Defending/Attacking Balance

[BettingBlade]

Bit like your post does to everyone else

Mate you’re now literally stalking my posts because of a comment on another thread.

All your proving is how sad you really are. I’d get to bed if I were you. School in the morning.

 

[Niceguyeddie]

Mate you’re now literally stalking my posts because of a comment on another thread.

All your proving is how sad you really are. I’d get to bed if I were you. School in the morning.

What ?

 

[BettingBlade]

What ?

Oh so must mean you’ve put that just to be a prick then? I guess that figures.

 

[Niceguyeddie]

Oh so must mean you’ve put that just to be a prick then? I guess that figures.

Bit of a jump there
I literally don't know who you are
Stop being so paranoid

 

[BettingBlade]

Bit of a jump there
I literally don't know who you are
Stop being so paranoid

Proves my point then that you’re just out to post derogatory comments without offering anything constructive.

Ignore button was made for posters like you.

 

[Niceguyeddie]

Proves my point then that you’re just out to post derogatory comments without offering anything constructive.

Ignore button was made for posters like you.

What are you talking about ?

 

[Akinbiyi]

I hate seeing threads hijacked for pathetic playground bickering. You’d never see me doing anything like that.

 

[Charlieblade]

So we aren’t scoring many goals, our top scorer is OG, and we all keep discussing strike pairings as if it’s suddenly going to click us into scoring 4 a game. You’re wrong, it won’t. Be it Billy with Oli, Didsy with Moose or Billy with Robinson - we simply will not become a free scoring team and that’s because of the shape and the organisation of the team. This is not a thread to slander ANY of the attackers so please don’t turn it into a slanging match because I can’t be arsed to see it. It’s not like they’re having chances put on a platter week in week out

We have abandoned our old shape of one behind the attacker but in honesty we did a lot towards the end of last season. Duffy often dropping in. After the collapse at Villa the mindset changed and we haven’t lost away from home since so you can’t say it’s not worked. Our priority now is to keep the ball out of the net first and foremost.

For the team to be free scoring with the system we currently play the front 2 would need to be Messi and Mbappe. There is no link between the midfield and attack that is quick enough to spring any sort of counter and when the defences are packed we don’t quite have the quality to unlock them. And that’s ok - we’re newly promoted and we’ve been fucking good.

The balance we currently have has us as the joint second best team is the division defensively. Better than or equal to Man City, Spurs, Arsenal and Man United. We aren’t going to our score these teams (see Norwich’s approach for proof of that) but we can be solid first and foremost, then you only need 1 to win. Make sure we don’t concede first, try and score second. It might not be what you want to see, but it is what will keep us in the division.

Highlighted the bit where you missed the Billy Didsy combo, because I think that could be the key.
If this goes well, bring on Luke Freeman to replace Lundstram and go for it.
Next home game against the Arse would be perfect for this.

 

[Champagneblade]

Seems the system has to evolve to be 3-5-1-1 from 3-4-1-2 to keep us compact enough.

The emphasis on not losing and not giving a leg up is much higher than last year.

To that ends McGoldrick seems to be a must, with Robinson deputising. Then it looks like Billy, Lys and Oli all competing for the one spot up front.

Oli needs a goal and I don't think it would hurt Mousset roughing up the Arsenal centre halves either.

McGoldrick helps us retain possession better which is as good as any type of food defending!

 

[finlaytheblade]

Tbf Akinbiyi my frustration isn’t that we are not free scoring, it’s that we created next to nothing. We won’t play a worse team then that today.

We lost a few games in the 1st division to teams playing the way Watford set up.
We got a good point ,they set up to lead us into traps ,we are more streetwise now but it can easily be undone as Walsall proved 3 times in the promotion season.

 

[I should coco]

But how you can definitively say what shots should and shouldn’t be goals is absolutely beyond me.

It doesn't 'definitively' say anything, especially in just one game.

You do know that the 'X' stands for EXPECTED don't you? As Jay (Blades analytics) has said many times. CG in one game might not be that useful, but over a block of games (or a season) it is very accurate, as actual stats revert to the mean.

If you don't like it then ignore it of course, but at least be sure what is you are attacking.

 

[Akinbiyi]

It doesn't 'definitively' say anything, especially in just one game.

You do know that the 'X' stands for EXPECTED don't you? As Jay (Blades analytics) has said many times. CG in one game might not be that useful, but over a block of games (or a season) it is very accurate, as actual stats revert to the mean.

If you don't like it then ignore it of course, but at least be sure what is you are attacking.

Erm ... Isn't that ... exactly ... what I'm saying?

For a goal to be expected, say, 1.56 xG they are saying they should've scored at least 1, definitively. Should they? Why? Because they had x amount of play around the box? Because they had some chances in the 6 yard box? What defines xG? It is calculated using an expected goal value, how can you calculate how much something should've been a goal if you watch football you know it doesn't work like that.

 

[I should coco]

Erm ... Isn't that ... exactly ... what I'm saying?

Not from what I'm reading.

For a goal to be expected, say, 1.56 xG they are saying they should've scored at least 1, definitively.

Not at all. We could have had six chances of 0.26 probability each. None of those individual chances are expected to result in a goal, but the tally for the game adds them up to 1.56.

The point I was trying to get over, was that XG in any single particle game can be misleading as per my 6 chances above, but over say 10 games or a season, it gives a much better picture of how many goals we should have scored/conceded. Think of it as an 'average', not a definitive measure for an individual chance.

What defines xG? It is calculated using an expected goal value, how can you calculate how much something should've been a goal if you watch football you know it doesn't work like that.

It doesn't really matter how accurate each individual bit of the expected goal value is, as long as it is consistently applied to both potential goals scored and conceded.

A fan might say "we should have scored half a dozen", but XG tries to break down each chance into a formulaic mathematical probability based on striker position, no of defenders, height/speed of ball etc etc etc. As long as these factors are always applied consistently, you then have an objective statistical comparison from game to game, rather than just a subjective 'feeeling'.

I don't obsess over it, or have a wank when I see our XGs, I just find it quite interesting. If you don't, then fine.

 

[BushBlade]

It’s a little bit interesting. But how you can definitively say what shots should and shouldn’t be goals is absolutely beyond me.

Everybody does it though. Every week there are loads of posts saying X should have scored that.