Why Did We Create Nowt ?
- Thread starter The Little General
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Yep he did, and we will lose a load of good players but Flan etc will be here next season. He blew it in Jan big time.
Are you both the same person? Monty NEVER replies to anyone!
I think losing Power so early knackered us. No McGeouch on the bench so had no like for like change and we then swapped formation and players all the way to the end. We were second best.
We were awful, no movement no nowt. We all knew Catts and Grant were either or and he went with both We could have played till now and done nowt. Does that not concern some of you blind people ? Ross is SO average.
We needed McGeady and Maguire on the pitch together. Wyke offers no threat whatsoever. Little anticipation, little movement, can't lose his marker, slow.
No, for me he got the bench wrong, three wingers and no midfield back up to keep the shape right was not in hindsight wise, we started well but lost our way with plan B, if that was what it was. Big factor was Morgan and Maguire were poor, I felt sorry for Wyke, limited as he is he at least put in a shift, cant say that for the other two, who if they don't score themselves, are liabilities.
Thought Morgan was in the wrong place a lot of the time. At least twice he stopped a pass going through to someone with a better opportunity, Wyke was one (Morgan tried to shoot ball hit his standing leg) and the other pass was a through ball to O9 which he intercepted. Think he shows promise but so do the young lads we have out on loan...they'll be back next season hopefully. Don't know much about Charlton but they looked like a team that's been together for a while and I think Lyle Taylor was the big difference between the 2 teams
Playing Wyke though means that we're playing with a target man and the purpose is for him to hold the ball up. We can play nice little combinations all around the park but we've got no cutting edge because he doesn't hold the ball up effectively. Nine times out of ten he loses the ball in the air or is in the wrong place or can't lose his marker. That nullifies the players (McGeady, Maguire, Morgan etc) whose job it is to get on to his flick ons or lay offs. Both Morgan and Maguire had the beating of their man and were whipping crosses in. When Maja was playing we weren't resorting to hitting a target man and were trying to play him, and other people, into scoring positions. Wyke's workrate and commitment isn't necessarily the problem but the game we have to play when he's in the side is and it's made worse by the fact he's not very good at it.
Gooch would have been a better choice than Morgan when power was injured imo. Morgan offered nothing (except one or two runs, I didn't really notice him ). We were effectively playing with 10 men. Having Gooch on the pitch would have allowed Ross to sub Leadbitter, cattermole or honeyman later on instead of maguire/wyke. But with Morgan already on the pitch we couldn't sacrifice another CM.
Choice was limited, that was the problem, I expected the sub to be Gooch at the time, even though I doubt he would have been the answer the form he has been in lately. watching Villa/Derby and Villa are through
McGeady must have been injured. He obviously did not want to play him or imo he should have been the 1st sub.
JR got the team spot on at Pompey where we only needed a point. He was maybe too negative yesterday but did he have a choice with the players at his disposal? When I saw the team sheet I had a concern there was not much creativity and so it proved.
I thought it was a poor game but they created chances and took them. We got a fluke.
Having watched that yesterday and all the draws we have had this season maybe another season in this league is not such a bad thing as we would deffo struggle in the championship with our present squad. The concern is will we have the money?
Lastly we must go up next season otherwise it will be a disaster.
JR got the team spot on at Pompey where we only needed a point. He was maybe too negative yesterday but did he have a choice with the players at his disposal? When I saw the team sheet I had a concern there was not much creativity and so it proved.
I thought it was a poor game but they created chances and took them. We got a fluke.
Having watched that yesterday and all the draws we have had this season maybe another season in this league is not such a bad thing as we would deffo struggle in the championship with our present squad. The concern is will we have the money?
Lastly we must go up next season otherwise it will be a disaster.
Last edited:
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/spo...ws/underlying-numbers-lays-bare-just-16338049
This season, Sunderland's tally of 80 goals scored ranked their attack joint-third in the division, which on the surface seems impressive.
Yet, their Expected Goals (xG) combined total for the season was just 65. Normally over the course of a league campaign, a teams xG should correlate with their overall goals scored.
If a team is overperforming in this department, it usually indicates that they have been scoring more goals than would be expected given the quality of chances created. This would therefore indicate that sooner or later, this overperformance will catch up with them.
Whilst Ross’ sides won’t complain that they have scored a further 15 goals than what the underlying numbers would suggest, it could prove a mistake to ignore in the long term. Notably, their tally of 596 shots on goal this season ranked them an uninspiring 11th in the division
Next term, Sunderland could have less fortune and covert fewer of their low quality chances created, seeing a dramatic decrease on their goal tally.
Ross will therefore need to add more creativity to his side this summer.
This season, Sunderland's tally of 80 goals scored ranked their attack joint-third in the division, which on the surface seems impressive.
Yet, their Expected Goals (xG) combined total for the season was just 65. Normally over the course of a league campaign, a teams xG should correlate with their overall goals scored.
If a team is overperforming in this department, it usually indicates that they have been scoring more goals than would be expected given the quality of chances created. This would therefore indicate that sooner or later, this overperformance will catch up with them.
Whilst Ross’ sides won’t complain that they have scored a further 15 goals than what the underlying numbers would suggest, it could prove a mistake to ignore in the long term. Notably, their tally of 596 shots on goal this season ranked them an uninspiring 11th in the division
Next term, Sunderland could have less fortune and covert fewer of their low quality chances created, seeing a dramatic decrease on their goal tally.
Ross will therefore need to add more creativity to his side this summer.
Who decides what the # expected goals are? What's the definition of "quality" chances created?
.other part of the article: Improve our discipline?? 8 red cards, but doesn't mention how many were overturned. Yellow cards against us, but how many were soft. Refs were ****, and overly penalised us through out the season.
'chances created, and 'quality chances created' are stats I've heard of before - possibly something to make fantasy football more interesting. I know I wouldn't want my club to pay £15 million for a fullback who doesn't create chances. You are so right about the refs and those damn cards. Not much of a debate though - about those 199 shots allowed on goal - fourth bottom.
But Wyke is not a footballer
Dosnt matter that he puts a shift in he can’t play football