggle getting past them.
I was comparing France 2016 rather than south Africa because 1) is a similar climate to this tourny 2) more recent to account for the tactics discussion since generally nations won't change too drastically in that time and 3) to draw a comparison with this "host nation boost" people have mentioned to explain the massive difference between Russia and the rest.
Apparently a high press is uniquely Russian in this tournament since no other country of the 32 can touch them for distance covered as yet, and they are also having a massive "host nation boost" on top of that despite the fact that nobody has been able to come up with any figures to support that such a correlation between hosting a tournament and distance covered exists (not saying it doesn't but where is the evidence?)
@Manicmania with further statistics coming out, especially the one about how far out the Russians are withing the standard deviation it is interesting for sure. As said and you agree with, the data at the moment is very small and there are many more factors that need to be considered and ones already mentioned such as climate, location of matches played, time of matches played, tactics, opposition, adrenaline, intensity etc.
At the latter stages of the tournament or at the end, when further data is released, it is then we can fully analyse the position of which it will portray itself. There is certainly a cause of concern with the drastic changes in distance covered and when in comparison to other nations who people may class them to be 'fitter'. However, without the variables we need, it doesn't accumulate to much.
You made a very good point in the amount of distance covered that has increased between this World Cup and previous tournaments. As Russia covered an average of 110km over their group matches, to an average of around116.5km, the extra 6.5km is only around an additional 500-650m per player throughout the match when you take into consideration substitutions. That could easily be achieved through a change of tactic, approach, pressing intensity, style of play, or a simple fact that they may be fitter than they were two years ago. Of course, drugs for performance enhancement could be what has done this, but we simply do not know at present with the data we have available to us.
As when I mentioned about the fact they may be hyped up more by being the home nation, therefore being able to run that extra distance, this has been proven by much research of the psychological theory of social facilitation and home advantage, there is a lot of reading around these subjects, but they can further point towards how performance is improved because of these two theories alone.
Here's a slightly different take on the probabilities graphic, showing how the #WorldCup round of 16 is likely to shape up as it stands: https://t.co/rdcIdANeDw
@Manicmania with further statistics coming out, especially the one about how far out the Russians are withing the standard deviation it is interesting for sure. As said and you agree with, the data at the moment is very small and there are many more factors that need to be considered and ones already mentioned such as climate, location of matches played, time of matches played, tactics, opposition, adrenaline, intensity etc.
At the latter stages of the tournament or at the end, when further data is released, it is then we can fully analyse the position of which it will portray itself. There is certainly a cause of concern with the drastic changes in distance covered and when in comparison to other nations who people may class them to be 'fitter'. However, without the variables we need, it doesn't accumulate to much.
You made a very good point in the amount of distance covered that has increased between this World Cup and previous tournaments. As Russia covered an average of 110km over their group matches, to an average of around116.5km, the extra 6.5km is only around an additional 500-650m per player throughout the match when you take into consideration substitutions. That could easily be achieved through a change of tactic, approach, pressing intensity, style of play, or a simple fact that they may be fitter than they were two years ago. Of course, drugs for performance enhancement could be what has done this, but we simply do not know at present with the data we have available to us.
As when I mentioned about the fact they may be hyped up more by being the home nation, therefore being able to run that extra distance, this has been proven by much research of the psychological theory of social facilitation and home advantage, there is a lot of reading around these subjects, but they can further point towards how performance is improved because of these two theories alone.
Fair points and also worth noting I am NOT stating that I believe Russia are doping at this stage, my only point is there is potentially a case to answer and i'm exploring the possibility and trying to use facts and data to do that - and I again point out we don't have nearly enough yet to be sure but i'm still finding it interesting!
Another thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the matches seem to be lasting longer than previous tournaments, Russia's first game had 8 minutes of injury time for example so that could also be a factor.
I was sceptical about your point about the Russian team becoming fitter so I had a quick look at the average age of the squad in 2016 compared to now - I assumed it would have gone up since we are hearing a lot about how Russia are an aging team but people might be surprised to know it has actually gone down slightly (so more fake news bbc!) from 29.3 to 28.8.
I understand that there will be lots of data around home advantage and the correlation to improved performance but the numbers seem overly high in this case for me and having looked at a couple of other host nations I am not seeing it yet (to be fair I have only looked at France and Brazil so far and their footballing style as pointed out may be why I haven't seen this reflected in their stats in terms of distance covered, where both sides score exceptionally low in their respective tournaments)
It is also worth pointing out that Russia's isn't the highest individual total KM covered in a match I have come across, Italy managed 119.7KM in their opening game of Euro 2016.
Spain are my tip for winners, but they do look vulnerable defensively. With some decent luck, England could beat them. They do not like bodies in the box against them.
I actually think Spain would be the worse team for England to play, they are the best side with the ball and we aren't that good without it so only one winner there. Any other side we play we will have a chance but Spain are too solid and unless they start overloading we would struggle to score, best chance on the counter.
Ifs and buts, this is anyones world cup and the most wide open in a while.
Anyone else think Jedinak has the beard of the tournament?
Anyone remember the Family Guy episode where Peter grew the beard and kept the baby birds in it, thats what he reminds me off(maybe Jedinak has some baby birds in his
Tell you what if Oz can get a winner here it could blow this group wide open for the final game, especially if Peru can somehow nick a point off France as well.
Talking about left backs and Evra said since he left Young has been the best left back at Man Utd. Ryan Giggs said United havent had a good LB since Irwin. Evra and Giggs burst out laughing and Keane smiled
Comments
1) is a similar climate to this tourny
2) more recent to account for the tactics discussion since generally nations won't change too drastically in that time and
3) to draw a comparison with this "host nation boost" people have mentioned to explain the massive difference between Russia and the rest.
Apparently a high press is uniquely Russian in this tournament since no other country of the 32 can touch them for distance covered as yet, and they are also having a massive "host nation boost" on top of that despite the fact that nobody has been able to come up with any figures to support that such a correlation between hosting a tournament and distance covered exists (not saying it doesn't but where is the evidence?)
At the latter stages of the tournament or at the end, when further data is released, it is then we can fully analyse the position of which it will portray itself. There is certainly a cause of concern with the drastic changes in distance covered and when in comparison to other nations who people may class them to be 'fitter'. However, without the variables we need, it doesn't accumulate to much.
You made a very good point in the amount of distance covered that has increased between this World Cup and previous tournaments. As Russia covered an average of 110km over their group matches, to an average of around116.5km, the extra 6.5km is only around an additional 500-650m per player throughout the match when you take into consideration substitutions. That could easily be achieved through a change of tactic, approach, pressing intensity, style of play, or a simple fact that they may be fitter than they were two years ago. Of course, drugs for performance enhancement could be what has done this, but we simply do not know at present with the data we have available to us.
As when I mentioned about the fact they may be hyped up more by being the home nation, therefore being able to run that extra distance, this has been proven by much research of the psychological theory of social facilitation and home advantage, there is a lot of reading around these subjects, but they can further point towards how performance is improved because of these two theories alone.
Here's a slightly different take on the probabilities graphic, showing how the #WorldCup round of 16 is likely to shape up as it stands: https://t.co/rdcIdANeDw
Another thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the matches seem to be lasting longer than previous tournaments, Russia's first game had 8 minutes of injury time for example so that could also be a factor.
I was sceptical about your point about the Russian team becoming fitter so I had a quick look at the average age of the squad in 2016 compared to now - I assumed it would have gone up since we are hearing a lot about how Russia are an aging team but people might be surprised to know it has actually gone down slightly (so more fake news bbc!) from 29.3 to 28.8.
I understand that there will be lots of data around home advantage and the correlation to improved performance but the numbers seem overly high in this case for me and having looked at a couple of other host nations I am not seeing it yet (to be fair I have only looked at France and Brazil so far and their footballing style as pointed out may be why I haven't seen this reflected in their stats in terms of distance covered, where both sides score exceptionally low in their respective tournaments)
It is also worth pointing out that Russia's isn't the highest individual total KM covered in a match I have come across, Italy managed 119.7KM in their opening game of Euro 2016.
Ifs and buts, this is anyones world cup and the most wide open in a while.
France to beat Denmark
Australia to beat Peru
France and Australia through unless Denmark win this match
Obviously joking I love feminism
Also very interesting in Group D if the Argies don't beat Croatia and Iceland beat Nigeria.
Talking about left backs and Evra said since he left Young has been the best left back at Man Utd.
Ryan Giggs said United havent had a good LB since Irwin.
Evra and Giggs burst out laughing and Keane smiled