Other Games 23/24

[Gemmill 48665]

Just now, OTF said:

 

This was my favourite poster.

 

"was". Thank you for your loyalty. 

[RobinRobin 12129]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

 

"was". Thank you for your loyalty. 

[OTF 8076]

15 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

"was". Thank you for your loyalty. 

 

Then the internet came and posters were no longer required....

 

[Ayatollah Hermione 14468]

I remember Gemmill was CTs daughter’s favourite poster but that’s a family that watches Benidorm and sits on wooden pallets in their garden so draw your own conclusions there 

[The Fish 11267]

4 hours ago, OTF said:

xPoints, xG etc will never be able to wholly accurately reflect the nuances of the game, the pressure, fatigue, makings of an injury that influence a forward as they prepare to take a shot. It's merely probability based modeling based on previous data for shots taken from similar areas with similar preceding action. No consideration for the quality or positioning of the keeper. Expected points is then an extrapolation based off xG. The fact that the reality is so much less predictable is why the game continues to be interesting. Villa have a quality GK (who's an unlikable dick) and a consistent team with forwards in form.

xG and xPts are just a way to represent the quality of chances made and allowed. What they show is that if one team is high up the table despite allowing more good chances than they make, that team's position is unsustainable. You mention Villa, they can only play that risky style effectively when Martinez is fit. So if he gets injured midgame, the wise and informed observer would do well to cash out before the inevitable collapse

xG doesn't tell the whole story, it can't. But it can give you insight without having to pore over hours of another team's games. The point of xG isn't to consider the quality of the player, his fatigue or anything like that. It's deliberately averaging out everyone from Beto to Batistuta. to give you a baseline from which you can judge a player (or a team).

 

Only the bottom 3 and West Ham give up more chances, the former are because they're not very good, the latter because they choose to play a counter-attack style which by it's very nature invites possession and opportunities around the West Ham box. Man Utd are bottom half for chances created too (behind the likes of Brentford and Everton.) Those two stats point to a problem with their style, it says to me that they're overreliant on their goalkeeper making unlikely saves, and over reliant on their outfield players scoring from unlikely chances. Their game against Liverpool e.g. they scored twice from 0.81xG and yet only conceded twice from 4.43xGA. Run that game 1000 times and Liverpool comfortably win it 900 times. 

 

I can't be arsed to do it right now, but I'd like to see, for each of Man Utd's goals, what value was given to the chance. I'd be pretty confident that they're scoring when they've no right to.

[Isegrim 10161]

1 hour ago, PaddockLad said:

Hmmm…. Why not put that to a poll? 🤷🏻‍♂️ I know how much you like your stats. If the findings don’t suit you perhaps you could make up some arbitrary index of “likes” that would disprove the original data?  

Expected likes as in xL?

 

Or in Gemmil’s case … xxxL.

[Alex 36232]

象形

[Dr Gloom 23191]

his xMC is big

[MrBass 2892]

Unlike his xDL and rDL 

[Gemmill 48665]

Hey fuckheads, when you do x and two initials that only make sense in your head, the joke only makes sense in your head. And maybe one other gom that's on your SHITE level. 

 

YSFCs.

[The Fish 11267]

2 hours ago, The Fish said:

I can't be arsed to do it right now, but I'd like to see, for each of Man Utd's goals, what value was given to the chance. I'd be pretty confident that they're scoring when they've no right to.

 

 

Ok, so a quick check and 38 of 52 (73%) Man Utd's goals come from chances valued at less than 0.35xG. Given a penalty is valued at 0.79xG I think it's safe to say that 0.35 counts as a half chance or worse. 

 

To go further, lets say any chance valued less than 0.1 is No Chance, 0.1-0.39 is a Half Chance, 0.39-0.79 is a Good Chance, and anything better than 0.79 is a Sitter

 

 

 

By comparison, here's ours

 

 

[Gemmill 48665]

Most of the outliers will be the ones Portuguese Freddie Mercury has pinged in from all areas. 

[The Fish 11267]

26 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Most of the outliers will be the ones Portuguese Freddie Mercury has pinged in from all areas. 

He hasn't scored a single goal from what I've arbitrarily deemed a 'Good Chance'. They're all either Penalties or <0.25 xG.

 

 

Compare that to our top scorer

[Howmanheyman 35493]

7 hours ago, The Fish said:

xG and xPts are just a way to represent the quality of chances made and allowed. What they show is that if one team is high up the table despite allowing more good chances than they make, that team's position is unsustainable. You mention Villa, they can only play that risky style effectively when Martinez is fit. So if he gets injured midgame, the wise and informed observer would do well to cash out before the inevitable collapse

xG doesn't tell the whole story, it can't. But it can give you insight without having to pore over hours of another team's games. The point of xG isn't to consider the quality of the player, his fatigue or anything like that. It's deliberately averaging out everyone from Beto to Batistuta. to give you a baseline from which you can judge a player (or a team).

 

Only the bottom 3 and West Ham give up more chances, the former are because they're not very good, the latter because they choose to play a counter-attack style which by it's very nature invites possession and opportunities around the West Ham box. Man Utd are bottom half for chances created too (behind the likes of Brentford and Everton.) Those two stats point to a problem with their style, it says to me that they're overreliant on their goalkeeper making unlikely saves, and over reliant on their outfield players scoring from unlikely chances. Their game against Liverpool e.g. they scored twice from 0.81xG and yet only conceded twice from 4.43xGA. Run that game 1000 times and Liverpool comfortably win it 900 times. 

 

I can't be arsed to do it right now, but I'd like to see, for each of Man Utd's goals, what value was given to the chance. I'd be pretty confident that they're scoring when they've no right to.

 

Fish's xP* is very high.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Expected paragraphs)

[Tdansmith 3260]

Dortmund 1 up at PSG   

[aimaad22 4514]

2 minutes ago, Tdansmith said:

Dortmund 1 up at PSG   

 

Hummels 😍

 

I could live with him and Reus lifting the CL trophy like. I suspect it has Real's name on it again though. 

[Dr Gloom 23191]

23 minutes ago, Tdansmith said:

Dortmund 1 up at PSG   

I hope they hang on. They were miles better than psg were against us. PSG only qualified from our group thanks to that disgusting penalty decision against us.

[Guest MrRaspberryJam]

That Sule at Dortmund amazes me. How is he a professional athlete?

 

he’s a giant pig. 

Edited May 7, 2024 by MrRaspberryJam

[Guest MrRaspberryJam]

Haha. PSG have hit the woodwork six times in both legs. 

[Tdansmith 3260]

Well done Borussia Dortmund

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 4152]

Fuck you psg you cheating cunts

[Gemmill 48665]

Stick it up your khyber, Kylian. 

[aimaad22 4514]

Ha, take that up your hairy cheese sniffing arses!

[aimaad22 4514]

Bloody hell Jamie Carragher is a total twat. Glad I don't have to watch Sky. Love the completely unamused face Henry makes sat next to him too when he tries to be funny. Twat. 

[GrahamTaylor5 1149]

Based on our group games, the better team (by a mile) won. I think they have been the best team that we have faced all year.