Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

Rovers vs Reading at Virtual Ewood


Recommended Posts

Watched three Reading highlights and they re-enforce my view that Reading are not that tight at the back and will give us chances. The keeper is good.

They are pretty deadly when they get chances but have been fortunate at times. Barnsley were severely testing them before being reduced to 9 men.

Watford looked the better side but Reading emphatically took their chance.

Edited by philipl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

It's a load of crap. There's a lot of pointless stats out there these days but expected goals is the most pointless and useless of them all. 

4 hours ago, Uddersfelt Blue said:

The most useless and pointless stat is easily possession. xG is very useful, and clubs worldwide are adopting data driven approaches to tactics and training for games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Thanks for the explanation firstly, certainly a very thorough description so fair play.

So is the xG not even specific to individual games? I presumed that it was implying that ultimately in the games that we didnt win, that we should have done based on xG. It is incredibly flawed because if most of our xG in 7 games came within 3 games, then that isnt fair to suggest that we should be top based on that!

You mention Bamford, what the stat also doesnt factor in is to have so many chances is reliant on him having that anticipation and intelligence to get himself into goalscoring situations, it isnt solely a striker being reliant on service scenario. Take Brereton, he never gets himself into goalscoring positions, so I wouldnt be surprised if his one goal from distance ensures that he is out scoring his xG. Whereas Bamford will have more yet might not take them all. So forwards who keep managing to get into positions to get clear cut chances will be penalised by this method should they not take them all. Andy Cole would have been screwed if his performance was measured like this!

You imply that it is not sustainable to outscore your xG consistently but surely you can if you have particularly clinical forwards?

I totally appreciate data in general and of course it does play a role but I can be incredibly skeptical of its use in football in certain situations. xG just seems flawed in my opinion to the point where it has limited value in my opinion.

xG is certainly flawed, but it's only flawed if you view it on its own to draw a conclusion about a team or a player. Tied in with multiple other variable data points it can be really useful. 

xG models differ, none are perfect but for me none are pointless entirely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JoeH said:

The most useless and pointless stat is easily possession. xG is very useful, and clubs worldwide are adopting data driven approaches to tactics and training for games. 

It's a completely pointless and useless stat, the only stat that matter is how many goals you score. Look at Aston Villa the other day they scored 7 and could have had easily had more against Liverpool and the expected goals for them was just 3 goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ewood Ace said:

It's a completely pointless and useless stat, the only stat that matter is how many goals you score. Look at Aston Villa the other day they scored 7 and could have had easily had more against Liverpool and the expected goals for them was just 3 goals.

Listen you're entitled to your opinion but the whole of modern football disagrees with you that the only stats that matter are goals scored and goals conceded. Are all the English football clubs in our League and the Premier League wrong and you're right?

The expected goals for Villa being low isn't a knock on them, it's a testament to how lethal they were in attack. I feel you've not read into what xG really means, ignored the explanation of the models I gave which some big sceptics on here have at least acknowledged - and you're using a misunderstood view of data to discredit it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

It's a completely pointless and useless stat, the only stat that matter is how many goals you score. Look at Aston Villa the other day they scored 7 and could have had easily had more against Liverpool and the expected goals for them was just 3 goals.

 

Yep, exhibit No 1: Rovers away to Watford last week

Mullered them off the pitch with possession and good football but lost 3-1.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JoeH said:

Listen you're entitled to your opinion but the whole of modern football disagrees with you that the only stats that matter are goals scored and goals conceded.

Goals scored and conceded are the only stats that have a bearing on where you finish in the table. Some people like to obsess over other stats but at the end of the day they are obsolete in the grand scheme of things.

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I feel you've not read into what xG really means, ignored the explanation of the models I gave which some big sceptics on here have at least acknowledged - and you're using a misunderstood view of data to discredit it. 

It's an incredibly flawed model. If you really want to know these sort of things use your eyes instead of flawed stats. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Goals scored and conceded are the only stats that have a bearing on where you finish in the table. Some people like to obsess over other stats but at the end of the day they are obsolete in the grand scheme of things.

It's an incredibly flawed model. If you really want to know these sort of things use your eyes instead of flawed stats. 

Stats help you look forwards/predict and are an unbiased representation of what happened. A football result is never the whole story and, as much as we try not to be, every human is inherently biased.

Data is everywhere and, like it or not, now powers the world. And the last industries/businesses to embrace it will be (/ have already been) left behind. Football is no different.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, XLM said:

Stats help you look forwards/predict and are an unbiased representation of what happened. A football result is never the whole story and, as much as we try not to be, every human is inherently biased.

I would argue that stats can give a misleading representation of the game. Look at our game last week at Watford people on here were raving about the shots and possession we had and if you looked at the stats you'd have though we battered Watford but when you used you eyes you would have seen that we were comfortably beaten by a side who were happy to sit back and counter and never needed to get out of 2nd gear. The score is the only story that matters you don't get any bonus points for having good stats.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

I would argue that stats can give a misleading representation of the game. Look at our game last week at Watford people on here were raving about the shots and possession we had and if you looked at the stats you'd have though we battered Watford but when you used you eyes you would have seen that we were comfortably beaten by a side who were happy to sit back and counter and never needed to get out of 2nd gear. The score is the only story that matters you don't get any bonus points for having good stats.

You have proven my point. I don't agree with that analysis of what happened. I thought we were the better side apart from some calamitous defending... I might be right, you might be right. How about we look at some unbiased stats to help us determine what the really happened, so we can build for the next game? That's the point. They provide an opinion to help you that has no preconceptions, isn't impacted by mood, fatigue etc. etc.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely agree that stats have the potential to mislead. A striker with clever movement and the intelligence to get into goalscoring positions, baring in mind that a strikers chances are as much down to his own movement as they are the supply, would compare very unfavourably to one who rarely gets into goalscoring positions in the first place surely?

They have such limited use, certainly in isolation. If a team has low xG and is outperforming that stat, why does that have to level out, perhaps that team has a particularly clinical attack, a player or two who is very adept from long distance, or a particularly good goalkeeper.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Listen you're entitled to your opinion but the whole of modern football disagrees with you that the only stats that matter are goals scored and goals conceded.

What a silly remark.  The goals for and against stat controls all the other stats.  

"Oh, we had 70% posession and lost...Happy days" said no manager ever

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.