Paul_Scholes18
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2014
- Messages
- 13,891
A loss or draw at best.What did our performance merit?
A loss or draw at best.What did our performance merit?
You can have a match where a team essentially beats themselves and the opposition gets the three points without ever really earning it. Everton benefitted in the same way last week too. We’re squandering too many of our chances and leaking some pathetic goals. When your keeper is un utter liability then you’re going to get far fewer points than your performances otherwise deserve and your opponent may well win without having to create anything of any real quality.What did our performance merit?
Thank you!No. They weren't. We were shit and they weren't. xG is the dumbest shit ever created.
Let's remove all the penalties given to us as well, no? All daft, aren't they?
Hm...let's see if I understand your reasoning...Thank you!
My thoughts exactly.
Why are people making excuses for us playing crap against the worst team in the league?
We are a mid table team because this is the rhetoric which is being said by Woodward and Ole. They said that we are going to be crap in the short term and that this is a long term plan. If Woodward fired Ole tomorrow, because 8th place is unacceptable and sent a message to the players that 8th place is unacceptable, I guarantee that the performance level will immediately improve. It'll improve further once a new competent manager and coaches are appointed.
This is not rocket science.
Giving away little but creating even less. Tonight’s will be embarrassing if the guy does it. Probably 0.01 vs 2.5 right now.So...how is the xG working out for our last games?
Lowest point of the season I would guess.So...how is the xG working out for our last games?
It's going to get worse.Lowest point of the season I would guess.
We had 19 shots overall and 10 on target, their keeper made some great saves. It's weird to see that the stats are so low, even if we scored 2 worldies and a great FK.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This is interesting. Obviously we have some good finishers capable of scoring great goals but how sustainable is that in the longer term? Ole's first real test is to get the team to score scruffy goals and tap-ins.
We were under-performing in relation to xg for a lot of the season anyway.we're creating lots of chances, i wouldn't worry about outperforming Xg it's only one game
Since Bruno signed our xGTweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This is interesting. Obviously we have some good finishers capable of scoring great goals but how sustainable is that in the longer term? Ole's first real test is to get the team to score scruffy goals and tap-ins.
Is it though? Is it?It's going to get worse.
The trend is downward.
I don't quite get this xG business, could someone explain to me why the above numbers are good for us?Since Bruno signed our xG
Vs Wolves 1.54
Vs Chelsea 0.68
Vs Watford 2.50
Vs Everton 1.13
Vs ManCity 1.74
Vs Spurs 1.77
Vs SHU 2.84
Vs Brighton 1.21
Vs Bournemouth 2.63
Vs LASK 3.14
Vs Norwich 2.7
We have done well in creating chances
Nothing wrong with that xG, its like 2.4 including the pen. Almost always when teams score 3 or more, its because they were clinical in the game. Keep in mind goals like Bruno's free kick, martials or Greenwoods 2nd were all very low chances, just brilliant pieces of play. We have so many different ways to score now, both in creating chance and through individual pieces of brilliance. Pogba and Bruno always had a reputation of scoring long range worldies, Rashford has an incredible shot from range and Martial is capable of shots like today. Greenwood also has shown he's more than capable of brilliant goals too. Having that many players who can all do something out of nothing will lead to more early goals to break teams down and lead to more high scoring performances, even though you'll have games you underperform xG (like Spurs).Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This is interesting. Obviously we have some good finishers capable of scoring great goals but how sustainable is that in the longer term? Ole's first real test is to get the team to score scruffy goals and tap-ins.
Same, I find it quite difficult to read if I'm honest.I don't quite get this xG business, could someone explain to me why the above numbers are good for us?
I think you are looking at xGA which is chances conceded. xG is chances created.Same, I find it quite difficult to read if I'm honest.
Simply put, I take it the lowest number (Chelsea) is poor and yesterday vs Bournemouth good?
Vs Chelsea 0.68
Vs Bournemouth 2.63
I'm a big advocate of performance date. Really annoys me when supporters completely ignore it cause so many top clubs have hired data analysts to delve into the numbers more now.
It would need the list pre Bruno for comparison which i assume would show on average the numbers now are higher than before. i.e. we're creating more/better chances that we expect to score from.I don't quite get this xG business, could someone explain to me why the above numbers are good for us?
Its pretty much just rating the chance created at the moment of a shot, ignoring shot quality, which is a pretty decent metric at judging how well a team regularly creates chances (and same defensively). You can't always account for screamers, pens have been proven to be relatively random and again hard to account for (though we've received an absurd amount of them this season), and you can have games where you create chance after chance, score a couple of goals but the opposition scores 2 worldies and the good work is undone. Meant to keep some perspective on the overall performance. On the flip side, it also won't be all that much use if a team scores a few worldies/low percentage chances early on and then coast the rest of the game (United vs Brighton), as then its likely the team finish with a low xG. Generally its a very good long term trend though. Understat.com I like with the way they have a constantly updating xG table, showing for and against and "xPts". You'll have teams like United in 2017/18 that massively out performed performances, and you'd expect a regression which duly came. Or United 16/17 that massively underperformed (bad finishing though the year had a lot if promise). Or Leicester this year, very much being clinical and the drop in results not being that surprising when you look at the general performances.I don't quite get this xG business, could someone explain to me why the above numbers are good for us?
Since January 31st (9 games) (keep in mind its been a hard run with Wolves, Chelsea, City, Spurs, Everton all part of it), we have:It would need the list pre Bruno for comparison which i assume would show on average the numbers now are higher than before. i.e. we're creating more/better chances that we expect to score from.
Thanks for taking the time to explain how the system works, much appreciated.Its pretty much just rating the chance created at the moment of a shot, ignoring shot quality, which is a pretty decent metric at judging how well a team regularly creates chances (and same defensively). You can't always account for screamers, pens have been proven to be relatively random and again hard to account for (though we've received an absurd amount of them this season), and you can have games where you create chance after chance, score a couple of goals but the opposition scores 2 worldies and the good work is undone. Meant to keep some perspective on the overall performance. On the flip side, it also won't be all that much use if a team scores a few worldies/low percentage chances early on and then coast the rest of the game (United vs Brighton), as then its likely the team finish with a low xG. Generally its a very good long term trend though. Understat.com I like with the way they have a constantly updating xG table, showing for and against and "xPts". You'll have teams like United in 2017/18 that massively out performed performances, and you'd expect a regression which duly came. Or United 16/17 that massively underperformed (bad finishing though the year had a lot if promise). Or Leicester this year, very much being clinical and the drop in results not being that surprising when you look at the general performances.
These numbers are good as its a hard run of fixtures with plenty of good defensive sides, yet we keep creating regularly, we keep the opposition chances down, and we've been scoring on top of that.
The first part is a very good point that many people are not aware of. The biggest pre-match handicaps occur when the best team (Man City) plays relegation fodder at home. And even then they will only be a 2.5 or 2.75 goal favourite. If you take home field advantage out of equation, you get a disparity of just about two goals between the best team and the worst team in the league. This is in line with actual performance data from this season which sees City at +1.39 xG per 90 and Villa at -0.78 (using StatsBomb data via fbref.com). Now these are averages but you get the idea that very few 3+ goal margins are a true reflection of actual performance levels. It is unfortunate that so many only look at individual results to form their opinion. Take Leicester's 9-0 at Southampton. As one-sided a match as you'll ever going to see, yet (obviously) nowhere near a 9-goal margin of victory. Expected goals for that match was 0.4 - 3.6 which in itself is massive but Southampton had a player sent off after 10 minutes. Yet people were seriously suggesting that Hasenhüttl may lose his job just for the fact he had recorded the biggest defeat in Premier League history which should be totally irrelevant.Nothing wrong with that xG, its like 2.4 including the pen. Almost always when teams score 3 or more, its because they were clinical in the game. Keep in mind goals like Bruno's free kick, martials or Greenwoods 2nd were all very low chances, just brilliant pieces of play. We have so many different ways to score now, both in creating chance and through individual pieces of brilliance. Pogba and Bruno always had a reputation of scoring long range worldies, Rashford has an incredible shot from range and Martial is capable of shots like today. Greenwood also has shown he's more than capable of brilliant goals too. Having that many players who can all do something out of nothing will lead to more early goals to break teams down and lead to more high scoring performances, even though you'll have games you underperform xG (like Spurs).
I just fear the day they start with advertising +++ etc on Understat, an amazing site.Its pretty much just rating the chance created at the moment of a shot, ignoring shot quality, which is a pretty decent metric at judging how well a team regularly creates chances (and same defensively). You can't always account for screamers, pens have been proven to be relatively random and again hard to account for (though we've received an absurd amount of them this season), and you can have games where you create chance after chance, score a couple of goals but the opposition scores 2 worldies and the good work is undone. Meant to keep some perspective on the overall performance. On the flip side, it also won't be all that much use if a team scores a few worldies/low percentage chances early on and then coast the rest of the game (United vs Brighton), as then its likely the team finish with a low xG. Generally its a very good long term trend though. Understat.com I like with the way they have a constantly updating xG table, showing for and against and "xPts". You'll have teams like United in 2017/18 that massively out performed performances, and you'd expect a regression which duly came. Or United 16/17 that massively underperformed (bad finishing though the year had a lot if promise). Or Leicester this year, very much being clinical and the drop in results not being that surprising when you look at the general performances.
These numbers are good as its a hard run of fixtures with plenty of good defensive sides, yet we keep creating regularly, we keep the opposition chances down, and we've been scoring on top of that.
I agree. Something has changed and needs to be rectified, ASAP.Major difference where as last season we were putting up very favourable xg and xga numbers for the first 6 months but running under expectation , this season we are giving up a crazy amount of chances. Obviously that can be seen with the eyes, but people weren't able to see with the eyes last season that we weren't giving up much so it is still worth pointing out
I know that “with Pogba is always polemic” but I think his prolonged absence last season was a huge help for our defence. He’s such a fecking defensive liability, on and off the ball. The wide open spaces our back four are trying and failing to properly defend has a lot to do with issues in central midfield IMO.I agree. Something has changed and needs to be rectified, ASAP.
People jumping to conclusions and saying the defence is shit and has always been shit or have been found out, are wilfully ignorant as far as I'm concerned. This same set of players were very solid last year.
I think what has caused this downturn, is a mix of poor application and lapses in concentration (possibly due to them being undercooked, or just in poor individual form), as well as Maguire suffering a hangover from what happened in the summer. He looks a totally different player from last year, and not for the better.
Lots of truth in this.I know that “with Pogba is always polemic” but I think his prolonged absence last season was a huge help for our defence. He’s such a fecking defensive liability, on and off the ball. The wide open spaces our back four are trying and failing to properly defend has a lot to do with issues in central midfield IMO.
Yeah, that's certainly possible too.I know that “with Pogba is always polemic” but I think his prolonged absence last season was a huge help for our defence. He’s such a fecking defensive liability, on and off the ball. The wide open spaces our back four are trying and failing to properly defend has a lot to do with issues in central midfield IMO.
The exact same thing happened under Jose. He'd taken so much criticism for his cautious approach that we started that season being more open using Pogba deeper and it spiralled from there.Lots of truth in this.
There has also been a change in approach. Solskjaer was much more conservative, not simply in team selection but also in approach, before Pogba and Bruno were both available for selection. The team was a lot more compact, the lines were a lot closer together and we were a much more reactive, transition based team, even after Bruno began to dominate our attacking tempo.
Solskjaer seems to have come to believe that having both Bruno and Pogba means we can change our approach. We can open up, we can leave the defence in more 1v1 situations, we can push Bruno right up to almost be a second striker. Its not a ridiculous idea, on paper, our shape in build up is very much like what a lot of top teams do. However, I think its being shown that maybe we are not as good as the lockdown games made us believe we were. The model for our team is probably closer to the 2-0 we got against City in March, rather than the 5-2 against Bournemouth during lockdown.
Its becoming increasingly clear that Jose was right about a lot of United's issues, even if he wasn't the right man to fix them.The exact same thing happened under Jose. He'd taken so much criticism for his cautious approach that we started that season being more open using Pogba deeper and it spiralled from there.
We had those threads praising the Carrick/McKenna influence and they then escaped any blame. Impossible for us fans to attribute blame (what does Phelan do afterall) but at some point you've got to say perhaps they're not helping even if they're not to blame?
We'd be lucky to get more than 30m or so to be honest. His contract expires next summer but with the option to extend 1 year. Which means he'd have a year left. He'll be 28. Thiago at 29 just went for 20-25m? He's far more proven, performed like a world class player for years, motm in the CL final, etc. I'm worried that we'll shoot ourselves in the foot and extend his contract.Yeah, that's certainly possible too.
I love the guy but I just think we have to cede defeat on this one and wish him the best at the end of the season. Let him go for a halfway acceptable sum (c.£40m-£50m), and let VdB come in and take his place and look to promote Garner next season as the squad option, with Mejbri going out on loan.
I still retain a modicum of hope that it properly clicks for him here, but it just doesn't seem to be working at all, and any semblance of a sporting project here maturing while he's at his peak went out of the window when Sancho didn't arrive.
Yeah, you're right. It'll most likely be in that range.We'd be lucky to get more than 30m or so to be honest. His contract expires next summer but with the option to extend 1 year. Which means he'd have a year left. He'll be 28. Thiago at 29 just went for 20-25m? He's far more proven, performed like a world class player for years, motm in the CL final, etc. I'm worried that we'll shoot ourselves in the foot and extend his contract.