That’s fair enough, we’ve all got our own opinions but the reason I’m not pointing the finger at our defence is because I don’t believe our defence is weaker than our attack. If it becomes that way then fair enough I’ll point my finger at the defence, but currently I’m pointing more fingers at our attack (breaking down in midfield, giving the ball away etc) than I am at our defence.I'm not saying are defence needs an overhaul, I'm just pointing out that our attack is our performing our defence so why aren't you pointing the finger at them?
It's ludicrous to say either need's changes at this early stage. They've both started steadily, things to both work on and with.
As for looking at the opposition, Watford had failed to score in their previous 3 league games!
Something like that yes, and highest XG for too...Didn’t Watford have the lowest xG against in the division prior to last weekend?
You have never played footballWhy the obsession with being able to do 90mins? There are these things called subs. If someone is a supersub that bangs in goals do you write them off because they don't do it for 90mins?
People's natural athleticism differs from person to person and no matter how hard they try their aerobic capacity etc will be limited. But if they have natural footballing ability bin them off because they get tired after 60mins? Would you prefer a player giving it everything for 60mins or coasting a bit so they can get through 90? Of course you couldn't have every player like that as there aren't enough subs, but 2 or 3 you could get away with. Wing backs especially it should be looked at as it's a very demanding position.
I'm not saying Palmer is some amazing superstar, but he does have technical ability and we should look to use it, and if we need to replace him after an hour so be it. Or use him as an option off the bench for 30.
Something like that yes, and highest XG for too...
Yep -it was.... !!They hadn't scored in their previous 3 league games which just shows this XG malarky isn't always that great an indicator.
Not sure if it's true but someone said Rotherham's XG was twice that of Stokes in the game Stoke put 6 past them!
Because xG is about the quality of the chance rather than the quality of finishing by whichever team it is.They hadn't scored in their previous 3 league games which just shows this XG malarky isn't always that great an indicator.
Not sure if it's true but someone said Rotherham's XG was twice that of Stokes in the game Stoke put 6 past them!
Are you going to keep this painfully boring, dreadfully unfunny, shtick up all season?
Exclusive footage of PVA favourite seat at kick off time at the CBS
Those are valid discussion points, but have nothing to do with him being able to play 90mins or not.You have never played football
I think he’s a decent footballer but zero goals assists this season and has never done a full season
team needs better long term
But they didn't score in their previous 3 games but put 3 past us.
But the week before we kept a clean sheet against Sunderland who put 5 past Southampton.
the point being, it's far too early to be making judgements on defence or attack, (we can all see the issue with midfield), but losing a star player late in the window will do that.
If we were shipping goals or not scoring I could understand it but we're above average for goals scored and around average for goals conceded, at this early stage that's fine, no need for panic or kneejerk reactions.
You have never played football
I think he’s a decent footballer but zero goals assists this season and has never done a full season
team needs better long term
Yeah exactly, so it shows that bar the Watford game our defence has been pretty solid, if we kept a clean sheet against Sunderland who since put 5 past Southampton then our defence can’t be the main issue.
But I agree that on the whole it’s too early to cast long term judgments on attack vs. defence, though the one thing I think we’re all clear on is that we’re lacking someone like Hamer, a defensively solid player that can also pick out a killer pass for our strikers to score from, something that I don’t think Eccles naturally is.
Something like that yes, and highest XG for too...
Yeah that’s right and they had only conceded twice before the weekend.Didn’t Watford have the lowest xG against in the division prior to last weekend?
Yes but their attacking stats have been strong bar the goals. They are one of the best teams in the league for chances created and shots at goal and 2nd in the league based on expected points. They brought in a new forward before our game against them and he scored two.They hadn't scored in their previous 3 league games which just shows this XG malarky isn't always that great an indicator.
Not sure if it's true but someone said Rotherham's XG was twice that of Stokes in the game Stoke put 6 past them!
If anything the stats point to the fact they should have been scoring a lot more than they did. Like you said I'm not surprised they finally scored a few against us, someone mentioned that they probably would pre match too. Can't remember who it wasYes but their attacking stats have been strong bar the goals. They are one of the best teams in the league for chances created and shots at goal and 2nd in the league based on expected points. They brought in a new forward before our game against them and he scored two.
Basically they scored the goals that Boro really should have done.If anything the stats point to the fact they should have been scoring a lot more than they did. Like you said I'm not surprised they finally scored a few against us, someone mentioned that they probably would pre match too. Can't remember who it was
Would love to know what the xG on that backpass own goal was! Must be near 0Thay had a really low XG against us
0.96
Ours against them was 1.9
Think we are the only team to have above a 1 XG against them
Thomas backpass also gifts them a goal , massively boosting their XGWould love to know what the xG on that backpass own goal was! Must be near 0
Yep very true.Thomas backpass also gifts them a goal , massively boosting their XG
Thomas backpass also gifts them a goal , massively boosting their XG
I think a penalty has a 0.76 XGIs our xG inflated by the penalty a bit though too?
Our fans on Twitter had it as 1.0 XG...I think a penalty has a 0.76 XG
It's 0.76 as there is a 76% chance of scoringOur fans on Twitter had it as 1.0 XG...
Indeed. I was getting at that the folk of Twitter believing it was criminal to miss a pen and Godden should be droppedIt's 0.76 as there is a 76% chance of scoring
Worse than that you can’t score 3 goals away and not win.It's amazing really these issues only really manifest because we're not doing what we could and should be really ...
You can't score 3 at home and not win
If anything the stats point to the fact they should have been scoring a lot more than they did. Like you said I'm not surprised they finally scored a few against us, someone mentioned that they probably would pre match too. Can't remember who it was
Post in thread 'Watford (h)' Match Thread - Watford (h)They have been good, not getting their rewards at the moment but lack that individual quality they used to have with João Pedro, Sarr etc.
They dominate the ball, dominate territory, create decent chances & give very little away. Will be a really tough game between 2 teams in transition I think.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?