Froggy Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Just now, Pata said: Â Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froggy Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Just now, KaKa said: Especially bringing Sulemana back into the fold. Â Hope he hasn't ruined Yoro's career. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 2 minutes ago, Froggy said:  Antony's was 0.28 believe it or not. xG doesn't take the keepers position into account.  Amad's third was 0.68.  xG is a load of bollocks like. Yeah. Mad when it is broken down like that. See loads of different ones. So guessing the models have slight differences. Live Score often seems really stingy for example.  Mental that an open goal tap in like that has a lower xG than a penalty. Or Antony’s 2-3 yards out. But if the keeper position isn’t factored in. Then individual massive chances like that seem pointless to even discuss on their own with xG.  Anyway, congratulations on your historic win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pata Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 5 minutes ago, Froggy said:  Antony's was 0.28 believe it or not. xG doesn't take the keepers position into account.  Amad's third was 0.68.  xG is a load of bollocks like.  As if. Use some better sources ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 11 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said: Crying about it is far worse. xG proves it isn’t  3.24 Tears - 4.73 No Tears Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Just now, Froggy said: Â Hope he hasn't ruined Yoro's career. Â Looks terrified of pace running at him. That was actually shocking. Â Not sure he'll be able to play that wide centre back position. Not in the short term anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Just now, KaKa said: Â Looks terrified of pace running at him. That was actually shocking. Â Not sure he'll be able to play that wide centre back position. Not in the short term anyway. Hope he plays there up at SJP Â Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 7 minutes ago, Froggy said:  Antony's was 0.28 believe it or not. xG doesn't take the keepers position into account.  Amad's third was 0.68.  xG is a load of bollocks like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbydazzla Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 5 minutes ago, Pata said: Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froggy Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 3 minutes ago, Pata said: As if. Use some better sources ffs. Â You're using understat which has Amad's third as 0.39. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Prontonise Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 xG nonces. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pata Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Froggy said: Â You're using understat which has Amad's third as 0.39. Â It's easy and free to use but not that great tbh. Saying xG doesn't care about the goalie is just wrong though. I'm not sure if understat's numbers get fixed by a human afterwards. Edited January 16 by Pata Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemtizz Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 12th now. They'll stay up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawalls Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Of course them stay up, they were seven points clear before kick off. They were never going down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fak Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 2 minutes ago, Gawalls said: Of course them stay up, they were seven points clear before kick off. They were never going down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froggy Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 3 minutes ago, Pata said: It's easy and free to use but not that great tbh. Saying xG doesn't care about the goalie is just wrong though. I'm not sure if understat's numbers get fixed by a human afterwards.  A lot of xG models genuinely don't. I don't like it either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checko Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Froggy said:  Antony's was 0.28 believe it or not. xG doesn't take the keepers position into account.  Amad's third was 0.68.  xG is a load of bollocks like. Should do tbf, would be a bit of a mad system to not take into account whether there's a goalkeeper in front of the striker or not:  "Opta’s xG model [...] The model uses several variables from before, and up to, the exact moment the shot was taken. It evaluates how over 20 variables affect the likelihood of a goal being scored. Some of the most important factors are listed below: Distance to the goal. Angle to the goal. Goalkeeper position, giving us information on the likelihood that they’re able to make a save. [...]" https://theanalyst.com/2023/08/what-is-expected-goals-xg  xG is meant to measure how many goals were likely to be scored from the shots that were taken, as far as I understand it. It doesn't say who played better [though it can imply it] because you could be crap and get gifted a couple of gilt edge chances with a poor back pass, dumb penalty etc that boosts the xG.  Similarly you can carve a team open 5 times and each time the striker's a trimmed toenail short of putting a cross in a empty net, but no xG as no shot.  xG is useful, but it has its limitations. I think it's most useful for evaluating how clinical players are over a long period of time. It's overly obessing with xG & thinking it's the be all and end all that's for nonces. Edited January 16 by Checko Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Hearing you can use your eyes to see how good a chance was. More as I get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemtizz Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Did Karen Carney really say we’re only where we’re at because of Isak? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Prontonise Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 19 minutes ago, Disco said: Hearing you can use your eyes to see how good a chance was. More as I get it. Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorJ_01 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Antony is fun to watch, in that he's remarkably bad.  Yoro had a shocker. Ugarte was mince. Loads of bad performances.  However, Southampton's changes were awful. All those random regens added zero and let Man Utd take control. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodneyCisse Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 7 hours ago, nemtizz said: Did Karen Carney really say we’re only where we’re at because of Isak? Quite often the case for most fans who don’t actually watch us, social media is a wash with thinking we’re on some lucky run and don’t realise we now boss most if not all midfields we face. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 The general consensus of female punditry would go a long way if someone like Nieve Petruzziello was there instead of someone who is selected because she kicked a ball around in front of probably an average of 1000 people a week across her career.  To say we are where we are solely because of Isak is lazy at best. No point in doing any analysis at all of us because we’re not one of the “top clubs”.  We don’t matter to them unless we’re being used as a farm so they can have their entitlement of taking our best players away from us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Froggy Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 9 minutes ago, Sima said: The general consensus of female punditry would go a long way if someone like Nieve Petruzziello was there instead of someone who is selected because she kicked a ball around in front of probably an average of 1000 people a week across her career. Â Just found out that's StuntPegg's real name. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixelphish Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 10 minutes ago, Sima said: The general consensus of female punditry would go a long way if someone like Nieve Petruzziello was there instead of someone who is selected because she kicked a ball around in front of probably an average of 1000 people a week across her career.  To say we are where we are solely because of Isak is lazy at best. No point in doing any analysis at all of us because we’re not one of the “top clubs”.  We don’t matter to them unless we’re being used as a farm so they can have their entitlement of taking our best players away from us.  Ignorant, lazy, incompetent. Plenty of terms that apply to 90% of 'pundits' regardless of their gender. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now