A few observations from the stats (Rovers)

[Coolblade]

A few observations from the stats:

- Although team stats were quite even (shots 12 v 11, shots on target 3 v 5, corners 5 v 5, possession 51 v 49) we won the xG battle (0.79 v 1.13) confirming we created better quality chances. [The various stats sites vary more than usual, I’ve mainly used Opta).

- Dominant aerially with 58 duels won at 51.7% success rate. McGuinness with 7 aerials won, and 14 clearances, Ben Mee supported with 4 aerials won, 1 interception, 9 clearances.

- Midfield screening was good Soumaré contributed 3 tackles and 2 interceptions, Peck with 4 tackles (most in team) and 1 clearance. Riedewald added 1 interception and 3 clearances with composed passing (5 passes, 80% accuracy).

- McCallum led creativity with 2 key passes along with 7 crosses (3 accurate), 1 shot on target, and 2 interceptions. Ogbene added 2 key passes alongside his 1 dribble, but again didn’t manage one accurate cross. O'Hare contributed 2 key passes and an assist from his 45 passes

- Obviously subs made a huge difference. Cannon attempted just 3 passes, only one reached our player. An all time low, even for him. Ings had no shots, no key passes, no dribbles etc. although at least had 24 touches. Burrows with a cooly taken goal and a fine assist. Campbell managed 3 aerials wins and a successful dribble, alongside his great goal but striker involvement in build-up remains a concern. Brooks deserves mention for putting Burrows through as the stats don’t recognise that as a key pass (when it was!)

A crucial three points secured through defensive organisation, aerial dominance, and clinical finishing. Main concern remains striker involvement, getting Campbell and Ings more integrated into our attacking play is essential. Great to see Burrows get his mojo back after the low confidence penalty miss against Hull.

Out of the relegation zone, on the up, only 9 points from the playoffs!

 

[Balham]

We won the xG battle despite the first goal being given as an OG which doesn’t register. Had it been Soumaré’s you could probably add 0.5+ to our total.

 

[Old Programme seller]

The league looks weak compared to last season I’m not suggesting that we can win it but with brute force we could be up there with luck and a good wind

 

[Rodley]

A few observations from the stats:

- Although team stats were quite even (shots 12 v 11, shots on target 3 v 5, corners 5 v 5, possession 51 v 49) we won the xG battle (0.79 v 1.13) confirming we created better quality chances. [The various stats sites vary more than usual, I’ve mainly used Opta).

- Dominant aerially with 58 duels won at 51.7% success rate. McGuinness with 7 aerials won, and 14 clearances, Ben Mee supported with 4 aerials won, 1 interception, 9 clearances.

- Midfield screening was good Soumaré contributed 3 tackles and 2 interceptions, Peck with 4 tackles (most in team) and 1 clearance. Riedewald added 1 interception and 3 clearances with composed passing (5 passes, 80% accuracy).

- McCallum led creativity with 2 key passes along with 7 crosses (3 accurate), 1 shot on target, and 2 interceptions. Ogbene added 2 key passes alongside his 1 dribble, but again didn’t manage one accurate cross. O'Hare contributed 2 key passes and an assist from his 45 passes

- Obviously subs made a huge difference. Cannon attempted just 3 passes, only one reached our player. An all time low, even for him. Ings had no shots, no key passes, no dribbles etc. although at least had 24 touches. Burrows with a cooly taken goal and a fine assist. Campbell managed 3 aerials wins and a successful dribble, alongside his great goal but striker involvement in build-up remains a concern. Brooks deserves mention for putting Burrows through as the stats don’t recognise that as a key pass (when it was!)

A crucial three points secured through defensive organisation, aerial dominance, and clinical finishing. Main concern remains striker involvement, getting Campbell and Ings more integrated into our attacking play is essential. Great to see Burrows get his mojo back after the low confidence penalty miss against Hull.

Out of the relegation zone, on the up, only 9 points from the playoffs!

This is why I take xG with a bit pinch of salt. We had three decent chances, two really good ones and the xG was only just over 1?

 

[Kenilworth]

Ings played a great slide through ball to O’Hare for a shot on target. Is that not a key pass?
Have to wonder the veracity of these stat banks some times.

 

[Silent Blade]

Ings played a great slide through ball to O’Hare for a shot on target. Is that not a key pass?
Have to wonder the veracity of these stat banks some times.

Ogbene not Ings

 

[Kenilworth]

Ogbene not Ings

You see.
You get one fact wrong in about 10 years, pour your heart out in a separate thread to admit it, and then have to sort me out on a regular basis.

 

[GrunkyPeep]

A few observations from the stats:

- Although team stats were quite even (shots 12 v 11, shots on target 3 v 5, corners 5 v 5, possession 51 v 49) we won the xG battle (0.79 v 1.13) confirming we created better quality chances. [The various stats sites vary more than usual, I’ve mainly used Opta).

- Dominant aerially with 58 duels won at 51.7% success rate. McGuinness with 7 aerials won, and 14 clearances, Ben Mee supported with 4 aerials won, 1 interception, 9 clearances.

- Midfield screening was good Soumaré contributed 3 tackles and 2 interceptions, Peck with 4 tackles (most in team) and 1 clearance. Riedewald added 1 interception and 3 clearances with composed passing (5 passes, 80% accuracy).

- McCallum led creativity with 2 key passes along with 7 crosses (3 accurate), 1 shot on target, and 2 interceptions. Ogbene added 2 key passes alongside his 1 dribble, but again didn’t manage one accurate cross. O'Hare contributed 2 key passes and an assist from his 45 passes

- Obviously subs made a huge difference. Cannon attempted just 3 passes, only one reached our player. An all time low, even for him. Ings had no shots, no key passes, no dribbles etc. although at least had 24 touches. Burrows with a cooly taken goal and a fine assist. Campbell managed 3 aerials wins and a successful dribble, alongside his great goal but striker involvement in build-up remains a concern. Brooks deserves mention for putting Burrows through as the stats don’t recognise that as a key pass (when it was!)

A crucial three points secured through defensive organisation, aerial dominance, and clinical finishing. Main concern remains striker involvement, getting Campbell and Ings more integrated into our attacking play is essential. Great to see Burrows get his mojo back after the low confidence penalty miss against Hull.

Out of the relegation zone, on the up, only 9 points from the playoffs!

Love all the stats!

Still a bit confused why we don't measure pre-assists. I think there are some players, Norwood in particular, that never showed up on the assists board but would have scored very highly on the pre-assists. Not the man to make the key pass but the one that got the team in the right areas.

 

[Blademan89]

Ogbene not Ings

Look same.

 

[Creepy]

- Midfield screening was good Soumaré contributed 3 tackles and 2 interceptions, Peck with 4 tackles (most in team) and 1 clearance.

4 tackles most in team!!!! I'm sure when I used to play I did at least 50 tackles a game - and I usually got subbed at half time. What on earth has the game come to.

I really like these posts by the way. Thank you

 

[Balham]

4 tackles most in team!!!! I'm sure when I used to play I did at least 50 tackles a game - and I usually got subbed at half time. What on earth has the game come to.

I really like these posts by the way. Thank you

The game has moved on. Now, if a player in the top divisions commits for a tackle, more often than not the opponent will be able to either beat the tackle with a bit of skill or move the ball on to a teammate. Additionally, committing to a tackle often takes a player out of position defensively, leaving a gap for the opposition to exploit. The only other thing is that some things we might see as tackles - the fullback on the slide - are actually interceptions.

I used to play centre half and didn't tackle that much. It's a last resort; much easier to pressure the opponent into a mistake.

 

[Snowflake]

4 tackles most in team!!!! I'm sure when I used to play I did at least 50 tackles a game - and I usually got subbed at half time. What on earth has the game come to.

I really like these posts by the way. Thank you

For the last few years we seem not to be able to tackle successfully. Frequently we lose 50/50 balls . Why ?

 

[Snowflake]

The game has moved on. Now, if a player in the top divisions commits for a tackle, more often than not the opponent will be able to either beat the tackle with a bit of skill or move the ball on to a teammate. Additionally, committing to a tackle often takes a player out of position defensively, leaving a gap for the opposition to exploit. The only other thing is that some things we might see as tackles - the fullback on the slide - are actually interceptions.

I used to play centre half and didn't tackle that much. It's a last resort; much easier to pressure the opponent into a mistake.

It’s in the middle of the pitch that we seem to lose contested balls most of the time. I understand why defenders don’t dive in, but loose balls rarely seem to end up with us.

 

[Champagneblade]

This is why I take xG with a bit pinch of salt. We had three decent chances, two really good ones and the xG was only just over 1?

Same.

It’s an interesting guide but it’s far too simple.

You create a chance for Billy Sharp and the same one falls to Paul Beesley and your “expected goal” is the same.

You could keep creating chances for the wrong players and the expected goal realistically would be almost zero.

It’s an interesting addition, but hugely flawed in my view as well.

Martin O’Neill seemed to think it was bollocks!

 

[dc_blade]

Same.

It’s an interesting guide but it’s far too simple.

You create a chance for Billy Sharp and the same one falls to Paul Beesley and your “expected goal” is the same.

You could keep creating chances for the wrong players and the expected goal realistically would be almost zero.

It’s an interesting addition, but hugely flawed in my view as well.

Martin O’Neill seemed to think it was bollocks!

But that scenario is exactly what xG is designed to illustrate.

And Martin O’Neill is a dinosaur.

 

[Coolblade]

I frequently stress that stats can be misleading, and need context to be interpreted fairly. But they do offer an objective perspective, removing subjectivity and confirmation bias (which we are all guilty of) and so can assist with providing a more complete picture.

 

[Houston_Blade]

This is why I take xG with a bit pinch of salt. We had three decent chances, two really good ones and the xG was only just over 1?

The O’Hare chance would have been low xG because it was wide and at a narrow angle.

Tanganga was a waving leg in a congested box so despite his proximity to goal I imagine it was low xG.