So you have an issue with the BBC for not including a key stat not the stats themselves. Fair enough, but kinda weird to be going on about. It's not a simple point at all, it's a daft one. You're trying to make out as if you can't get a sense of the game from reading the stats when you can. Not even sure why you're trying to make an argument out of it when you could be enjoying the win.
Yes, indeed, but xg doesn't have a standard, nor is it nuanced enough to use as a definitive stat in the context of a single match either. It's a statistical tool like many others which should be used to identify relative trends on a broad basis. Not make a definitive assessment of a specific game, or circumstance. Nowt wrong with it being used in a professional context for diagnostic purposes, but media using stats to reimagine a game ( like happens in live coverage) is a mis-use. In my opinion. Academically speaking.
This match reminded me very much of the 2013 away hammering (4-1) against the same team - Pochettino was their manager and he had the best pressing team that I'd ever seen; I think first half we were equally that good, with a bit more luck we could have been out of sight. We have a great young coach and the makings of a really exciting team.
Nah, I just don't live on here mate, I have things to do. And why would I read this place when we lose anyway? I suffer from depression. This place would make me suicidal the way some of you act. Hell, when we win some still have to find a way to moan.
It does have a standard, it's entire existence is based around a standard shot taken by a standard player from that position of the pitch. Far too much discussion about this now. The stats can tell the story if the correct ones are used. And that story was a terrific away win so let's enjoy it instead of carrying this on?
FFS. I quoted the stats that Ron Burguvdy posted which didn't have xG. They were the bare stats of possession, corners and shots. Why are you arguing?
The 8 days in 1966 after winning promotion from Div 3 where we scored 13 goals and only conceded 1 in front of 90,000 for the 3 games wasn’t too bad.
Not speaking for Syd, but it's dry data with no context. It isn't nuanced enough to give a narrative of the game. No stats are, in isolation.
The thing with xG over an entire match is it loses the nuance of, for example, a tap-in (virtually 0.99xG) and then let’s say 10 long shots at 0.02xG each, as opposed to two decent chances of 0.4xG each let’s say both of which are scored and no other shots all match. In the former case you had 11 shots and a total 1.19xG and in the second 2 shots and a total 0.8xG, which makes it look like wasteful finishing in the first instance and luck in the second. When really it was nothing of the sort.
The internet full stop can be a bad place for depression, I know we having always seen eye to eye. But I'd never wish depressed on anyone and I know I'll be nowhere near the top of your list but if you ever fancy a chat about football or life etc when you're not feeling great, my inbox is always open and id be more then happy to grab a coffee or something and argue about our progress
