Mikel John Obi

[Phil Driver 503]

This Chelsea fans logic and know it doesnt have to be Ramires he plays with ,take your pick ...............

After 3rd Feb 2013, we have played 32 games. Mikel started 10 of these games.

Our results when Mikel started: 3 wins, 2 draws and 5 defeats

Our results in the other 22 games: 17 wins, 3 draws and 2 defeats.

The 2 defeats when Mikel did not start: vs Rubin Kazan away when we were leading 2-1 before Mikel came on as sub and we lost 2-3 and the Super Cup defeat to Bayern on penalties.

[Phil Driver 503]

No not know Wouldnt want to make a spelling mistake when digging out Mikel .

[The Skipper 20,593]

This Chelsea fans logic and know it doesnt have to be Ramires he plays with ,take your pick ...............

After 3rd Feb 2013, we have played 32 games. Mikel started 10 of these games.

Our results when Mikel started: 3 wins, 2 draws and 5 defeats

Our results in the other 22 games: 17 wins, 3 draws and 2 defeats.

The 2 defeats when Mikel did not start: vs Rubin Kazan away when we were leading 2-1 before Mikel came on as sub and we lost 2-3 and the Super Cup defeat to Bayern on penalties.

How many times do you have to regurgitate the same stuff? It's all you've been saying in the last few pages. Give it a rest already.

[Tomo 21,733]

@Phil Driver, I have got a nice little stat for you that proves this Mikel stat you keep rolling out is completely and utterly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Before the Club World Cup last season these were our stats with and without Azpilicueta.

With Azpi: Won 3 Drew 4 Lost 4

May i note that in those 3 wins one of them in extra time, another to Wolves's B team and the other he came on when we were 4-1 up.

Without Azpi: Won 10 Drew 1 Lost 2

Now despite those stats he was widely regarded as one of our best players in the first 6 months, which just proves those stats alone can't be used as damning evidence against Mikel.

[The only place to be 11,313]

@Phil Driver, I have got a nice little stat for you that proves this Mikel stat you keep rolling out is completely and utterly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Before the Club World Cup last season these were our stats with and without Azpilicueta.

With Azpi: Won 3 Drew 4 Lost 4

May i note that in those 3 wins one of them in extra time, another to Wolves's B team and the other he came on when we were 4-1 up.

Without Azpi: Won 10 Drew 1 Lost 2

Now despite those stats he was widely regarded as one of our best players in the first 6 months, which just proves those stats alone can't be used as damning evidence against Mikel.

Are you comparing a newly arrived player, completely inexperienced with the English game, with a player with about 250 appearances for the club?

[Tomo 21,733]

Are you comparing a newly arrived player, completely inexperienced with the English game, with a player with about 250 appearances for the club?

Well who has come into English football and had stats that (on the face of it) look that bad? All im saying is their is more to it than just the mere results.

But even taking that point into consideration here is another example, Werder Breman last year with De Bruyne in it didn't win any of their last 12, then without him they win two in a row and only just lose to Dortmund in their 3rd.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Yes I am.

Well isn't that a little unfair, especially when your point is about stats without context?

[Tomo 21,733]

Well isn't that a little unfair, especially when your point is about stats without context?

Why have you put words into my mouth? (so to speak by quoting something i didn't even say).

[The only place to be 11,313]

Why have you put words into my mouth? (so to speak by quoting something i didn't even say).

Just seemed easier.

[Tomo 21,733]

Just seemed easier.

Well the point im trying to make above it all is it's unfair to use winning and losing stats against a player. Azpilicueta was one of our best players for those first six months despite the stats.

For the record im not convinced Mikel's anything more than a squad player, but it's very, very harsh to use winning/loosing stats against him. If Phil really wanted to tear him apart, maybe he should instead use stats to compare Mikel's individual game to that off his fellow midfielders in those games, instead of using the result's when he is one of eleven players.

[Fernando 6,484]

Well at least Mikel now get the stick.

Cause last season it was always Benitez and Torres fault!

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Well who has come into English football and had stats that (on the face of it) look that bad? All im saying is their is more to it than just the mere results.

But even taking that point into consideration here is another example, Werder Breman last year with De Bruyne in it didn't win any of their last 12, then without him they win two in a row and only just lose to Dortmund in their 3rd.

I remember a couple of seasons ago, throughout an entire season, Barcelona had a 100% win record without Messi which was obviously less with him in the team. So by this logic he should have been dropped.

There are way too many variables involved to try to make conclusions about an individual player based on team winning stats. There are 21 other players on the field, plus manager tactics, plus the referee, not to mention the general luck or randomness off football. All those affect the final result other than the player in question.

You need only to look at recent examples to see how misleading this stat can be. For example in our last match against Everton we lost despite dominating the game and Mikel being our MOTM while against Villa we won despite being dominated by Villa and Lampard, Mikel's direct replacement, was a passenger throughout the match.

[Tomo 21,733]

I remember a couple of seasons ago, throughout an entire season, Barcelona had a 100% win record without Messi which was obviously less with him in the team. So by this logic he should have been dropped.

Also in 2009/2010 we had a 100% record without Drogba (averaging 3 a game in the process). Infact we also went two and a half years without losing a league game he didn't play in.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Also in 2009/2010 we had a 100% record without Drogba (averaging 3 a game in the process). Infact we also went two and a half years without losing a league game he didn't play in.

Right, I remember that. It was brought up by commentators every time Drogba was injured or in the AFCONs.

EDIT: Here's another one. Last season in the PL united had an 82% win percentage without Rooney but only 70% with him.

[Tomo 21,733]

Right, I remember that. It was brought up by commentators every time Drogba was injured or in the AFCONs.

Between the 2-1 defeat to Arsenal under Big Phil and the 1-0 defeat to Everton in Carlo's last game it was , infact between those two i think we only lost one game in all comps without Drogba and that was in the Carling Cup against Newcastle when half our team were teenagers/early 20's.

Yet despite that Drogba was by far our best player for a substantial part of that period.

[Kojo 4,676]

CHOULO you where the one who started the whole Stats debate, and now you're trying to prove it wrong just because people have now started to use stats against you?

Hypocrites at there best.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

CHOULO you where the one who started the whole Stats debate, and now you're trying to prove it wrong just because people have now started to use stats against you?

Hypocrites at there best.

Can't you give it a rest?

[Kojo 4,676]

Can't you give it a rest?

WTF, it's my first post in the thread today.

Can you put your hatred for me to one side for once.