Contextualised......you sound like Simon Jordan.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
All these stats mean very little in the great scheme of things.
Shot from 35 yds , bounces 4 times and goes straight to the keeper....that is ON target
Shot from 20 yds hits the inside of the post , runs across the line and hits the other post and is then cleared.
That is OFF target.
Sonny got another assist yesterday with a 5 yd pass to Harry.
I see the top scorers list now has assists added.
Keeps the people at Opta in a job I suppose.
Shot from 35 yds , bounces 4 times and goes straight to the keeper....that is ON target
Shot from 20 yds hits the inside of the post , runs across the line and hits the other post and is then cleared.
That is OFF target.
Sonny got another assist yesterday with a 5 yd pass to Harry.
I see the top scorers list now has assists added.
Keeps the people at Opta in a job I suppose.
If it wasn't for their goalie we'd have had about goals
Deleted member 15314
Guest
Yeah that's exactly what I said you clown.
Deleted member 15314
Guest
Who is this mythical person?
In any case I thought we deserved to beat Palace but also thought that Fulham were unlucky not to win it
Quietly confident of a win on Wednesday
BTW I still don’t think that Aurier committed a foul which led to their free kick for the goal which was in any case not taken from where the alleged offence occurred
Kevin Friend is a cunt in other words
That's WH, Newcastle and CP then..... Lucky to not get fucked over against Brighton too... State of the officiating these days.
You seem to be misunderstanding the concept of X/G.
X/G isn’t assessing the end result, or the final action (the shot/header etc in this case), it’s quantifying and qualifying the chances created that leads to that final action and the probability of its outcome.
Again, you are confusing the final outcome - retrospectively (and with the benefit of hindsight) - with what X/G is describing, which is the event that precedes that - at the time it happened.
To put it another way, you are confusing "what chance came closest to scoring" with "what chance is more likely to come closest to scoring".
X/G doesn't describe who was the better side, whatever that means, it describes whose chance creation is more likely to lead to a goal based on hundreds of thousands of similar events. It will never be perfect because humans aren't replicants and there are so many variables, but it's better - less biased - than human assessment which is influenced by emotion and bias.
You're misunderstanding original comment you found yourself responding to.
Regardless of it's devised purpose, it commonly gets (mis-)presented as a reflection on who was the better (more dangerous if you prefer) team....
Even so, I maintain that Palace weren't that threatening in the final 3rd.
Odds are someone will do this, and that team will almost certainly go on and win the league.
Hopefully its us, because if it stays this tight there is very little chance of my heart holding up till the end off the season.
Just because it doesn't tally with your subjective opinion, doesn't mean it doesn't work or is being misrepresented.
Funny how these discussions about xG so rarely bring up Liverpool's title-winning season. They outperformed their expected points (based on xG/xGA for each match) by an extraordinary ~25 points. And in fact, on the xP table, Liverpool finished 12 pts behind Man City. But back here in the real world, they won the league comfortably, 18 pts clear. (FWIW, we finished 12th on the expected points table last season)
12 games in, we're outperforming our xP by ~6 pts. Extrapolate that out to the rest of the season and we'd outperform our xP by 19: still under Liverpool's 25 pts over xP last season!
I get that people like to use xG/xGA as an indictment of Jose ball, but when the only two teams to win the title since 14/15 with the highest expected points are Man City and Chelsea (funnily enough, Jose's Chelsea), maybe.. just maybe.. we dont need to freak out every time the team puts up a lower xG than the opponent ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Don't know how to post screenshots here, so here's a link to the expected points stats EPL xG Table and Scorers for the 2020/2021 season | Understat.com)
12 games in, we're outperforming our xP by ~6 pts. Extrapolate that out to the rest of the season and we'd outperform our xP by 19: still under Liverpool's 25 pts over xP last season!
I get that people like to use xG/xGA as an indictment of Jose ball, but when the only two teams to win the title since 14/15 with the highest expected points are Man City and Chelsea (funnily enough, Jose's Chelsea), maybe.. just maybe.. we dont need to freak out every time the team puts up a lower xG than the opponent ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Don't know how to post screenshots here, so here's a link to the expected points stats EPL xG Table and Scorers for the 2020/2021 season | Understat.com)
You’re spot on. In addition to being poor in transition and losing too many balls to sloppy passing, I think our players may have gotten a bit too overconfident because of how the game was going in those early stages.
I don't understand your objection (mis-interpreatation?) here.... You don't think people blindly throw XG about in the name of who's the better team?
I think you're seeing it as an attack on stats rather than me pointing the finger at how some people deploy them.
Last edited:
I 100% support your stance on the own-team perspective bias (which is why my neutral eye was not surprised to find out that Palace led those numbers) but you're overselling what xG models are at this moment in time. The ultimate function of a perfect xG model would be what you say but we're far enough away from that point that 1.5 vs 1.1 is probably still inside the error margin, which is why I don't endorse xG's use as a single-game "who deserved to win?" type barometer.
There are big problems with how people use xG. I'll die on that hill with you.
xG is awesome and I love it: it's the next big leap in quantitative analysis of football, the models are getting better all the time, and it has the potential to solve hitherto intractable problems. Anyone who claims that xG doesn't represent something meaningful doesn't sufficiently understand the underlying principles (which is actually entirely fair enough: they're not simple). The biggest clients of the top football analytics firms, whose major work includes modelling xG, are the clubs themselves! Clubs care about xG, even if some of the fans don't.
Regardless, I definitely think we could've used another few years of training and refining the models before we unleashed them so publicly to the point where MOTD is showing xG numbers without necessary context.
Overeagerness with this newfangled idea has hurt football discourse in some ways and actually caused reputational damage to xG itself as a concept. Our models aren't lining up well enough with what people are seeing (often when the people are correct and the models are not) so people are rejecting the models. And I can't say that's completely unfair, even if it is ultimately misguided.
And if so why aren’t those odds on the only team that hasn’t lost since August
Everyone who claimed that we were only 5pts off 6th when he was sacked and it was unfair and Jose hasn’t improved us.
So about half the forum
Football is the ultimate butterfly effect.
Without a simple forgotten throw in or tackle 1 minute earlier, the goal may well not have occurred.
So where’s the cut off point in all this nonsense?