Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: albie on December 21, 2024, 03:15:55 pm
-
Up quick today...scroll down;
https://www.skysports.com/football/doncaster-rovers-vs-tranmere-rovers/report/508483
-
Stupid ball from McGrath for their goal!
-
For anyone abroad who goes geolocation blocked by Sky;
https://videos.skysports.com/media/v1/pmp4/static/clear/6057984924001/6a1ccc03-8d6d-45e2-8d2b-70323342fd3b/8272ba5b-dbfa-499b-bd6d-21100e8fc827/main.mp4
-
I thought they were awful today. How Adkins keeps getting work in football is beyond me.
Their centre half stopping when his shorts were pulled down for the second goal was hilarious. Kelly just ran straight past him.
-
That was in many ways just about the lowest quality game in the 72 today. Chances missed, comic defending and officials who won their places in a raffle. Absolutely magnificent spectacle and pleased the rest of the world could feast on that being televised.
-
The second goal… Billy Sharp should definitely get an assist for pulling the defenders shorts down. Brilliant!
-
The second goal… Billy Sharp should definitely get an assist for pulling the defenders shorts down. Brilliant!
To add to that, after Hursty scored and went to celebrate, was he mimicking the defender and pretending to pull his shorts up
-
The second goal… Billy Sharp should definitely get an assist for pulling the defenders shorts down. Brilliant!
It was molyneux that was fouled so grabbed hold of the shorts of the defender
-
Great finish by Hurst. Hard to pick the spot and score cleanly from that angle.
-
Stupid ball from McGrath for their goal!
It was,I think TSL might have saved it,but it got a slight deflection from our defender which took it just high enough to go over TSL.
-
Jay is still making too many costly mistakes like that
-
I like Jay.
He gives 100% every game.
He is usually solid enough but today he ran into trouble with the ball a few times and his passing seemed rather hurried and he was lucky that it only cost us the one goal.
Hopefully it is a one off bad day for him and he learns from his mistakes.
-
I like Jay.
He gives 100% every game.
He is usually solid enough but today he ran into trouble with the ball a few times and his passing seemed rather hurried and he was lucky that it only cost us the one goal.
Hopefully it is a one off bad day for him and he learns from his mistakes.
Agreed hound.
He’s still young and still learning and the mistake he made today which gifted them an undeserved goal will have hurt him, I’m sure.
That’s how you learn.
He’s a great prospect and he has all the attributes to have a very successful career.
-
That waa some header from molyneux, shame it didnt skim the post and go in
-
For anyone abroad who goes geolocation blocked by Sky;
https://videos.skysports.com/media/v1/pmp4/static/clear/6057984924001/6a1ccc03-8d6d-45e2-8d2b-70323342fd3b/8272ba5b-dbfa-499b-bd6d-21100e8fc827/main.mp4
that's me, thanks Albie
-
I thought they were awful today. How Adkins keeps getting work in football is beyond me.
Their centre half stopping when his shorts were pulled down for the second goal was hilarious. Kelly just ran straight past him.
I couldn't believe their tactics.
Anyone who watches us for 30 seconds knows we struggle against a low block, but are set up to break rapidly against a high press. Yet Adkins pushed 5 players onto the 18 yard line every time TSLhaf the ball. Insane tactics. On another day, we'd have scored 8/9 goals.
-
Jay is still making too many costly mistakes like that
You could say that the initial mistake was well exploited by Tranmere. 3 or 4 other defenders had opportunities to reclaim or intercept the ball or tackle opposition players before the final shot. People are eager to single out one defender when these things happen when defence is team effort.
-
Jay is still making too many costly mistakes like that
You could say that the initial mistake was well exploited by Tranmere. 3 or 4 other defenders had opportunities to reclaim or intercept the ball or tackle opposition players before the final shot. People are eager to single out one defender when these things happen when defence is team effort.
Exactly!!
Very poor ball from Jay. But we actually got a tackle in and nicked the ball back, whereby Mr Close just watched, and watched and watched…
-
I thought Jay was looking to go down the line initially but Hurst was doing his frequent disappearing act which is why he had to turn inside. Doesn’t excuse the poor ball of course.
-
Poor ball from Jay, however he’s only a young lad ! And if the talk around the ground is to be believed there’s one or two teams watching him, and rightly so. So the way I see it is that it may have put on or two scouts off ! We need him another season or two then cash in if he carries on improving!
-
I thought they were awful today. How Adkins keeps getting work in football is beyond me.
Their centre half stopping when his shorts were pulled down for the second goal was hilarious. Kelly just ran straight past him.
I couldn't believe their tactics.
Anyone who watches us for 30 seconds knows we struggle against a low block, but are set up to break rapidly against a high press. Yet Adkins pushed 5 players onto the 18 yard line every time TSLhaf the ball. Insane tactics. On another day, we'd have scored 8/9 goals.
I’ve been doing more tactical/ style match up stuff (professionally) this season rather than just data stuff. It’s amazing how many managers set up in a way that has essentially a negative expected value in the game. That’s even at the top level.
Teams end up playing well against teams that suit their style and poorly against ones that don’t but managers see this as a fluctuation in performance as opposed to a more tactical issue. Bit of a stopped clock is right twice a day situation. We ended up looking ok yesterday due to what Tranmere did/didn’t do as opposed to what we did well.
-
I know Spurs are pony but was interesting to see Liverpool mix it up with different styles of play throughout the game yesterday. Even quite direct at times and trying to get in behind, was. refreshing to see .
-
I thought they were awful today. How Adkins keeps getting work in football is beyond me.
Their centre half stopping when his shorts were pulled down for the second goal was hilarious. Kelly just ran straight past him.
I couldn't believe their tactics.
Anyone who watches us for 30 seconds knows we struggle against a low block, but are set up to break rapidly against a high press. Yet Adkins pushed 5 players onto the 18 yard line every time TSLhaf the ball. Insane tactics. On another day, we'd have scored 8/9 goals.
I’ve been doing more tactical/ style match up stuff (professionally) this season rather than just data stuff. It’s amazing how many managers set up in a way that has essentially a negative expected value in the game. That’s even at the top level.
Teams end up playing well against teams that suit their style and poorly against ones that don’t but managers see this as a fluctuation in performance as opposed to a more tactical issue. Bit of a stopped clock is right twice a day situation. We ended up looking ok yesterday due to what Tranmere did/didn’t do as opposed to what we did well.
Interesting…. clubs employ analysts, but we don’t hear from them directly. Collecting stats is one thing, but learning from them may be less certain. TV pundits relate their comments to positional graphics and often make a good deal of sense in what they say. And it seems as though the better PL teams and players give the impression of understanding where they need to position themselves especially in defence.
So what might we conclude about the value of analysts at lower league level? Losing to teams we ought to beat (Harrogate and Bromley) makes you wonder.
-
I thought they were awful today. How Adkins keeps getting work in football is beyond me.
Their centre half stopping when his shorts were pulled down for the second goal was hilarious. Kelly just ran straight past him.
I couldn't believe their tactics.
Anyone who watches us for 30 seconds knows we struggle against a low block, but are set up to break rapidly against a high press. Yet Adkins pushed 5 players onto the 18 yard line every time TSLhaf the ball. Insane tactics. On another day, we'd have scored 8/9 goals.
I’ve been doing more tactical/ style match up stuff (professionally) this season rather than just data stuff. It’s amazing how many managers set up in a way that has essentially a negative expected value in the game. That’s even at the top level.
Teams end up playing well against teams that suit their style and poorly against ones that don’t but managers see this as a fluctuation in performance as opposed to a more tactical issue. Bit of a stopped clock is right twice a day situation. We ended up looking ok yesterday due to what Tranmere did/didn’t do as opposed to what we did well.
Interesting…. clubs employ analysts, but we don’t hear from them directly. Collecting stats is one thing, but learning from them may be less certain. TV pundits relate their comments to positional graphics and often make a good deal of sense in what they say. And it seems as though the better PL teams and players give the impression of understanding where they need to position themselves especially in defence.
So what might we conclude about the value of analysts at lower league level? Losing to teams we ought to beat (Harrogate and Bromley) makes you wonder.
Can’t really comment on the quality of analysts and it really is a more nuanced than my pretty simple black and white opinion but I think a lot of the time managers focus on details and miss the bigger picture in these situations.
-
I thought they were awful today. How Adkins keeps getting work in football is beyond me.
Their centre half stopping when his shorts were pulled down for the second goal was hilarious. Kelly just ran straight past him.
I couldn't believe their tactics.
Anyone who watches us for 30 seconds knows we struggle against a low block, but are set up to break rapidly against a high press. Yet Adkins pushed 5 players onto the 18 yard line every time TSLhaf the ball. Insane tactics. On another day, we'd have scored 8/9 goals.
I’ve been doing more tactical/ style match up stuff (professionally) this season rather than just data stuff. It’s amazing how many managers set up in a way that has essentially a negative expected value in the game. That’s even at the top level.
Teams end up playing well against teams that suit their style and poorly against ones that don’t but managers see this as a fluctuation in performance as opposed to a more tactical issue. Bit of a stopped clock is right twice a day situation. We ended up looking ok yesterday due to what Tranmere did/didn’t do as opposed to what we did well.
Wouldn't argue with much of that. Other than to say we looked more than "OK". We created maybe 10 very high quality chances. It was as dominant a performance as you're going to see at this level, first 15 mins aside.
I think that raises a very interesting point. We are overwhelmingly set up (squad balance and tactics, both) to play a fast transition game. We have used that with punishing effect when a team sets up to try to dominate us high up the pitch.
We, so far this season, have been next to clueless when a side denies us that option.
Is that poor management? The "eggs all in one basket" approach? Or is McCann perfecting a style that might suit a relatively small club higher up the leagues?
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
-
Whilst there was much to be pleased about. The result, the goals, the chances so the overall performance to get back to winning ways, there was still some concerns.
Some terrible basic ball control, some woeful clearances which put the ball back into dangerous areas and particularly in the last 15 minutes our game management v 10 men was really poor. We cannot afford to be that generous to Walsall or many other teams in this league as all the good stuff will count for nothing.
Hopefully the confidence gained will help reduce a few of the errors going forward but we still need to be smarter.
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
The xG for each chance is based on:
- Shot location
- Type of shot (e.g. header, volley)
- Assist type (how the ball arrives at the shooter)
- Defensive pressure.
- Goalkeeper position.
Molyneux’s header that hit the post had an xG of 0.02 based on those factors. So you’d only expect him to score it 1 out of 50 times.
https://statsbomb.com/soccer-metrics/expected-goals-xg-explained/
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
It baffles me
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
That goal was 0.41xG.
Click on Patrick Kelly then on the football on his shot map. Download the site’s app it’s really good.
https://www.fotmob.com/en-GB/matches/tranmere-rovers-vs-doncaster-rovers/2qsgo3#4521200:tab=facts
-
Shot location? You can blow that and all the other factors out of the window when you have 4 one on one situations in the game.
1.91? Don't make me laugh. It's all utter b*ll*cks.
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
That goal was 0.41xG.
Click on Patrick Kelly then on the football on his shot map. Download the site’s app it’s really good.
https://www.fotmob.com/en-GB/matches/tranmere-rovers-vs-doncaster-rovers/2qsgo3#4521200:tab=facts
That's odd.
I looked earlier today and that one was definitely 0.08. with a total xG of about 1.7.
Just looked again on the same site and it's 0.41 as you say, with a total of 3.07.
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
That goal was 0.41xG.
Click on Patrick Kelly then on the football on his shot map. Download the site’s app it’s really good.
https://www.fotmob.com/en-GB/matches/tranmere-rovers-vs-doncaster-rovers/2qsgo3#4521200:tab=facts
That's odd.
I looked earlier today and that one was definitely 0.08. with a total xG of about 1.7.
Just looked again on the same site and it's 0.41 as you say, with a total of 3.07.
Oh yeah they’ve changed the total on FotMob now too. Still, not bad from us in terms of finishing. So 3.07 is the correct answer Filo.
For the season so far, despite the narrative of missing chances, we’ve only underperformed our xG by 1 (we’ve scored 31 goals instead of 32).
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
That goal was 0.41xG.
Click on Patrick Kelly then on the football on his shot map. Download the site’s app it’s really good.
https://www.fotmob.com/en-GB/matches/tranmere-rovers-vs-doncaster-rovers/2qsgo3#4521200:tab=facts
That's odd.
I looked earlier today and that one was definitely 0.08. with a total xG of about 1.7.
Just looked again on the same site and it's 0.41 as you say, with a total of 3.07.
A lot of these sites initially use the in running xG which is pretty arbitrary but then update once the game has been modelled properly using better data. 0.41 is a better reflection of that chance.
-
Not that I understand it, but what was the xg for Saturday
1.91 for us. So we took our chances
I don’t understand it even more now, we scored 3 goals, it the post twice and missed 2 one on one’s and the xg was 1.91?
I don't think I'm ever going to "get" xG.
Figures I've seen give an xG of 0.08 for the chance that Kelly put away. Surely you'd expect that a chance clean through on the keeper, 12 yards out, no defender close enough to challenge and a useful angle, to be converted more often that once in 12 or 13 attempts?
It baffles me
Ignore it Filo, it is absolute b*llocks.
Just enjoy the game as you see it mate.
-
We got dicked by Stockport last season and our xG was only marginally worse than theirs. It's a complete load of rubbish all because Biggins' goal was unmissable.
-
Taking a 1 on 1 situation, a great deal depends on the ability and proximity of the goalkeeper as well as the skill of the striker and the time he has to control the ball. Unless I am much mistaken, these are not factors which can be catered for within the statistics.
-
For anyone abroad who goes geolocation blocked by Sky;
https://videos.skysports.com/media/v1/pmp4/static/clear/6057984924001/6a1ccc03-8d6d-45e2-8d2b-70323342fd3b/8272ba5b-dbfa-499b-bd6d-21100e8fc827/main.mp4
that's me, thanks Albie
Are you not signed up to Rovers+ Syd?
You can view extended highlights and even full match replays from abroad on that I’m pretty sure.