A few observations from the stats (Coventry)

[Coolblade]

A few observations from the stats (Coventry):

• xG battle went against us again (1.91 v 1.01), and the scoreline reflects it. We weren’t unlucky. Coventry converted their chances clinically, while we struggled despite creating some openings. We had fewer shots overall (17 v 11) and fewer on target (8 v 4). Possession was also against us: 57.9% v 42.1% and that territorial disadvantage told in key moments.

• Aerial duels remained competitive: 50 contested, 58% success rate. McCallum led with 7 wins, Mee close behind with 6, and McGuinness added 3. Peck contributed 4 aerial wins. Coventry were strong in the air, but we weren’t outmatched.

• Midfield screening stretched again: Peck posted 5 tackles, 2 interceptions, 2 clearances, but passing accuracy dipped to 71% from 31 passes. O’Hare and McCallum were busy defensively (4 and 3 tackles respectively), but transitions hurt us badly. Riedewald struggled (51.3% passing, only 39 passes) before being subbed.

• Creativity came mainly from wide areas: McCallum delivered 13 crosses (though only 1 accurate), plus 3 shots and 1 on target. Peck added 11 crosses and 1 key pass. O’Hare chipped in with 1 key pass and 1 dribble. Mee surprisingly contributed 2 key passes from deep. But overall, quality in the final third was lacking. Indeed Ogbene didn’t even attempt a cross, with no key passes and one successful dribble.

• Defensive organisation under strain:McCallum’s clearance count (14) shows the pressure we were under. Mee added 10 clearances, McGuinness 11. Despite this, the back line couldn’t prevent three goals.

• Ongoing striker concerns: Conversion rate poor again – 11 shots, only 1 goal (McCallum from LB). Campbell had 2 shots, 1 on target, but little involvement beyond that.Cannon started but had only 7 touches (with a low pass accuracy rare, no shots, no dribbles, no crosses) before being withdrawn. Striker contribution remains a major concern. Ings barely featured after coming on.

• Subs impact minimal again: Brooks, Seriki, Davies, Ings combined for just 2 key passes and no shots.

Losing 3–1 away to Coventry despite their lofty position is another bitter pill. Our inability to respond to opponent changes in tactics is an ongoing problem, especially given our choices of substitutions can be baffling. The numbers suggest effort, but quality and decision-making in both boxes remain our Achilles’ heel. Possession, xG, and defensive metrics underline the story: we’re just not smart enough in key phases

Sadly confidence is dwindling - both mine and the teams. Whether Wilder genuinely is the right man must soon be questioned - but as we know from our recent history, you only make a change if you’re confident you can attract someone better. Can we?

UTB

 

[nopigfansintown]

The first 50-55 minutes are the only stats that really give any information of note. That's the period when we have the energy and physicality to try to compete. After that we're non league level because we don't have the rudiments. Those stats for that game are pretty good all things considered.

If teams stay less than two goals behind they can just wait us out like Nadal and Djokovic did at the Grand Slams ("that's a very nice game but can your body and mind do it for 4- 6 hours?). Get through the first 35-40 minutes relatively unscathed and you've beaten us.

 

[Sky Blues]

Losing 3–1 away to Coventry despite their lofty position is another bitter pill. Our inability to respond to opponent changes in tactics is an ongoing problem, especially given our choices of substitutions can be baffling. The numbers suggest effort, but quality and decision-making in both boxes remain our Achilles’ heel. Possession, xG, and defensive metrics underline the story: we’re just not smart enough in key phases

The changes we made put players in their correct positions. It's close to the side that's won 7 out of the last 8 games and the Wrexham defeat was without 5 of them. It was never going to be easy for you in the 2nd half yet we relied on defensive mistakes to score. Mason-Clark on the left and Sakamoto on the right normally pull defences apart. The runs and long throws of MVE normally cause problems. You coped better than most sides have but were badly let down by individual errors.

The big difference between the two sides was goalscorers. We've had as many players score as you've scored goals. 2 of our players have got 18 goals between them and Thomas-Asante hasn't been playing as a striker yet has 10 so far. We're very hard to set up against with so many goal threats in the side yet you managed them very well in the 1st half.

Your top priority has to be bringing in a goalscorer.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

The changes we made put players in their correct positions. It's close to the side that's won 7 out of the last 8 games and the Wrexham defeat was without 5 of them. It was never going to be easy for you in the 2nd half yet we relied on defensive mistakes to score. Mason-Clark on the left and Sakamoto on the right normally pull defences apart. The runs and long throws of MVE normally cause problems. You coped better than most sides have but were badly let down by individual errors.

The big difference between the two sides was goalscorers. We've had as many players score as you've scored goals. 2 of our players have got 18 goals between them and Thomas-Asante hasn't been playing as a striker yet has 10 so far. We're very hard to set up against with so many goal threats in the side yet you managed them very well in the 1st half.

Your top priority has to be bringing in a goalscorer.

There’s no quick fix at the bottom of the league…Players won’t be queuing round the block to get into BDTBL

 

[CPsufc]

0.9 xG on their third so identical until then..

 

[DI36O]

0.9 xG on their third so identical until then..

Yep, this is what I hate about people quoting xg stats.

 

[Daredevil]

A few observations from the stats (Coventry):

• xG battle went against us again (1.91 v 1.01), and the scoreline reflects it. We weren’t unlucky. Coventry converted their chances clinically, while we struggled despite creating some openings. We had fewer shots overall (17 v 11) and fewer on target (8 v 4). Possession was also against us: 57.9% v 42.1% and that territorial disadvantage told in key moments.

• Aerial duels remained competitive: 50 contested, 58% success rate. McCallum led with 7 wins, Mee close behind with 6, and McGuinness added 3. Peck contributed 4 aerial wins. Coventry were strong in the air, but we weren’t outmatched.

• Midfield screening stretched again: Peck posted 5 tackles, 2 interceptions, 2 clearances, but passing accuracy dipped to 71% from 31 passes. O’Hare and McCallum were busy defensively (4 and 3 tackles respectively), but transitions hurt us badly. Riedewald struggled (51.3% passing, only 39 passes) before being subbed.

• Creativity came mainly from wide areas: McCallum delivered 13 crosses (though only 1 accurate), plus 3 shots and 1 on target. Peck added 11 crosses and 1 key pass. O’Hare chipped in with 1 key pass and 1 dribble. Mee surprisingly contributed 2 key passes from deep. But overall, quality in the final third was lacking. Indeed Ogbene didn’t even attempt a cross, with no key passes and one successful dribble.

• Defensive organisation under strain:McCallum’s clearance count (14) shows the pressure we were under. Mee added 10 clearances, McGuinness 11. Despite this, the back line couldn’t prevent three goals.

• Ongoing striker concerns: Conversion rate poor again – 11 shots, only 1 goal (McCallum from LB). Campbell had 2 shots, 1 on target, but little involvement beyond that.Cannon started but had only 7 touches (with a low pass accuracy rare, no shots, no dribbles, no crosses) before being withdrawn. Striker contribution remains a major concern. Ings barely featured after coming on.

• Subs impact minimal again: Brooks, Seriki, Davies, Ings combined for just 2 key passes and no shots.

Losing 3–1 away to Coventry despite their lofty position is another bitter pill. Our inability to respond to opponent changes in tactics is an ongoing problem, especially given our choices of substitutions can be baffling. The numbers suggest effort, but quality and decision-making in both boxes remain our Achilles’ heel. Possession, xG, and defensive metrics underline the story: we’re just not smart enough in key phases

Sadly confidence is dwindling - both mine and the teams. Whether Wilder genuinely is the right man must soon be questioned - but as we know from our recent history, you only make a change if you’re confident you can attract someone better. Can we?

UTB

Who had the most corners?

 

[Selly]

Your top priority has to be bringing in a goalscorer

Hard disagree. Its not like we are making and missing bucketloads of chances.

I'm not sure what we need to do to right the ship, but I'd be looking at the other end of the pitch first and foremost.

We could have Haaland in our team right now and we'd still at best score one a game and concede 2 or 3. That is the fundamental problem.

 

[Rodley]

0.9 xG on their third so identical until then..

Yep, this is what I hate about people quoting xg stats.

This. We were well in that and it was a decent performance. We rightly gambled to try and get an equaliser and were picked off on the break with a tap-in.

xG is limited in terms of analysis.

 

[sheepbridge]

Hard disagree. Its not like we are making and missing bucketloads of chances.

I'm not sure what we need to do to right the ship, but I'd be looking at the other end of the pitch first and foremost.

We could have Haaland in our team right now and we'd still at best score one a game and concede 2 or 3. That is the fundamental problem.

Yep. Which why I laugh when it's stated if only we'd kept Moore, or if Wilder had stayed we'd now have McBurnie as though they'd have made a massive difference to our results.

They both had poor records under Wilder previously and nothing has changed to improve it. Maybe if we start playing 2 up front but we didn't do that for most of last season and not seen much to suggest we will this season either.

 

[Balham]

Hard disagree. Its not like we are making and missing bucketloads of chances.

I'm not sure what we need to do to right the ship, but I'd be looking at the other end of the pitch first and foremost.

We could have Haaland in our team right now and we'd still at best score one a game and concede 2 or 3. That is the fundamental problem.

We could start by playing our best centre half in central defence and a natural right back at right back. Who knows, maybe playing players in their best positions would help?

Has Tanganga played at CB under Wilder? Or is the gaffer confused by the #2 on his back?

 

[dc_blade]

xG is limited in terms of analysis.

Fortunately there are other stats. And Coventry were better than us by every measure.

 

[Tarqs]

Backs up my thoughts that Reidewald was barely in the game, looked knackered, yet lasted over 60 mins before he was taken off again (like Preston).

 

[Sky Blues]

Yep. Which why I laugh when it's stated if only we'd kept Moore, or if Wilder had stayed we'd now have McBurnie as though they'd have made a massive difference to our results.

They both had poor records under Wilder previously and nothing has changed to improve it. Maybe if we start playing 2 up front but we didn't do that for most of last season and not seen much to suggest we will this season either.

Moore scored 3 against us.....

 

[Houston_Blade]

Moore scored 3 against us.....

Wrexham probably created some chances for him to score though. We don’t bother with such nonsense.

 

[SRBlade]

"Ogbene didn’t even attempt a cross, with no key passes and one successful dribble"

I was one dribble away from contributing as much as Ogbene while sat on my arse.

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

"Ogbene didn’t even attempt a cross, with no key passes and one successful dribble"

I was one dribble away from contributing as much as Ogbene while sat on my arse.

I actually matched him while sat on my arse. Still, things have firmed up a bit since then thankfully.

 

[finlaytheblade]

Fortunately there are other stats. And Coventry were better than us by every measure.

We need to take Mcguinness out and try a different aproach ,one which we are used to! Tanganga , Mee central and why not try Bindon at left centre back ,i know he was brought in by Sellers early doors.He was hung out to dry like Sydie Peck .Plays regulary for New Zealand so worth a try in my book! Tall and good in the air so he would make up for the loss of height taking
Mcguinness out.
Mee would find centreback less taxing than playing left centreback.
Tanganga is struggling and apart from playing right back which is not working ! is he a captain ! Could be it is weighing him down.

 

[Keen Blade]

"Ogbene didn’t even attempt a cross, with no key passes and one successful dribble"

I was one dribble away from contributing as much as Ogbene while sat on my arse.

Good point well made.

Also , gave me a rueful smile about my last holiday in Egypt.

 

[FlamingLip]

This. We were well in that and it was a decent performance. We rightly gambled to try and get an equaliser and were picked off on the break with a tap-in.

xG is limited in terms of analysis.

We were in it, and playing well, til HT. Would like to see comparison stats just for second half.

 

[Bladesman]

In defence of Ogbene teams are doubling up on him on that right side. Both Derby and Coventry did it and no one went out to support him.

 

[Balham]

In defence of Ogbene teams are doubling up on him on that right side. Both Derby and Coventry did it and no one went out to support him.

That would be because they know that Tanganga isn't going to get forward to support. Makes it easier to contain Ogbene; part of the reasons Seriki and Brooks look so much more effective in an attacking sense is that they're both attacking.

 

[Bladesman]

That would be because they know that Tanganga isn't going to get forward to support. Makes it easier to contain Ogbene; part of the reasons Seriki and Brooks look so much more effective in an attacking sense is that they're both attacking.

Chipping it out to Ogbene from Cooper, we are asking him to win first contact in the air and bring the ball down then take on two players. He is a decent player but he isn't fucking Ronaldo.

Not sure what we are expecting him to do out there with little support.

 

[Coolblade]

We were in it, and playing well, til HT. Would like to see comparison stats just for second half.

1st Half v 2nd Half

1. Possession & Control

• First Half: We had 40.2% possession, Lost possession 15 times in defensive half and 22 times in middle third which suggests pressure from Coventry and difficulty progressing play.

• Second Half improved slightly to 44.4% possession, but still behind. Possession losses increased (17 defensive, 28 middle third) indicating more risk-taking or fatigue under pressure.

We never dominated possession; second half saw more turnovers, likely due to chasing the game.

2. Attacking Output

• First Half: Shots: 5 (4 on target); xG: 0.57; Key passes: 4; Shooting accuracy: 80%

• Second Half: Shots: 6, but 0 on target; xG: 0.36; Key passes: 3; Shooting accuracy: 0%

Our attacking threat disappeared after half-time. Despite more shots, none tested the keeper. Tactical response from Coventry neutralised us completely.

3. Defensive Performance

• First Half: Tackles: 9 (success 55.6%); Clearances: 17; Recoveries: 18; Defensive third recoveries: 9; Interceptions: 3

• Second Half: Tackles: 5 (success 100%); Clearances: 35 (huge increase); Recoveries: 23; Defensive third recoveries: 14; Interceptions: 3

Defensive workload skyrocketed in second half (35 clearances vs 17), showing sustained pressure from Coventry. Perfect tackle success suggests last-ditch defending rather than proactive pressing.

4. Duels & Physicality

• First Half: Duels: 48 (success 52.1%) Aerial duels won: 65% (dominant in air)

• Second Half: Duels: 58 (success 55.2%); Aerial duels won: 56.7% (still strong but slightly less dominant)

We remained competitive physically, especially aerially, but couldn’t translate that into attacking advantage.

5. Tactical Patterns

• First Half: Compact shape, relied on efficiency and counter-attacks, scored with limited chances.

• Second Half: Dropped deeper, absorbed pressure, relied on clearances and duels. No attacking penetration; became reactive rather than proactive.

 

[FlamingLip]

1st Half v 2nd Half

1. Possession & Control

• First Half: We had 40.2% possession, Lost possession 15 times in defensive half and 22 times in middle third which suggests pressure from Coventry and difficulty progressing play.

• Second Half improved slightly to 44.4% possession, but still behind. Possession losses increased (17 defensive, 28 middle third) indicating more risk-taking or fatigue under pressure.

We never dominated possession; second half saw more turnovers, likely due to chasing the game.

2. Attacking Output

• First Half: Shots: 5 (4 on target); xG: 0.57; Key passes: 4; Shooting accuracy: 80%

• Second Half: Shots: 6, but 0 on target; xG: 0.36; Key passes: 3; Shooting accuracy: 0%

Our attacking threat disappeared after half-time. Despite more shots, none tested the keeper. Tactical response from Coventry neutralised us completely.

3. Defensive Performance

• First Half: Tackles: 9 (success 55.6%); Clearances: 17; Recoveries: 18; Defensive third recoveries: 9; Interceptions: 3

• Second Half: Tackles: 5 (success 100%); Clearances: 35 (huge increase); Recoveries: 23; Defensive third recoveries: 14; Interceptions: 3

Defensive workload skyrocketed in second half (35 clearances vs 17), showing sustained pressure from Coventry. Perfect tackle success suggests last-ditch defending rather than proactive pressing.

4. Duels & Physicality

• First Half: Duels: 48 (success 52.1%) Aerial duels won: 65% (dominant in air)

• Second Half: Duels: 58 (success 55.2%); Aerial duels won: 56.7% (still strong but slightly less dominant)

We remained competitive physically, especially aerially, but couldn’t translate that into attacking advantage.

5. Tactical Patterns

• First Half: Compact shape, relied on efficiency and counter-attacks, scored with limited chances.

• Second Half: Dropped deeper, absorbed pressure, relied on clearances and duels. No attacking penetration; became reactive rather than proactive.

Thanks a lot Coolblade.