Expected goals.
0.95 is missing an open net, from 3 yards.
Interesting stat, but must be looked at in context.
For example last night, could argue after WBA went one up, they didn't particularly chase a second- hence our Xg must have reached 2+
For every shot taken in a match, it is compared to a historical dataset of previous shots. If let’s say 20% of similar shots actually went in, that would give that particular shot an xG value of 0.2.I'm an old fart of nearly 72, and definately old school. So can someone explain what the f**k is xg and how is it supposed to aid statistics?
Just seems pointless to me.
Yep, it's bollocks.It's bollocks.
It's bollocksFrom last season's Championship 4 of the 6 teams with the highest xG for finished in the top 6. West Brom outperformed their xG rank (11) as did Norwich (8). Cov underperformed our xG rank (7).
In the xG against again 4 of the top 6 had the lowest xG against.
It's all obviously just coincidence though.
It's bollocks.
It is a really pointless “stat”, I wouldn’t worry about it.
It's definitely a useful stat but I don't agree that underperforming it for a long period of time counts as bad luck like some do. Means we're doing things right for sure but obviously failing at the most crucial part of the game.I love the way people have this explained to them, numerous times, in many many different ways and they still post “iTs shiTe” etc.
Imagine having that level of mental comprehension, then posting opinions on stuff in the match day threads. Love SBT!
Well that’s the thing, it’s a useful stat!It's definitely a useful stat but I don't agree that underperforming it for a long period of time counts as bad luck like some do. Means we're doing things right for sure but obviously failing at the most crucial part of the game.
Who in our team yesterday scores Grant’s chance? None of them, which is why the opposition will continue to score nearly every shot on target while we require 15-20.It's definitely a useful stat but I don't agree that underperforming it for a long period of time counts as bad luck like some do. Means we're doing things right for sure but obviously failing at the most crucial part of the game.
It's definitely a useful stat but I don't agree that underperforming it for a long period of time counts as bad luck like some do. Means we're doing things right for sure but obviously failing at the most crucial part of the game.
The goals we concede are just criminally soft. The latest of many this season was WBA’s second last night.It's unbelievable how much we are underperforming it this season
Basically if we scored from half of our chances the same as everyone does against us we’d be 3rd in the league
xG doesn’t take game state into account and because we spend so long chasing games, it will have the effect of skewing are xG upwards and xgA downwards.
We don’t need xG / xgA stats to see just how poor our defending is at times. This is something FL really needs to address. I don’t trust Lati nor Binks so the only person left is Kitching.
I’d happy watch dross football if it meant us winning games 1-0.
same asxG doesn’t take game state into account and because we spend so long chasing games, it will have the effect of skewing are xG upwards and xgA downwards.
We don’t need xG / xgA stats to see just how poor our defending is at times. This is something FL really needs to address. I don’t trust Lati nor Binks so the only person left is Kitching.
I’d happy watch dross football if it meant us winning games 1-0.
No, of course not. You can be creative with the data too, like this example: Removing the 4 biggest outliers for xG & xGA. Still paints a very similar picture.Are we unique in chasing games though?
i don’t think anyone is saying it just means we’re unlucky. I think it just shows when you are creating chances that on average should be scoredIt's definitely a useful stat but I don't agree that underperforming it for a long period of time counts as bad luck like some do.
I'll never get over him deliberately smashing the ball into the roof of our net at the family stand end.xG doesn’t take game state into account and because we spend so long chasing games, it will have the effect of skewing are xG upwards and xgA downwards.
We don’t need xG / xgA stats to see just how poor our defending is at times. This is something FL really needs to address. I don’t trust Lati nor Binks so the only person left is Kitching.
I’d happy watch dross football if it meant us winning games 1-0.
Cmon has anyone ever seen an own goal like that ?I'll never get over him deliberately smashing the ball into the roof of our net at the family stand end.
Yea because we’ve gone behind in 12 to 14 of our games this season.Are we unique in chasing games though?
Yea because we’ve gone behind in 12 to 14 of our games this season.
Only Hull and Plymouth have conceded first more often than us. When we score first, we tend to do well!What’s that compared to others?
Genuine Q. Curious how much of an outlier we are in terms of conceding first/conceding early.
So much bollocks that the best teams in the world pay huge amounts of money to study it in unbelievable detail?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?