One shot on goal wasnt it? And it was that..
Possession means nothing. You go through large periods of the game making nothing passes around the back.
Its a lot of stat padding, nothing football
Jurgen Klopp Sack Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Possession means nothing. You go through large periods of the game making nothing passes around the back.
Its a lot of stat padding, nothing football
Just had a look at the xG table 
has this ever happened?
Before any Liverpool fans jump on this and decry statistics poisoning the game...
I think this raises valid questions about what the xG paradigm is capturing. Is Liverpool outperforming xG by 17 points an indictment of the model's shortcomings (in not capturing what goes on between the boxes) or are Liverpool certain to fall back to earth soon? I'm a Bayesian at heart so I lean towards the bolded, plus it's arrogant to assume a model is perfect. The question is how much of the discrepancy is driven by noise/variation that we can expect to revert to the mean, vs a dynamic that math has not been able to capture/translate yet? And what exactly is that dynamic that results in 17 points above what chances conceded/created would predict?
The mentality explanation only goes so far (you have to be a Liverpool fan to think that only players on this team have exceptional mentality). City displayed exceptional mentality last season but didn't outperform their xG this way.
has this ever happened?Before any Liverpool fans jump on this and decry statistics poisoning the game...
I think this raises valid questions about what the xG paradigm is capturing. Is Liverpool outperforming xG by 17 points an indictment of the model's shortcomings (in not capturing what goes on between the boxes) or are Liverpool certain to fall back to earth soon? I'm a Bayesian at heart so I lean towards the bolded, plus it's arrogant to assume a model is perfect. The question is how much of the discrepancy is driven by noise/variation that we can expect to revert to the mean, vs a dynamic that math has not been able to capture/translate yet? And what exactly is that dynamic that results in 17 points above what chances conceded/created would predict?
The mentality explanation only goes so far (you have to be a Liverpool fan to think that only players on this team have exceptional mentality). City displayed exceptional mentality last season but didn't outperform their xG this way.
This generations equivalent of the back pass is VAR or XG. Got to admire the way that the narrative’s are keeping pace with technology. I wonder what it will be in 20 years time - breaking the rules regarding AI perhaps?
Just had a look at the xG table
Before any Liverpool fans jump on this and decry statistics poisoning the game...
I think this raises valid questions about what the xG paradigm is capturing. Is Liverpool outperforming xG by 17 points an indictment of the model's shortcomings (in not capturing what goes on between the boxes) or are Liverpool certain to fall back to earth soon? I'm a Bayesian at heart so I lean towards the bolded, plus it's arrogant to assume a model is perfect. The question is how much of the discrepancy is driven by noise/variation that we can expect to revert to the mean, vs a dynamic that math has not been able to capture/translate yet? And what exactly is that dynamic that results in 17 points above what chances conceded/created would predict?
The mentality explanation only goes so far (you have to be a Liverpool fan to think that only players on this team have exceptional mentality). City displayed exceptional mentality last season but didn't outperform their xG this way.
Always thought xG crap was pure bullshit, this just proves it. How exactly can people use it as valid metric when it's that bad in this case.
It also shows us as 8 points behind, which is also poor stat considering that we are nothing better than our points tally suggest.
Can this finally put that xG crap to bed, it would be actually good if someone would be free to create a thread with this argument, and hopefully get the term banned from this forum.
The first drawn game at Old Trafford.
Probably
Liverpool has played the 3rd most long balls in the league, but they are also 3rd best in terms of short passing. In fact, Liverpool has the second highest possession stats in the league (with 58%, only second to City 60%). As Norcroft pointed out, we are just remarkably versatile tactically.
That is the main reason why no one has been able to find a way to stop us till now. The modern game (pretty much ever since Sacchi in fact) has been largely based on narrow predominantly zonal systems. Managers are usually very happy to force the play outwide, press compact in numbers and leave the other side free (as switches to the other flank are some of the least dangerous passes: they are sideways, are tough to execute under pressure, can be intercepted in the centre for excellent offensive transition possibilities, and the defensive block has time to shift sideways while the ball is travelling). The problem is Liverpool's full-backs are redefining the game. People often talk about their final third contributions, but their incredible switching ability in build-up (particularly Trent) is completely nullifying the modern compact pressing strategy. The best example is Salah's goal against Man City. Best goal from a tactical perspective this season in my opinion. So many commentators and fans referred to that goal as a devastating counter-attack, except it was not a counter attack. City were not attacking and were in their usual defensive shape, but got done by a placed attack with two perfectly executed passes.
As a result, we have started to see teams try to defend wider than usual to counter the wide build-up like Mourinho did. Problem then is Klopp just dropped Mane, Firmino and Salah all in the half-spaces and completely overloaded Spurs' central midfield. Others have tried not pressing us to avoid getting down by the flank switch, while keeping a fairly high line to prevent the full-backs bombarding them with crosses into the box. In that case, we just used the passing ability of our centre-backs (usually VVD) to play vertical long balls behind their backline (e.g. Everton & Bournemouth). The long balls Liverpool play, contrary to most teams, are rarely out of desperation, they are very much effective fit-for-purpose strategies.
Overall, Klopp has assembled a team with such a varied skill set that he can find solutions to pretty much any opposition strategy. The team is exceptional at attacking through the centre whether it's Mane and Salah running in behind, or Firmino dropping between the lines. And, just as good a creative force outwide with Robertson and TAA. Similarly, the deense is fast enough to play a high line and aerially good enough to defend deep. Add to that a purposefully safe midfield to minimise potential turnovers in the central zones, and yet hardworking enough to maximise offensive transition potential to allow the front three to stay high up the pitch. In that sense, it is perhaps not surprising that more opposition managers, rather than your average football fan, has been waxing lyrical about this team as a complete puzzle. There have been many great sides over the years, all with their own strengths, but this may well be the most tactically flexible team I've seen. Liverpool are pretty much a jack of all trades - and nearly master of all at this point in time.
That is the main reason why no one has been able to find a way to stop us till now. The modern game (pretty much ever since Sacchi in fact) has been largely based on narrow predominantly zonal systems. Managers are usually very happy to force the play outwide, press compact in numbers and leave the other side free (as switches to the other flank are some of the least dangerous passes: they are sideways, are tough to execute under pressure, can be intercepted in the centre for excellent offensive transition possibilities, and the defensive block has time to shift sideways while the ball is travelling). The problem is Liverpool's full-backs are redefining the game. People often talk about their final third contributions, but their incredible switching ability in build-up (particularly Trent) is completely nullifying the modern compact pressing strategy. The best example is Salah's goal against Man City. Best goal from a tactical perspective this season in my opinion. So many commentators and fans referred to that goal as a devastating counter-attack, except it was not a counter attack. City were not attacking and were in their usual defensive shape, but got done by a placed attack with two perfectly executed passes.
As a result, we have started to see teams try to defend wider than usual to counter the wide build-up like Mourinho did. Problem then is Klopp just dropped Mane, Firmino and Salah all in the half-spaces and completely overloaded Spurs' central midfield. Others have tried not pressing us to avoid getting down by the flank switch, while keeping a fairly high line to prevent the full-backs bombarding them with crosses into the box. In that case, we just used the passing ability of our centre-backs (usually VVD) to play vertical long balls behind their backline (e.g. Everton & Bournemouth). The long balls Liverpool play, contrary to most teams, are rarely out of desperation, they are very much effective fit-for-purpose strategies.
Overall, Klopp has assembled a team with such a varied skill set that he can find solutions to pretty much any opposition strategy. The team is exceptional at attacking through the centre whether it's Mane and Salah running in behind, or Firmino dropping between the lines. And, just as good a creative force outwide with Robertson and TAA. Similarly, the deense is fast enough to play a high line and aerially good enough to defend deep. Add to that a purposefully safe midfield to minimise potential turnovers in the central zones, and yet hardworking enough to maximise offensive transition potential to allow the front three to stay high up the pitch. In that sense, it is perhaps not surprising that more opposition managers, rather than your average football fan, has been waxing lyrical about this team as a complete puzzle. There have been many great sides over the years, all with their own strengths, but this may well be the most tactically flexible team I've seen. Liverpool are pretty much a jack of all trades - and nearly master of all at this point in time.
Why should i or anyone here be obliged to answer your questions?
Don't be a pushy two-shoes.
Now answer my questions by going to your LiVARpool forum and ask your friends there:
1) why your team spent 30 years in the wilderness of not winning any League and your rivals win 13 PL's during that time;
2) and why Gerrard and Carragher never managed to lift the League Trophy while players like Anderson and Young managed it ?
instead of coming here to ask irrelevant questions
Opposition fans talk a lot about how lucky Liverpool are and that and that teams have missed sitters against them. But the hypothetical scenario that Lo celso, Martial or Docoure scored these chances...based on what Liverpool have actually done over the past few months and not hypotheses, they would probably have just revved up the engine and turned it up a couple of gears to dispatch their opponent. They have done pretty much the minimum needed to win football matches and will in my opinion produce more 'Leicester away ' type performances in the last few months of the season to retain the Champions League.
I don't see many teams on the continent which can Live with them. The ones with the personnel to are managed by managers who love to overcomplicate things and mess up important matches. I'm talking Pep and his disciples in Sarri and Tuchel.
And to those deluding themselves saying this is a freak season and Liverpool will be displaced easily next season and beyond, just check their stats since about March 2018. That's when they became a top football team and they have gone from strength to strength since. They are probably the level of Peps Bayern if not better. It's ominous but it is what it is. We had our time.
I don't see many teams on the continent which can Live with them. The ones with the personnel to are managed by managers who love to overcomplicate things and mess up important matches. I'm talking Pep and his disciples in Sarri and Tuchel.
And to those deluding themselves saying this is a freak season and Liverpool will be displaced easily next season and beyond, just check their stats since about March 2018. That's when they became a top football team and they have gone from strength to strength since. They are probably the level of Peps Bayern if not better. It's ominous but it is what it is. We had our time.
I never snapped on anything with you Speedy Gonzales but i always wonder why people like you prefer to come here and wind up United fans, with the excuse of trying to converse about football, instead of trying to start conversations on the LiVARpool forum.
I, as a United fan, would never dream of going there to converse with opposition fans.
IMHO
I wouldn't want to get quite that excited, obviously
However, I do think the wide and central attacking facility is relevant and opposition teams haven't caught on yet.
Utd's tactics weren't terrible yesterday but the execution wasn't great. Jenas said a lot of the right points about this on motd2.
And teams need to be careful trying to play out as it invites the press. But everyone thinks playing out is great.
SW, BACK 3, MF4 man marking out wide practically, AMF, 1 striker??
Try and keep the ball. Be aware they break like lightning.
Was your face as smug as that sounds when you typed that out?
Still unsure how we tolerate these smug scouse twats on this forum.
It's like opening the door to your house and inviting in some wee neds and letting them do whatever they want. Crap on the floor, piss in the plant pots while telling you in a loud voice that your house is a shit hole.
It's like opening the door to your house and inviting in some wee neds and letting them do whatever they want. Crap on the floor, piss in the plant pots while telling you in a loud voice that your house is a shit hole.
These last 3 responses are so much better than mine. I don't know what I was doing.
I agree with these comments.
I did no winding up until you decided to start but go with whatever narrative makes you feel better.
Most of the Utd fans on here are great to talk, debate and banter with. You don't fall into any of those categories
You didn't answer my questions about why you all come here and i assure you that the majority of Utd fans here do not want to (what you call) talk, banter and debate with LiVARpool supporters who come here with devious intentions.
You don't fall into those categories either.
I have massive respect for what Chris Wilder and Sheffield are doing this season. But they were not the better side vs Liverpool, this is nonsense. Wilder said so in his post-match interview, the first game all season were they were clearly second best. That was a really one-sided game.
This is a simply untrue and ignorant view. xG are a better predictor of future results than actual goals and points, this has been proven. It doesn't make sense to solely look at goals in a low-scoring sport such as football where results often don't represent what happened on the pitch at all (see Newcastle's freak result at the weekend). I don't think there is great need for an equivalent model in say basketball for example but xG was first used in hockey (another low-scoring sport) to better assess team strenghts and performances. It is not perfect (and doesn't aim to be) but is one of the best and easiest to understand models there is. Results are a function of performances, not the other way around.
Always thought xG crap was pure bullshit, this just proves it. How exactly can people use it as valid metric when it's that bad in this case.
It also shows us as 8 points behind, which is also poor stat considering that we are nothing better than our points tally suggest.
Can this finally put that xG crap to bed, it would be actually good if someone would be free to create a thread with this argument, and hopefully get the term banned from this forum.
Really?
I am not bothered about pride, I am bothered about the result. Liverpool had an off day and I think we missed an opportunity. In pressurised situations we need to remain composed. We were delighted with the shape but their chances came from our mistakes.
"We have had big moments in the game but we did not take them. We had to jump all over it and we didn't. We had enough to get something out of this game but we did not take our opportunities. Points are the most important thing and we did not get the points we deserved today."
So let's say Chelsea had a 5.00 xG and Newcastle a 1.00 xG - does that mean that Chelsea deserved to win or that they were so shit at finishing their chances that they deserved absolutely nothing from the game? Does the 1.00 xG mean that Newcastle barely got a chance or does it mean that they're great at converting their chances?
xG could be a good tool but unsurprisingly it's been used completely wrong in football. The fact that it doesn't take into account who is taking a penalty but just applies a general score for each one says it all for me. There are a hundred other circumstances which are not factored in by the xG model which renders it pretty pointless.
Well firstly, you didn't actually ask me that, you asked someone else and secondly, I have some really good conversations on here with people as I don't tend to judge people based on the football team they support.
I come on here as it's probably the best football forum on the internet. Yeah it was set up as a Utd board and I have always respected that (apart from the one bit of shit I gave you in response to some wumming) so I'm quite happy talking about Liverpool, Utd and other football matters to the vast majority on here. I joined this forum years ago before Liverpool became good and I have always taken the banter that comes with being a rival fan in good spirits and will continue to do so.
Your responses however, are not banter, they're just frankly ridiculous. You're just a bit of a troll who can't help but WUM and get upset when people don't play ball with you. Grow up
Are we talking about different games? I mean Liverpool v Sheffield at Anfield.
GaryLifo hit the nail on the head with his post further up:
''Still unsure how we tolerate these smug scouse twats on this forum.
It's like opening the door to your house and inviting in some wee neds and letting them do whatever they want. Crap on the floor, piss in the plant pots while telling you in a loud voice that your house is a shit hole.''
You can't take the Flak and you're trying to show that 'i'm holier than thou and i'm a nice person' with a lot of blah, blah blah.
I won't tell you to grow up as i'm not patronising like you are so you've got the Ignore button and you can easily use it.
1.00 xG would have been pretty decent for Newcastle considering the opponent they were facing. They were well below that. The point is that this result doesn't tell me anything, it is largely irrelevant. Watching the game confirmed pretty much what we've seen so far this season. Newcastle are one of the worst sides in the league who have more points than they should and Chelsea are one of the best in the league. Whether Hayden scores that header in the end or narrowly puts it wide shouldn't alter your evaluation of the match.
The problem with being overly results-oriented is that it creates unrealistic expectations and knee-jerk reactions. Look no further than the Guardiola sack watch thread on this very forum which is ridiculous. Or the fact that you can be sure the Chelsea and Lampard threads get bumped after a result like at the weekend because now is the time to score some points in the imaginery Ole vs Frank debate. Some Leicester fan got upset earlier this season when it was pointed out that their results and Vardy's conversion rate are unsustainable. On Leicester forums they were suggesting they have closed the gap to the top 2 and might be favourites if they were to play City at that point. But the notion that they were anywhere near Liverpool's and City's level is ridiculous and nothing in their performance data suggested that this could possibly be true. Now, give it a few more results like they've had recently and you'll see the same people start to question Rodgers, which is equally dumb. Managers lose their jobs because of this which of course not helped by the media who are trying to create controversy and talking point whereever possible and will also tell you that a 2-0 win must have been deserved because one team took their chances or something like that. Though, to be fair, some managers get 6-year contracts after they fluked 5th place with a +5 goal difference (Pardew at Newcastle).
This is a great story along the same lines:
A good example from last season was in League One. After 10 games played Peterborough were top of the league with 22 points from a possible 30. However their Expected Goals numbers told a very different story.
The xG numbers couldn’t say any more clearly that Peterborough seemed to have gotten results much, much better than their performances suggested they “deserved”. On average with the chances they created you’d have expected them to score around 14 – 15 goals, have conceded around 19 – 20 and picked up around 10 – 11 points.
After a closer match-by-match inspection, it was obvious that marginal moments had pretty much all gone their way in almost every game. They were scoring at a completely unsustainable rate – over 25% of their 102 total shots and 74% of their “big chances” resulted in a goal. They also got 3 penalties at crucial times in tight games. Their opponents also missed their big opportunities at an unsustainable rate. Basically, anything that could go their way, was going their way. There seemed little chance they could keep up that level of good fortune.
I remember someone tweeted Posh owner Darragh Macanthony sometime around this point pointing this out and he replied sarcastically something along the lines of “yeah we are just really lucky. Top of the league but rubbish. Cant wait until we get it right!” P’boro fans were pretty much in unanimous agreement with replies of “it’s a results business”, “whatever we are doing it’s working”, “the only stat that matters is the league table” etc etc
4 months later and manager Steve Evans was sacked after claiming just 26 points from their next 20 games. The numbers suggest their overall performance level didn’t change in any meaningful way. They just stopped getting all the breaks they had previously got earlier in the season. They were now in the position their overall play merited, a solid but unspectacular 6th – 8th range. You wonder if the breaks had fell in a more even pattern, whether owner and supporters would have been perfectly content with their league position and Evans would still be in the job?
Unless you were a regular Peterborough spectator it would have been difficult to spot that early season overperformance without xG. Even if you suspected it, having the stats laid out to prove the theory is incredibly useful.
The xG numbers couldn’t say any more clearly that Peterborough seemed to have gotten results much, much better than their performances suggested they “deserved”. On average with the chances they created you’d have expected them to score around 14 – 15 goals, have conceded around 19 – 20 and picked up around 10 – 11 points.
After a closer match-by-match inspection, it was obvious that marginal moments had pretty much all gone their way in almost every game. They were scoring at a completely unsustainable rate – over 25% of their 102 total shots and 74% of their “big chances” resulted in a goal. They also got 3 penalties at crucial times in tight games. Their opponents also missed their big opportunities at an unsustainable rate. Basically, anything that could go their way, was going their way. There seemed little chance they could keep up that level of good fortune.
I remember someone tweeted Posh owner Darragh Macanthony sometime around this point pointing this out and he replied sarcastically something along the lines of “yeah we are just really lucky. Top of the league but rubbish. Cant wait until we get it right!” P’boro fans were pretty much in unanimous agreement with replies of “it’s a results business”, “whatever we are doing it’s working”, “the only stat that matters is the league table” etc etc
4 months later and manager Steve Evans was sacked after claiming just 26 points from their next 20 games. The numbers suggest their overall performance level didn’t change in any meaningful way. They just stopped getting all the breaks they had previously got earlier in the season. They were now in the position their overall play merited, a solid but unspectacular 6th – 8th range. You wonder if the breaks had fell in a more even pattern, whether owner and supporters would have been perfectly content with their league position and Evans would still be in the job?
Unless you were a regular Peterborough spectator it would have been difficult to spot that early season overperformance without xG. Even if you suspected it, having the stats laid out to prove the theory is incredibly useful.
There is a reason advanced metrics have become mainstream and is used by all clubs now, such as yours.
One last thing: Good xG models (such as StatsBomb's) take a lot of factors into consideration, probably more than you give it credit for. Goalkeeper positioning for example. What it shouldn't do is look at who took the shot. Then it wouldn't really be comparable anymore would it? It is also not really necessary to use xG at all (using it for single matches also can sometimes give you a wrong or at least incomplete impression of how the game went). But at least people should look beyond results.
Last edited:
So Guardiola's performances should be judged based on xG rather than spent billions, poor transfer strategy, wrong formations against some teams, playing midfielders as CB, them being behind Leicester on the table, poor results in Champions league, etc.?
Subotic, Schmelzer, Pizczek, Gundogan, Bender, Mkhitaryan, Gotze, Blazczykowski, Kagawa, Grosskeutz...
What do all those players have in common? They all had the best years of their careers under Klopp independent of their position or their age.
Liverpool have the best coach in world football at the moment and he has put a system and implemented coaching that is getting the most out of the squad whilst the other teams are in disarray.
This upturn in fortunes will end with Klopp’s exit. He is the motivator and the man responsible for all of it.
Without Klopp in charge, a number of those Liverpool players will revert to pre-Klopp levels.
You can talk about Xg, chances missed, tactical flexibility and whatever else, but it’s just a very good coach elevating a good team above themselves as he always has done.
Pool supporters love to romanticize it and have always loved hyping up their own players, so imagine when they are actually doing well!
Enjoy it while it lasts Pool fans, really soak it up, because this is as good as it gets and these players won’t get close to this level of performance under anyone else.
What do all those players have in common? They all had the best years of their careers under Klopp independent of their position or their age.
Liverpool have the best coach in world football at the moment and he has put a system and implemented coaching that is getting the most out of the squad whilst the other teams are in disarray.
This upturn in fortunes will end with Klopp’s exit. He is the motivator and the man responsible for all of it.
Without Klopp in charge, a number of those Liverpool players will revert to pre-Klopp levels.
You can talk about Xg, chances missed, tactical flexibility and whatever else, but it’s just a very good coach elevating a good team above themselves as he always has done.
Pool supporters love to romanticize it and have always loved hyping up their own players, so imagine when they are actually doing well!
Enjoy it while it lasts Pool fans, really soak it up, because this is as good as it gets and these players won’t get close to this level of performance under anyone else.
That's my whole point - it isn't advanced, it's over-simplified. It doesn't take into account the quality of the player involved for example, so a Kroos 20-yarder would have the same xG as one from Phil Jones. Does it account for the GK's position? Pressure from defense? I bet it doesn't. You say that, e.g. if Salah consistently scores more goals than his xG, he's on a lucky streak and will regress to the mean rather sooner than later. I say that your model is extremely flawed and that Salah is just an excellent finisher. Giving the same xG to a player who scores 50% of his penalties and Hazard is mind-boggling for example.
It could be a good indication for teams, players and games if it's actually used in an advanced way, but it isn't. It's too flawed to take anything away from at the moment.
It is still hard to use it to predict things. Momentum can be very important in football. New seasons see managers, players etc change.
Quality players can do much better than expected and reverse for poor players. Using just xG gives you almost nothing in my view.
I think for a mid table side who are pretty average it could be a good indication. If they get too many points they will probably decline.
If too few they might bounce up with some more confidence.
In the PL you could maybe look at Southampton and think they might improve overall with xG. They had a very poor start, but has picked up recently.
Still Ings might drop in form and they could decline anyway.
For a team like Liverpool that are dominating everyone. I don't see that stopping just because they give away a few chances in games, but still wins.
Is this even a thread about Klopp anymore
If he fails to win xG league at the end of the season and also no VAR league then his title should be removedIs this even a thread about Klopp anymore
.Everyone loves a Jesse Lingard with xG 10 and 0 goals for a year or something like that.
1) Because Liverpool weren't good enough
2) Because Liverpool weren't good enough
Now they are.
It does though. StatsBomb track the exact position of every single player on the pitch when a shot is taken. They even track the vision cone of the goalkeeper. Finishing ability is also less important than a lot of people think. Lewandowski was slightly below his expected goals numbers over the last five seasons. Doesn't mean he isn't one of the number 9s in football. But what makes him great is largely his ability to get into great goal-scoring positions. Ronaldo is below his xG and he is always being talked about as great finisher. There are players who consistantly post better numbers than they "should" (Messi notably) but that doesn't render the model useless. If you want to see how useful these metrics are look no further than Brentford or Midtjylland who have been punching well above their weight on small budgets and have some of the best analytics units in world football. Incidentally they are owned by the same person, who helped develop these metrics and made fortunes in the betting markets because he could predict football matches more precisely than anyone else.
Last edited:
I agree with the two answers to my questions - well done and cheers.
Sure there are different models, but a lot of the times they seem to give weird numbers.
Van Dijks easy free header against us what 0.06 xG. For me he scores that 9/10 given how free he was.
Quality of the pass with the speed and the curve is also hard to model fully.
Don't think you should trust those numbers over actually watching the games and chances that are given.
What if I can't watch every game? Do I trust your eyes?
Not patronising? Not self aware either then are you? Ignore button is gladly being pushed
You're on to something here