A few (brief) observations from the stats (plane pointers):

[Coolblade]

A few briefer observations from the stats:

- whilst I appreciate that Burnley have a very strong defence, in a game we absolutely had to win, we created just one “big chance’ and had an xG of a mere 0.58. Bizarrely, of our starting eleven, only one player made a successful cross, and he made just one - being Anel! The lack of penetration is a real concern.

- However to balance that, Moore won 9 aerial duels and had most shots (4), And whilst Hamer’s stats were lower than usual, they were still the best from a creative viewpoint (with second most shots, most key passes, third most tackles etc.). Cannon only had 11 touches with one shot, but perhaps was our best moment! Let’s hope it’s the start of a flurry of similar goals!

- on a positive note (although against the current agenda) Robinson was our strongest defender with joint most aerial duels (9) and most successful defensive contributions (10).

I am weary just thinking about the playoffs so off back to get the red wine out…….

UTB.

 

[Bladesman]

We were mostly shit despite everyone saying we did alright in the first half.

 

[Frank the tank]

We were mostly shit despite everyone saying we did alright in the first half.

So either everyone else is wrong or you are

 

[Barmyblade]

Thanks Cool

For me the muddled thinking continued, with the most embarrassing stat being that we moved to two upfront but in an odd 442 formation that resulted in only one accurate cross.

And pace is highly effective when trying to catch teams on the break. Bringing on pacy players when you’re losing and your opponents are sitting back, is pretty pointless as our second half performance showed, creating pretty much nothing.

And leaving stats to one side, the calming influence of Holding we saw against Cardiff was desperately missed. Having two ball playing centre halves would have greatly assisted us to beat the press, especially if we had pace up front for the Holding ping!

From having a settled pattern before Christmas we seem to have lost our identity and just lurch from one confused plan to another.

It needs sorting! And fast.

 

[loyalblade95]

Problem is with Burnley is that you don't get too many chances against them in a match, so you have to be clinical when you get them.

1st half
Moore: 2 shots on target, 1 Esteve clearance in front of goal
Hamer: 1 shot on target
Cannon: 1 shot on target
Total chances = 5 (we took 1)

That's as many good chances as some teams have had against Burnley in a full game this season, and that's not including McCallums header and BBD's miss from the second half.

 

[loyalblade95]

Thanks Cool

For me the muddled thinking continued, with the most embarrassing stat being that we moved to two upfront but in an odd 442 formation that resulted in only one accurate cross.

We haven't been big on crosses into the box this season, but the 4-4-2 formation doesn't just set up for crosses into the box.

It sets up for balls over the top and between the defenders, where most of our chances in that 1st half came from, including the goal.

1st chance of the game, Peck plays the ball over the top to Cannon, he passes inside to Moore, who turns and forces a save.

The goal, Hamer passes to Souza, moves inside, gets the ball back, passes it between the defenders, Cannon runs onto it, turns and scores.

We could and probably should have tried to utilise crosses more, but the threaded passes and balls over the top were working well enough anyway.

 

[Coolblade]

Problem is with Burnley is that you don't get too many chances against them in a match, so you have to be clinical when you get them.

1st half
Moore: 2 shots on target, 1 Esteve clearance in front of goal
Hamer: 1 shot on target
Cannon: 1 shot on target
Total chances = 5 (we took 1)

That's as many good chances as some teams have had against Burnley in a full game this season, and that's not including McCallums header and BBD's miss from the second half.

Whilst I admire your positivity, I fear you are overstating the quality of our chances created, as against the chances other teams have created against Burnley

Our xG over the whole game was 0.58, suggesting we created enough chances to score about one goal in two games, and that our finishing was above average.

Just looking at Burnley’s recent opponents in April;

Watford xG of 1.06
Norwich xG of 1.95
Derby xG of 1.32
Coventry xG of 1.95

So they all created better/more chances, and all by a large margin, in two cases by about three to four times our number.

 

[nopigfansintown]

I'm not sure stats tell the whole story. I thought Moore had two great opportunities. One in the first minute and one later when he should've thrown something at it right in front of goal. He waited too long and the chance went. He also had another half chance that was saved by the keeper. BBD had a decent chance that he skied to the right of the goal (Cannon pass) and almost had a better one when an excellent Burrows diag wouldn't quite sit for him.

Burnley had the open play goal which should've been a regulation clearance from Anel, the pen, and a shot that was blocked by their own player. They looked dangerous in transition at times but there wasn't much else

The issue for United was that despite the territory and having the ball in good areas second half our delivery into the box was usually poor. First half when they came out we created more chances. There was a few good low balls near post from the left which nobody attacked late in the second half.

 

[ReeceofBDTBL]

- on a positive note (although against the current agenda) Robinson was our strongest defender with joint most aerial duels (9) and most successful defensive contributions (10).

UTB.

Best of a bad bunch is the best you’ll ever get with that lump of 5h1t.

Name me one match ever where he’s genuinely looked a defender of quality. He’s wank and if we end up losing in the play offs with that abomination at center back the manager wants sacking on the spot.

Granted, if we got promoted I wouldn’t want either him or Anel anywhere near the first team so it’s not like I rate either of them.
But Robinson is a shit player and a mediocre game amidst a weak team performance won’t change that

 

[Coolblade]

I freely admit that stats rarely tell the whole story; however Opta's objective analysis over an extended period of time should also not just be disregarded. For every excuse or example we give for a spurned opportunity by Moore, I am sure Norwich, Derby etc could do likewise. These stats remove bias (confirmation or otherwise) to provide a fair basis for analysis.

And the only conclusion to be drawn is that every other team who played Burnley in April created much more than we did and that Burnley deserved their victory yesterday.

I also agree that stats over a short period are less valuable than over an extended time. This shows

- our inability to create chances yesterday wasn't a one off, for example against Plymouth our xG was a measly 0.63.

- Opta estimate that over the season our performances would usually result in 69 points, which reflects a lots of fans thoughts on over achievement and

- whilst Robinson's stats yesterday appeared strong, over the season he is undoubtedly a weak link.

 

[Blade56]

Neither the team or the manager seem to have the inner character to break out of this downward negative attitude we have had all season, the crown of success eventually became to heavy to wear. One thing for sure, had we been promoted we would have been right back in the embarrassing doo doo we left behind in the PL with the same manager and same central defence he stubbornly failed to improve when he had the chance.

 

[Barmyblade]

I recall during our winning spell that Wilder was outspoken on the subject of stats, making the fairly obvious point that only one stat matters.

However that comment feels a long time ago, and the new owners are reputedly into their stats analysis, having signed two players purely on that basis. And having invested significant additional sums in January, apparently with a negative effect, they must surely ask questions if we fail in the playoffs. I probably wouldn’t sleep as soundly if I was Wilder. Although he probably will just dream of another huge pay off!

 

[loyalblade95]

Whilst I admire your positivity, I fear you are overstating the quality of our chances created, as against the chances other teams have created against Burnley

Our xG over the whole game was 0.58, suggesting we created enough chances to score about one goal in two games, and that our finishing was above average.

Just looking at Burnley’s recent opponents in April;

Watford xG of 1.06
Norwich xG of 1.95
Derby xG of 1.32
Coventry xG of 1.95

So they all created better/more chances, and all by a large margin, in two cases by about three to four times our number.

Fair enough, personally I don't really pay too much attention to the xg stats, I usually look at the shots on target (some of which we should have done better with, like Moore), and other shots where we should be hitting the target, like BBD and McCallum.

Quality of some of our chances wasn't great (true), but I didn't think Burnley usually conceded a lot of chances per game to be honest, given how few goals they have conceded.

That, and because in 44 league games, they haven't conceded more than 1 goal in a game, which to me is just as impressive as their defensive record, as it sets them up not to lose as soon as they score.

 

[SwitchBLADE Smiles]

Unsurprising that we didn’t get many crosses in. We set up to try and go through the best defence in the league rather than round it. Was always going to be tough going there needing a win but overall felt like we did alright.

I think BBD added nothing to the game and considering we didn’t have any other wingers on the pitch until JRS was brought on (for BBD…) he seemed an odd choice to start the game. Ultimately, I feel like we had enough chances to get something out of the game & we lost due to 2 defensive errors.

 

[ReeceofBDTBL]

I freely admit that stats rarely tell the whole story; however Opta's objective analysis over an extended period of time should also not just be disregarded. For every excuse or example we give for a spurned opportunity by Moore, I am sure Norwich, Derby etc could do likewise. These stats remove bias (confirmation or otherwise) to provide a fair basis for analysis.

And the only conclusion to be drawn is that every other team who played Burnley in April created much more than we did and that Burnley deserved their victory yesterday.

I also agree that stats over a short period are less valuable than over an extended time. This shows

- our inability to create chances yesterday wasn't a one off, for example against Plymouth our xG was a measly 0.63.

- Opta estimate that over the season our performances would usually result in 69 points, which reflects a lots of fans thoughts on over achievement and

- whilst Robinson's stats yesterday appeared strong, over the season he is undoubtedly a weak link.

Those stats don’t take into account game state, which for a team that generally sees out narrow wins having taken the lead, is very significant.

It’s another reason Burnley seemed to be overachieving so much for much of the season

 

[dsr-burnley]

If I may stick my oar in, and I promise I'm not here to gloat, I think some of your fans are being a bit hard on your team. Yesterday I thought Sheffield United played pretty well considering. You had (from memory) four decent shooting chances that went straight at the goalkeeper in the middle of goal, and scored a good goal which incidentally was only the second equaliser Burnley have conceded this year. xg of about a half seems too low, The second half was a Parker masterclass of nothing happening - Burnley are exceptionally good at killing the game once we get in front. The first half of the season we could keep clean sheets but struggled to score - since we signed Edwards we've almost scrapped the 0-0 draws while the defence has stayed tight.

It's the other matches that cost you. I reckon if you'd played in the 3 defeats like you played yesterday, you'd have won at least a couple of them.

 

[Zeblades34]

I just don’t know what sort of team we are now, before souttar got injured we were defensively sound and relied on our talented players freedom to win us the game hence all the 1-0’s we’ve had this season but then he got injured and we never replaced him and never had the solid defence since.

 

[Coolblade]

Always good to hear other’s reasoned opinions, so thanks for your input.

I’m actually quite surprised how excited Burnley fans were to get promotion, when they must know next year will be no fun at all. I am genuinely relaxed about going back up, as a fully competitive championship season is far more enjoyable.

I understand why Ipswich and Luton fans went nuts because it had been so long since they played the big teams and were on MOTD etc - but last season’s abject misery still lives with me. I am sure over time my views may change, but having a mate who supports Soton, has almost given me flashbacks, as I watch a team in red and white three down after 20 minutes, with no hope of a win, and a grumbling unhappy crowd (they even had Archer and BBD to start with!).

I suppose the key question is whether we will still be competitive next season, as I wouldn’t want to have Luton’s season either. But I’m hopeful the new owners will ensure we are, given they can’t yet be bored of their new toy (like Chansiri is with the Wendies).

 

[dsr-burnley]

Always good to hear other’s reasoned opinions, so thanks for your input.

I’m actually quite surprised how excited Burnley fans were to get promotion, when they must know next year will be no fun at all. I am genuinely relaxed about going back up, as a fully competitive championship season is far more enjoyable.

I understand why Ipswich and Luton fans went nuts because it had been so long since they played the big teams and were on MOTD etc - but last season’s abject misery still lives with me. I am sure over time my views may change, but having a mate who supports Soton, has almost given me flashbacks, as I watch a team in red and white three down after 20 minutes, with no hope of a win, and a grumbling unhappy crowd (they even had Archer and BBD to start with!).

I suppose the key question is whether we will still be competitive next season, as I wouldn’t want to have Luton’s season either. But I’m hopeful the new owners will ensure we are, given they can’t yet be bored of their new toy (like Chansiri is with the Wendies).

Competitive spirit. We al want to win, even if the prize is a bit rubbish.

(Actually we have to get promoted regularly, for the money. The owners have taken so much out that we owe the banks £70m or so and have to pay £10m or so interest each year. That'as affordable on PL money, but once tha parachute money stops, we're right in Dickie's Meadow.)

 

[Frank the tank]

Competitive spirit. We al want to win, even if the prize is a bit rubbish.

(Actually we have to get promoted regularly, for the money. The owners have taken so much out that we owe the banks £70m or so and have to pay £10m or so interest each year. That'as affordable on PL money, but once tha parachute money stops, we're right in Dickie's Meadow.)

Had talksport on all day while I've been doing bits round the house and all the talk has been of wether the two will stay up and the poor records of the managers at that level
Not one person mentioned how fucking hard it is for any club to compete financially but most pundits will try and find reasons why you will rather than admit its a closed shop

I actually think. You have a much better chance than Leeds who don't seem to have the money to upgrade the squad or a manager who can adapt his hung ho tactics

All the talk is of how poor the three ( soton and Leicester in particular) have been, conveniently forgetting they were streets ahead of the competition last season


I don't know what the answer is it but trying to play them at their game like kompant did doesn't seem like a great idea and I think Leeds will get dry bummed most weeks

 

[andy m]

If you think about it, going up 2nd season of parachute payments is better as you can have 2 enjoyable seasons before the inevitable shit one.

 

[Coolblade]

Given the parachute payments are (roughly) £43m for the first year, £35m for the second year and £16m for the third year, there is also an argument that the second year down is the best year to seek promotion.

In the first year down the parachute payments are often used to pay off deferred transfer fees and inflated salaries of those players you need to get off the wage bill, and to ditch those players who don’t form part of the future plan. Having shed the deadwood, in the second season you don’t have that much less money from parachute payments, and instead can spend it on transfers and salaries. And hopefully the confidence had been restored.

But if that doesn’t work, it does get much harder in the third year!

 

[William Large]

Whilst I admire your positivity, I fear you are overstating the quality of our chances created, as against the chances other teams have created against Burnley

Our xG over the whole game was 0.58, suggesting we created enough chances to score about one goal in two games, and that our finishing was above average.

Just looking at Burnley’s recent opponents in April;

Watford xG of 1.06
Norwich xG of 1.95
Derby xG of 1.32
Coventry xG of 1.95

So they all created better/more chances, and all by a large margin, in two cases by about three to four times our number.

Whilst I get the point of your argument. I do think that xG is the most pointless stat.