Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
markjazzbassist

Watford (Home) Saturday August 17th

Recommended Posts

Was just saying to a friend I went with.

Watford were set up all game to deal with DCL. Kean came on, and they had no idea how to handle him. This is exactly what we need options.

If Kean would have started, it would have been a completely different game for him as they would be set up to deal with him.

We no longer have to go through like for like substitutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won 5 on the bounce at home and the last time we conceded at home was against City in February. That’s absolutely amazing and credit to “Martinez mk2” for adapting his defensive tactics and implementing whatever he has done to get us solid at the back again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Was just saying to a friend I went with.

Watford were set up all game to deal with DCL. Kean came on, and they had no idea how to handle him. This is exactly what we need options.

If Kean would have started, it would have been a completely different game for him as they would be set up to deal with him.

We no longer have to go through like for like substitutions.

What did you think of Gbamin’s performance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Palfy said:

What did you think of Gbamin’s performance.  

I like him. He had a few hiccups but generally did well. Better at harassing than I expected as well. He also looks like he has tidy feet when in possession.

He could be a very good player once he gets up to speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our xG today was less than 1 which I don't understand.  Richarlison had 2 sitters, Bernards goal was from a good position in the box and Kean had two chances, which I would expect a Premier League striker to score 1 in every 4 or 5. 

Just shows you that stats are only as good as the person pressing the buttons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Bailey said:

Our xG today was less than 1 which I don't understand.  Richarlison had 2 sitters, Bernards goal was from a good position in the box and Kean had two chances, which I would expect a Premier League striker to score 1 in every 4 or 5. 

Just shows you that stats are only as good as the person pressing the buttons.

Richarlison should have scored one of his two, especially the free header. But te others weren't great chances, Bernard's was covered by two defenders and only went in thanks to the deflection (and his new found belief/confidence). Kean's was a long distance shot which are scored only 13% of the time if they're on target, adjusting for misses and it's only 3% chance of scoring (passing to Walcott might have been the better option), the other one of his was offside. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/cartilagefreecaptain.sbnation.com/platform/amp/2013/11/13/5098186/shot-matrix-i-shot-location-and-expected-goals

https://statsbomb.com/2014/02/mythbusting-is-long-range-shooting-a-bad-option/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

I'm not even that old and I miss the days when people just judged a game by what they actually watched, rather than on some weirdly worked out stats that are stupid to even consider. I don't care how many goals we were "expected" to score/concede. The only stat that matters in judging the game is how many goals we "actually" scored/conceded.

Me too,  it's the same with all this FIFA 19 player ratings etc, I judge a player on how they perform on the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, pete0 said:

Richarlison should have scored one of his two, especially the free header. But te others weren't great chances, Bernard's was covered by two defenders and only went in thanks to the deflection (and his new found belief/confidence). Kean's was a long distance shot which are scored only 13% of the time if they're on target, adjusting for misses and it's only 3% chance of scoring (passing to Walcott might have been the better option), the other one of his was offside. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/cartilagefreecaptain.sbnation.com/platform/amp/2013/11/13/5098186/shot-matrix-i-shot-location-and-expected-goals

https://statsbomb.com/2014/02/mythbusting-is-long-range-shooting-a-bad-option/

 

If Richarlison should have scored 1 of his 2 then that is already 0.5 for each attempt taking us over 1 expected goal even forgetting about the other chances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Matt said:

Won 5 on the bounce at home and the last time we conceded at home was against City in February. That’s absolutely amazing and credit to “Martinez mk2” for adapting his defensive tactics and implementing whatever he has done to get us solid at the back again. 

Totally this. He’s definitely been putting the time in on the training ground. Better than a fat Sam cardboard cut out I guess 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Matt said:

Won 5 on the bounce at home and the last time we conceded at home was against City in February. That’s absolutely amazing and credit to “Martinez mk2” for adapting his defensive tactics and implementing whatever he has done to get us solid at the back again. 

Last two games the clean sheets have been thanks to Pickford. The lengths people go to justify Silva is laughable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Last two games the clean sheets have been thanks to Pickford. The lengths people go to justify Silva is laughable. 

Your choosing of appropriate statistics is the only laughable thing here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

I'm not even that old and I miss the days when people just judged a game by what they actually watched, rather than on some weirdly worked out stats that are stupid to even consider. I don't care how many goals we were "expected" to score/concede. The only stat that matters in judging the game is how many goals we "actually" scored/conceded.

Stop acting like a miserable old git then :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Last two games the clean sheets have been thanks to Pickford. The lengths people go to justify Silva is laughable. 

Explain? Just because you see Pickford doing his job and stopping the ball? What about the stuff you don’t see off the ball? How about Coleman today saying how is taken time but the clean sheets are down to the work silva puts in on the training ground? Keane has said the same thing. You say it’s laughable people are giving the manager credit. Some people would say it’s laughable how you discredit him at every opportunity. I so hope we win the league cup this year 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Matt said:

Your choosing of appropriate statistics is the only laughable thing here. 

Which statistics? 

10 minutes ago, Finn balor said:

Explain? Just because you see Pickford doing his job and stopping the ball? What about the stuff you don’t see off the ball? How about Coleman today saying how is taken time but the clean sheets are down to the work silva puts in on the training ground? Keane has said the same thing. You say it’s laughable people are giving the manager credit. Some people would say it’s laughable how you discredit him at every opportunity. I so hope we win the league cup this year 

Doing his job would imply they were routine saves. I'd not have begrudged Pickford if any of them had gone in. To credit the manager for clean sheets when the keeper being exceptional to keep the ball out the net doesn't make sense. Maybe credit the goal keeping coaches but ultimately the lions share of credit goes to Pickford who's saved us three points so far. 

Credit where it's due. Silva's tactics have been poor and his subs too, it's only got having a very good keeper that we're on 4 points rather than 1. We're not creating many good chances, no clear ones I'm the Palace game and only the one header for Richarlison which was from a set piece. Two relatively easy games yet Silva's tactics aren't creating good opportunities just as they weren't last year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Finn balor said:

Deeneys shot hit him in the fucking face! You saying he flexed his nose to save that? 

That's down to his positioning. He's made himself big to block the goal. 

1 minute ago, Finn balor said:

Two relatively easy games? Wow you should go into football management you are wasting your life pal 

Watford got beat 3 nil at home by Brighton and Palace had their best player on the bench and had three of their back four were back up players last year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Finn balor said:

And as much as I love Pickford I disagree they were exceptional saves in either game 

He was motm first game, and currently joint second for yesterday's performance (albeit with three votes). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pete0 said:

That's down to his positioning. He's made himself big to block the goal. 

Watford got beat 3 nil at home by Brighton and Palace had their best player on the bench and had three of their back four were back up players last year. 

You are aware that the opposition are allowed to shoot? And our goalkeeper is paid to stop that shot. So when Pickford is paid to do his job i.e sort his positioning out the ball gets hit in his face. He hasn’t done a Gordon banks save he’s done his job. So to discredit silva and the obvious work he’s done behind the scenes is just daft mate 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are saves you would hope he would make IMO. The two against Palace were better but they were all about his positioning. 

No manager in this league is going to realistically get through a game without needing his keeper to make a good save. To suggest it's down to not being tactically good enough is laughable. City conceded 3 shots yesterday and conceded 2. Is that down to Peps tactics or down to other factors outside of his control?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, pete0 said:

He was motm first game, and currently joint second for yesterday's performance (albeit with three votes). 

I’m not making this about Pickford. I love him I’m making it about you just don’t have clean sheet after clean sheet at home because of Pickford. It’s a collective throughout the team. That has come from silva. If you can’t see that then your more of a sausage than I originally thought 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the big teams bar Liverpool were on a bad day. Liverpool dropped a bollock in the Derby going conservative, yet they still should have scored Salah missed a sitter. Of the teams that tried we conceded 3 against Newcastle, 2 against Fulham and 2 against Spurs reserves. 

If they were expected Pickford wouldn't have got motm. Another keeper and we'd likely have conceded. 

The first one city conceded was the keepers fault. Should be saving them but he was poorly positioned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Bailey said:

Our xG today was less than 1 which I don't understand.  Richarlison had 2 sitters, Bernards goal was from a good position in the box and Kean had two chances, which I would expect a Premier League striker to score 1 in every 4 or 5. 

Just shows you that stats are only as good as the person pressing the buttons.

I’d never heard of xG until you posted this message. What exactly is it, and how is it calculated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, pete0 said:

Which statistics? 

Doing his job would imply they were routine saves. I'd not have begrudged Pickford if any of them had gone in. To credit the manager for clean sheets when the keeper being exceptional to keep the ball out the net doesn't make sense. Maybe credit the goal keeping coaches but ultimately the lions share of credit goes to Pickford who's saved us three points so far. 

Credit where it's due. Silva's tactics have been poor and his subs too, it's only got having a very good keeper that we're on 4 points rather than 1. We're not creating many good chances, no clear ones I'm the Palace game and only the one header for Richarlison which was from a set piece. Two relatively easy games yet Silva's tactics aren't creating good opportunities just as they weren't last year. 

We've played two games, and defenses don't tend to gel until five or six weeks into the season. The fact that we haven't conceded a goal at home since February is quite an achievement and no fluke. Pickford is part of that defense, and the fact that he's playing well shouldn't detract from our defensive record as a whole. If we can match a solid defense with Matinezesque attacking flair, we're going to be quite a force this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

I’d never heard of xG until you posted this message. What exactly is it, and how is it calculated?

It is the expected goals that an individual at a certain level of football will score from that position on the pitch. That expectation is based upon statistics gathered from years of data of other players in that league in a similar situation. The problem is that it is still down to individual calculations. For the Bernard goal, they will take the difficulty of having to beat defenders decide how more likely or unlikely it was to score from that position. 

As another example from understat.com the two Richarlison headers were assessed at 0.28 and 0.05. I think that is massively out.  

It's interesting and the expected points as a result of xG largely correlated with the final table. The one anomaly at the top was Arsenal (likely due to have 2 excellent finishers). They had Palace and Bournemouth underperforming due to xG (crap defending for the latter) and West Ham in particular over preforming. 

As with any stat though it's limited by whoever presses the button. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Bailey said:

It is the expected goals that an individual at a certain level of football will score from that position on the pitch. That expectation is based upon statistics gathered from years of data of other players in that league in a similar situation. The problem is that it is still down to individual calculations. For the Bernard goal, they will take the difficulty of having to beat defenders decide how more likely or unlikely it was to score from that position. 

As another example from understat.com the two Richarlison headers were assessed at 0.28 and 0.05. I think that is massively out.  

It's interesting and the expected points as a result of xG largely correlated with the final table. The one anomaly at the top was Arsenal (likely due to have 2 excellent finishers). They had Palace and Bournemouth underperforming due to xG (crap defending for the latter) and West Ham in particular over preforming. 

As with any stat though it's limited by whoever presses the button. 

Thanks for the explanation. Given the infinite number of combinations of player positions, direction, and speed, the effect of wind and rain, the effects of tiredness and how long a player's been on the field, etc., this would seem to be a very subjective statistic. Pattern matching of that sort would need some hefty computing power, which makes me very skeptical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/08/2019 at 07:25, Bailey said:

If Richarlison should have scored 1 of his 2 then that is already 0.5 for each attempt taking us over 1 expected goal even forgetting about the other chances. 

I think people overestimate how likely a goal is from the positions Richarlison found himself in. Those were good chances but no way is he supposed to score 50% of the time from there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

Thanks for the explanation. Given the infinite number of combinations of player positions, direction, and speed, the effect of wind and rain, the effects of tiredness and how long a player's been on the field, etc., this would seem to be a very subjective statistic. Pattern matching of that sort would need some hefty computing power, which makes me very skeptical. 

The sentence you’re looking for is “it’s a load of shite.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah americans love stats, like really LOVE stats.  most of our popular sports are super stats heavy (sabremetrics).  But i've always felt soccer is the one sport where they just don't work well.  i have thought about it and tried to figure out why, but the off the ball stuff isn't easily quantifiable and most of that is extremely important stuff to the game.  positioning, movement, dragging defenders, blocking passing lanes, etc.  that's why the stats fall short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/08/2019 at 15:02, Cornish Steve said:

Thanks for the explanation. Given the infinite number of combinations of player positions, direction, and speed, the effect of wind and rain, the effects of tiredness and how long a player's been on the field, etc., this would seem to be a very subjective statistic. Pattern matching of that sort would need some hefty computing power, which makes me very skeptical. 

All stats are to be fair. Is it a completed pass if its that bad it goes to the wrong player? Or if it hits him at knee height when he cant possibly control it? Is it an interception if the ball goes to a teammate or just a tackle? What about if 2 players going to the tackle and the bump from player 1 allows player 2 to take the ball away? Even some possession stats differ as some only take into account the time the team is on the ball whilst it is in play whereas others include the time the ball is not in play but the clock is going (ie a goal kick or throw in). All stats can only show black and white.

As a different example, in boxing I remember Pauli Malinaggi slating punching stats such as whether a punch connects or doesn't. He said it all depends on who is pressing the button and whether they see it in the first place and then how they interpret it.

On 19/08/2019 at 15:13, SpartyBlue said:

I think people overestimate how likely a goal is from the positions Richarlison found himself in. Those were good chances but no way is he supposed to score 50% of the time from there. 

That is true in a sense. I think it would be hard to say that a professional footballer at that level shouldn't be hitting the target. Then you have to factor in the chance of the keeper saving the shot. One of the chance was plum though, a good header would have given the keeper very little chance to make the save unless it was right at him. The other one was a little further out and been more difficult but it would have been far higher than 0.05.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...