Jessica Hargreaves is the chair of the RSS’s Statistics in Sport Section. She’s also a Lecturer in Statistics in the Department of Mathematics at the University of York. Her academic focus includes nonstationary time series analysis, wavelet analysis, and applications in sports analytics, such as ClusterAFC. She also researches pedagogy, including peer-assisted learning and accessible course notes.
Rob Mastrodomenico is a sports statistician and an active fellow of the Royal Statistical Society. He’s been the chair of the Statisticians for Society initiative since its inception in 2017. He’s also an RSS Statistical Ambassador, which involves regular work with the media in assisting with their reporting of statistical issues. Mastrodomenico also works as director of data science at Blue Crow Sports Group.
Episode Description
Sports and statistics go hand-in-hand. But some of those statistics are more interesting than others. Each year, the Royal Statistical Society highlights some of the most compelling sports stats in its Sports Statistic of the Year competition – this year’s winners are the focus of this episode of Stats and Stories with Jessica Hargreaves and Robert Mastrodomenico.
Full Transcript
Rosemary Pennington
Sports and statistics go hand in hand, but some of those statistics are more interesting than others. Each year, the Royal Statistical Society highlights some of the most compelling sports stats in its Sports Statistic of the Year competition.
This year's winners are the focus of this episode of Stats and Stories, where we explore the statistics behind the stories and the stories behind the statistics.
I'm Rosemary Pennington. Stats and Stories is a production of the American Statistical Association in partnership with Miami University's Departments of Statistics and Media, Journalism, and Film.
Joining me, as always, is regular panelist John Bailer, emeritus professor of statistics at Miami University.
We have two guests joining us today. Jessica Hargreaves is the chair of the RSS's Statistics in Sports Section. She's also a lecturer in statistics in the Department of Mathematics at the University of York. Her academic focus includes nonstationary time series analysis, wavelet analysis, and applications in sports analytics, such as cluster AFC. She also researches pedagogy, including peer-assisted learning and accessible course notes.
Rob Mastrodomenico is a sports statistician and an active Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society. He's been the chair of the Statisticians for Society Initiative since its inception in 2017. He's also an RSS Statistical Ambassador, which involves regular work with the media, assisting with their reporting of statistical issues. Mastrodomenico also works as director of data science at Blue Crow Sports Group.
Thank you so much for joining us today, Rob and Jessica.
Rob Mastrodomenico
Hi, thanks for having us.
Jessica Hargreaves
Thanks for having us.
Rosemary Pennington
Have a drum roll, John?
John Bailer
Drum roll.
Rosemary Pennington
What is the Sports Statistic of the Year?
Rob Mastrodomenico
Jess, I'll leave this one to you.
Jessica Hargreaves
Well, the Sports Statistic of the Year was very much an England- and UK-focused one, and it was about the Lionesses, the England women's football team—or soccer team—and their triumph in the Euros in 2025.
The Sports Statistic of the Year was 4 minutes and 52 seconds.
Rosemary Pennington
What made that particularly compelling for the committee that chose it?
Jessica Hargreaves
Well, Rob, do you want to say? You were on the panel that picked it as the winner.
Rob Mastrodomenico
I was. I think, for us, the number really stood out. When you think about how many games the Lionesses played, for the total amount of time they were actually leading to be so short really caught our attention.
Among all of the nominations we reviewed, this one instantly looked like a strong candidate. Ultimately, it was the one that won.
John Bailer
So, how many games were in the knockout stage for the team?
Rob Mastrodomenico
You're really coming with the tough questions. Sorry.
I believe... in fact, I'll find out.
John Bailer
This is that thing we were talking about—being able to edit things in.
Rob Mastrodomenico
We'll just do the question again. No worries.
John Bailer
No worries.
Rosemary Pennington
I do have a follow-up. If this under five minutes of having led during the tournament is so remarkable, what might we have expected from a team that was going to win the Euros?
I also wonder, going into the tournament, was it a surprise that the Lionesses won, for those of us who didn't follow this as closely as those of you in the UK did?
Rob Mastrodomenico
Jess, you can go.
Jessica Hargreaves
So, shall I give you a bit of the behind-the-scenes story?
Rosemary Pennington
Oh, please. That'd be great.
Jessica Hargreaves
So, the RSS ran this competition a few years ago, and we were talking as a committee about bringing it back. The person in charge at the time said, "Oh, you know, it's December. I don't know if we've got time to turn this around."
And I said, "I've got the winner. We can turn this around because I've got the winner. I know what it's going to be."
That's why I said I wasn't on the panel choosing it. I deliberately wanted to be one of the people who could suggest statistics. We opened it up to our mailing list within the Royal Statistical Society and invited people to submit their suggestions.
I compiled those suggestions and then sent them to Rob and the team so they could pick the winner independently.
Your question was whether the Lionesses were expected to win. Well, they were the reigning champions, so they were certainly one of the favorites. It wasn't that they won that was surprising. You're right—it was the small amount of time they spent in the lead that was the surprise.
You'd expect a team that wins a tournament to be winning games, getting to the final, winning the final, and generally dominating those matches. But this statistic is just about the knockout stages. How many games was that, Rob?
Rob Mastrodomenico
Three games.
Jessica Hargreaves
Three. Yes.
So, you've got three football matches that are 90 minutes each, and they might even go to extra time or penalties. Yet, across all of that, they were only actually ahead for five minutes.
That doesn't look like a team that dominated the competition and flattened everyone in its path.
The reason I was so sure—even before we ran the competition—that this would be the winning statistic was because, if you were watching the tournament, this is exactly what it felt like. They kept going behind, or they weren't beating teams comfortably, and yet there was always this belief that they were going to find a way.
I think this number, being so small, really captures that tournament and their performance. They won it in the way that they won it.
But, as I say, I'm biased. Rob was the person who actually picked it, completely independently. I did not tell them this was the one.
Rob Mastrodomenico
Just to follow on from what Jess said, I think that number, although the story of the tournament for those watching it felt like there were lots of big comebacks and lots of times England just pulled it out and ultimately won, is still insanely small for what you would have expected in that type of tournament.
To me, you'll see it this summer. We've got the World Cup over in your neck of the woods. Find a team that could potentially win it. I know we're going to have more knockout games, but I would be surprised if we saw something similar to this, just because it's so unlikely.
As Jess said, England was one of the favorites. They had a good chance of winning. It's not like they were an underdog that battled back all the time and just played their way into the tournament.
Over here in England, it was a huge deal for them to win it again, especially in the manner that they did.
John Bailer
Yes, I find this remarkable. When I think about 4 minutes and 52 seconds, that's about what extra time is in one game anymore. That's injury time that's being added on.
I was over in London last fall when they were celebrating this at the Battersea Power Station mall. Seeing the tremendous excitement and energy was incredible, and I hadn't appreciated at that time that we were looking at this outcome of essentially only leading at the end of every game in the knockout stage to secure victory. That's really cool.
Rob Mastrodomenico
I think it's a testament to the growth of the England women's game as a whole. I know it's very big in the U.S., but tournament after tournament, it's just gained in popularity.
When you have games like this and performances like this, it helps grow the sport even more. I'm sure, Jess, you would agree with that.
Jessica Hargreaves
Oh, yes, absolutely.
In fact, I've done a bit of work looking at the numbers of people who attend football games after tournament wins to see whether that success makes a difference. It definitely helps.
But, yes, it was a big deal.
I should also say that a couple of those matches went into extra time and penalties. Based on the England men's team, England doesn't traditionally enjoy penalties very much, but the England women's team is very, very strong in penalty shootouts.
So, actually, it is something of a tactic for the Lionesses.
Rob Mastrodomenico
Sorry, the vibe around the England women's team is very different from what our men's team has over here. It's very surprising.
They came into the tournament with lower expectations. They had a poor start to the tournament and then grew into it. But that kind of mania you get over here—you've probably seen on the news, with people throwing their plastic beer glasses when a goal goes in, which is a very common celebration in England—that really grew as the tournament went on, and people got into it.
I think that's somewhat different from what you sometimes get with the men's team.
Rosemary Pennington
So, that was the winner. One of the other highly commended statistics also related to the Lionesses. Do you want to talk us through that one?
Rob Mastrodomenico
Yes, I can go for that.
16.2 million—that is the peak TV audience for England's Euro final victory over Spain. It was the most-watched moment of 2025, which is crazy to think about.
Essentially, the nation stopped to watch that game. As we said just before, the growth of the women's game in popularity has been remarkable, and for it to produce the most-watched moment of 2025 is, I think, a very highly commended statistic.
John Bailer
So, if we wanted to leave football for a bit, what were some of the other sporting statistics that kind of jumped out for you?
Rob Mastrodomenico
There were lots. We aren't just football-centric.
I don't know, Jess. Do you want to take one, or I can take one? I think I've got two.
Jessica Hargreaves
So, like I say, I was collating these entries with a particular favorite already in my head. But then this one came in.
It was from somebody on our mailing list who suggested it. It came in, and I thought, "Oh no, this could challenge. This could challenge."
Give me two seconds.
So, we're in tennis, and the number is 1,651.
In all the matches that Yannick Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz have played against each other, they've both won the exact same number of points. If you collated all their games and all of their matches together into one big fixture, it's dead even—1,651 each.
That was after the finals in November and December at the end of the year. I think they faced each other in that final, and by the end of it, they were completely even.
I really liked this one because, for me, the Sports Statistic of the Year is about trying to distill an interesting story down to one number that successfully conveys all that complexity.
The fact that they would be dead even on this number was doing exactly that. It was really encapsulating tennis in 2025. These are the two players defining the new rivalry after all the greats who came before them, and they're even.
There have also been some really good matches involving those two. So, yes, I really liked that one.
Rosemary Pennington
You're listening to Stats and Stories, and we're talking with Jessica Hargreaves and Rob Mastrodomenico about the RSS's Sports Statistic of the Year.
John Bailer
Just as a quick follow-up before we get to the next commended one, in tennis, you got me thinking about this.
How many matches had they played? That was one question. What was their history against each other?
Boy, I'm really being a nuisance here with these detailed follow-up questions, so apologies for that.
The second question is: Do you have any sense of the typical number of points that are available in a match at a very high professional level?
Rob Mastrodomenico
I mean, on the points level, it would depend on the tournament and what type of match it is. Obviously, whether it's a three-set match or a five-set match, and the relative difference between the players.
I think what this statistic encapsulates is how close together these two players are and what a rivalry we've got brewing here.
The previous era of Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, and, to a lesser degree, Murray, who was in that mix for a while, was really peak tennis for a long time.
I think these two have kind of sneaked onto the scene and taken over as the new big hitters. To have two players who are so close, as this number implies, really ignites a bit of excitement in the game.
If you think about how many points there are in any single game, any single set, or any single match, for them to be exactly even at this point is remarkable. There's a degree of randomness in it, but it's very interesting.
As Jess said, it ignites something in your imagination. It gets you excited about these two players. Look how close they are. Look at this number.
Rosemary Pennington
Yes, they're a pair that you want to keep watching because who knows what's going to happen next, right?
Rob Mastrodomenico
Yes, of course. It's like in all sports. When you have these rivalries, even for those of us who only casually follow a sport and maybe aren't able to watch as much as we'd like, you still want those big-match feelings—the big game, the big contest.
When these two are playing, you notice that people watch, and that's great. We've had rivalries like that previously in tennis, and this kind of implies that level of importance whenever they're going to have a match. It shows just how close they are.
Sometimes people can't necessarily appreciate that just from being a casual watcher, but this could be one of the great rivalries going forward.
Jessica Hargreaves
So, to answer your question, at that point in time, they'd played each other 16 times, and Alcaraz was leading the head-to-head 10–6.
So in terms of the overall number of matches, it's not particularly close. But when you look at the total number of points, that shows just how close those matches were in themselves.
John Bailer
I'm curious if you've heard back from any of the winners or the highly commended entries. Did any of the representatives—the Lionesses, for example—respond when they found out there were two aspects of their tournament that made the Sports Statistic of the Year?
Or have you heard back from these two tennis players, since they almost made it to the top?
Rob Mastrodomenico
Jess, you're better placed to answer that. I don't know. You're the expert.
Jessica Hargreaves
No, we've not heard back from them yet.
However, at the RSS Conference this year, we're going to have one of the analysts for the England women's football team on one of our panel discussions about the data gap in women's sport.
So, if they're not already aware that they're involved in two Sports Statistics of the Year, they'll know by the end of that conference.
We've not heard from them yet, but you're absolutely right. I'll make sure I point that out to them when we have that chat.
Rosemary Pennington
So, there is one more highly commended statistic, and I'm going to be honest. John and I are going to need a lot of help understanding why this one is commended because it involves cricket, and neither one of us really understands that sport very well.
Rob Mastrodomenico
I mean, I'll probably join you on that one. I'm joking.
When we were judging this, Pete, who was on our judging panel, was a huge cricket fan. He didn't really push it—it's an interesting statistic on its own—but he's probably the biggest cricket fan I know.
The number is 67.3 overs. Not since 1904 have England survived so few deliveries in losing a Test match as they did in the first Ashes Test in Perth.
That probably means nothing to anybody.
Rosemary Pennington
What is an over? Can you explain that?
Rob Mastrodomenico
What is cricket? Yes, please walk us through why this number matters. I don't know how much of a cricket fan you are, Jess.
Jessica Hargreaves
I'm not a huge cricket fan, I'll be honest. I'm with you. I'm a baseball fan if I'm going to watch this sort of sport.
So, the idea is that an over, I believe, is six deliveries, or six times the bowler bowls to the batter. Cricket, again, is a bit like baseball in that there's no clock. You just keep going until everybody's out or one team has won.
So, there is this idea that a game can be short if you absolutely dominate and get everyone out quickly. Then it can be a shorter game. It's not going to go on for a set amount of time like the Lionesses' matches did.
So, this statistic is basically saying that England got absolutely dominated by the other team, and it was over very quickly.
But the reason this is an interesting one is, again, this idea that a single number can encapsulate something. I think of the Sports Statistic of the Year as a bit of a time capsule for the year.
As we've said, some of the things we were talking about in the UK in 2025 were the Lionesses winning, the big rivalry in tennis, and this idea of something called Bazball, which is an approach to cricket that basically means you go for it from the start. You try to hit the ball as far as you can and score lots of runs.
As I say, I'm with you. When I first heard this was considered a controversial tactic in a sport—that you would actually go for it and try to score lots of runs—I was a bit surprised and needed that explained to me.
But that's the point. Cricket is traditionally played over several days. It's a slow-moving game that's about building an inning. This thing called Bazball is ripping up that approach and just going for it, trying to score lots and lots of runs quickly.
As we're saying here, it can tremendously backfire, and you can get out very quickly.
So, this statistic is really showing that debate. The traditionalists who were criticizing this style of play could point to this result and say, "Well, look—historically bad result here in this Ashes Test."
Have I done a good job of conveying cricket? Rob Mastrodomenico
I was just about to blow their minds and say there are different types of cricket as well.
So, you can play faster versions of the game, and Test cricket is really a thing unto itself. The Ashes is such a big event in the UK and Australia.
A lot of these players compete across different formats. Something like Twenty20, where it's a fixed amount of time and a fixed number of overs, really leans into what Jess was saying. Those formats were developed to be more exciting and faster-paced, where you can go and watch a match in just a few hours.
So, essentially, you've got these players who compete in different types of cricket and move between competitions like the IPL or Twenty20 in England.
It's a fascinating sport and actually very enjoyable once you get into it. I'm very partial to an evening Twenty20 match somewhere nice in London if I ever get the chance. So, I would definitely recommend it to you.
But, again, I like going to baseball as well. That's always fun.
Rosemary Pennington
Yes, I've watched it. I just don't always understand what's happening.
But it's interesting because these statistics are so different. The winner is this triumph of the England women's football team, and then this one is sort of the opposite of that. It's really a yin and yang.
Rob Mastrodomenico
I think there's probably an element, from our side, that it really could have gone either way.
When you're on the judging panel, you're really looking for the most interesting statistic. The outcome itself—or whether it represents something positive or negative—isn't as important as how well that number conveys what happened.
In this instance, we ended up with a really nice story for the Sports Statistic of the Year. But next year, it could easily be something that's not quite so enjoyable—especially with England in a World Cup. I'm sure something could come up.
Rosemary Pennington
Heartbreak City, right?
Rob Mastrodomenico
I'm Italian, so I'm already half expecting that.
John Bailer
So, I'm curious. What sports were most represented in the nominations this year, and what sports were least represented?
Rob Mastrodomenico
So, essentially, the way this works is that people submit nominations.
I can't remember all the sports off the top of my head, but there was definitely representation from American sports. There were darts, cricket, tennis, football, and some others.
There are also sports where the available data may not lend itself to particularly interesting statistics, so we don't necessarily see as many submissions. For example, I can't remember a Formula One statistic coming in, and I've judged a few years of this competition.
Ultimately, it depends more on the statistic than the sport itself. If something interesting happens, it can come from any sport.
Jessica Hargreaves
So, I was collating the entries and putting them together.
I'm actually a bit interested to ask because I've really enjoyed doing this podcast. I get an insight into what the judges are looking for.
I collected the entries by category because, as they were coming in, it became apparent that people were getting at the same sorts of things. We saw a lot of entries about the Lionesses. We also had the Women's Rugby World Cup in the UK that year, so there were quite a few entries about women's rugby as well.
The categories we ended up with were athletics, baseball, basketball, cricket, as we've heard, cycling, darts, and lots of football. As I say, the Lionesses really became their own category because there were so many entries about them.
As I said, I also grouped some of the entries together because I thought some of them were really about the visibility of sport. That number of 16.2 million people watching the England women's football team, for example, felt more about the visibility of the sport than the actual competition itself. So, I put those into a category as well.
But I have been thinking about whether we should have an international category. I think the RSS Statistic of the Year has both a UK statistic and an international statistic. Maybe we should branch out and deliberately try to include things that are a bit more international.
Rob Mastrodomenico
I believe you have the authority to do that, Jess. Less of a question and more of a "take it straight to the top."
Rosemary Pennington
That sounds like a declaration of what's going to happen in the coming years. You heard it here first.
I wonder, given that the World Cup is happening, what sporting events are you anticipating being the big drivers of this in the next round?
Jessica Hargreaves
So, like you say, I think the men's football World Cup could feature heavily again. It might depend, because our audience is quite UK-based, on how well the UK teams do. We've got Scotland involved as well.
Of course, we've also had the Winter Olympics. I'd really like to see something from the Winter Olympics because that's such a great event.
Those are the two on my list. Have you got any, Rob, that you think people might submit?
Rob Mastrodomenico
I can't get past it. I mean, a World Cup year, for me, is everything. Life is essentially going to stop at the start of June, so that's really all that's on my mind.
But one of the things I always think is that there will be a surprise. Like Jess said, I thought the Winter Olympics were brilliant this year, and I watched way more than I thought I would.
I can definitely see another sport delivering something we don't expect. In the UK, darts is always interesting because it usually comes around the time we're judging the competition, and you sometimes get some really fascinating statistics from it.
What I like about the Sports Statistic of the Year is that there will always be something I didn't expect—something different that somebody noticed that just raises an eyebrow, and you think, "Oh, I didn't realize that."
We all have the sports we like, and through the Royal Statistical Society, there are lots of people who are fans of very specific sports, so we get some really interesting submissions.
Again, when we look at the Sports Statistic of the Year, it's trying to encapsulate what happened, but it's also trying to shed light on things maybe everyone didn't know.
The cricket statistic, for you, I think, was interesting because you probably wouldn't have known it, but it sparked your interest in a sport you're not as familiar with.
So, I'm excited to see what comes next.
Rosemary Pennington
Well, that's all the time we have for this episode of Stats and Stories. Jessica and Rob, thank you so much for joining us today. I look forward to seeing what wins next year.
Stats and Stories is a partnership between the American Statistical Association and Miami University's Departments of Statistics and Media, Journalism, and Film.
You can follow us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you'd like to share your thoughts on the program, send us an email at statstories@amstat.org, or check us out at statsandstories.net.
Be sure to listen for future editions of Stats and Stories, where we discuss the statistics behind the stories—and the stories behind the statistics.