Stats Shot | Round 5

Another week of big scorelines in the Hyundai A-League - but what do the rest of the numbers reveal?

Another week of big scorelines in the Hyundai A-League - but what do the rest of the numbers reveal?

Central Coast Mariners v Sydney FC The scoreline tells one story from this game but what about the rest of the numbers?

Possession: Mariners 49 % / Sydney 51 % Total shots: Mariners 19 / Sydney 9; on target: 13 / 3 Tackles: Mariners 9 / Sydney 21; effectiveness: 82% / 88% Completed passes: Mariners 327 / Sydney 383; accuracy: 82% / 81% Crosses: Mariners 18 / Sydney 8 Goalkeeper saves: Mariners 1 / Sydney 4

If anything, these figures show you not to place your trusts in statistics. If you didn-t know the score, you might think this was an even contest - apart from some key indicators.

The possession and passing stats are very close, with Sydney apparently even having slightly more of the ball - although perhaps this was just Ivan Necevski picking it out of his net.

But it-s the goal-threat where the Mariners dominate: 19 shots in total, with 13 on target - compared to just three from Sydney. See also Necevski-s four saves to Matt Ryan-s one.

And then there-s the tackles - Sydney made more than double of their hosts, which shows how much pressure they were under, compared to the Mariners nine challenges, which almost seems like an easy ride.

Perth Glory v Newcastle Jets A five-goal thriller at nib Stadium and, as you-d expect with these teams, plenty to talk about. Possession: Glory 50 % / Jets 50 % Total shots: Glory 10 / Jets 10; on target: 7 / 5 Tackles: Glory 23 / Jets 15; effectiveness: 85% / 79% Completed passes: Glory 218 / Jets 280; accuracy: 75% / 79% Crosses: Glory 11 / Jets 15; corners: 8 / 4

There are a lot of similarities between Perth and Newcastle; they shared possession, had the same number of shots (although Perth got a couple more on target) and made almost the same number of passes (The Jets were slightly more accurate). It-s also worth nothing that both sides got four yellow cards each.

The differences are slight but serve to illustrate the nature of this game. Glory made 23 tackles - more than Sydney FC in their loss to Central Coast - while the Jets also made a combative 15 challenges.

Brisbane Roar v Adelaide United An uneven affair at Suncorp Stadium, the Roar had the better of the game - not that it does Rado Vidosic much help.

Possession: Roar 59 % / Adelaide 41 % Total shots: Roar 24 / Adelaide 6; on target: 12 / 3 Tackles: Roar 21 / Adelaide 35; effectiveness: 81% / 70% Completed passes: Roar 522 / Adelaide 228; accuracy: 90% / 81% Crosses: Roar 35 / Adelaide 7 Goalkeeper saves: Roar 0 / Adelaide 4

Just check out some of those numbers. Brisbane had almost 60 per cent of the ball, 24 shots, with 12 on target, made more than double the number of passes and put 35 crosses into the box. And Michael Theo didn-t have make a single save.

It-s hard to understand exactly how Brisbane didn-t score more than the Mariners but the Reds put up much more stubborn resistance, making a whopping 35 tackles as the tried to disrupt their hosts. Interestingly, their tackle effectiveness (defined as “an intervention that is the main reason the player with the ball loses possession, whether or not the tackler ends up with the ball”) was much lower than Brisbane-s.

Melbourne Victory v Wellington Phoenix Melbourne Victory were brilliant for an hour on Monday night, and flaky for the final third of the game, which almost let Wellington in the back door.

Possession: Victory 53 % / Phoenix 47 % Total shots: Victory 8 / Phoenix 9; on target: 4 / 4 Tackles: Victory 33 / Phoenix 41; effectiveness: 77% / 67% Completed passes: Victory 433 / Phoenix 215; accuracy: 84% / 75% Crosses: Victory 12 / Phoenix 16

It would be interesting to compare the numbers for the first hour and the final 30 or so, as the game changed and Victory lost control of the game. As it is, the possession are pretty similar.

Wellington made a mighty 41 tackles as they chased their way back into the game but their effective was quite low, which means Victory retained the ball. Is this due to some of the Melbourne players- close control or perhaps the close interplay meaning there was often someone else on hand to pick up the loose ball.

Victory made plenty more passes than the visitors, as expected but Phoenix-s attacking stats are certainly up there with their hosts, showing that over the full match, they were never completely out of the running, despite often being outplayed by Victory-s use of space.

*Note: we chose not to analyse Western Sydney Wanderers v Melbourne Heart as the statistics were very even and offered little insight.