Topic: Luis Alberto Suárez Díaz - 17 goals & X assists worth of 'I told you so'

[haste]

No it isn't. Seasons are won and lost in 6 games. Managers often make decisions to alter formations or change players on less than a 6 game sample.

City won the league with 2 minutes of play.  Should that be an adequate sample, based on your logic? 

[Titan]

In 2 games. 1 goal being a penalty that shouldn't have been.

As I said, our form over 10 games without Suarez was 7-2-1. So far, with Suarez back, it's 2-0-1. Lets wait 7 more games before we see if our form has improved with Suarez or not.

You're counting a League Cup tie at home to Notts County as part of your shite deluded nonsense? Hardly the same as a Cup tie at Old Trafford, where our record has been woeful for the past few years (bar the 4-1).

Our league form was 6-2-1 without Suarez. Our league form is 2-0-0 with Suarez so far.

Anyone can see that we've been better since Suarez has come back into the side.

[Halcyon Lissome]

You are lost. My comments about 2 MOTM performances were for Assaidi and not Sahin. I argued that 2 MOTM performances in a few appearances merited more game time. Based on those performance, I couldn't understand why he was frozen out.

I remember you did similar for Sahin, but I forgot you did it for Assaidi. As aforesaid, you have a history of this.

No it isn't. Seasons are won and lost in 6 games. Managers often make decisions to alter formations or change players on less than a 6 game sample.

No, garbage; irrefutable nonsense.

[Beninger]

But you are acting as if we haven't scored goals when he hasn't played. We put 3 past West Ham and Fulham without him, and 6 past Newcastle without him.

I admit, he has done well upon his return as I expected. I have said many times that Suarez will always score goals and will always make an impact. I was more concerned about the form of our team. The claim that people on here have made is that we are a better team with Suarez has to be backed up with an improvement of form when he returns. We still have to wait and see if over a larger sample (say 8 games), if he has made a difference to our form. So far so good, but he has only been back for 3 games.

First two words from my post were "This season"...

Do I think we need to make him the focal point?  No.  He might leave and we may have issues replacing that.  But I do think him slotting into a well oiled machine can do nothing but help.  Even last season he was doing the scoring when very few others were chipping in (pre Sturridge and Cou). 

[Smudgester]

In 2 games. 1 goal being a penalty that shouldn't have been.

As well as talking rubbish about sample sizes (3 is small but 6 isn't !!!) you also don't seem to have any idea about football, it was a definite penalty today.

[Rohit]

He was saying that Suarez is the reason that Ajax couldn't win the Dutch League, so unless we win the League with Suarez scoring a hat trick in the clincher, he will stick to his guns.
And even if that happens, he will turn around and say that it could have happened the same way even if Suarez was sold last summer, we just never got the chance to know it.

Lets just ignore the biggest factor in ajaxs success, in sacking Martin Jol for the De Boer. Cause that surely had nothing to do with their success. The agenda is sickening and misguided. Just because two events seem to occur doesn't mean there was causality behind, in this case Ajax winning leagues after he left.

[juan1001]

Lets just ignore the biggest factor in ajaxs success, in sacking Martin Jol for the De Boer. Cause that surely had nothing to do with their success. The agenda is sickening and misguided. Just because two events seem to occur doesn't mean there was causality behind, in this case Ajax winning leagues after he left.

Yeah. Suarez got Jol fired. Just like he got Kenny fired.

[LFC when it suits]

City won the league with 2 minutes of play.  Should that be an adequate sample, based on your logic? 

No, Man Utd's form in their last 6 games is what lost them the title. Just as City's form for about 6 games put Utd in poll positi

I remember you did similar for Sahin, but I forgot you did it for Assaidi. As aforesaid, you have a history of this.

I judge players on the available sample. With Suarez under Brendan Rodgers, we have 10 league games that he hasn't played. In those 10 games, 7-2-1. If there were more games, I would have used more games.

With Sahin, I was judging him on his Dortmund for where he was the best player in Germany 3 seasons ago (2 seasons at the time). You clearly have no clue.

No, garbage; irrefutable nonsense.

You are not to keen on stats when they don't suit your argument.

You're counting a League Cup tie at home to Notts County as part of your shite deluded nonsense? Hardly the same as a Cup tie at Old Trafford, where our record has been woeful for the past few years (bar the 4-1).

Our league form was 6-2-1 without Suarez. Our league form is 2-0-0 with Suarez so far.

Anyone can see that we've been better since Suarez has come back into the side.

It's only 2 games. We are actually 7-2-1 if you include West ham where we won without Suarez. As for being 2-0-0 with Suarez, that is a tiny sample size. If after 10 games, we have a better record than 7-2-1, then I will stand up and say I was chatting rubbish and I was wrong. Anything less and Suarez won't have improved our form.

Bottom line is that without Suarez, we have shown title winning form over a 10 game sample. That shows we have not missed him one bit because other players were able to step up and replace what he brought to the team. Since he has returned, we have won 2 games, which is great and Suarez has done well, but why not add the 3 consecutive draws to our sample that we got  before Suarez got banned? or does it not suit your argument?

[juan1001]

Seasons are won and lost in 6 games.

I guess that means we came second. We've qualified for CL, and there's no need to watch the rest of our games in 13/14.

P.S Utd. & City have already lost the title.

[vivabobbygraham]

Lipbool...top of the league!

[LFC when it suits]

First two words from my post were "This season"...

Do I think we need to make him the focal point?  No.  He might leave and we may have issues replacing that.  But I do think him slotting into a well oiled machine can do nothing but help.  Even last season he was doing the scoring when very few others were chipping in (pre Sturridge and Cou). 

I have always said, that when Suarez is playing, he will always score. However, if he leaves, we would have no trouble replacing him or improving as a team. All the evidence so far points to us being able to pick up points at a better rate than any time he has been in the team. Those are the facts.


Now that Suarez is no longer the focal point of the team, this could change. Sturridge is now the main man and rightly so.

[LFC when it suits]

I guess that means we came second. We've qualified for CL, and there's no need to watch the rest of our games in 13/14.

No, but form is usually judged over 6 games which gives a good indication of how a team is doing at a particular moment. If you can get a sample of more than 6 games, that is even better.

[Halcyon Lissome]

I judge players on the available sample. With Suarez under Brendan Rodgers, we have 10 league games that he hasn't played. In those 10 games, 7-2-1. If there were more games, I would have used more games.

Suarez has played more than 3 games with us.

Just sit down and think it over. If you told anyone that Liverpool don't need Suarez because he doesn't make them (us) a better team you'd be laughed out of the room.

With Sahin, I was judging him on his Dortmund for where he was the best player in Germany 3 seasons ago (2 seasons at the time). You clearly have no clue.

You judged him on his Dortmund form, disregarding the fact that he had been at Real for more than a year and had a serious injury during his time there. You just pick and choose.

You are not to keen on stats when they don't suit your argument.

No, it's a fact. Leagues aren't decided on 6 games; they're decided on 38 games.

[vivabobbygraham]

Lipbool...top of the league!

Who's the fucking causation of that?

[Pistolero]

I have always said, that when Suarez is playing, he will always score. However, if he leaves, we would have no trouble replacing him or improving as a team. All the evidence so far points to us being able to pick up points at a better rate than any time he has been in the team. Those are the facts.

look....you've been made to look a right tool with your anti--suarez piffle....and you're now just using the keyboard as a shovel with which to dig even further...........give it up and give your fingers a rest......you'll thank me later



...you're welcome

[Halcyon Lissome]

I have always said, that when Suarez is playing, he will always score. However, if he leaves, we would have no trouble replacing him or improving as a team. All the evidence so far points to us being able to pick up points at a better rate than any time he has been in the team. Those are the facts.


Now that Suarez is no longer the focal point of the team, this could change. Sturridge is now the main man and rightly so.

And yet despite the fact that with Gerrard being in the middle the whole year and that we've gotten a great start...you continually denigrate him.

You talk about performances when it suits you, results when it doesn't. You're clueless.

[Solomon Grundy]

2 wins and 1 loss in 3 games. Our form during our first 3 games without Suarez was 2 wins and 1 draw. Which one is better? Form is judged over 4-5 games at the minimum.

Fucking hell, your clutching at straws now aren't you.

[Beninger]

I have always said, that when Suarez is playing, he will always score. However, if he leaves, we would have no trouble replacing him or improving as a team. All the evidence so far points to us being able to pick up points at a better rate than any time he has been in the team. Those are the facts.

I think this is an issue of correlation and causation.  Like you said, we'll just have to wait and see what happens now that he is back. 

[LFC when it suits]

Suarez has played more than 3 games with us.

I know. We can include all those games if you want into the sample of how Liverpool do with Suarez. You want to know how that turns out?

Just sit down and think it over. If you told anyone that Liverpool don't need Suarez because he doesn't make them (us) a better team you'd be laughed out of the room.

This is not a valid point.

You judged him on his Dortmund form, disregarding the fact that he had been at Real for more than a year and had a serious injury during his time there. You just pick and choose.

I judged him on the last time he played football on a consistent basis.

No, it's a fact. Leagues aren't decided on 6 games; they're decided on 38 games.

So basically, you are saying that you can't judge a teams form unless you take a whole 38 game season?

[Halcyon Lissome]

I know. We can include all those games if you want into the sample of how Liverpool do with Suarez. You want to know how that turns out?

Are you thinking anymore? Simply taking points per game ratios from two periods and comparing does not give you a proper comparison. The team is far better now than what it was at the beginning of last year with Suarez carrying us.

This is not a valid point.

Of course it is. If it sounds stupid to you, sounds stupid to everyone else, then there is a good chance you need to rethink your bullshit, so at least it makes sense to one person.

I judged him on the last time he played football on a consistent basis.

Which was irrelevant since it was more than a year ago and he had a serious injury since then. There was no guarantee he'd be the same player. Even if he healed properly, there's no guarantee he'd be good for US.

So basically, you are saying that you can't judge a teams form unless you take a whole 38 game season?

It depends what you want to compare. But saying 6 games is enough to rule a team better with or better without a player is absolute nonsense.

[Solomon Grundy]

No, but form is usually judged over 6 games which gives a good indication of how a team is doing at a particular moment.

Says who?...You?

[El Lobo]

I have always said, that when Suarez is playing, he will always score. However, if he leaves, we would have no trouble replacing him or improving as a team. All the evidence so far points to us being able to pick up points at a better rate than any time he has been in the team. Those are the facts.


Now that Suarez is no longer the focal point of the team, this could change. Sturridge is now the main man and rightly so.

Mate, let it go.

If you're that keen on pushing this tiresome point that we perform better without Suarez, you need to go MUCH further than just 'our win percentage is better'. Who have we played without him? What formation? Match stats? Who else played? What about the stats with everyone else? Since Sturridge joined what are the stats with and without each one? Etc.

In the meantime, just sit back and enjoy waiting for us to drop points so you can say 'told you so'.

[juan1001]

I have always said, that when Suarez is playing, he will always score. However, if he leaves, we would have no trouble replacing him or improving as a team. All the evidence so far points to us being able to pick up points at a better rate than any time he has been in the team. Those are the facts.


Now that Suarez is no longer the focal point of the team, this could change. Sturridge is now the main man and rightly so.

Doesn't that go against your belief that we win and lose as a team and should build in that fashion with contributions from all areas and players?
Why can't you just drop the Suarez fixation and enjoy the season? Is it that important to you o prove that we are better without Suarez? Apparently FSG and Rodgers don't agree with you, maybe you should trust them, like everyone else does (whether they like it or not).

[LFC when it suits]

Are you thinking anymore? Simply taking points per game ratios from two periods and comparing does not give you a proper comparison. The team is far better now than what it was at the beginning of last year with Suarez carrying us.

I never said it wasn't. However, the reality is, when Suarez was out for 10 games, we picked up 23 points out of 30. Those are the facts. You can clearly deduce from those stats that we didn't miss Suarez for a number of games that amounts to a quarter of a season. If he is that important to the success of Liverpool, you have to ask, why didn't we miss him? Everyone could see how much we missed Lucas when he was out for an extended period of time. But with Suarez, there is nothing to suggest we missed him unless he goes on to improve our form in the next few weeks.

Of course it is. If it sounds stupid to you, sounds stupid to everyone else, then there is a good chance you need to rethink your bullshit, so at least it makes sense to one person.

Says the guy who get his opinion from whoscored.com.

Which was irrelevant since it was more than a year ago and he had a serious injury since then. There was no guarantee he'd be the same player. Even if he healed properly, there's no guarantee he'd be good for US.

You do realise that he was brought into the club based on they form he had shown a year previous? How could his form in Germany irrelevant? There is no guarantee any player would be good for us,

It depends what you want to compare. But saying 6 games is enough to rule a team better with or better without a player is absolute nonsense.

I am not using 6 games. I am using 10 games without him, which is a lot of games.  Would you agree or not?

[McSquared]

I know. We can include all those games if you want into the sample of how Liverpool do with Suarez. You want to know how that turns out?

This is not a valid point.

I judged him on the last time he played football on a consistent basis.


So basically, you are saying that you can't judge a teams form unless you take a whole 38 game season?

YAWN

[Il Capitano]

A 3 game sample is smaller than a 6 game sample. You do realise that? 6 games isn't a small sample by the way.

Jeez Louise, know when to stop making yourself look so small-time.

[LFC when it suits]

And yet despite the fact that with Gerrard being in the middle the whole year and that we've gotten a great start...you continually denigrate him.

You talk about performances when it suits you, results when it doesn't. You're clueless.

The midfield has been the biggest weakness in our start this season. Despite our great start, we could have had even more points if our midfield wasn't so poor and could control a game like they are supposed to. For example, our midfield letting Shelvey waltz through unmarked for the equaliser vs Swansea.

[Titan]

It's only 2 games. We are actually 7-2-1 if you include West ham where we won without Suarez. As for being 2-0-0 with Suarez, that is a tiny sample size. If after 10 games, we have a better record than 7-2-1, then I will stand up and say I was chatting rubbish and I was wrong. Anything less and Suarez won't have improved our form.

Bottom line is that without Suarez, we have shown title winning form over a 10 game sample. That shows we have not missed him one bit because other players were able to step up and replace what he brought to the team. Since he has returned, we have won 2 games, which is great and Suarez has done well, but why not add the 3 consecutive draws to our sample that we got  before Suarez got banned? or does it not suit your argument?

You're counting the West Ham game?

Seeing as you've been using stats in a certain way to suit your agenda, i will do the same:

Our League form this season without Suarez- 3-1-1. Our League form with Suarez- 2-0-0.

So there you have it, the stats prove that we are better with Suarez in the League this season than without. Just ignore the flaws in my argument as you have the same flaws in yours too, so you should be fine with it.

Oh and the 'title winning form' thing is hilarious

[Halcyon Lissome]

I never said it wasn't. However, the reality is, when Suarez was out for 10 games, we picked up 23 points out of 30. Those are the facts. You can clearly deduce from those stats that we didn't miss Suarez for a number of games that amounts to a quarter of a season. If he is that important to the success of Liverpool, you have to ask, why didn't we miss him? Everyone could see how much we missed Lucas when he was out for an extended period of time. But with Suarez, there is nothing to suggest we missed him unless he goes on to improve our form in the next few weeks.

Nonsense. You are making the same mistake, after you acknowledge the difference. The only way it would make a proper comparison is if you could take two extended periods, compare the team strength without Suarez vs with him; compare the strength of the opposition; compare game stats, individual stats, etc; then you'd have something beginning to look like a point.

You're just comparing two periods of completely different contexts, coming up with a points per game ratio (which is not an individual stat, it is just a team one) and comparing. That's about as stupid as it gets with using stats.

Says the guy who get his opinion from whoscored.com.

My opinions come from me; my stats come from whoscored.com

Or do you count each pass and convert percentages of the game in realtime? Maybe that's why you don't get to watch the game properly and want to hammer Suarez. 

You do realise that he was brought into the club based on they form he had shown a year previous? How could his form in Germany irrelevant? There is no guarantee any player would be good for us,

It's not totally irrelevant, but in terms of using it as a gauge of how good of a player he was/could be for Liverpool it is. If Messi goes to Chelsea after an ACL and doesn't score a goal for 2 years, you can't keep referring to his good times at Barca anymore. Yes, the reason he was sought after had relevance to his past; but beyond that he has to show himself.

I am not using 6 games. I am using 10 games without him, which is a lot of games.  Would you agree or not?

Of course not, you're using a sample without him and then 3 for this year; almost excluding the fact that he was brilliant for us when we were in a weaker side before.

And let's scratch all that. If you can't see how much he has already added to the team in the last 3 games (even the one we lost against United) then you simply don't have much a clue about football. And considering the theories I've read from yours truly in the past year doesn't really surprise me.

[juan1001]

So basically, you are saying that you can't judge a teams form unless you take a whole 38 game season?

Ten years from now nobody is going to care how Liverpool did for the ten games that Suarez was suspended. They are going to look at the record books and see how Liverpool did over the 38 games in 2012/13 and the 38 games in 2013/14.
You can judge a teams form over 5min, or a half, but nobody will care a year from now. It doesn't matter. The whole of the season, that's what matters. There will be highs and lows, it's how you deal with them over the long run that matters.

[Zoomers]

Nutmeg city.

[Yorkykopite]

3 games is a small sample. On top of that, the 3 game sample doesn't even show an improvement over our form without Suarez.

George Orwell called this 'doublethink'. It's a classic sign of bad faith. The first proposition obviously cancels out the second. But you want to say them both anyway because you've already made your mind up.

[elpistolero7]

Thank fuck we didn't sell him. He looks deadly with Sturridge, they have the potential to reach Torres-Gerrard levels, these two. Don't know how long they'll play together as I think this is most likely Suarez's last year here, but lets enjoy it while we can. He might be a questionable character at times, but he's one of the most talented players to ever pull on the red shirt. Lets hope him and Sturridge can fire us to 4th.

[Macedonian Red Reborn]

I still think that we should sell him in January, because we are a better team without him. Imagine what we could do with all that money.

[Bangin Them In]

Nutmeg city.

That is quite possibly the greatest meg ever seen by man

Unless you count Meg Ryan who was decent for a bit of time

[newterp]

he might be the king of turning and letting the ball run - it's great to see someone use that move so effectively.

[elbow]

I still think that we should sell him in January, because we are a better team without him. Imagine what we could do with all that money.

Buy Andy Carroll?

[elpistolero7]

Lfc 4 a while, heres something for you, mr. statto, read up on 'ceteris parabus' - all else equal. Your reasoning is so juvenile, its like a fucking child studying gcse's saying that a and b occur together, so therefore a must imply b, without taking into account any extenuating factors, in this case - team form, other injuries, time of the season, pressure the squad is under etc. Seriously, for a man with such an affinity for statistics, your knowledge of sample sizes and mitigating circumstances from a mathematical standpoint make you sound like an 8 year old.

Here's something to consider - football is a team game, just because we did well in 10 games without Suarez doesn't mean that he doesn't add to the side. Sure, our PPG is better without him in the side, but you fail to account for an adequate sample size, mitigating circumstances etc. So far this season, we've faced 3 sides that will likely finish in the top 10 (Southampton, United, Swansea). Only 1 of them will be top 6, that's a dead cert.

At the back end of last season (the games Suarez missed), we faced Newcastle, Everton, Fulham and QPR. 1 of them was a top 10 side. You see the quality of opposition over this 10 game stretch you harp on about? Now over the course of a 38 game season, you play every team twice, so you play Arsenal twice, Tottenham twice, Chelsea twice, United twice and City twice. We've had one out of those ten games over this period that you've been talking about. See what I'm getting at?

The only assumption I've made here is that Palace, Villa, Sunderland and Stoke will finish in the bottom half this season. Its a fairly reasonable one to make I think.

Post Rafa, we're clearly a team (at least in the league) that does well without pressure. There have been countless occasions in the last 3 years when our so called challengers for 4th have dropped points on a Saturday, and we've had the chance to close the gap, only to fuck up time after time when the opportunity presented itself. The pressure was off at the tail end of last season, further skewing your sample size and putting into question your apparent 'inference' from this. Or the fact that the managers philosophy took time to be understood by the players and it was natural for results to be better later on in the season than in the beginning?

Sometimes I wonder what team you support. And please, when you bring up stats, stop twisting them to suit what you want, cause you know they don't ever tell the whole story. If they did, Downing and Carroll would have torn the league up and Mr. Comolli would still be our Director of Football after getting a pay raise mind you.

[TSC]

Lfc 4 a while, heres something for you, mr. statto, read up on 'ceters parabus' - all else equal. Your reasoning is so juvenile, its like a fucking child studying gcse economics saying that a implies b,without taking into account any extenuating factors, in this case - team form, other injuries, time of the season, pressure the squad is under etc. Seriously, for a man with such an affinity for statistics, your knowledge of sample sizes and mitigating circumstances from a mathematical standpoint make you sound like an 8 year old.

Here's something to consider - football is a team game, just because we did well in 10 games without Suarez doesn't mean that he doesn't add to the side. Sure, our PPG is better without him in the side, but you fail to account for an adequate sample size, mitigating circumstances etc. So far this season, we've faced 3 sides that will likely finish in the top 10 (Southampton, United, Swansea). Only 1 of them will be top 6, that's a dead cert.

At the back end of last season (the games Suarez missed), we faced Newcastle, Everton, Fulham and QPR. 1 of them was a top 10 side. You see the quality of opposition over this 10 game stretch you harp on about? Now over the course of a 38 game season, you play every team twice, so you play Arsenal twice, Tottenham twice, Chelsea twice, United twice and City twice. We've had one out of those ten games over this period that you've been talking about. See what I'm getting at?

The only assumption I've made here is that Palace, Villa, Sunderland and Stoke will finish in the bottom half this season. Its a fairly reasonable one to make I believe.

Post Rafa, we're clearly a team (at least in the league) that does well without pressure. There have been countless occasions in the last 3 years when our so called challengers for 4th have dropped points on a Saturday, and we've had the chance to close the gap, only to fuck up time after time when the opportunity presented itself. The pressure was off at the tail end of last season, further skewing your sample size and putting into question your apparent 'inference' from this. Or the fact that the managers philosophy took time to be understood by the players and it was natural for results to be better later on in the season than in the beginning?

I'd love to hear your response to this. Ta

He's the forum clown mate.  Don't bother reasoning with him.  He spouts similar nonsense in threads re Gerrard.  He actually wishes Suarez and Gerrard didn't play for Liverpool.  I think he's some idiot who supports some other team and somehow has evaded the moderators.

[deadsetred]

We nearly let this guy go? (The fans I mean)