Sir Eddie’s majestic mags v that prat Parish’s Palace - On him be pleased to pour

[RobinRobin 12818]

11 minutes ago, David Kelly said:

Even if the penalty had been given an XG of 1

xG as Eze started his run up

[Meenzer 16719]

That's about as fast as his run-up, too

[Gemmill 52027]

20 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

what did you make of the xG modelling for yesterday’s game? I’m struggling to comprehend how Palace’s xG was 2 and ours was less than 2.
 

Okay, I get that Murphy’s goal was a screamer from an angle with a low xG probability and that their missed penalty inflated their figures but did they have any other big chances apart from that? Maybe I’m guilty of  looking at the game through black and white spectacles but I don’t remember being overly concerned by many of their chances and thinking we wasted at least 3-4 good opportunities on top of the 5 goals scored. 

 

I'm not sure whose model Sky use. I would guess Opta but I don't know. The one I posted, our full match xG was 2.33.

 

I don't have any argument with their assessment of our four goals:

 

Schar: 0.28

Barnes: 0.27

Murphy: 0.03

Isak: 0.04

OG: 0.00

 

So if our total combined xG from our 5 goals scored was 0.62xG, the idea that the remainder of our xG from which we got zero goals totalled 1.71 doesn't seem that ridiculous to me at all. 

 

It's not remotely uncommon for teams to score 5 goals from 2 or 3 xG. Usually in a top league, when one team beats another decent team by that many goals, it's cos they've had one of those days where stuff just flies into the net. 

 

As for Palace's chances, honestly I dismiss them from my memory as soon as they happen, which in itself tells you that as fans we have a tendency to weight our own chances higher than we weight the opposition. I couldn't describe a single one of Palace's missed chances to you from last jight

 

I appreciate you trying to engage sensibly btw. Genuinely some of the patter on here about a statistic which is the cornerstone of how matches and players are assessed by the biggest clubs in the world, is embarrassing. 

 

Not often on here that you see stupidity worn as a badge of honour but it's paraded around proudly by some when it comes to xG. 

 

 

[thebrokendoll 10776]

when I go to a match and a player from the opposing team blasts high and wide I usually shout aaaahhhh in his direction often accompanied with an arm aloft wanker gesture.

if the opposing player hits the woodwork or forces our keeper in to tremendous save I usually remark to the person next to me... fucking hell, we were lucky there.

if the opposing player actually scores I tend to let out a groan whilst muttering... ah yer cunt.

not once, ever,, have I started rating the opportunities as a percentage to four decimal points and making a mental note of them to tot up at the end of the game.

 

call me old fashioned if you like. 

Edited Thursday at 09:34 by thebrokendoll

[Dr Gloom 24171]

14 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

I'm not sure whose model Sky use. I would guess Opta but I don't know. The one I posted, our full match xG was 2.33.

 

I don't have any argument with their assessment of our four goals:

 

Schar: 0.28

Barnes: 0.27

Murphy: 0.03

Isak: 0.04

OG: 0.00

 

So if our total combined xG from our 5 goals scored was 0.62xG, the idea that the remainder of our xG from which we got zero goals totalled 1.71 doesn't seem that ridiculous to me at all. 

 

It's not remotely uncommon for teams to score 5 goals from 2 or 3 xG. Usually in a top league, when one team beats another decent team by that many goals, it's cos they've had one of those days where stuff just flies into the net. 

 

As for Palace's chances, honestly I dismiss them from my memory as soon as they happen, which in itself tells you that as fans we have a tendency to weight our own chances higher than we weight the opposition. I couldn't describe a single one of Palace's missed chances to you from last jight

 

I appreciate you trying to engage sensibly btw. Genuinely some of the patter on here about a statistic which is the cornerstone of how matches and players are assessed by the biggest clubs in the world, is embarrassing. 

 

Not often on here that you see stupidity worn as a badge of honour but it's paraded around proudly by some when it comes to xG. 

 

 

The xG for Isak’s goal seems particularly low. It was a much easier one than Murphy’s, which was hit from an angle where few go in. Isak’s was 15-20 yards out with only the keeper to beat. There must be some shit strikers out there for the modelling to be so low on that one. I suppose we’re lucky to have Isak because those are the chances he usually takes. The header he missed was a massive chance too. If he heads that into the ground, he scores 

[Renton 24389]

4 minutes ago, thebrokendoll said:

when I go to a match and a player from the opposing team blasts high and wide I usually shout aaaahhhh in his direction often accompanied with an

arm aloft wanker gesture.

if the opposing player hits the woodwork or forces our keeper in to tremendous save I usually remark to the person next to me... fucking hell, we were lucky there.

if the opposing player actually scores I tend to let out a groan whilst muttering... ah yer cunt.

not once, ever,, have I started rating the opportunities as a percentage to four decimal points and making a mental note of them to tot up at the end of the game.

 

call me old fashioned if you like. 

 

Me too, this however was Gemmill last night. 

 

[Gemmill 52027]

4 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

The xG for Isak’s goal seems particularly low. It was a much easier one than Murphy’s, which was hit from an angle where few go in. Isak’s was 15-20 yards out with only the keeper to beat. There must be some shit strikers out there for the modelling to be so low on that one. I suppose we’re lucky to have Isak because those are the chances he usually takes. The header he missed was a massive chance too. If he heads that into the ground, he scores 

 

He scored from outside the D. It's the little blue star just in front of the D in the graphic below. Think of how many shots from there go in. It's a really low proportion man. Think of all that are blazed over, wide, are just terrible shots, or are saved. I have no problem believing that, on average, 4% of shots from there result in a goal. 1 in every 25 shots seems reasonable to me.

 

It's why you don't see anywhere near as many long shots these days, and why Man City spend forever building up around the box. 

 

 

 

https://understat.com/match/26890

 

Visit that link and you can tap on all of our chances and all of Palace's and it'll tell you the xG for them. The two big circles are Isak chances. 

[toonotl 3565]

It's interesting that apart from the missed penalty Crystal Palace's other two "big chances" did not actually appear that way in the match.

 

36th Minute: Penalty Chance (0.76 xG)

 

8th Minute: Chance from corner for Richards (0.45 xG). It was a big chance. Basically a free header from a corner right on the six yard box in the middle of the goal. However, Richards mistimed his jump and the header ballooned over the bar. Easily forgettable.

 

50th Minute: Chance for Mateta (0.59 xG). It was a big chance too given it is in a similar place to Richard's chance but with feet. However, Tino (I believe it was Tino from memory) basically blocked the shot at source in a 50/50 challenge. But technically it was a shot since Mateta got to the ball marginally before Tino. It's also perhaps a contributing factor to our recollection of this chance that it was already 5-0 at this point. So the game was over.

 

That accounts for 1.8xG of their chances according to the understat page. The rest of their chances are basically potshots. It's just a statistical anomaly, lads. It happens. Doesn't mean the entire model is useless in my opinion. It just means that it is a stat, like every other stat, it needs to be taken in context and broken down and analysed to see how much it is representative of reality.

 

[Gemmill 52027]

12 minutes ago, thebrokendoll said:

when I go to a match and a player from the opposing team blasts high and wide I usually shout aaaahhhh in his direction often accompanied with an arm aloft wanker gesture.

if the opposing player hits the woodwork or forces our keeper in to tremendous save I usually remark to the person next to me... fucking hell, we were lucky there.

if the opposing player actually scores I tend to let out a groan whilst muttering... ah yer cunt.

not once, ever,, have I started rating the opportunities as a percentage to four decimal points and making a mental note of them to tot up at the end of the game.

 

call me old fashioned if you like. 

 

Neither does anyone else at the match. Nor do I when I'm watching. Nor am I suggesting you should be totting up xG at the game.

 

That doesn't prevent me from understanding that there are people paid to do exactly that because it's incredibly valuable to people that understand statistics. And those people are now employed by football clubs.

 

You're basically proudly being Howard Wilkinson in this discussion. This is precisely what I'm talking about when I reference stupidity being worn as a badge of honour. 

[thebrokendoll 10776]

9 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

Neither does anyone else at the match. Nor do I when I'm watching. Nor am I suggesting you should be totting up xG at the game.

 

That doesn't prevent me from understanding that there are people paid to do exactly that because it's incredibly valuable to people that understand statistics. And those people are now employed by football clubs.

 

You're basically proudly being Howard Wilkinson in this discussion. This is precisely what I'm talking about when I reference stupidity being worn as a badge of honour. 

 

when I'm driving/been driven home I tend to ponder on whether or not I remembered to put some beers in the fridge. I generally have.

I crack a few open and drink them while watching m.o.t.d. on the iplayer. then I go to bed.

it's such a simple, uncomplicated life. 

[Gemmill 52027]

Just now, thebrokendoll said:

 

when I'm driving/been driven home I tend to ponder on whether or not I remembered to put some beers in the fridge. I generally have.

I crack a few open and drink them while watching m.o.t.d. on the iplayer. then I go to bed.

it's such a simple, uncomplicated life. 

 

I have no problem believing this.

 

[thebrokendoll 10776]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

 

I have no problem believing this.

 

 

honestly, you should try it.

[Gene_Clark 41]

 I thought the much-vaunted Wharton was shit when he came on last night. All he wanted to do was kick people. Very disappointing & even worse than the rancid Hughes.

 

As for us, well what can you say? I've run out of superlatives for Tonali. Surely Player of the Season? Hosting, talk about getting the monkey off your back. The Cup win has changed the whole nature of our club & support. Sure Villa might do us at the weekend, but we've transformed forever into a happy club with happy fans. Imagine that 4 years ago?

 

We were that good moaning twat from Ashganistan kept his mouth shut after early slagging of Isak for missing the first chance.

[Gemmill 52027]

13 minutes ago, Gene_Clark said:

 I thought the much-vaunted Wharton was shit when he came on last night. All he wanted to do was kick people. Very disappointing & even worse than the rancid Hughes.

 

As for us, well what can you say? I've run out of superlatives for Tonali. Surely Player of the Season? Hosting, talk about getting the monkey off your back. The Cup win has changed the whole nature of our club & support. Sure Villa might do us at the weekend, but we've transformed forever into a happy club with happy fans. Imagine that 4 years ago?

 

We were that good moaning twat from Ashganistan kept his mouth shut after early slagging of Isak for missing the first chance.

 

I genuinely think the cup final has flipped a switch for the club. We went to Wembley and we battered the best team in the country and won comfortably, and now it looks like we're taking that into every game we play.

 

Obviously you can't win every game, and we might even lose our next one, but I still think there's been a change somewhere. Last night was exactly the sort of game we usually either lose or win by 1 goal and it's nervy as fuck. We started like a train and were out of sight by half time. That's the sort of thing big, confident clubs do, and that isn't usually us. 

[Craig 7235]

Everything aside, I think this version of NUFC is playing the most complete football I've every witnessed in 39 years. 

We talk fondly of the 94-97 and 01-04 squads but even the most biased NUFC fan has to admit those squads had their flaws - particularly in defence. 

 

This side feels complete and what's doubly impressive is it's not down to buying our success, it's mainly been coached. The likes of Man Utd and Spurs could learn a thing or two at looking at our model rather than buying from the likes of Palace / Wolves / Forest / etc. at ridiculously inflated prices. 

 

We really did land on our feet with Eddie and his team. It's tremendous.

[David Kelly 1380]

34 minutes ago, toonotl said:

It's interesting that apart from the missed penalty Crystal Palace's other two "big chances" did not actually appear that way in the match.

 

36th Minute: Penalty Chance (0.76 xG)

 

8th Minute: Chance from corner for Richards (0.45 xG). It was a big chance. Basically a free header from a corner right on the six yard box in the middle of the goal. However, Richards mistimed his jump and the header ballooned over the bar. Easily forgettable.

 

50th Minute: Chance for Mateta (0.59 xG). It was a big chance too given it is in a similar place to Richard's chance but with feet. However, Tino (I believe it was Tino from memory) basically blocked the shot at source in a 50/50 challenge. But technically it was a shot since Mateta got to the ball marginally before Tino. It's also perhaps a contributing factor to our recollection of this chance that it was already 5-0 at this point. So the game was over.

 

That accounts for 1.8xG of their chances according to the understat page. The rest of their chances are basically potshots. It's just a statistical anomaly, lads. It happens. Doesn't mean the entire model is useless in my opinion. It just means that it is a stat, like every other stat, it needs to be taken in context and broken down and analysed to see how much it is representative of reality.

 

This is well put.  I think real question is not whether XG is useful, it's how useful it is for supporters.  In analysis of how your team is doing and how players (particularly strikers) are doing, I'm sure it's very useful.  But showing it to the masses on a quick rundown alongside more traditional stats like possession and shots on target on MOTD or after the match on Sky doesn't really offer that much especially when it's clearly not even understood by the people who are using it.  And of course when it comes up with results like last night, it is more likely to confuse than enlighten.

[Gene_Clark 41]

Howe's tactical acumen cannot be overstated. The potentially ruinous suspension of Gordon meant he changed plans for the final. We won it in midfield rather than out wide, which none of us saw coming. Nor did Slot either.

 

Reflecting on that, we won last night by killing them both in midfield and down the flanks. Reminded me, in a very different way, of the 6-0 scudding we handed out to Barnsley In April 93. 

[Renton 24389]

34 minutes ago, Craig said:

Everything aside, I think this version of NUFC is playing the most complete football I've every witnessed in 39 years. 

We talk fondly of the 94-97 and 01-04 squads but even the most biased NUFC fan has to admit those squads had their flaws - particularly in defence. 

 

This side feels complete and what's doubly impressive is it's not down to buying our success, it's mainly been coached. The likes of Man Utd and Spurs could learn a thing or two at looking at our model rather than buying from the likes of Palace / Wolves / Forest / etc. at ridiculously inflated prices. 

 

We really did land on our feet with Eddie and his team. It's tremendous.

 

I was thinking exactly this last night. Feel almost sacreligious, but this team is just objectively better than Keegan's best in all departments. Am I enjoying it as much? No, I'm not because I am a much older jaded man who just doesn't have the carefree joy and exuberance I once had. And this is almost personified by the managers, Keegan was a tidal wave of optimism, whereas Howe is much more guarded, objective, and circunspect. I suspect the latter is a strategy more likely to be maternally successful (materially as in winning stuff). 

 

But I am still massively enjoying it as much as I can about a sport played by overpaid stars kicking a lump of synthetic leather around. I hope the youngsters today appreciate it, I am sure they do. 

[Monkeys Fist 46063]

52 minutes ago, Craig said:

We talk fondly of the 94-97 and 01-04 squads but even the most biased NUFC fan has to admit those squads had their flaws…

 

…This side feels complete

Both above squads had super talented players who, whilst great to watch, could often be guilty of selfishness and reluctance to drop back when needed. 
 

 Every single one of current side, especially the “stars” of it, give 100% to the team. 
 

The semi-final and the final are probably the most complete examples of this that I can recall. 
 

It’s also very rare to see our lads properly arguing or frustrated with each other, even when they’re losing ( what’s that again? ). 
 

All of which comes from the unbelievably thorough job that Howe, Tindall, Jones and all the other backroom staff are doing, from coaching, recruitment, everything. 

 

After the initial, massive, adrenaline hit of the takeover had worn off and the size of the job at hand was apparent, I don’t think anyone, from Chairman down, could have possibly expected us to be in such a strong position so soon. 

It’s a beautiful thing to see. 

 

[RobinRobin 12818]

1 hour ago, Craig said:

We really did land on our feet with Eddie and his team. It's tremendous.

Thanks to Bruce for recommending him. 🙂 

[RobinRobin 12818]

1 hour ago, thebrokendoll said:

 

when I'm driving/been driven home I tend to ponder on whether or not I remembered to put some beers in the fridge. I generally have.

I crack a few open and drink them while watching m.o.t.d. on the iplayer. then I go to bed.

it's such a simple, uncomplicated life. 

Even better when someone else chauffeurs you. 🙂 

[Toonpack 12019]

2 hours ago, Gemmill said:

 

I don't have any argument with their assessment of our four goals:

 

Schar: 0.28

Barnes: 0.27

Murphy: 0.03

Isak: 0.04

OG: 0.00

 

 

I do, sorry.

 

Schar - the stat would suggest he'd score one time out of four. He was 8 yards out centre of goal in front of any defender, under little pressure, and meeting a perfectly pacey, flighted ball at perfect height. If he missed that 3 times out of four he wants shot with shit.

 

Isak, His little blue star may be outside the D but he was under no pressure, no defender within 6 foot of him and the keeper was out of position/on his heels because ball was given away. The replay angle from behind Isak perfectly shows how much goal he had to aim at, to suggest Isak (or even Shola) would miss that 96 times out of a hundred is just not realistic.

[Toonpack 12019]

14 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

Both above squads had super talented players who, whilst great to watch, could often be guilty of selfishness and reluctance to drop back when needed. 
 

 Every single one of current side, especially the “stars” of it, give 100% to the team. 
 

The semi-final and the final are probably the most complete examples of this that I can recall. 
 

It’s also very rare to see our lads properly arguing or frustrated with each other, even when they’re losing ( what’s that again? ). 
 

All of which comes from the unbelievably thorough job that Howe, Tindall, Jones and all the other backroom staff are doing, from coaching, recruitment, everything. 

 

After the initial, massive, adrenaline hit of the takeover had worn off and the size of the job at hand was apparent, I don’t think anyone, from Chairman down, could have possibly expected us to be in such a strong position so soon. 

It’s a beautiful thing to see. 

 

 

I love them as a group and when they do bollock each other it's never for a fit of pique, it's constructive. We have a really great "team".

[Renton 24389]

So then my take from thus is that xG only take account the final touch of the ball, is that right? If that's the case I think it's a canny useless stat and it explains the anomalous score last night. Surely the whole attacking build up needs to be considered? 

[Monkeys Fist 46063]

One more fucking mention of x fucking G, in support of it or baffled by it, and I’m fucking Quiffing whichever cunt does it. 
 

 

One fucking more!