Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: philsky on February 24, 2024, 09:09:25 pm
-
https://www.soccerstats.com/formtable.asp?league=england4
-
Walsall away should be a cracker then.
-
Our next 3 games are against sides up and around us in that form table!
-
We have done very well in that run, showing a great mix of tenacity, resilience and threat. Much better at the back, and ability to break quickly to score. It’s an excellent run of form.
We’ve also played in that run teams currently placed 24, 22, 19, 17 and 12 in table. There will be tougher tests ahead, starting with Walsall and their excellent home record.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
-
Not too much encouragement on the “Form” front except to note that they have not done very well at home against teams you’d expect them to beat. They only drew with Sutton and lost 3-0 to Newport, both within the last month.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Also both Salford & Tranmere were on relative hot streaks at the time we played them.
-
Lot of teams ‘jostling’ for position under 6th place
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Statistically we've struggled most against the "mid-table" teams (9th-16th) in terms of goals and points this season, so beating them was a step forward.
(Apologies in advance to those who hate statistics being used on the forum)
-
Lot of teams ‘jostling’ for position under 6th place
That's right, we'll 6th & 7th. If we could get into that chasing pack, it will be an interesting climax to the season just to see how close we can get.
Of course, these next few games are tough on paper, but we're bucking the form tables at the moment so let's ride this wave of confidence.
Every season seems to throw up unlikely possibilities, when it gets down to the last 6 games, with teams going on either great runs or terrible runs.
Whilst we should be more confident defensively, I don't think we have enough firepower to put the top teams away, although we only have to score one more than them.
Lady luck deserted us in the first half of the season so maybe it's our turn for her to smile on us. Anything that keeps the interest going will help us finish on a positive note going into the summer.
-
Even if we’d started the season only slightly better, getting 7 points from the first 7 games. Still very bad form but we’d be up near the playoffs now.
-
About time, long may it last
-
It bodes well for next season. For whatever reason McCann didn’t seem to identify our problem areas at the start of the season but with the loan signings in January we’re suddenly a force.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Yes. And Walsall were not much different either and we still lost.
It’s a work in progress. We won’t go down this season but we are still short in many areas.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Yes. And Walsall were not much different either and we still lost.
It’s a work in progress. We won’t go down this season but we are still short in many areas.
What are you talking about?
I’ve not mentioned Walsall, but saying we beat a side in 12th, and the fact they’re 12th is because we beat them is just negative nonsense.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Yes. And Walsall were not much different either and we still lost.
It’s a work in progress. We won’t go down this season but we are still short in many areas.
Where do you think we are short ?
I think we need a top attacking midfielder with goal and creative threat.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Yes. And Walsall were not much different either and we still lost.
It’s a work in progress. We won’t go down this season but we are still short in many areas.
Where do you think we are short ?
I think we need a top attacking midfielder with goal and creative threat.
To fairly universal acclaim, our best players recently are our keeper, Craig and Adelekun. All on loan.
-
Wimbledon were 9th when we played them. They’re 12th because we beat them, if they beaten us they’d have been 8th
Yes. And Walsall were not much different either and we still lost.
It’s a work in progress. We won’t go down this season but we are still short in many areas.
Where do you think we are short ?
I think we need a top attacking midfielder with goal and creative threat.
To fairly universal acclaim, our best players recently are our keeper, Craig and Adelekun. All on loan.
Wood and Anderson have been excellent for the last 6 games.
Regarding loan players I imagine most clubs in league 2 would say their best players were their loan players
-
Judging by our league position we're short all over the pitch, no room for sentiment even in successful teams there has to be some ruthlessness when it comes to recruitment and looking to improve on what you already have
-
Judging by our league position we're short all over the pitch, no room for sentiment even in successful teams there has to be some ruthlessness when it comes to recruitment and looking to improve on what you already have
You can’t look at the league position and say the current team is short all over the pitch.
We are where we are due to a horrendous start to the season, and a disastrous injury list.
If we’d had wood, Anderson, Sterry, senior, westbrooke, playing all season then the signings of Timmy, craig, and aledekun would’ve been made for a playoff push
-
Judging by our league position we're short all over the pitch, no room for sentiment even in successful teams there has to be some ruthlessness when it comes to recruitment and looking to improve on what you already have
You can’t look at the league position and say the current team is short all over the pitch.
We are where we are due to a horrendous start to the season, and a disastrous injury list.
If we’d had wood, Anderson, Sterry, senior, westbrooke, playing all season then the signings of Timmy, craig, and aledekun would’ve been made for a playoff push
Thats a bold statement based on a few decent results against teams pretty much in & around us in recent weeks. Injuries haven't helped this season but we concede goals for fun . According to this forum a month ago Anderson had gone at the game & we should never have signed Wood but now they should be our preferred cb pairing for a promotion push next season?! Can't keep making excuses we're miles off it
-
Some people getting very angry when faced with what are fairly incontrovertible facts.
We’ve improved significantly the last month or so, with some very good performances and also results.
Many of our better players in this run have been loan players. McCann has signed good players in the January window who are making a difference.
We have during this good run played largely very average sides, including some pretty poor sides.
We came up today against a side with a solid home record and really never looked like winning.
We are quite patently a work in progress, improving but not there, and didn’t today really threaten a side in mid table.
-
Bang on CB. Our kid was saying the same thing today, how depressing it is to see people get so angry at simple facts that contradict what they'd like to be true.
-
3 of the signings have been good.
Waters looks poor and Carty didn't think much of him
McGrath has played 2 games so wait and see.
Craig also shows just how far off we are. In the fact he is miles better than Bailey. Bailey is also much better than Biggins Broadbent Rowe etc.
-
I think in every window McCann improved us. But as it stands we are not much better than lower mid table. That’s just what we are now and people just wanting us to be better than that does not mean we are that. We played Walsall today, not West Ham. They are a competent mid-table side and we conceded three and lost.
-
According to the table Walsall are in the playoffs. Hardly mid table
-
Judging by our league position we're short all over the pitch, no room for sentiment even in successful teams there has to be some ruthlessness when it comes to recruitment and looking to improve on what you already have
You can’t look at the league position and say the current team is short all over the pitch.
We are where we are due to a horrendous start to the season, and a disastrous injury list.
If we’d had wood, Anderson, Sterry, senior, westbrooke, playing all season then the signings of Timmy, craig, and aledekun would’ve been made for a playoff push
Thats a bold statement based on a few decent results against teams pretty much in & around us in recent weeks. Injuries haven't helped this season but we concede goals for fun . According to this forum a month ago Anderson had gone at the game & we should never have signed Wood but now they should be our preferred cb pairing for a promotion push next season?! Can't keep making excuses we're miles off it
That’s why people on here aren’t football league managers. They’re as good as anyone in this division.
It’s not just the results it’s the performances, since the surton game we’ve been excellent performance wise,
Regardless of results
-
Some people getting very angry when faced with what are fairly incontrovertible facts.
We’ve improved significantly the last month or so, with some very good performances and also results.
Many of our better players in this run have been loan players. McCann has signed good players in the January window who are making a difference.
We have during this good run played largely very average sides, including some pretty poor sides.
We came up today against a side with a solid home record and really never looked like winning.
We are quite patently a work in progress, improving but not there, and didn’t today really threaten a side in mid table.
An average side, every post you make comes from a negative angle. It’s ridiculous
They’ve won 6 on the bounce, they’re comfortably the best side in the league at the moment. And we have them a great game, it could’ve gone either way. We were the better side for long periods
-
Some people getting very angry when faced with what are fairly incontrovertible facts.
We’ve improved significantly the last month or so, with some very good performances and also results.
Many of our better players in this run have been loan players. McCann has signed good players in the January window who are making a difference.
We have during this good run played largely very average sides, including some pretty poor sides.
We came up today against a side with a solid home record and really never looked like winning.
We are quite patently a work in progress, improving but not there, and didn’t today really threaten a side in mid table.
An average side, every post you make comes from a negative angle. It’s ridiculous
They’ve won 6 on the bounce, they’re comfortably the best side in the league at the moment. And we have them a great game, it could’ve gone either way. We were the better side for long periods
Walsall haven’t won six on the bounce. That’s something that’s been made up. A fantasy.
-
Some people getting very angry when faced with what are fairly incontrovertible facts.
We’ve improved significantly the last month or so, with some very good performances and also results.
Many of our better players in this run have been loan players. McCann has signed good players in the January window who are making a difference.
We have during this good run played largely very average sides, including some pretty poor sides.
We came up today against a side with a solid home record and really never looked like winning.
We are quite patently a work in progress, improving but not there, and didn’t today really threaten a side in mid table.
An average side, every post you make comes from a negative angle. It’s ridiculous
They’ve won 6 on the bounce, they’re comfortably the best side in the league at the moment. And we have them a great game, it could’ve gone either way. We were the better side for long periods
Walsall haven’t won six on the bounce. That’s something that’s been made up. A fantasy.
Sorry!
They’ve won their last 5 games and drew the 1st of this 6 game run.
That makes zero difference to my point
-
Perhaps, perhaps not. Again though you made something up. Another fantasy.
-
Judging by our league position we're short all over the pitch, no room for sentiment even in successful teams there has to be some ruthlessness when it comes to recruitment and looking to improve on what you already have
You can’t look at the league position and say the current team is short all over the pitch.
We are where we are due to a horrendous start to the season, and a disastrous injury list.
If we’d had wood, Anderson, Sterry, senior, westbrooke, playing all season then the signings of Timmy, craig, and aledekun would’ve been made for a playoff push
Thats a bold statement based on a few decent results against teams pretty much in & around us in recent weeks. Injuries haven't helped this season but we concede goals for fun . According to this forum a month ago Anderson had gone at the game & we should never have signed Wood but now they should be our preferred cb pairing for a promotion push next season?! Can't keep making excuses we're miles off it
That’s why people on here aren’t football league managers. They’re as good as anyone in this division.
It’s not just the results it’s the performances, since the surton game we’ve been excellent performance wise,
Regardless of results
Unfortunately footballs a results business, fair doo's an upturn in performances will hopefully improve results over time and hopefully Grant will improve us window upon window. Can't hide from the fact we're nowhere near at the minute & today we played a team challenging for playoffs and got done
-
Results have improved
-
Perhaps, perhaps not. Again though you made something up. Another fantasy.
You’ve just made a point on another thread stating port vale have lost 4 on the bounce.
When your this persnickety on my posts you think you’d be more careful.
-
We’ve improved by doing the simple things right. Two solid stoppers at the back and getting dug in more in midfield. The goalkeeper coming in has helped the backline. Biamou could be an inspired signing or not work out. We need someone to take the strain off Ironside here and there. It’s a deal we can’t lose on.
-
According to xG for the season so far:
There are 13 teams with a worse defence than us
There is only 1 team with a worse attack than us
The attack has always been more of an issue than the defence
-
According to xG for the season so far:
There are 13 teams with a worse defence than us
There is only 1 team with a worse attack than us
The attack has always been more of an issue than the defence
I’ve said that for the last few seasons. Creating chances has been our issue.
-
According to xG for the season so far:
There are 13 teams with a worse defence than us
There is only 1 team with a worse attack than us
The attack has always been more of an issue than the defence
not sure how xg works, but there's 5 teams who have scored less than us ?
-
According to xG for the season so far:
There are 13 teams with a worse defence than us
There is only 1 team with a worse attack than us
The attack has always been more of an issue than the defence
not sure how xg works, but there's 5 teams who have scored less than us ?
It's based on how many goals a standard attack force at this level would expect to get from the quality of the chances they make.
So we are scoring at a bit better rate than might be expected from the chances we have made.
I don't know the numbers work, but it feels to me that we've scored more than our share of worldies this season. Nowt wrong with that. They all count. But you don't want to be relying on those goals. And if the xG figures are right, we are the weakest team in the division at creating really good chances. I wouldn't be able to put a strong argument against that, based on what I've seen this year.
-
When were the “worldies?”
Nixon maybe, molyneux maybe but the play for that goal was outstanding.
Can’t recall any others
-
https://www.fotmob.com/en-GB/leagues/109/stats/season/20723/teams/expected_goals_team/league-two-teams
The stats don’t lie dicko.
Ben Close has scored a few worldies.
And Ironside is a good finisher - he has 14 goals from 11.2xG. The opposite of the wasteful Miller last year. His main job is to be the dog’s body / link up and hold up guy. He is very good at that and I think that is critical at this level. He’s also one of our best defenders at set pieces. But he isn’t going to run the channels to give a midfielder a creative option that often. Others need to chip in.
I think in the summer we need 2 new fast and tricky goal scoring wide players (hopefully one is Hakeeb) and a creative attacking midfielder to play around Ironside. Then a different striker option off the bench or to rotate. Our general attacking play has been far too predictable this season.
It’s about getting the balance right.
-
The goals by Biggins and Close at FGR were outrageous. Nixon's against Mansfield even moreso. Add Molyneux's goals against Grimsby and MK Dons and that's at least 5 goals that have come from situations where the odds were very much against us scoring when the scorer cocked the trigger.
That's at least 11% of our goals that have come from situations that would have registered very low on the xG scale.
I said early on in the season after the FGR game that I was very concerned at how rarely we were looking like creating good chances. It has got a bit better, but we are still well off the standard required.
-
That will be no different to any team, and I’m not sure either of molyneuxs goals could be described as odds very much against. The mk dons one he was clean through and granted the Grimsby one was a great finish but it was a shot 20 yards out, created from superb football starting from our keeper.
-
Count up the number of times you see efforts of those sort in a season.
20? 30? 40?
And how often you see them result in goals.
3? 4?
-
That will be no different to any team, and I’m not sure either of molyneuxs goals could be described as odds very much against. The mk dons one he was clean through and granted the Grimsby one was a great finish but it was a shot 20 yards out, created from superb football starting from our keeper.
What does the build up play have to do with it? XG is just dependent on the proportion of times a chance in that situation would have resulted in a goal.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
-
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am delighted to have seen 44 wonder goals fly in this season, each one out of utterly nothing. It’s been breathtaking. But I’ll spend my days wondering what the reaction would’ve been like under Schofield.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
-
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am delighted to have seen 44 wonder goals fly in this season, each one out of utterly nothing. It’s been breathtaking. But I’ll spend my days wondering what the reaction would’ve been like under Schofield.
You might have missed that also I said our defence has been above average this season (using that metric).
-
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am delighted to have seen 44 wonder goals fly in this season, each one out of utterly nothing. It’s been breathtaking. But I’ll spend my days wondering what the reaction would’ve been like under Schofield.
Am I reading a different thread? Who has said anything about Schofield or that all of our goals have been wonder goals?
-
Didn't go to Walsall and all I've seen is the highlights, but to me it was always going to be very tough. They are the form side in the league at the minute and look equipped for a play-off charge. No shame in the result really, given where we were a few weeks ago.
It was inevitable Faal was going to score, especially after being booed. We should focus less on ex-players and not give them the extra motivation to get one over on us, but I guess that message is never going to get across to some of our fanbase.
Just because our recent form was better, I was never expecting us to go on a lengthy unbeaten run between now and the end of the season. I'm a bit more relaxed now we're looking more likely to be safe and accept that we'll probably show patchy form again between now and the end of the season. We've made some good additions in January but we were never going to shoot up the league, as we need significant surgery to the squad again in the summer and the same deficiencies are still fundamentally there.
I don't think most folk on here need constantly reminding of this. I don't think many (if any) are of the delusion that we are a top 7 side in the making at this moment in time. We have had a relatively poor season, most would accept that. However, we have shown improvements in recent games, and I don't really get the attempts to undermine this. Very few people think we are now world-beaters. Most people seem to be of the hope (which I share) that we can carry on gradually turning the corner ahead of a really important season next season.
-
Didn't go to Walsall and all I've seen is the highlights, but to me it was always going to be very tough. They are the form side in the league at the minute and look equipped for a play-off charge. No shame in the result really, given where we were a few weeks ago.
It was inevitable Faal was going to score, especially after being booed. We should focus less on ex-players and not give them the extra motivation to get one over on us, but I guess that message is never going to get across to some of our fanbase.
Just because our recent form was better, I was never expecting us to go on a lengthy unbeaten run between now and the end of the season. I'm a bit more relaxed now we're looking more likely to be safe and accept that we'll probably show patchy form again between now and the end of the season. We've made some good additions in January but we were never going to shoot up the league, as we need significant surgery to the squad again in the summer and the same deficiencies are still fundamentally there.
I don't think most folk on here need constantly reminding of this. I don't think many (if any) are of the delusion that we are a top 7 side in the making at this moment in time. We have had a relatively poor season, most would accept that. However, we have shown improvements in recent games, and I don't really get the attempts to undermine this. Very few people think we are now world-beaters. Most people seem to be of the hope (which I share) that we can carry on gradually turning the corner ahead of a really important season next season.
Bang on.
-
Didn't go to Walsall and all I've seen is the highlights, but to me it was always going to be very tough. They are the form side in the league at the minute and look equipped for a play-off charge. No shame in the result really, given where we were a few weeks ago.
It was inevitable Faal was going to score, especially after being booed. We should focus less on ex-players and not give them the extra motivation to get one over on us, but I guess that message is never going to get across to some of our fanbase.
Just because our recent form was better, I was never expecting us to go on a lengthy unbeaten run between now and the end of the season. I'm a bit more relaxed now we're looking more likely to be safe and accept that we'll probably show patchy form again between now and the end of the season. We've made some good additions in January but we were never going to shoot up the league, as we need significant surgery to the squad again in the summer and the same deficiencies are still fundamentally there.
I don't think most folk on here need constantly reminding of this. I don't think many (if any) are of the delusion that we are a top 7 side in the making at this moment in time. We have had a relatively poor season, most would accept that. However, we have shown improvements in recent games, and I don't really get the attempts to undermine this. Very few people think we are now world-beaters. Most people seem to be of the hope (which I share) that we can carry on gradually turning the corner ahead of a really important season next season.
Good post pib.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
It’s not data
It’s Billy’s opinion that these goals were worldies scored out of nowhere
-
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am delighted to have seen 44 wonder goals fly in this season, each one out of utterly nothing. It’s been breathtaking. But I’ll spend my days wondering what the reaction would’ve been like under Schofield.
Here we go again. For a smart lad, you don't half make some daft contributions.
The fact is that our xG figure is the lowest in the division. There's no getting away from that. It's a big problem. All my own contribution was aimed at was musing on how that squares with our goals tally only (!) being the 5th worst.
Literally no-one talked about 44 wonder goals, so God alone knows why you raise that. And that obsession with Schofield is very unhealthy.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
It’s not data
It’s Billy’s opinion that these goals were worldies scored out of nowhere
We are doing angels on pin heads here. The fact is that a) we aren't very good at creating chances - worst side in the division according to xG data. And b) we are a little bit better at actually scoring goals. My comments were solely aimed at musing whether we'd scored a few more than normal that came from positions wouldn't flash up as high xG situations and whether that might explain the slight discrepancy.
We've had three goals this season which were utterly exceptional. The sort where at this level, 1 effort like that in maybe 25 or 50 goes in. Nixon's against Mansfield, and both goals against FGR. That immediately goes a bit of the way towards closing that gap. Molyneux's goals at MK and Grimsby weren't in the same exceptional category, but they were absolutely not ones that you tear your hair out and scream "how did he miss THAT" if they don't go in. See the image below of the MK game. If you think that was "an excellent chance and we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored" then that goes a long way towards explaining why you and I see games very differently.
-
Think the truth is we are about where we should be in the table. We aren't as bad as our early-season form suggested, and we aren't as good as our recent run suggested either. We are a below-average League 2 team in dire need of an overhaul, and most of the out of contract players still need shipping out in the summer.
My worry is that we'll fall into a trap with players like Molyneux (not picking on him in particular, he's just the first one who came to mind) and offer him a new contract based on our recent upturn in form, when in reality we should be aiming for better if we want to be anything more than a mediocre basement division side.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
It’s not data
It’s Billy’s opinion that these goals were worldies scored out of nowhere
We are doing angels on pin heads here. The fact is that a) we aren't very good at creating chances - worst side in the division according to xG data. And b) we are a little bit better at actually scoring goals. My comments were solely aimed at musing whether we'd scored a few more than normal that came from positions wouldn't flash up as high xG situations and whether that might explain the slight discrepancy.
We've had three goals this season which were utterly exceptional. The sort where at this level, 1 effort like that in maybe 25 or 50 goes in. Nixon's against Mansfield, and both goals against FGR. That immediately goes a bit of the way towards closing that gap. Molyneux's goals at MK and Grimsby weren't in the same exceptional category, but they were absolutely not ones that you tear your hair out and scream "how did he miss THAT" if they don't go in. See the image below of the MK game. If you think that was "an excellent chance and we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored" then that goes a long way towards explaining why you and I see games very differently.
This is reminding me of the time that Barry Bannan tapped one in against us from 25 yards and we needed a series of lines drawn showing how the positioning of Pontus Dhalberg made it the kind of simple chance that would have had XG indicators buzzing around the country.
-
You're on form today Jonathan. Another stupid contribution.
For what it's worth, the issue you are referring to came up when I pointed out that Bannan hadn't had to stick the ball right in the top corner. The ball went in a good couple of feet from the post and because Dahlberg had taken up such a poor position, he still got nowhere near it. Cracking shot but not the unsavable one in a million that some insisted it was.
It's a strange stance you're taking. Trying to make a point by demonstrating that you cannot properly remember an issue you were wrong about at the time. Good luck with that.
-
Can someone explain why xG is not a data measure?
-
You're on form today Jonathan. Another stupid contribution.
For what it's worth, the issue you are referring to came up when I pointed out that Bannan hadn't had to stick the ball right in the top corner. The ball went in a good couple of feet from the post and because Dahlberg had taken up such a poor position, he still got nowhere near it. Cracking shot but not the unsavable one in a million that some insisted it was.
It's a strange stance you're taking. Trying to make a point by demonstrating that you cannot properly remember an issue you were wrong about at the time. Good luck with that.
An issue that you thought I was wrong about. I think it’s important we highlight that. I was not demonstrably wrong, rather we just had differing views of the same incident. These are not black and white judgements no matter how hard you try to make them into that to validate a sense that you are right and anyone that disagrees is wrong. We’re going beyond points on the board here. It’s a game of opinions, of hopes and dreams that often defy logic. That’s the beauty of being a football fan. But by all means carry on trying to prove how shit we are if that’s what you enjoy.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
It’s not data
It’s Billy’s opinion that these goals were worldies scored out of nowhere
We are doing angels on pin heads here. The fact is that a) we aren't very good at creating chances - worst side in the division according to xG data. And b) we are a little bit better at actually scoring goals. My comments were solely aimed at musing whether we'd scored a few more than normal that came from positions wouldn't flash up as high xG situations and whether that might explain the slight discrepancy.
We've had three goals this season which were utterly exceptional. The sort where at this level, 1 effort like that in maybe 25 or 50 goes in. Nixon's against Mansfield, and both goals against FGR. That immediately goes a bit of the way towards closing that gap. Molyneux's goals at MK and Grimsby weren't in the same exceptional category, but they were absolutely not ones that you tear your hair out and scream "how did he miss THAT" if they don't go in. See the image below of the MK game. If you think that was "an excellent chance and we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored" then that goes a long way towards explaining why you and I see games very differently.
The mk dons molyneux goal I thought you meant the home game.
But the away game goal was a good goal but nothing you wouldn’t see in a high proportion of games up and down the country.
Similar to Walsall’s second on Saturday
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
It’s not data
It’s Billy’s opinion that these goals were worldies scored out of nowhere
We are doing angels on pin heads here. The fact is that a) we aren't very good at creating chances - worst side in the division according to xG data. And b) we are a little bit better at actually scoring goals. My comments were solely aimed at musing whether we'd scored a few more than normal that came from positions wouldn't flash up as high xG situations and whether that might explain the slight discrepancy.
We've had three goals this season which were utterly exceptional. The sort where at this level, 1 effort like that in maybe 25 or 50 goes in. Nixon's against Mansfield, and both goals against FGR. That immediately goes a bit of the way towards closing that gap. Molyneux's goals at MK and Grimsby weren't in the same exceptional category, but they were absolutely not ones that you tear your hair out and scream "how did he miss THAT" if they don't go in. See the image below of the MK game. If you think that was "an excellent chance and we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored" then that goes a long way towards explaining why you and I see games very differently.
This is reminding me of the time that Barry Bannan tapped one in against us from 25 yards and we needed a series of lines drawn showing how the positioning of Pontus Dhalberg made it the kind of simple chance that would have had XG indicators buzzing around the country.
You really are wasting your time here mate.
-
You're on form today Jonathan. Another stupid contribution.
For what it's worth, the issue you are referring to came up when I pointed out that Bannan hadn't had to stick the ball right in the top corner. The ball went in a good couple of feet from the post and because Dahlberg had taken up such a poor position, he still got nowhere near it. Cracking shot but not the unsavable one in a million that some insisted it was.
It's a strange stance you're taking. Trying to make a point by demonstrating that you cannot properly remember an issue you were wrong about at the time. Good luck with that.
An issue that you thought I was wrong about. I think it’s important we highlight that. I was not demonstrably wrong, rather we just had differing views of the same incident. These are not black and white judgements no matter how hard you try to make them into that to validate a sense that you are right and anyone that disagrees is wrong. We’re going beyond points on the board here. It’s a game of opinions, of hopes and dreams that often defy logic. That’s the beauty of being a football fan. But by all means carry on trying to prove how shit we are if that’s what you enjoy.
Ooh! I thought I'd jolted you into talking seriously for a bit, but then you had to go and spoil it with that last line.
-
Both molyneuxs goals were nothing out of the ordinary, yes he put it in the top corner but it was a good chance and the mk dons goal was an excellent chance which we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored.
The second Walsall goal yesterday was much more unexpected than either of molyneuxs,
Surely that is not the point. This is data, not opinion.
It’s not data
It’s Billy’s opinion that these goals were worldies scored out of nowhere
We are doing angels on pin heads here. The fact is that a) we aren't very good at creating chances - worst side in the division according to xG data. And b) we are a little bit better at actually scoring goals. My comments were solely aimed at musing whether we'd scored a few more than normal that came from positions wouldn't flash up as high xG situations and whether that might explain the slight discrepancy.
We've had three goals this season which were utterly exceptional. The sort where at this level, 1 effort like that in maybe 25 or 50 goes in. Nixon's against Mansfield, and both goals against FGR. That immediately goes a bit of the way towards closing that gap. Molyneux's goals at MK and Grimsby weren't in the same exceptional category, but they were absolutely not ones that you tear your hair out and scream "how did he miss THAT" if they don't go in. See the image below of the MK game. If you think that was "an excellent chance and we would’ve been very disappointed if he hadn’t scored" then that goes a long way towards explaining why you and I see games very differently.
The mk dons molyneux goal I thought you meant the home game.
But the away game goal was a good goal but nothing you wouldn’t see in a high proportion of games up and down the country.
Similar to Walsall’s second on Saturday
Yes, I agree, but it isn't one that would score a high xG tariff, because the vast majority of efforts like that don't result in goals. Maybe one in 10 or 15 does, if that? Which is the point I'm musing on.
It's not really that important to be honest. What's far more important and what needs fixing for next year is that generally, we simply don't create many good chances.
-
I sometimes think it’s a shame that posts aren’t more anonymised on here (not that that would work in practice). So many threads are derailed because some posters are absolutely desperate to play the man rather than the ball.
It’s why I stopped reading off topic a long, long time ago but it’s becoming more and more prevalent on the main board.
-
Think the truth is we are about where we should be in the table. We aren't as bad as our early-season form suggested, and we aren't as good as our recent run suggested either. We are a below-average League 2 team in dire need of an overhaul, and most of the out of contract players still need shipping out in the summer.
My worry is that we'll fall into a trap with players like Molyneux (not picking on him in particular, he's just the first one who came to mind) and offer him a new contract based on our recent upturn in form, when in reality we should be aiming for better if we want to be anything more than a mediocre basement division side.
In the recent DFP article, it doesn’t sound like
McCann is enthusiastic about many of them.
https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/update-on-doncaster-rovers-contract-talks-with-20-players-deals-set-to-expire-4539889
Expecting Hurst to be a promotion standard 1st choice starter would also be a trap IMO.
-
Think the truth is we are about where we should be in the table. We aren't as bad as our early-season form suggested, and we aren't as good as our recent run suggested either. We are a below-average League 2 team in dire need of an overhaul, and most of the out of contract players still need shipping out in the summer.
My worry is that we'll fall into a trap with players like Molyneux (not picking on him in particular, he's just the first one who came to mind) and offer him a new contract based on our recent upturn in form, when in reality we should be aiming for better if we want to be anything more than a mediocre basement division side.
In the recent DFP article, it doesn’t sound like
McCann is enthusiastic about many of them.
https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/update-on-doncaster-rovers-contract-talks-with-20-players-deals-set-to-expire-4539889
Expecting Hurst to be a promotion standard 1st choice starter would also be a trap IMO.
Sounds like he's waiting to hear what the owner's aims are. But really we don't want to get tied into many 2+ year deals on this lot, so it's encouraging to see that from McCann to be honest.
-
I sometimes think it’s a shame that posts aren’t more anonymised on here (not that that would work in practice). So many threads are derailed because some posters are absolutely desperate to play the man rather than the ball.
It’s why I stopped reading off topic a long, long time ago but it’s becoming more and more prevalent on the main board.
Debating rationally is an ideal, but it is probably a fact that there is a significant percentage of humanity who have never really appreciated the extent to which emotion enters into reasoning and thinking. I believe I had a reasonably good education, but it was not something I learnt at school. Even then, I’m sure I drift away from it frequently.
Politicians don’t help by using emotion constantly and I wonder with today’s breed whether they all do so deliberately or because their education never progressed far enough to know better.
Our support for Rovers is based largely, maybe totally, on emotion, and for some, perhaps this overrides everything. So to experience it here is not unexpected, yet to comment intelligently on sport does demand sensible consideration of facts and the exchange of views would not extend far if it were not the backbone of most of the discussion.
For what it’s worth I am impressed with a lot of the contributions and I suppose I’d stop if the good did not outweigh the irritating content and my reaction to that is often emotionally based.
What I do find upsetting is when questions are asked about facts which some people are privileged to know or about previous official statements which appear contradictory, and instead of answering them, or admitting they were inconsistent with later events, they do what you say, “play the man”. When you have made your point clearly, it is plainly disrespectful to claim that the question, politely put, is incomprehensible, thus avoiding answering.
-
Think the truth is we are about where we should be in the table. We aren't as bad as our early-season form suggested, and we aren't as good as our recent run suggested either. We are a below-average League 2 team in dire need of an overhaul, and most of the out of contract players still need shipping out in the summer.
My worry is that we'll fall into a trap with players like Molyneux (not picking on him in particular, he's just the first one who came to mind) and offer him a new contract based on our recent upturn in form, when in reality we should be aiming for better if we want to be anything more than a mediocre basement division side.
In the recent DFP article, it doesn%u2019t sound like
McCann is enthusiastic about many of them.
https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/update-on-doncaster-rovers-contract-talks-with-20-players-deals-set-to-expire-4539889
Expecting Hurst to be a promotion standard 1st choice starter would also be a trap IMO.
An interesting article that ncRover, thanks for sharing.
I was particularly struck by these words from Grant regarding the decisions to be made around the players out of contract:
It's peoples' careers at the end of the day. And I don't take that lightly. I have to try and get it right for our football club and what we want to do but also I have to think about the family side of it and the people side of it."
There is little room for sentiment in these matters and when the time comes, I'm sure Grant will make the right decisions for the good of the club above all else.
Nevertheless, it is heartening to see that he recognises the human consequences of these decisions and that he takes them seriously.
He made some remarks recently about Jon Taylor's struggles and how being out injured for so long had affected him. Grant said that when he and Cliff arrived at the Club "Tayls was really down, bless him. We had to pick him up".
Again, this speaks volumes to me about Grant as a man, as a person.
It brings to mind a conversation my brother and I had with Caolan Lavery last summer. We'd attended the event to watch the players in pre-season training and to have lunch with them afterwards. Grant had re-joined the club and there was so much positivity around the squad. The players were buzzing and the new signings such as Owen Bailey were champing at the bit to get started.
Afterwards, we called into the Club Shop before we set off home.
In there was Caolan Lavery, 'on duty', meeting and greeting supporters.
The contrast was stark - all his team mates training together and CL stood in the Club Shop, trying to put on a brave face for the fans.
We got talking. What a lovely bloke.
His frustration was clearly evident at not being a part of things, not having an opportunity to impress the new gaffer. He spoke of his successful stint at Scunny and how he was so excited when he joined Rovers.
He explained that he had another year on his contract and that he was desperately hoping to get fit enough to get a chance, and to show GM what he could offer.
You couldn't fail to feel for the bloke. All he wanted was a chance to do his job. Just like Grant had said about Taylor.
I remember seeing a couple of Lavery's handful of appearances for Rovers before he got injured. It was at the time when Schofield insisted on playing one man up front and I recall seeing Caolan's frustration at the lack of service he was getting. At one point he got booked for chasing back to try and get the ball off an opponent.
It would be so easy to look back and judge Lavery as a failure for us; a bad signing. But the guy had something, he just didn't get long enough to show it in my opinion.
The conversation with Caolan made me re-examine my attitude towards players who, for whatever reason, fail to deliver on the pitch. Some, of course, don't seem to be arsed - we could all name examples.
But Caolan Lavery doesn't fall into that category, any more than Jon Taylor does.
Inevitably, I expect Lavery will be released in the Summer and will be forced to try and start again somewhere else.
He'll be 32 in October. It won't be easy.
I, for one, will watch with great interest what happens to Caolan and I sincerely wish him all the best, whatever the future holds.
I'd absolutely love to see him on the pitch again, for whatever club, performing well and scoring goals, enjoying once again the career he loves.
-
xG is the most pointless stat in football. In our fairly recent home drubbing by Stockport we had an xG just slightly less than theirs and ours was slightly higher from open play.
-
xG is the most pointless stat in football. In our fairly recent home drubbing by Stockport we had an xG just slightly less than theirs and ours was slightly higher from open play.
I've always thought it depends on how the xG figure is determined. If it's just based on the distance from goal of an effort, it's pretty pointless. If it's going to have any value, there needs to be some assessment of where defenders and attackers are relative to each other when a chance is made. Are the defenders in good shape and facing the play, or have they been stretched and turned? The former is easy to automate and I assume that's what free xG data is based on, or something similarly simplistic. The latter requires more than just collating number. It needs assessment and critique and than ain't cheap. So I assume we never see professionally produced xG data unless someone is paying for it.
The (free) figures I've seen for that Stockport walkover were 0.92 for us and 1.65 for them. Which is nonsense, really, given that they had 4 unmarked headers in the 6 yard box and hit the inside of the post, while we had 1 shot on target all day.
-
xG is the most pointless stat in football. In our fairly recent home drubbing by Stockport we had an xG just slightly less than theirs and ours was slightly higher from open play.
I've always thought it depends on how the xG figure is determined. If it's just based on the distance from goal of an effort, it's pretty pointless. If it's going to have any value, there needs to be some assessment of where defenders and attackers are relative to each other when a chance is made. Are the defenders in good shape and facing the play, or have they been stretched and turned? The former is easy to automate and I assume that's what free xG data is based on, or something similarly simplistic. The latter requires more than just collating number. It needs assessment and critique and than ain't cheap. So I assume we never see professionally produced xG data unless someone is paying for it.
The (free) figures I've seen for that Stockport walkover were 0.92 for us and 1.65 for them. Which is nonsense, really, given that they had 4 unmarked headers in the 6 yard box and hit the inside of the post, while we had 1 shot on target all day.
Usually takes into account positioning of the keeper, positioning of the defenders, angle of the ball, height of the ball, is it being taken with a foot or a header, etc. a shot at an angle with a number of players ahead of him, e.g. Molyneux is 0.06xG, so 6% of the time someone shoots with similar parameters they'll score. The goals conceded against Stockport were headers, usually marked, a couple were corners too so crowded boxes, and based on the positioning of the keeper they were deemed to be between 0.2-0.4 xG chances. The hit the inside of the post? Was that the shot from Powell on the corner of the box just before half time? That was a very low chance. With ours Ironside, Bailey and Hurst had decent chances in the first half hour which they put wide, the goal was obviously the biggest chance for us as it was a tap in.
-
xG is the most pointless stat in football. In our fairly recent home drubbing by Stockport we had an xG just slightly less than theirs and ours was slightly higher from open play.
I've always thought it depends on how the xG figure is determined. If it's just based on the distance from goal of an effort, it's pretty pointless. If it's going to have any value, there needs to be some assessment of where defenders and attackers are relative to each other when a chance is made. Are the defenders in good shape and facing the play, or have they been stretched and turned? The former is easy to automate and I assume that's what free xG data is based on, or something similarly simplistic. The latter requires more than just collating number. It needs assessment and critique and than ain't cheap. So I assume we never see professionally produced xG data unless someone is paying for it.
The (free) figures I've seen for that Stockport walkover were 0.92 for us and 1.65 for them. Which is nonsense, really, given that they had 4 unmarked headers in the 6 yard box and hit the inside of the post, while we had 1 shot on target all day.
People just automatically presume xG is just derived from shot location models. Even the shot based models are much more detailed than that now. They would consider type of shot, proximity of defenders etc etc.
For what it’s worth, no model on the planet would think the Stockport 1-5 game was a fair result based on what happened in the game. We had some bad moments but the performance wasn’t as bad as the score suggested.
-
I sometimes think it’s a shame that posts aren’t more anonymised on here (not that that would work in practice). So many threads are derailed because some posters are absolutely desperate to play the man rather than the ball.
It’s why I stopped reading off topic a long, long time ago but it’s becoming more and more prevalent on the main board.
One poster in particular, has an obsession, keep it in off topic eh?
-
the annoying thing is that if the ref played the game fairly at sutton, and gave us at least one penno, we would maybe have won, if the ref hadnt dissallowed a good goal v salford, we would have won, if we had taken one of a first half dominance performance v bradford, we would be sitting here with 7 wins out of 8, form team of the division, absolutley flying and a smidgen away from the top 7. And thats including having the worst start for many a year, plus an awful xmas period, and the worst injury crisis weve ever had. Madness how everything has gone against us, yet we will still probably finish in a decent mid table position...
-
the annoying thing is that if the ref played the game fairly at sutton, and gave us at least one penno, we would maybe have won, if the ref hadnt dissallowed a good goal v salford, we would have won, if we had taken one of a first half dominance performance v bradford, we would be sitting here with 7 wins out of 8, form team of the division, absolutley flying and a smidgen away from the top 7. And thats including having the worst start for many a year, plus an awful xmas period, and the worst injury crisis weve ever had. Madness how everything has gone against us, yet we will still probably finish in a decent mid table position...
It's really not the worst injury crisis we've ever had.