Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I was more interested in the stats regarding bringing everyone back vs leaving players up.
Yeah, I was more interested in the stats regarding bringing everyone back vs leaving players up.Didn't someone post a stat last season ,when this was discussed for the eleventy billionth time , that less then 2% of corners result in goals across all 4 divisions
Well seeing as that's what pretty much all teams do these days I would imagine the stat is pretty much the same .Yeah, I was more interested in the stats regarding bringing everyone back vs leaving players up.
I don’t think anyone’s said we’re the only team doing it. Just a modern ‘meta’ that I don’t like and don’t really agree with.Well seeing as that's what pretty much all teams do these days I would imagine the stat is pretty much the same .
There seems to be a silly idea that we are the only team to do it but every team I've seen is play this season do the same .
Only thing that annoys me is other teams seem to transition a lot quicker than we do currently from defending a set piece
Totally agree, we've played teams like Oxford at home who transitioned very quickly and looked dangerous doing itI don’t think anyone’s said we’re the only team doing it. Just a modern ‘meta’ that I don’t like and don’t really agree with.
However, whatever the benefits of it are, we must clearly be doing it wrong as we’re unconvincing on the corners and really bad at breaking away if we do win the ball in.
Yep. We seem to set up wrong to pick up the second balls. If we are bringing people back some at least need to be patrolling the edge of the area. We just seem to stay in the box waiting for the ball to come back in. And if we do win it no-one busts a gut to get up the field.I don’t think anyone’s said we’re the only team doing it. Just a modern ‘meta’ that I don’t like and don’t really agree with.
However, whatever the benefits of it are, we must clearly be doing it wrong as we’re unconvincing on the corners and really bad at breaking away if we do win the ball in.
Ain't nothin' but a quick break.Tell us why then?
Our problem is the Xg against us.
My perception is we’re quite sieve likeThat's not particularly bad tbh
I think 5 games is too soon to be looking at xG tbh. Can be completely thrown off by one good or one bad game.
I wonder what it is if you remove the first half v Watford and the second vs Oxford.
Just gone off data I can access but if you stripped them out and then brought back up to 5 games on an ‘average’ basis we’d be 10th. XG of 4.13 vs XGA of 3.18.
What would the numbers look like if we stripped out the Stoke first half or Bristol second half?
This is rhetorical because there’s no good manipulating the data to wipe out by far our two strongest half performances.
To be 10th despite wiping that out shows that the performances aren’t as bad as people think as a whole. Things will pick up!
What would the numbers look like if we stripped out the Stoke first half or Bristol second half?
This is rhetorical because there’s no good manipulating the data to wipe out by far our two strongest half performances.
To be 10th despite wiping that out shows that the performances aren’t as bad as people think as a whole. Things will pick up!
It was more “those were two very high xG performance and not representative of our start, so how bad is the bit people are moaning at?” Agree 10th isn’t bad, but it’s not particularly good either (data caveats accepted)
First half 1.13 second half 1.83That’s 10th compared to all the other teams without the same adjustments i.e. removing their 2 best xG halves. By the sounds of it, that adjustment means we’re comparing Cov’s 4 games versus everyone else’s 5 games. The data manipulation means the 2 best indicators of performance have been removed.
On a side note, I think the Oxford 2nd half has a similar xG to Oxford 1st half.
Checks out to me, their keeper made 2-3 top draw saves and Haji Wright’s winner alone would be at least 0.4 to 0.6 xG - about the same as a penalty.First half 1.13 second half 1.83
Not at allMy perception is we’re quite sieve like
Then the sample size is so small it’s even more meaningless than it already is. It probably isn’t controversial to say we’ve underperformed what we expected but it’s just 5 games at the start of the season.Just gone off data I can access but if you stripped them out and then brought back up to 5 games on an ‘average’ basis we’d be 10th. XG of 4.13 vs XGA of 3.18.
That’s 10th compared to all the other teams without the same adjustments i.e. removing their 2 best xG halves. By the sounds of it, that adjustment means we’re comparing Cov’s 4 games versus everyone else’s 5 games. The data manipulation means the 2 best indicators of performance have been removed.
On a side note, I think the Oxford 2nd half has a similar xG to Oxford 1st half.
Not at all
I understood the point perfectly. What I’m pointing out is that the quality of the data is poor and not v useful. I’m sure most teams around us would have similar drop offs if we did the same exercise to each of the 23 other teams. So the table would be mostly unchanged.Well removing them was the point. I was curious of their impact.
Why not? All the clean sheets?Not at all
Actually it means that we are creating good chances.We won on xg again tonight. Means nothing
Yes last season showed similar, we should be scoring goals basically .. players like simms have to start stepping up
People don't like xg tables but they show a clear underperforming of the players infront of goal
Ironically , the xgA table shows we are conceding somewhat crappy goals too
We are the leagues joint 5th highest scorers but slightly underperforming our XG .
However , 6 goals in the last 2 games show that we are very capable of creating and scoring good chances , get it right at the back and it's 22/23 all over again
I still think part of the getting it right at the back includes getting it right in midfield
I can't quite out my finger on it but there's definitely a vulnerability there
It’s only the armchair managers who seem to disregard xG.Actually it means that we are creating good chances.
Which means something
Perhaps, although that Sheffield W performance was God awful.It’s only the armchair managers who seem to disregard xG.
All xG is a barometer of performance. When people were calling for Robins to be sacked, the underlying data showed our performances weren’t as bad as the league table showed.
The last 2 performances have shown that and you take Haji’s disallowed goal v PNE (I mention this because it should’ve stood) out… Our form could’ve looked a lot better from the false dawn v Blackburn.
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?