United and xG (now that Ole is gone will things change?)

largelyworried

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
1,381
Most teams actually drop down defensive midfielder and form three at the back in a manner called "Salida Lavolpiana" after Argentinian coach Ricardo La Volpe, who first introduced it. Full backs move higher up, defensive midfielder drops down and central defenders spread sideways, making it much more difficult for opposition to press you effectively.

I'm not saying this without reason. Defensive midfielder has to know thing or two in terms of passing and has to be press resistant. Imagine McTominay being employed in such task. Just considering it sounds horrible.
That's different from what I'm talking about. Irrespective of what formation you play, its impossible to outnumber your opposition's outfield players - its 10 vs 10. But if you include your goalkeeper in passing moves, now its 11 vs 10, meaning a well strucutred team will always have a pass on. Until we reach the day that teams get goalkeepers to press - and even Bielsa hasnt tried that one yet I believe - giving your GK the chance to get involved will always open passing lanes that you can't get from outfielders alone.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
677
Pretty sure it was in this same thread a few weeks ago that people (including me) were trying to make the point that we haven't been great going forward for years and years now, and the usual "lolpatternsofplay" crowd were saying well, we were second highest scorers last season and we're doing well on xG this season (4 or 5 league games in), so we're clearly dominating games by "most metrics". That's aged well.
My bad, it was actually the awfully-coached thread.

See this post, my response, and the ensuing discussion - this post , which I responded to with this and received this and this as supposed counterpoints.

The conclusion in my last post in that exchange ( I'm not sure we're going to stay as high in the table as we are playing the same way we have been ) seemed extremely obvious even then, but clearly not to these chaps.
 

Bosnian_fan

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Messages
334
Supports
Sarajevo
That's different from what I'm talking about. Irrespective of what formation you play, its impossible to outnumber your opposition's outfield players - its 10 vs 10. But if you include your goalkeeper in passing moves, now its 11 vs 10, meaning a well strucutred team will always have a pass on. Until we reach the day that teams get goalkeepers to press - and even Bielsa hasnt tried that one yet I believe - giving your GK the chance to get involved will always open passing lanes that you can't get from outfielders alone.
Oh I do agree with you, I was just pointing out that he hasn't actually selected players even in the other roles that would be comfortable building from the back. Yes, the goalkeeper, main centre-back, holding midfielder, everyone is just incredibly incapable of playing modern passing game.
 

tomaldinho1

Full Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
11,043

Attacking output in the usual range, defence horrific again.
Basically that Cavani sitter he missed because it was so close and central makes up for most of our total xG.
 

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008 & 2020
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
116,928
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
My bad, it was actually the awfully-coached thread.

See this post, my response, and the ensuing discussion - this post , which I responded to with this and received this and this as supposed counterpoints.

The conclusion in my last post in that exchange ( I'm not sure we're going to stay as high in the table as we are playing the same way we have been ) seemed extremely obvious even then, but clearly not to these chaps.
I’m not sure quoting yourself and then a bunch of other quotes from another argument in a different thread - all in the name of “I told you so” - is as attractive a prospect for the reader as you think.
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
I’m not sure quoting yourself and then a bunch of other quotes from another argument in a different thread - all in the name of “I told you so” - is as attractive a prospect for the reader as you think.
:D my thoughts exactly.

Guys, the Ole in movement is on its knees, now is the time to silently enjoy having the upper in the debate and making it even worse for them by being the bigger man by not rubbing it in needlessly. Noone cares about "I told you so".
 

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008 & 2020
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
116,928
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
:D my thoughts exactly.

Guys, the Ole in movement is on its knees, now is the time to silently enjoy having the upper in the debate and making it even worse for them by being the bigger man by not rubbing it in needlessly. Noone cares about "I told you so".
You could make a better effort to read the room an’ all.
 

Reapersoul20

Can Anderson score? No.
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
7,909
Location
Jog on
:D my thoughts exactly.

Guys, the Ole in movement is on its knees, now is the time to silently enjoy having the upper in the debate and making it even worse for them by being the bigger man by not rubbing it in needlessly. Noone cares about "I told you so".
JFC
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
You could make a better effort to read the room an’ all.
I meant enjoying the position in the debate in regards to "Ole - yay or nay", no need for boring "I told you so" posts. Did you think I meant to enjoy United situation as a whole?
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
34,667
Location
xG Zombie Nation
Laurie Whitwell in The Athletic mentions the pressing issue

Sources have reported confusion over the style as a contributing factor. Solskjaer is said to have given an instruction to press high on Liverpool but players were confused by the exact coordination. In training, United do not train much pressing, with an explanation being that the strategy under Solskjaer is for the man nearest the ball to close down the opponent in possession as the team track back and get into shape.

I feel this is the same for playing out from the back with the players being given a vague idea rather than a system to follow.
 

Carl

has permanently erect nipples
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
43,841
Not really sure how it's calculated. Rashford and Cavani both 1 on 1 with the keeper, and Spurs' only chance I remember is Son's in the first half. No idea how XG is even close tbh.
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
That makes a mockery of xG in all honesty.
Why? The Ronaldo goal isn't a good chance, tight angle, very very good finish that. The other goals were good, so xg might have been a bit higher but only a bit. Both finishes were really good. I am sure fbref xg will have a bigger difference between the teams. But 1.3-1.5 seems quite fair to me. There was nothing we created. At least this time because we stayed in a good defensive shape all the time.

(edit: understat has us 1.39 vs 1.16, indicating two big chances of Spurs in first half. The quick counters were finished from quite far out (for one-on-ones) therefor not higher ranked (0.45 and 0.56).
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
34,667
Location
xG Zombie Nation
Not really sure how it's calculated. Rashford and Cavani both 1 on 1 with the keeper, and Spurs' only chance I remember is Son's in the first half. No idea how XG is even close tbh.
Look how good the finishes were to score those goals but I do see what you’re saying. Son had a chance very close to goal which he spooned over and I think the other Spurs chance was a clear close header from a corner that went over too.
 

TMDaines

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
11,329
xGOT was 0 vs 2.5. Need to give our forwards some credit for turning water into wine. That’s fine to be part of the story. Spurs needed a heroic goalkeeping performance to keep a clean sheet with the finishes our lads provided.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
677
I can't remember anything Spurs did to get close to 1 XG today, in fairness. That Son chance was suspiciously close to offside and would probably have been flagged if he'd managed to score.

Good performance, well worth the win.
 

Pexbo

Online influencer who has never watched Star Wars
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
60,869
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
Why? The Ronaldo goal isn't a good chance, tight angle, very very good finish that. The other goals were good, so xg might have been a bit higher but only a bit. Both finishes were really good. I am sure fbref xg will have a bigger difference between the teams. But 1.3-1.5 seems quite fair to me. There was nothing we created. At least this time because we stayed in a good defensive shape all the time.

(edit: understat has us 1.39 vs 1.16, indicating two big chances of Spurs in first half. The quick counters were finished from quite far out (for one-on-ones) therefor not higher ranked (0.45 and 0.56).
Look how good the finishes were to score those goals but I do see what you’re saying. Son had a chance very close to goal which he spooned over and I think the other Spurs chance was a clear close header from a corner that went over too.
Right but anyone who watched the game will tell you that Spurs never really threatens us and United deserved to win by 3 goals so what exactly is the point of xG again?
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
34,667
Location
xG Zombie Nation
Right but anyone who watched the game will tell you that Spurs never really threatens us and United deserved to win by 3 goals so what exactly is the point of xG again?
They did threaten us from a couple of set pieces but failed to score, we took our chances today. It suggests that the performance wasn’t as dominant as the score line suggests, the same that the rest of the other stats from the game suggests i.e. this is not a corner being turned, rather the continued instability of results you should expect from Oleball.
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
Right but anyone who watched the game will tell you that Spurs never really threatens us and United deserved to win by 3 goals so what exactly is the point of xG again?
The point of xG isn't to tell you who won deservedly. It only tells you about the relative quality of shooting positions in one game. I know what you mean by doubting it but you are asking too much of it. There was the Son-chance in the first half which was from a good (promising, often successful in the past) position (0.45) and there seems to be a header from a corner (0.56) these values are often higher than from open play. So I agree, the difference between the teams should have been higher (based on my feeling as well) but as the other poster said, it took one worldclass finish and two very good ones to give us the scoreline we got.
 

Carl

has permanently erect nipples
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
43,841
I disagree that the Cavani and Rashford chances were difficult ones. They both took them excellently, but they were 1 on 1 with the goal keeper. Its pretty much as good as it gets for creating a chance surely.
 

OleBoiii

New Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2019
Messages
6,021
For every day that passes I'm getting more and more convinced that xG is shite.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
34,667
Location
xG Zombie Nation
I disagree that the Cavani and Rashford chances were difficult ones. They both took them excellently, but they were 1 on 1 with the goal keeper. Its pretty much as good as it gets for creating a chance surely.
It depends on the distance from goal, the keeper’s positioning, the angle the attacker is shooting from and the defensive pressure. The best chances are generally close to goal and more central.
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
I disagree that the Cavani and Rashford chances were difficult ones. They both took them excellently, but they were 1 on 1 with the goal keeper. Its pretty much as good as it gets for creating a chance surely.
Maybe "difficult" or "easy" isn't the best way to look at it. XG looks at statistical data. How many shots from that position in a comparable situation ended in a goal.
Both our counters were finished from relatively wide out. I am sure, once the fbref xG is available, the difference between the sum of our xG and Spurs' will be more significant (as their xG calculation model take more factors into consideration).
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
86,797
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
I disagree that the Cavani and Rashford chances were difficult ones. They both took them excellently, but they were 1 on 1 with the goal keeper. Its pretty much as good as it gets for creating a chance surely.
Facts. I'd have been disappointed if they didn't score from there
 

DWelbz19

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
27,944
xGOT was 0 vs 2.5. Need to give our forwards some credit for turning water into wine. That’s fine to be part of the story. Spurs needed a heroic goalkeeping performance to keep a clean sheet with the finishes our lads provided.
What’s xGOT?
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
34,667
Location
xG Zombie Nation
Maybe "difficult" or "easy" isn't the best way to look at it. XG looks at statistical data. How many shots from that position in a comparable situation ended in a goal.
Both our counters were finished from relatively wide out. I am sure, once the fbref xG is available, the difference between the sum of our xG and Spurs' will be more significant (as their xG calculation model take more factors into consideration).
I’m sure you’re right But doesn’t Caley Graphics use a decent model too? On the Cavani goal the keeper manages to come out far enough to dive at his feet so it requires a nice chip and it’s quite far out. The Rashford finish is quite far out and at an angle. That said watching them again I do think they should be high be higher xG.
 

TMDaines

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
11,329
What’s xGOT?
xG on target or post-shot xG. Normal xG is calculated based on quality of chance. xGOT or post-shot xG is calculated based on quality of shot, so anything off-target is zero and everything else is based on the degree of difficulty for the keeper to save.

I think normal xG looks a tad harsh on us, but really we came out dominant winners because our forwards were clinical – and that’s perfectly fine!
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
34,667
Location
xG Zombie Nation
I think normal xG looks a tad harsh on us, but really we came out dominant winners because our forwards were clinical – and that’s perfectly fine!
That’s the sticker though isn’t. It’s great when those forwards are on song but when they’re inevitably not a low xG means much less margin for error. Liverpool and City are vastly superior at creating chance than us so are more likely to win more of the time. This is the essential problem with Ole as manager.
 

TMDaines

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
11,329
That’s the sticker though isn’t. It’s great when those forwards are on song but when they’re inevitably not a low xG means much less margin for error. Liverpool and City are vastly superior at creating chance than us so are more likely to win more of the time. This is the essential problem with Ole as manager.
Yes, longer term, but I think you are looking for a stick to beat Ole with tonight. United were winning for all the second half and still created some good further chances that were finished very well. Just looking at raw xG isn’t really meaningful given the game state.
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
I’m sure you’re right But doesn’t Caley Graphics use a decent model too? On the Cavani goal the keeper manages to come out far enough to dive at his feet so it requires a nice chip and it’s quite far out. The Rashford finish is quite far out and at an angle. That said watching them again I do think they should be high be higher xG.
Yeah, I had the same feeling. Thats why I say I am pretty sure, the fbref values will be a lot lower in general (especially for Spurs) which will make the difference between the teams bigger. Apart from that, as far as I know, a penalty is 0.76 or 0.75 xG. So in that light, I think the counters are ranked quite high with (0.56 and 0.45).

To be honest, I don't really know much about the Caley model nor about the specific differences of these models. What I know is that understat is pretty rough, taking position of the shot, lefty or righty and situation into consideration. The fbref model, as far as I understood, are way more sophisticated, looking additionally into height of the ball when the shot was made, position of defenders (or number of defenders between goal and shot).
 

Redfrog

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,598
Facts. I'd have been disappointed if they didn't score from there
I agree. Maybe xg doesn’t take in consideration the nature of the chance and only the position. From that pov the Rashford shot one on one is the same as the same shot in a packed box.
 

Hoof The Ball

Full Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
9,508
Location
San Antonio, Texas.
xG measures not only quality of chance but also quantity of them.

3-0 is partly deceptive because although Spurs were toothless, we were very clinical with the chances and half-chances we got, and so it creates the narrative that we were far and away more productive in xG production, when in fact we were simply just super efficient.
 

NZT-One

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
845
Location
Berlin
Yes, longer term, but I think you are looking for a stick to beat Ole with tonight. United were winning for all the second half and still created some good further chances that were finished very well. Just looking at raw xG isn’t really meaningful given the game state.
But have we really done that? I mean, the counters are a bit lucky weren't they. Both should have been defended easily. It wasn't like we were forcing stuff, more like Tottenham gifting something. But this isn't intended to beat Ole with. He provided defensive stability which was missing for the last 7 games. This a big plus mark in the calender. But the difficulty is bringing attack and defense in a balance, that is where we aren't good. And todays game did nothing to suggest otherwise. Which again sounds like criticism, but it isn't meant as that: it was a good result which we should be careful to get the wrong conclusions from.