The 'Committee'

I agree, but I'd happily take a 6-5 win every game!

I don't mind either, if we could get an equivalent of Suarez here. The difference I believe is last season we have a free roaming agent in Suarez, who could be on the left, right, centre or nowhere to be seen and the opposition finds it difficult to play against us as we don't have a standard pattern of attack but this season everything has changed we're so rigid, oppositions can read our tactics like a book. 

I don't mind either, if we could get an equivalent of Suarez here. The difference I believe is last season we have a free roaming agent in Suarez, who could be on the left, right, centre or nowhere to be seen and the opposition finds it difficult to play against us as we don't have a standard pattern of attack but this season everything has changed we're so rigid, team can read our tactics like a book. 

Don't worry, Aspas is only out on loan!   

Don't worry, Aspas is only out on loan!   

Aspas. Lololol, I'd get Torres back any day.

The Clowns is what im calling them. We needed to improve one area in our team from last season and every single player we signed for defence is dropped.

We had to replace a man who contributed over fourty goals to the team we got a bunch of attackers who dont fit in the team with Balotelli and Lambert, Markovic who is still very raw, and even though we tried to flog off Borini he is the next best option for us at this point.

We are playing with the same team as last season but taking out all our goals from last season. The regression in quality is alarming.

Im not a fan of the DoF but you look at other clubs who hire proper football men to sign players and let the manager be a coach. That probably suits Brendan more than most.

The Clowns should be fired on the spot. And Ian Ayre needs to be removed from all footballing matters. A superb businesman who knows how to handle the off field decisions but he's in a key position signing players for us without a clue what hes doing.

The Clowns should be fired on the spot.

Having actually read the article I'd have to agree mate: Starting with this Coco...

* Michael Edwards (head of performance analysis): "A former video analyst whom Damien Comolli brought with him from Tottenham Hotspur, Edwards gained the trust of Liverpool's principal owner, John W. Henry, by presenting a statistical model for analysing potential signings.

Famously enamoured with Billy Beane's sabermetric approach to hiring baseball players, Henry believed that in the young Englishman he had a football equivalent."

The strange thing is; having sacked Comolli, FSG kept Edwards who then appointed Ian Graham as Liverpool's director of research.
 

* Ian Graham: "Holder of a PhD in theoretical physics, Graham had developed a computer programme designed to add discriminative value to player performance statistics provided by companies such as ProZone."

"When Rodgers, a scout or an agent suggested Liverpool sign a particular player, Edwards would have the player's numbers run through the Graham model. If the computer said no, the deal was off."

So there you have it: your starter for ten - two clowns who decide, after consulting numbers and a computer programme have a veto on who is good enough to play for Liverpool F.C. A computer programme which has been described, by an unnamed Premier League manager, whose club also utilised the Graham model... as no surprise.

"That guy was a serious nerd," he says. "And the program was ridiculous. The parameters were set from his own view of what a defender, midfielder or attacker should do. They were ludicrous and inaccurate."

Just to be clear: the article is pretty scathing on Brendan's role within the committee and the "stand-offs" [refusal to play Edwards' players] which ensued. Not playing these players was seen as the ultimate veto by Brendan, I suppose and something which the savvy amongst us noted way back.

Now... whether one wants to blame FSG for persisting with it under different guises, Brendan, Edwards/Graham, Ayre or the committee as a whole; one thing is for sure - this statistical, sabrematic/money-ball, transfer model [which picks players from a computer programme that adds "discriminative value to player performance statistics"  ]... sucks shitty ass.

It's time "The Committee" went and went for good. NO reincarnations this time 'round. NO shuffling the sh*te and calling it something different; NO more F***ing "discriminative value to player performance" and... NO repeating the mistakes then looking puzzled... Just get rid. 

HAPPY NEW YEAR. 

It's time "The Committee" went and went for good. NO reincarnations this time 'round. NO shuffling the sh*te and calling it something different; NO more f**king "discriminative value to player performance" and... NO repeating the mistakes then looking puzzled... Just get rid. 

HAPPY NEW YEAR. 

So we can do what? Sign more Lovrens and Borinis? Another five year contract for Gerrard perhaps?

If there is no committee we need a DOF. We need a mechanism that ensures the signings we make are right for the medium to long term interests of the club as well as the manager's needs.

This probably wouldn't matter so much if the usual snarks weren't ready to stick the knife between the manager's shoulder blades every time we lose a match but you can't have it both ways.

The problem with stat analysis, computer programmes and the like is that they are incapable of making a prediction to the future development of a player, incapable of mentally putting the pieces together to see how he would perform with others we already have. No computer programme would have picked up on the amount of improvement we saw in Suarez over three seasons for example, no computer programme could say that he was about to become one of the best players in the world.

it's about finding the right player for the right slot. Matic at Chelsea is a good example. In many ways a limited central midfielder, but AT WHAT HE DOES, IN THE TEAM HE DOES IT, an absolutely superb player who'd be my player of the season in the Premiership so far. Fitting in as he does with their more creative types and the style which they play.

If you look at potential "targets" we're linked with today, a computer programme wouldn't tell you much about Berahino for example, or Bony. In the latters case you don't need a programme to tell you he would definitely score goals for Liverpool, he's scored them everywhere else so why wouldn't he? You don't need a computer to tell he's not a great presser much like Balotelli, nor do you need one to see that he's as good a hold up striker as there is in the division, as well as being excellent at defending set pieces. You just need eyes for that, and then a judgement as to whether he would play better/worse with Sterling, Sturridge, Coutinho, Lallana and the like.

In the case of Berahino once again a computer programme would tell you little. Common sense would tell you that he's a headstrong young man off the pitch who needs to mature a little, that he's very much an unpolished diamond. A computer programme wouldn't track his runs across the line and wonder whether or not with a Coutinho feeding him if he might prosper. A programme wouldn't tell you that he instinctively hits it off both feet and has a good spring for not so tall fella, or that he has pace to burn as well excellent anticipation.

You don't need a programme for that, you just need eyes, then you need some judgement. To my mind we desperately need a striker in about a weeks time, and we ought to go all out for one of those two. Me? I'd take a punt on Berahino, but then I'm a punter. If we want to play it safe, we ought to take Bony. That said, as the computer will point out he'll be f*cking off to the African nations thing in about a month. See they do come in handy sometimes.   

Glad you've posted this up Mouse I've seen the article before and it's quite worrying if Brendan is being overruled by a computor programme that's been designed by someone with little or no footballing knowledge.  I have no problem with stats as an additional resource to be used in conjunction with scouting reports when we're looking at potential recruits but they should never be used as the deciding factor in which players we persue. 

FSG and Brendan must decide how we improve our recruitment process as so far it's the one area of their ownership that's holding the Club back.

You don't need a programme for that, you just need eyes, then you need some judgement.

Correct. Judgement and power Mick; power to act on your judgement.

Now... If I had the power; power to promote; power to sack; power to change things that clearly were not working - I'd start by admitting I got things wrong. I'd most likely look at admitting I was wrong to promote Ian Ayre to a position where he has influence on football matters; quickly followed by admitting that a committee which is governed by a computer programme is laughable and unworkable.

Having done that; I'd weigh up the options between a DoF (working closely with the manager, under very defined parameters) and giving the manager carte blanche to decide what team he puts together to decide how money will be spent and on which players. *

In each case there would obviously be a budget allocated. It would then be down to them [Manager & DoF or Manager's team] on how that money is spent. No restrictions, no computer programmes - just human eyes and human judgement.

Either option could then spend the money on players that they feel will improve the on-field performance of the team. There would be no ambiguity; no debate: the manger would stand or fall on those judgements.

* n.b.  My gut instinct would be a DoF/Manager set-up with only football people involved but either option, in my opinion, is better than any nerd, sat in front of a computer, running a programme he designed, to see if a player represents "value". 

Correct. Judgement and power Mick; power to act on your judgement.

Now... If I had the power; power to promote; power to sack; power to change things that clearly were not working - I'd start by admitting I got things wrong. I'd most likely look at admitting I was wrong to promote Ian Ayre to a position where he has influence on football matters; quickly followed by admitting that a committee which is governed by a computer programme is laughable and unworkable.

Having done that; I'd weigh up the options between a DoF (working closely with the manager, under very defined parameters) and giving the manager carte blanche to decide what team he puts together to decide how money will be spent and on which players. *

In each case there would obviously be a budget allocated. It would then be down to them [Manager & DoF or Manager's team] on how that money is spent. No restrictions, no computer programmes - just human eyes and human judgement.

Either option could then spend the money on players that they feel will improve the on-field performance of the team. There would be no ambiguity; no debate: the manger would stand or fall on those judgements.

* n.b.  My gut instinct would be a DoF/Manager set-up with only football people involved but either option, in my opinion, is better than any nerd, sat in front of a computer, running a programme he designed, to see if a player represents "value". 

DOF - tried with Comolli and a "footballing man" - ended up with Andy Carroll, Downing, Adam, Coates etc.

And since Brendan has explicity said he wouldn't work with a DOF either we get a new manager or we can the idea.

Pretty obvious really - so what's your bright idea to solve the problems we actually have?

The problem with stat analysis, computer programmes and the like is that they are incapable of making a prediction to the future development of a player, incapable of mentally putting the pieces together to see how he would perform with others we already have. No computer programme would have picked up on the amount of improvement we saw in Suarez over three seasons for example, no computer programme could say that he was about to become one of the best players in the world.

it's about finding the right player for the right slot. Matic at Chelsea is a good example. In many ways a limited central midfielder, but AT WHAT HE DOES, IN THE TEAM HE DOES IT, an absolutely superb player who'd be my player of the season in the Premiership so far. Fitting in as he does with their more creative types and the style which they play.

If you look at potential "targets" we're linked with today, a computer programme wouldn't tell you much about Berahino for example, or Bony. In the latters case you don't need a programme to tell you he would definitely score goals for Liverpool, he's scored them everywhere else so why wouldn't he? You don't need a computer to tell he's not a great presser much like Balotelli, nor do you need one to see that he's as good a hold up striker as there is in the division, as well as being excellent at defending set pieces. You just need eyes for that, and then a judgement as to whether he would play better/worse with Sterling, Sturridge, Coutinho, Lallana and the like.

In the case of Berahino once again a computer programme would tell you little. Common sense would tell you that he's a headstrong young man off the pitch who needs to mature a little, that he's very much an unpolished diamond. A computer programme wouldn't track his runs across the line and wonder whether or not with a Coutinho feeding him if he might prosper. A programme wouldn't tell you that he instinctively hits it off both feet and has a good spring for not so tall fella, or that he has pace to burn as well excellent anticipation.

You don't need a programme for that, you just need eyes, then you need some judgement. To my mind we desperately need a striker in about a weeks time, and we ought to go all out for one of those two. Me? I'd take a punt on Berahino, but then I'm a punter. If we want to play it safe, we ought to take Bony. That said, as the computer will point out he'll be f*cking off to the African nations thing in about a month. See they do come in handy sometimes.   

What statistical modelling does is provide you with focus on who to look at, especially when it comes to foreign leagues. For example, you're looking for a play maker so you run analysis on pass completion rate, accuracy percentage etc. and come up with a short list for your scouts to watch and assess. What seems to be going wrong at Liverpool is decisions are being made on the back of the statistics rather than it being used as a tool to help the scouting team. Either that or we have the single worst scouting team in the history of Football and if any of us where to get our job as consistently and comprehensively wrong as they are, we'd not be in a job. As I've said elsewhere, the committee as an organisation is neither something unique to us nor something inherently misguided. It's the structure behind it that is at fault, i.e. either the policies or the people.

I have no problem with stats as an additional resource to be used in conjunction with scouting reports when we're looking at potential recruits but they should never be used as the deciding factor in which players we persue.

Neither have I debs.

I do have a problem with someone sat in front of a computer running a programme, he designed, coming up with an equation which decides whether or not a player represents "value". Anyone can see it doesn't work... the proof of the pudding and all that?

FSG and Brendan must decide how we improve our recruitment process as so far it's the one area of their ownership that's holding the Club back.

Indeed. Truth is: only a F***ing muppet or FSG's PR department (clutching at straws to try to save face) would deny the current model is pure sh*te. FSG need to dismantle the current committee and sit down with Brendan to look at what's actually needed.

Like I said earlier, either option: [a DoF (which worked way better than this sh*t), working closely with Brendan or Brendan being able to select his own set-up, without a DoF.]  in my opinion, is better than any nerd, sat in front of a computer, running a programme he designed, to see if a player represents "value".

Although one thing's for sure: If enough noise is made FSG will act - they don't like it when the spotlight, highlighting their failures, is turned on them. That sh*t will soon be running down hill again. 

Neither have I debs.

I do have a problem with someone sat in front of a computer running a programme, he designed, coming up with an equation which decides whether or not a player represents "value". Anyone can see it doesn't work... the proof of the pudding and all that?
Indeed. Truth is: only a F***ing muppet or FSG's PR department (clutching at straws to try to save face) would deny the current model is pure sh*te. FSG need to dismantle the current committee and sit down with Brendan to look at what's actually needed.

Like I said earlier, either option: [a DoF (which worked way better than this sh*t), working closely with Brendan or Brendan being able to select his own set-up, without a DoF.]  in my opinion, is better than any nerd, sat in front of a computer, running a programme he designed, to see if a player represents "value".

Although one thing's for sure: If enough noise is made FSG will act - they don't like it when the spotlight, highlighting their failures, is turned on them. That sh*t will soon be running down hill again. 

They're a sucker for anyone who uses numbers to prove a point mate.  Maybe Brendan needs to come up with some stats to show them a different way.

Stats on their own are as useless as eyewitness statements on their own.  For some reason, I highly doubt they use stats alone though.

They're a sucker for anyone who uses numbers to prove a point mate.  Maybe Brendan needs to come up with some stats to show them a different way.

*Copy and pastes league table and forwards

This computer program works just fine for the Red Sox. Maybe they just need a time to tune it up with us?

This computer program works just fine for the Red Sox. Maybe they just need a time to tune it up with us?

Completely different games and financial worlds though I'm afraid

I don't know, adding a noise term to account for variability that is poorly understood is reasonable. I don't know why the designer would have to understand football either. If we are getting it wrong now the data could still be very useful in correcting the program .... If we had a team of Daleks

This computer program works just fine for the Red Sox. Maybe they just need a time to tune it up with us?

We might aswell relocate to the States and buy some rounders bats in that case.

This computer program works just fine for the Red Sox. Maybe they just need a time to tune it up with us?

A computer programme would work well for a computerised game such as baseball.
Football is an incalculably different concept.
That no doubt is the quandary that FSG attempt to juggle.

This computer program works just fine for the Red Sox. Maybe they just need a time to tune it up with us?

Bit of a different game. The mechanics in baseball (and other sports like cricket, golf etc.) are not exposed to human elements as much as football. I'm struggling to find a way to say what I'm trying to, but essentially football is not like clockwork whereas those other sports are largely a game of repetition. Bit of a rough description but hopefully you get what I'm saying.

Therefore the math in baseball is very relevant, compared to football where its not really. It can be useful but shouldn't be the overruling factor in deciding who to sign.

Plus, given the amount of money we've pissed away on sub-standard players it should click that moneyball or whatever you want to call it doesn't really work in football.

They've invested (loose term, i don't want to spark a debate with the term "invested") enough in players for us to see more than what we're seeing. But we're not. Hopefully something changes in the player recruitment process.

We might aswell relocate to the States and buy some rounders bats in that case.

 
I was just jesting mate. Nothing to do till the KO. Hopefully Van Barneveld&co and the ski jumpers will keep me entertained until another Mignolet show..