Statistically it's actually not a golden chance though. Because multiple things need to happen for the goal to actually materialise - one of the attackers needs to play and execute the correct pass at the correct time, and then the player in the goal scoring position needs to make sure he's in the correct position to receive it and then score it.
The second isn't a chance because the foul stopped the chance from materialising. Unless it's a penalty or a shot from free kick range.
Precisely.
Statistically it's not a golden chance. In fact - it's not any sort of chance at all. But
in practice a simple five yard square pass to an unmarked Ronaldo most definitely is a golden chance to score. The "multiple things" required for an incredibly high probability (or chance) of scoring are in place.
And someone clear through on goal is clearly a chance. To be sent off for denying someone an obvious goal-scoring opportunity... they must have been an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.
I'm a fan of the use of stats as can balance out human tendency towards bias. I'm even a fan of xG specifically. But the idea that player in the position to square the ball for a tap-in isn't a chance for the team to score is baffling. Whether there is a shot or not, that is a huge chance to score. When stats are used the way you're using them they actually become less useful.
One final example (as I sense we may be talking past each other):
- A forward rounds the keeper but is unbalanced so shoots with too little power allowing the defender time to slide in and clear off the line
- A forward rounds the keeper but is unbalanced so passes with too little power to his unmarked teammate 2 yards out allowing the defender to slide in and intercept
In both cases striking the ball with more power would almost certainly have lead to a goal, but xG can't account for the second case. Which is fine, it just means that we have to use our judgement to see that both are examples of chance creation.
Anyway, congrats on United's xG-busting win.