Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
It’s better than a lot of ways of judging it
But as you say it doesn’t factor in even if it’s a striker or a defender taking the shot. That’s flawed to me
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Emerson Royal
- Thread starter Daisuk
- Start date
But as you say it doesn’t factor in even if it’s a striker or a defender taking the shot. That’s flawed to me
Mooresinho
Michael Brown
These last pages have made no sense to me.
I think we should just try and stick it in the onion bag as much as we can.
I think we should just try and stick it in the onion bag as much as we can.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
It can work. Mourinho showed that (and also showed the limitations of such an approach). Playing a defensive game without more strings to your bow makes you rather one dimensional, and the team lose the ability to play when they get the ball. Eventually, it catches up with you. You have to have possession to score. So a top team will rarely be a one-trick pony. You get exceptions - Greece, Leicester - but they are a flash in the pan. Top teams need to be able to do a number of things well. Defend, play possession football, and adapt to the situation.
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Sorry but your never gonna persuade me of the need for possession
Football is about scoring, and stopping the opposition scoring
I’ve seen is play possession football many times and lose. I’ve rarely seen us play with less ball and win. You find a system that wins you games and that is all that matters
You need the ball when you score. That’s about it
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
You've answered your own post.
Without the ball you can't score - by definition. Why would any team wish to be one-dimensional? You need more than one way to play imo. It might work in the short term - as with Mourinho we got to the top of the league in December - but longer term you need more. Even Mourinho knew that - he just couldn't execute us transitioning and playing more because we were so focused on defensive setup.
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Jose’s team wasnt one dimensionalYou've answered your own post.
Without the ball you can't score - by definition. Why would any team wish to be one-dimensional? You need more than one way to play imo. It might work in the short term - as with Mourinho we got to the top of the league in December - but longer term you need more. Even Mourinho knew that - he just couldn't execute us transitioning and playing more because we were so focused on defensive setup.
Our team isn’t one dimensional
I don’t think any successful side is
I do think too many people are obsessed with possession rather than the key measure which is goals (for and against). Football is the worlds most popular sport because there are so many ways to win it. But having more of the ball isn’t one. If it was, it would probably be an American sport
I think you are being slightly factious here, possession for possession sake means nothing, however
Game management is a thing, and having control of the ball gives you an edge in game control
You can score and your opponent can´t if you have the ball
The problem with Jose system was we gave up control of the ball to lesser sides, side we could have controlled the ball more than simply by the quality of player we have. Poch was the opposite we tried to control the ball all the time, even when the opposition had better players. Nuno is in the middle, if we can, we do.
Xg shows how many chances a team is creating in a match, whether the person taking the shot is world class finisher or not doesn't really matter wrt that - if we have a low xg but are scoring a high amount due to Kane & Son being exceptional finishers then the value in the xg rating is that we know we can/or need to improve our creativity and are relying on strikers scoring half chances, rather than being a side that is opening teams up at will.
Last edited:
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Of course I am
But it’s the obsession with possession equals control again…. It really doenst
We didn’t have possession vs city. We controlled the game IMO. We made them go to areas where we need we could deal with it. Same as arsenal at home last year for example.
Wolves had all the possessions vs us But their one real chance came from a long, great pass, after losing possession
You control a game of football in many ways
It’s why teams going down to 10 men rarely struggle now as they now how to control the opposition in those circumstances, without the ball
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Course it matters
Chance creation doesn’t equal goals
I mean we have seen defenders literally leave sissoko with the ball and markka but he mean when we were 2 on 1 against them… they knew he wouldn’t have a high likelihood of scoring
I don't think that's really relevant to what the stat is there to show - a stat that tells you that Kane has a higher chance of scoring in a certain situation than another, lesser player, would be rather pointless imv
Think about it from the other angle, if you're giving up a high xg rating to a team like Norwich but don't actually concede, through them having brick forwards, then the stat still shows you that your defense has performed poorly and got torn apart numerous times, a stat weighted by the level of player taking the final shot wouldn't highlight that
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Not really
You can have a cumulative number of pork quality shots equal a solid xG
20 shots from range with a 0.1 xG would equal 2…. We have seen that. But that team could lose to a side with one shot, one goal from 2 yards and rightly so
live how a passion convo has now gone to xG on a thread about a new RB most of us have never seen
what I will say on the possession front or xG front for that matter is that the team that works the hardest without the ball generally wins IMO.
Yes, but the argument would be use the easiest tool when it makes sense
- Against City most teams in the world would struggle to out-possess them, so make them play where you want
- Against Watford, we can, therefore we did control possession and limited them significantly.
My point is while I agree possession doesn't always equal game management, if you have the option (e.g. against lesser teams), why would you ever willingly give it up? something we often did with Jose for no real gain (often also has brick side effect of giving the opponent more confidence)
braineclipse
Willie Hall
Well, no. If the xG is 2 you'd expect that team to average two goals in a game like that (with "average" long range shooting ability).
Concede 20 decent (0.1 is definitely decent at least) long range shots in a game and that's going to end up a real problem sooner or later, probably sooner.
braineclipse
Willie Hall
Agreed.
We have two players in Son and Kane that probably can be relied on to outperform xG. That's great, but there's a limit to how much that can be relied on. We still need at least decent xG numbers to succeed over time.
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
I think it has a purpose
But it’s relevance has to be in context with other data
braineclipse
Willie Hall
We were one dimensional under Jose, to an extent at least. The failure to develop more dimensions was part of his undoing.
You don't need high possession numbers to win, definitely not. But it's a huge boost to your chances of winning consistently enough if you can create more good chances in varying game conditions, in different phases of play.
Having to rely too much on counter attacking to create enough good chances will cause problems.
Some teams, and in some parts of games, opponents will pretty much let us have high possession numbers. Being better at creating chances in those situations increases the chances of success over time.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
This was the game where it became really clear we wouldn't prosper long term doing the same thing under Mourinho. We won the game, but there was no way we'd replicate that across a whole season. At the time, many many Spurs fans pointed it out after the game. They were happy we won of course, but the writing was on the wall. You can make such a defensive approach work in a cup game, but it is not sustainable. Great sides are able to use the ball as well as block out teams.