Statistically, Arteta makes less fouls, more tackles, clearances and interceptions, blocks more shots and accumulates less bookings than Wanyama.
----------------------------------------------
Most of these are wrong because on a per minute basis, they're clearly in favour of Wanyama. Of course Arteta commits less fouls and bookings, cos he's a soft touch who often gets overrun and bounces off players.
I did factor that in, and if you do the maths you will see Arteta makes more tackles/interceptions/etc per games.
-----------------------------------------
I use per minute metrics. http://www.liverpoolfc.com/statistics/player-comparison
If you factor that Wanyama comes out on top in many of those stats.
Wanyama is at his level, he looked good today but the last thing we need is an average player earning 70k a week for 4/5 years and using a valuable squad spot. Arsenal are far more ambitious than settling for Wanyama
And that he was dispossessed 12 times in 31 games, whereas Wanyama lost out 30 times in 23 games.
-----------------------------------------------
Wilshere and Ramsey also get dispossessed far more than Arteta. It's not hard to figure out why. Arteta rarely runs with the ball, so he's rarely caught on it.
No they aren't
Wanyama - 2.8 tackles per game, 1.4 interceptions per game, 2 fouls per game
Arteta - 3.4 tackles per game, 2 interceptions per game, 1.1 fouls per game
Do the maths.
Yea and Wanyama is always bringing the ball forward, isn't he?
Btw Wanyama dispossessed 1.3 times per game, Ramsey and Wilshere both 1.2
fack off with these stats you ret.ards, just watch with your eyes.
and if you watch this donkey with your eyes, you will see he's in the wrong sport.
can't believe I suggested him as an option a while back, I'd only seen him in that Barca a game
I don't need stats to tell me Wanyama is shít. But it is fun using them to make a complete fool of Sheriff
Wanyama - 2.8 tackles per game, 1.4 interceptions per game, 2 fouls per game
Arteta - 3.4 tackles per game, 2 interceptions per game, 1.1 fouls per game
Do the maths.
---------------------------------------------------
Your tackling stats are wrong. Look at my link. And use the per minute metric instead.
Btw Wanyama dispossessed 1.3 times per game, Ramsey and Wilshere both 1.2
---------------------------------------
And how is this relevant. I said Arteta doesn't get dispossessed as much as those players cos he rarely runs with the ball. He'd rather make a few sideways passes. So why compare Wanyama with Wilshere and Ramsey?
I don't need stats to tell me Wanyama is shít. But it is fun using them to make a complete fool of Sheriff
-----------------------------------------
In your dreams pal. Your stats have been manipulated BS with no context. I also like how Wanyama is meant to be a sloppy player but his tackling success percentage is in the 80's while Arteta's is in the 60's.
They aren't my stats, they are from whoscored, every single stat I've posted has been from that website, both the total figures and the figures per game so I'm not sure why you are saying I've manipulated anything. I would guess it is because you are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong. Keep digging
I never brought up Wilshere/Ramsey You brought them up, Wanyama doesn't run with the ball either so why does he lose the ball so much? More so than Wilshere/Ramsey who often run with the ball?
They aren't my stats, they are from whoscored, every single stat I've posted has been from that website, both the total figures and the figures per game so I'm not sure why you are saying I've manipulated anything. I would guess it is because you are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong. Keep digging
---------------------------------------
I've also linked you to my own stats site which directly compares from OPTA stats and it tells me you've got something wrong in a good couple of your figures. I've also told you per minute metrics give a more accurate picture rather than per game. You can keep "embarrassing" me in your own mind like a playground kid.
Arteta played 2407 minutes and made 105 tackles = 22.92 minutes per tackle.
Wanyama player 1659 minutes and made 65 tackles = 25.52 minutes per tackle.
Now stop embarrassing yourself
never brought up Wilshere/Ramsey You brought them up, Wanyama doesn't run with the ball either so why does he lose the ball so much? More so than Wilshere/Ramsey who often run with the ball?
---------------------------------------
Wanyama runs with the ball a lot more than Arteta. Your own stats show he makes more dribbling runs. That was my comparison which you somehow turned into a Wilshere/Ramsey vs Wanyama one. Of course Wilshere and Ramsey are much better on the ball. I don't rate Wanyama because he's as silky as Iniesta on the ball.
Arteta played 2407 minutes and made 105 tackles = 22.92 minutes per tackle.
Wanyama player 1659 minutes and made 65 tackles = 25.52 minutes per tackle.
-----------------------------------
Now I see why the mug has been getting it wrong. That's why I talk abut stats with context. You'v been computing tackles MADE rather than tackles WON. Wanyama won 53 of his 65 tackles. Arteta only won 71 of his 105. Do the math.
lmao 16 dribbles in 23 games and you say he runs with the ball a lot. You are facking demented. If you don't rate him for being silky on the ball, why do you rate him because even Arteta is better than him defensively
That's why Isaid you've been parroting manipulated BS. Why is tackles made more relevant than tackles actually won?
Not once did I say tackles won.
lmao 16 dribbles in 23 games and you say he runs with the ball a lot. You are facking demented. If you don't rate him for being silky on the ball, why do you rate him because even Arteta is better than him defensively
----------------------------------------------------
Because Arteta is NOT better than him defensively at all. And he still dribbles more than Arteta.
this reminds me of the time a young, inexperienced batmoanu wanted us to sign tiote.
he's obviously learnt from that is now fighting against the delusion he used to represent. unreal recovery.
Not once did I say tackles won.
--------------------------------------------
That's the point. You picked the crap stat that suits your crap argument.
Arteta is better than him defensively, because Wanyama is a cleaner tackler doesn't make him better defensively. How an earth has Arteta made so many more tackles when we have far better possession stats than Southampton? How come he intercepts the ball far more than Wanyama when he doesn't even have the legs to get around the pitch anymore?
And Kam I never wanted us to sign Tiote
Sign in if you want to comment
Wanyama
Page 2 of 3
posted on 17/8/14
Statistically, Arteta makes less fouls, more tackles, clearances and interceptions, blocks more shots and accumulates less bookings than Wanyama.
----------------------------------------------
Most of these are wrong because on a per minute basis, they're clearly in favour of Wanyama. Of course Arteta commits less fouls and bookings, cos he's a soft touch who often gets overrun and bounces off players.
posted on 17/8/14
I did factor that in, and if you do the maths you will see Arteta makes more tackles/interceptions/etc per games.
-----------------------------------------
I use per minute metrics. http://www.liverpoolfc.com/statistics/player-comparison
If you factor that Wanyama comes out on top in many of those stats.
posted on 17/8/14
Wanyama is at his level, he looked good today but the last thing we need is an average player earning 70k a week for 4/5 years and using a valuable squad spot. Arsenal are far more ambitious than settling for Wanyama
posted on 17/8/14
And that he was dispossessed 12 times in 31 games, whereas Wanyama lost out 30 times in 23 games.
-----------------------------------------------
Wilshere and Ramsey also get dispossessed far more than Arteta. It's not hard to figure out why. Arteta rarely runs with the ball, so he's rarely caught on it.
posted on 17/8/14
No they aren't
Wanyama - 2.8 tackles per game, 1.4 interceptions per game, 2 fouls per game
Arteta - 3.4 tackles per game, 2 interceptions per game, 1.1 fouls per game
Do the maths.
posted on 17/8/14
Yea and Wanyama is always bringing the ball forward, isn't he?
posted on 17/8/14
Btw Wanyama dispossessed 1.3 times per game, Ramsey and Wilshere both 1.2
posted on 17/8/14
fack off with these stats you ret.ards, just watch with your eyes.
and if you watch this donkey with your eyes, you will see he's in the wrong sport.
can't believe I suggested him as an option a while back, I'd only seen him in that Barca a game
posted on 17/8/14
I don't need stats to tell me Wanyama is shít. But it is fun using them to make a complete fool of Sheriff
posted on 17/8/14
Wanyama - 2.8 tackles per game, 1.4 interceptions per game, 2 fouls per game
Arteta - 3.4 tackles per game, 2 interceptions per game, 1.1 fouls per game
Do the maths.
---------------------------------------------------
Your tackling stats are wrong. Look at my link. And use the per minute metric instead.
posted on 17/8/14
Btw Wanyama dispossessed 1.3 times per game, Ramsey and Wilshere both 1.2
---------------------------------------
And how is this relevant. I said Arteta doesn't get dispossessed as much as those players cos he rarely runs with the ball. He'd rather make a few sideways passes. So why compare Wanyama with Wilshere and Ramsey?
posted on 17/8/14
I don't need stats to tell me Wanyama is shít. But it is fun using them to make a complete fool of Sheriff
-----------------------------------------
In your dreams pal. Your stats have been manipulated BS with no context. I also like how Wanyama is meant to be a sloppy player but his tackling success percentage is in the 80's while Arteta's is in the 60's.
posted on 17/8/14
They aren't my stats, they are from whoscored, every single stat I've posted has been from that website, both the total figures and the figures per game so I'm not sure why you are saying I've manipulated anything. I would guess it is because you are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong. Keep digging
posted on 17/8/14
I never brought up Wilshere/Ramsey You brought them up, Wanyama doesn't run with the ball either so why does he lose the ball so much? More so than Wilshere/Ramsey who often run with the ball?
posted on 17/8/14
They aren't my stats, they are from whoscored, every single stat I've posted has been from that website, both the total figures and the figures per game so I'm not sure why you are saying I've manipulated anything. I would guess it is because you are too embarrassed to admit you are wrong. Keep digging
---------------------------------------
I've also linked you to my own stats site which directly compares from OPTA stats and it tells me you've got something wrong in a good couple of your figures. I've also told you per minute metrics give a more accurate picture rather than per game. You can keep "embarrassing" me in your own mind like a playground kid.
posted on 17/8/14
Arteta played 2407 minutes and made 105 tackles = 22.92 minutes per tackle.
Wanyama player 1659 minutes and made 65 tackles = 25.52 minutes per tackle.
Now stop embarrassing yourself
posted on 17/8/14
never brought up Wilshere/Ramsey You brought them up, Wanyama doesn't run with the ball either so why does he lose the ball so much? More so than Wilshere/Ramsey who often run with the ball?
---------------------------------------
Wanyama runs with the ball a lot more than Arteta. Your own stats show he makes more dribbling runs. That was my comparison which you somehow turned into a Wilshere/Ramsey vs Wanyama one. Of course Wilshere and Ramsey are much better on the ball. I don't rate Wanyama because he's as silky as Iniesta on the ball.
posted on 17/8/14
Arteta played 2407 minutes and made 105 tackles = 22.92 minutes per tackle.
Wanyama player 1659 minutes and made 65 tackles = 25.52 minutes per tackle.
-----------------------------------
Now I see why the mug has been getting it wrong. That's why I talk abut stats with context. You'v been computing tackles MADE rather than tackles WON. Wanyama won 53 of his 65 tackles. Arteta only won 71 of his 105. Do the math.
posted on 17/8/14
lmao 16 dribbles in 23 games and you say he runs with the ball a lot. You are facking demented. If you don't rate him for being silky on the ball, why do you rate him because even Arteta is better than him defensively
posted on 17/8/14
That's why Isaid you've been parroting manipulated BS. Why is tackles made more relevant than tackles actually won?
posted on 17/8/14
Not once did I say tackles won.
posted on 17/8/14
lmao 16 dribbles in 23 games and you say he runs with the ball a lot. You are facking demented. If you don't rate him for being silky on the ball, why do you rate him because even Arteta is better than him defensively
----------------------------------------------------
Because Arteta is NOT better than him defensively at all. And he still dribbles more than Arteta.
posted on 17/8/14
this reminds me of the time a young, inexperienced batmoanu wanted us to sign tiote.
he's obviously learnt from that is now fighting against the delusion he used to represent. unreal recovery.
posted on 17/8/14
Not once did I say tackles won.
--------------------------------------------
That's the point. You picked the crap stat that suits your crap argument.
posted on 17/8/14
Arteta is better than him defensively, because Wanyama is a cleaner tackler doesn't make him better defensively. How an earth has Arteta made so many more tackles when we have far better possession stats than Southampton? How come he intercepts the ball far more than Wanyama when he doesn't even have the legs to get around the pitch anymore?
And Kam I never wanted us to sign Tiote
Page 2 of 3