Going down at this rate

[MTFCMusings]

I honestly believe that if this current squad could jump into a time travelling DeLorean and go back in time to play the last lot that got us relegated to the Conference, the 2008 lot would win quite easily

That's a worrying thought.

Not a chance

We can't hit a barn door at the moment.
The 2008 side at least had Micky Boulding that could.
If that 2008 side hadn't got Jason White in goal, it could have been a different story.

Maynard only has two less goals than Boulding had at the same stage in that season.

Cook and Rose already have more goals that the second top scorers in that season (Arnold, Brown, Louis all finished on 4).

Not talking goals in total.
Aren't you the one who's a big lover of the expected goals stuff?
If you could choose a player going through one on one against a keeper, who are you having?
Boulding or Maynard?
That's what I'm getting at.
Our defence can't keep a clean sheet to save their lives.
Hypothetically what I am saying is I believe the 2008 side would beat this expensive giant turd (in my opinion) because we would give them more than enough chance to and they haven't got CJ Hamilton and Maynard sticking 8 shots wide before one might go in

Even Jason White wouldn't have to drop one in the goal for us if they don't hit the target

That is me yes, but obviously we don't have the xG stats from back then so we cannot compare.

I think they're pretty similar players to be honest. Maynard has had a better career. Maynard is two goals from matching Boulding's second best ever season already this season. Boulding only scored over 15 league goals once in his career.

[Dan]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

[MTFCMusings]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

It measures the quality of chances a team creates, taking into account distance from goal, angle to goal, whether it's a shot or a header etc.

This link will explain it better than I can, and why it is useful https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/07/25/expected-goals-xg-does-show-man-city-should-win-premier-league/

[stagmanrob]

.

I think they're pretty similar players to be honest. Maynard has had a better career. Maynard is two goals from matching Boulding's second best ever season already this season. Boulding only scored over 15 league goals once in his career.

The way I always judge players for us is how I always have... I look at them and think "Could they be at a better club than us?"
At the time in 2008 Boulding would definitely have done a job elsewhere further up the pyramid. He had a bit more to his game in terms of graft and running, though technically I wouldn't say he's as good as Maynard who played far more regularly at a higher level for that reason.
At the moment I don't look at Maynard and think he'd walk into a League One side for example. Boulding went on to be a backup Championship striker (who barely got a kick mind you, but he was signed as one) after our relegation.
I'm just trying to add a bit of reason to the argument that I think a 2008 squad probably being paid in buttons, would have a bit more about them than this current lot being paid in gold.
It seems mental but there are striking similarities where we were in games still, yet losing them in very similar fashion to the Forest Green game recently, but we were certainly getting more for our money in 2008.

[MTFCMusings]

Defensively, the thing that strikes me is the sheer panic the defenders seem to have when anyone gets near our box. None of them hold their position like other teams do, they all start chasing the ball like they've never played football before.

[arsene wengers coat]

Maidstone away, anybody?

[The One]

Maidstone away, anybody?

Thats the spirit.

[arsene wengers coat]

Cheer up The One

If you cant laugh at 'Maidstone away', what can you laugh at?

[Amber Andy]

Cheer up The One

If you cant laugh at 'Maidstone away', what can you laugh at?

I agree. Those were the days. "With an away following of " 37

[Big yella]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

They're a pile of kack Dan that say City are 5 points clear of Liverpool and Newcastle rock bottom with just 16 points and 6 from safety. Heck its got Chelsea less than 3 points behind Liverpool rather than the 25 they actually are.

Of Europe's top 5 leagues XG only has one with the correct leader and shock horror that's PSG in France. It can't even get Italy right. According to this heap of dung Juventus, winners of the last 8 Serie A titles aren't 4 points clear of Inter they're 3 points behind.

You don't need XG to tell you City aren't taking the chances they were last year, especially at key moments, just your eyes. You don't need XG to tell you that Van Dijk is like a magnet at snuffing out chances or that Allison actually catching shots instead of parrying them means Liverpool are conceding less than last year, just your eyes.

[MTFCMusings]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

They're a pile of kack Dan that say City are 5 points clear of Liverpool and Newcastle rock bottom with just 16 points and 6 from safety. Heck its got Chelsea less than 3 points behind Liverpool rather than the 25 they actually are.

Of Europe's top 5 leagues XG only has one with the correct leader and shock horror that's PSG in France. It can't even get Italy right. According to this heap of dung Juventus, winners of the last 8 Serie A titles aren't 4 points clear of Inter they're 3 points behind.

You don't need XG to tell you City aren't taking the chances they were last year, especially at key moments, just your eyes. You don't need XG to tell you that Van Dijk is like a magnet at snuffing out chances or that Allison actually catching shots instead of parrying them means Liverpool are conceding less than last year, just your eyes.

As you can see, some like them, some don't, and yella definitely doesn't.

But what Yella constantly fails to understand is that they're not the be all and end all, they are a performance indicator. They give an indication of whether performances are likely to continue long term. They're not meant to predict who will win the league or who will finish bottom, they're there to measure performance, amongst many other variables, including intangibles which cannot be measured.

For example, Yella mentions Newcastle. Against Chelsea, they had 30% possession and 7 shots, against 70% and 19 shots. Averages would say that if that happens in every game, you're more likely to lose more than you win. At the moment they are defying those stats as their players are taking the low quality of chances they create and their keeper is saving shots he has no right to save. xG doesn't take into account the quality of player on the end of the chance, or the quality of defender/goalkeeper trying to prevent.

He also seems to have something against stats in general, or anything that can be seen with your own eyes. Most people only watch one team a week for 90 minutes, so it's an indicator of how other teams are doing. According to Yella you may as well not bother having any stats at all as everything can be seen with your own eyes. He says Liverpool are conceding less because Alisson is catching more balls, when they've actually conceded four more goals this season then they had at this stage last season. He says City aren't taking their chances this year, when they've actually scored five more goals than they had at this stage last season, it's their defence which is obviously the problem (10 more goals conceded). But of course, Yella only needs his eyes to judge

[Big yella]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

They're a pile of kack Dan that say City are 5 points clear of Liverpool and Newcastle rock bottom with just 16 points and 6 from safety. Heck its got Chelsea less than 3 points behind Liverpool rather than the 25 they actually are.

Of Europe's top 5 leagues XG only has one with the correct leader and shock horror that's PSG in France. It can't even get Italy right. According to this heap of dung Juventus, winners of the last 8 Serie A titles aren't 4 points clear of Inter they're 3 points behind.

You don't need XG to tell you City aren't taking the chances they were last year, especially at key moments, just your eyes. You don't need XG to tell you that Van Dijk is like a magnet at snuffing out chances or that Allison actually catching shots instead of parrying them means Liverpool are conceding less than last year, just your eyes.

As you can see, some like them, some don't, and yella definitely doesn't.

But what Yella constantly fails to understand is that they're not the be all and end all, they are a performance indicator. They give an indication of whether performances are likely to continue long term. They're not meant to predict who will win the league or who will finish bottom, they're there to measure performance, amongst many other variables, including intangibles which cannot be measured.

For example, Yella mentions Newcastle. Against Chelsea, they had 30% possession and 7 shots, against 70% and 19 shots. Averages would say that if that happens in every game, you're more likely to lose more than you win. At the moment they are defying those stats as their players are taking the low quality of chances they create and their keeper is saving shots he has no right to save. xG doesn't take into account the quality of player on the end of the chance, or the quality of defender/goalkeeper trying to prevent.

When Leicester won the league they did so by having less possession than their opponents in most games. They played on the break, it didn't take made up stats to tell me that. XG debunked again.

Saturdays game saw us have just one third of the possession, yet only one less shot and nearly twice as many on target. It doesn't take made up guesses to tell me we aren't taking our chances and that we can't defend for toffee, my own eyes tell me that.

[MTFCMusings]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

They're a pile of kack Dan that say City are 5 points clear of Liverpool and Newcastle rock bottom with just 16 points and 6 from safety. Heck its got Chelsea less than 3 points behind Liverpool rather than the 25 they actually are.

Of Europe's top 5 leagues XG only has one with the correct leader and shock horror that's PSG in France. It can't even get Italy right. According to this heap of dung Juventus, winners of the last 8 Serie A titles aren't 4 points clear of Inter they're 3 points behind.

You don't need XG to tell you City aren't taking the chances they were last year, especially at key moments, just your eyes. You don't need XG to tell you that Van Dijk is like a magnet at snuffing out chances or that Allison actually catching shots instead of parrying them means Liverpool are conceding less than last year, just your eyes.

As you can see, some like them, some don't, and yella definitely doesn't.

But what Yella constantly fails to understand is that they're not the be all and end all, they are a performance indicator. They give an indication of whether performances are likely to continue long term. They're not meant to predict who will win the league or who will finish bottom, they're there to measure performance, amongst many other variables, including intangibles which cannot be measured.

For example, Yella mentions Newcastle. Against Chelsea, they had 30% possession and 7 shots, against 70% and 19 shots. Averages would say that if that happens in every game, you're more likely to lose more than you win. At the moment they are defying those stats as their players are taking the low quality of chances they create and their keeper is saving shots he has no right to save. xG doesn't take into account the quality of player on the end of the chance, or the quality of defender/goalkeeper trying to prevent.

When Leicester won the league they did so by having less possession than their opponents in most games. They played on the break, it didn't take made up stats to tell me that. XG debunked again.

Saturdays game saw us have just one third of the possession, yet only one less shot and nearly twice as many on target. It doesn't take made up guesses to tell me we aren't taking our chances and that we can't defend for toffee, my own eyes tell me that.

What has possession got to do with xG? Thinking it's tosh is your prerogative but at least understand it first. Leicester created the second best quality of chances that season, possession doesn't come into it.

Saturdays game saw us lose the xG battle 2.3 to 1.5. xG debunked again

[Big yella]

What’s xG stats & how are they worked out/proved?

They're a pile of kack Dan that say City are 5 points clear of Liverpool and Newcastle rock bottom with just 16 points and 6 from safety. Heck its got Chelsea less than 3 points behind Liverpool rather than the 25 they actually are.

Of Europe's top 5 leagues XG only has one with the correct leader and shock horror that's PSG in France. It can't even get Italy right. According to this heap of dung Juventus, winners of the last 8 Serie A titles aren't 4 points clear of Inter they're 3 points behind.

You don't need XG to tell you City aren't taking the chances they were last year, especially at key moments, just your eyes. You don't need XG to tell you that Van Dijk is like a magnet at snuffing out chances or that Allison actually catching shots instead of parrying them means Liverpool are conceding less than last year, just your eyes.

As you can see, some like them, some don't, and yella definitely doesn't.

But what Yella constantly fails to understand is that they're not the be all and end all, they are a performance indicator. They give an indication of whether performances are likely to continue long term. They're not meant to predict who will win the league or who will finish bottom, they're there to measure performance, amongst many other variables, including intangibles which cannot be measured.

For example, Yella mentions Newcastle. Against Chelsea, they had 30% possession and 7 shots, against 70% and 19 shots. Averages would say that if that happens in every game, you're more likely to lose more than you win. At the moment they are defying those stats as their players are taking the low quality of chances they create and their keeper is saving shots he has no right to save. xG doesn't take into account the quality of player on the end of the chance, or the quality of defender/goalkeeper trying to prevent.

When Leicester won the league they did so by having less possession than their opponents in most games. They played on the break, it didn't take made up stats to tell me that. XG debunked again.

Saturdays game saw us have just one third of the possession, yet only one less shot and nearly twice as many on target. It doesn't take made up guesses to tell me we aren't taking our chances and that we can't defend for toffee, my own eyes tell me that.

What has possession got to do with xG? Thinking it's tosh is your prerogative but at least understand it first. Leicester created the second best quality of chances that season, possession doesn't come into it.

Saturdays game saw us lose the xG battle 2.3 to 1.5. xG debunked again

You brought possession into it. You know the highlighted part of your post. There's only one stat that matters, can you score more than you let in, we can't, hence were pants and where we deserve to be.

[Sandy Pate Best Stag]

I'm with Yella on this. XG is definitely overrated by some as the be all and end all and has far too much importance placed upon it.

How can you rate a chance when you take no account of the players involved? Surely it's less of a realistic chance if you up against a top class keeper than it is against an also ran. The same applies to the quality of striker and must be taken into account if Xg is to anywhere near accurate. If it's not accurate then it is not fit for purpose and should only be used as a very rough guide.

Ask Jergan Klopp what he thinks of the system and I think you will hear that he doesn't trust it and places no faith in it. But then again what does he know about football?

[MTFCMusings]

I'm with Yella on this. XG is definitely overrated by some as the be all and end all and has far too much importance placed upon it.

How can you rate a chance when you take no account of the players involved? Surely it's less of a realistic chance if you up against a top class keeper than it is against an also ran. The same applies to the quality of striker and must be taken into account if Xg is to anywhere near accurate. If it's not accurate then it is not fit for purpose and should only be used as a very rough guide.

Ask Jergan Klopp what he thinks of the system and I think you will hear that he doesn't trust it and places no faith in it. But then again what does he know about football?

But it's not there to be the be all and end all. Even those who advocate it admit it has it's faults. It's an indicator of team performance. If your xG rating is 10 goals higher than your actual goals, you might need a new striker, etc. It does not taking into account player ability, but conversely can be used to show a players shooting ability.

Have you actually heard Klopp say that? Would be interested to hear/read what he thinks. Thanks

[Sandy Pate Best Stag]

I'm with Yella on this. XG is definitely overrated by some as the be all and end all and has far too much importance placed upon it.

How can you rate a chance when you take no account of the players involved? Surely it's less of a realistic chance if you up against a top class keeper than it is against an also ran. The same applies to the quality of striker and must be taken into account if Xg is to anywhere near accurate. If it's not accurate then it is not fit for purpose and should only be used as a very rough guide.

Ask Jergan Klopp what he thinks of the system and I think you will hear that he doesn't trust it and places no faith in it. But then again what does he know about football?

But it's not there to be the be all and end all. Even those who advocate it admit it has it's faults. It's an indicator of team performance. If your xG rating is 10 goals higher than your actual goals, you might need a new striker, etc.

Have you actually heard Klopp say that? Would be interested to hear/read what he thinks. Thanks

Yes about 6 weeks ago I saw an interview on tv when he let his thoughts be known and he said that he took no notice of the figures. Sorry I can't give you more info than that not even which channel it was on.

[MTFCMusings]

I'm with Yella on this. XG is definitely overrated by some as the be all and end all and has far too much importance placed upon it.

How can you rate a chance when you take no account of the players involved? Surely it's less of a realistic chance if you up against a top class keeper than it is against an also ran. The same applies to the quality of striker and must be taken into account if Xg is to anywhere near accurate. If it's not accurate then it is not fit for purpose and should only be used as a very rough guide.

Ask Jergan Klopp what he thinks of the system and I think you will hear that he doesn't trust it and places no faith in it. But then again what does he know about football?

But it's not there to be the be all and end all. Even those who advocate it admit it has it's faults. It's an indicator of team performance. If your xG rating is 10 goals higher than your actual goals, you might need a new striker, etc.

Have you actually heard Klopp say that? Would be interested to hear/read what he thinks. Thanks

Yes about 6 weeks ago I saw an interview on tv when he let his thoughts be known and he said that he took no notice of the figures. Sorry I can't give you more info than that not even which channel it was on.

No worries. Again, I would guess managers do not use it heavily. It's more for recruitment staff, analysts and people outside the game such as punters and bookmakers.

[arsene wengers coat]

I'm with Yella on this. XG is definitely overrated by some as the be all and end all and has far too much importance placed upon it.

How can you rate a chance when you take no account of the players involved? Surely it's less of a realistic chance if you up against a top class keeper than it is against an also ran. The same applies to the quality of striker and must be taken into account if Xg is to anywhere near accurate. If it's not accurate then it is not fit for purpose and should only be used as a very rough guide.

Ask Jergan Klopp what he thinks of the system and I think you will hear that he doesn't trust it and places no faith in it. But then again what does he know about football?

Think you'll find he does use stats. https://www-liverpool-com.cdn.ampprojec ... 569689.amp

[STAGS FOR LIFE]

Looks like Macclesfield will have another points deduction


https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... ed-fixture