• 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

*******Spurs v PSG*******Official OMT*******

Bedfordspurs said:
Said that to my mates
They didn’t like it because I’ve being use XG to highlight our lack of chance creation but we have had some screamers go against us
Click to expand...
I think ppl misunderstand what xG is really telling you. Most seem to think it's a rating of your chances when in reality it's a rating of your finishing. If you have an xG of 1 but score 2 then you have great finishing. If you have an xG of 6 but score 2, even if you win that match your finishing is poor.

So many forget xG is a cumulative stat. So you need to look at the xG versus how many shots you've had. Again if you have an xG of 1 but took 10 shots that tells you the chances themselves were of a very low quality whereas an xG of 3 with 4 or 5 shots tells you the chances were of a high quality and really should have been scored.
 
Last edited:
Muttley said:
I think someone already nailed it (Sissoko?). It was a win for manager tactics and a loss for player's individual errors. I would be asking 2 of them, Spence and Romero, to take a step down and watch the weekend game from the bench. Let them think about their casual nature to defending and whether it is acceptable. Both are repeat offenders. Get Danso and Udogie back in.

Then let's continue with what we saw for most of that game. Don't recall Palhinha as it all becomes less dynamic with him just sitting all the time. When Bents went into advanced areas last night, you just knew the 1 or 2 of the Gray, Sarr and Bergvall would be reforming the shield in front of the centre halves. When Bents got back into position the covering player just reverted back to the wide position. Same as if Gray or Bents pushed up on the press. The other 2 would drop in narrow. I personally believe the 4 midfielders that started last night deserve another go together.
Click to expand...
No asking of Romero - he's suspended anyway after his booking on Sunday.
 
thfcsteff said:
He basically reverted to the 'reset' formation in football -4-4-2- with a twist in so much as he employed a diamond. I think Pahlinha is so good at being sixy that he could absolutely replace Bentancur at the base and offer more security than Bentancur has there. I know Bents is a more dynamic player, however thisn system would give us a chance to see what an expert at the base of that midfield could do in terms of releasing others around him to be themselves. I have to say, Bentancur is also culpable for the Romero pass gaffe as he simnply does not drop quickly into a supportive easy-pass space, instead he seems to almost watch Romero struggle with it. I think the shape is best for Frank as he figures his stuff out for sure.

Udogie should always start at LB when fit for balance reasons. Romero? An awful 7 minutes or so when he seemed to lose his head. And I think that underlines our issues. We still lack game management experience. At 2-1 up you have to slow it down, take any pace you can out of the game (go down with cramp, anything), commit little fouls, anything you can do to make it a stop/start game for 10-15 minutes. We did none of that.
Click to expand...

Just wrote the same thing on the other thread about Bents making his captain look a mug by not making a simple move to receive a pass for the goal. I also called out Romero for not being able to live with another player's mistake and clearing his lines.

I'm not saying that I know the answer here but there is a concern that if Palhinha is the 6 then Gray, Sarr and Bergval stop dropping into the holding midfield space. Then there is less rotation from the 4 midfielders, the opposition get less stretched and we then end up back where we were. That stale pattern can re-emerge.

If Palhinha comes back in at the expense of Bents, then he also needs to change his game if we play like we did last night. That is unless we go another step further in the evolution of the system and drop into a 4-1-3-2. Then Pal sits permanently (Dier..esque) and the full-backs become wing-backs but with a back 4. That is so much easier with Udogie in the team.

I have a feeling we'll smash Fulham at the weekend. They have 4 losses and 2 wins in 6 league games and are there for the taking. I have a feeling Frank has had his Eureka moment.
 
Bishop said:
I think ppl misunderstand what xG is really telling you. Most seem to think it's a rating of your chances when in reality it's a rating of your finishing. If you have an xG of 1 but score 2 then you have great finishing. If you have an xG of 6 but score 2, even if you win that match your finishing is poor.

So may forget xG is a cumulative stat. So you need to look at the xG versus how many shots you've had. Again if you have an xG of 1 but took 10 shots that tells you the chances themselves were of a very low quality whereas an xG of 3 with 4 or 5 shots tells you the chances were of a high quality and really should have been scored.
Click to expand...

It rates chance creation (assuming an attempt on goal is made).

It’s more useful defensively.

Our xGa was ok last night for an away game against the CL holders.

I’m still fuming that we ballsed it up.
 
thfcsteff said:
At 2-1 up you have to slow it down, take any pace you can out of the game (go down with cramp, anything), commit little fouls, anything you can do to make it a stop/start game for 10-15 minutes. We did none of that.
Click to expand...
At which point at least half of our fanbase will be foaming at the mouth because we're not playing free-flowing, balls-out, Audere est Facere attacking football! :)
 
Last edited:
Junior19 said:
My major concern is that I'm not being excited by this. Nor am I tinkled off by it. That is the problem.
Click to expand...
Given that the new manager is not long in the door I'm perfectly happy to be in a place in which I share your feelings for now.

We were in a mess, and it was so big that it was never going to be sorted out quickly. I'm enjoying watching the process of that happening, as I will do for the rest of the season. For now, I'm not getting too excited when we win - nor dropping into navel-gazing existential despair when we lose.
 
Last edited:
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
I thought it was a good game to watch, dissapointed at losing and parts of our game but I did not expect us to get much from this match, they scored 2 wonderful goals and a penalty. I think anyone expecting us to beat them was deluded, they are a top team with a realistic chance of getting to semi finals of this tournament we are no way near that level.
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part , a 5-3 game -should- be a good game to watch.

And I am as much worried about the lack of emotions about the game (from me) as I am about anything else I'm rambling about on. Because everything else flows from that.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
I thought it was a good game to watch, dissapointed at losing and parts of our game but I did not expect us to get much from this match, they scored 2 wonderful goals and a penalty. I think anyone expecting us to beat them was deluded, they are a top team with a realistic chance of getting to semi finals of this tournament we are no way near that level.
Click to expand...
Very similar to my thoughts. If you want to put a positive spin on it - the best midfielder in the world scored a hat trick and that was the difference between beating an elite team and a loss
 
Junior19 said:
I agree for the most part , a 5-3 game -should- be a good game to watch.

And I am as much worried about the lack of emotions about the game (from me) as I am about anything else I'm rambling about on. Because everything else flows from that.
Click to expand...

Is it lack of emotion or coming to terms with the reality that we are where we are in our history? I think people get too emotional about what is just a game, I get dissapointed with our performances and defeats but get on with my life.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
I thought it was a good game to watch, dissapointed at losing and parts of our game but I did not expect us to get much from this match, they scored 2 wonderful goals and a penalty. I think anyone expecting us to beat them was deluded, they are a top team with a realistic chance of getting to semi finals of this tournament we are no way near that level.
Click to expand...
The team and Frank were a victim of their own 'success' in this game. I had a feeling we would fare ok as playing this sort of team suits us, but most were saying they expected us to be thrashed. Yet we took it to them and had we got something from the game no one would have suggested we got lucky.

The intent was positive, the football was better and the balance was good as we were not exposed at the back anymore than you would expect playing one of the best attacking teams in the game. The individual errors were what cost us which of course is annoying but I see no reason why we shouldn't be positive about yesterday....
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
Is it lack of emotion or coming to terms with the reality that we are where we are in our history? I think people get too emotional about what is just a game, I get dissapointed with our performances and defeats but get on with my life.
Click to expand...
It might be the reality-thing, to be honest.

I was reflecting a bit on something along those lines to myself during the game yesterday.
And it is also inevitable that anyone following Pochettino and Ange, to a certain extent would be unfairly viewed by me. And that is not because I thought the last months and season with Ange was so fudging brilliant, even if it culminated in that silvery thing because it was horrible to endure! But because of what they represented, the idea, the vision of what could be. Therefore the disappointment when we fail hits so much harder.
 
Bishop said:
I think ppl misunderstand what xG is really telling you. Most seem to think it's a rating of your chances when in reality it's a rating of your finishing. If you have an xG of 1 but score 2 then you have great finishing. If you have an xG of 6 but score 2, even if you win that match your finishing is poor.

So many forget xG is a cumulative stat. So you need to look at the xG versus how many shots you've had. Again if you have an xG of 1 but took 10 shots that tells you the chances themselves were of a very low quality whereas an xG of 3 with 4 or 5 shots tells you the chances were of a high quality and really should have been scored.
Click to expand...
There's more to it than the quality of your finishing, surely. An individual xG stat (ie for a single goal attempt) is a measure of the quality of the chance, so (xG total)/(shots total) measures your average quality of chances created in the game. If a goal is scored from a chance created, then 1/xG for that chance is probably a measure of a combination of finishing quality/goalkeeping quality and some coefficient of the amount of luck involved, however you want to measure that (the larger the value, the better the finishing and/or the poorer the keeping and/or the luckier the goal, 1/xG values always being >= 1.0). The ratio (goals scored)/(total xG) therefore gives the average measure of that combination of quality and luck over the game.
 
Last edited:
I just don't get why fans are interested in "match stats"
Does having most possession, shots, shots on target, successful passes or tackles, algebra figures mean your team will win or lose? I don't think it does, the only "stat" that matters is goals scored the rest is just fodder for "experts" to chew on and confirm thier opinions.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
I just don't get why fans are interested in "match stats"
Does having most possession, shots, shots on target, successful passes or tackles, algebra figures mean your team will win or lose? I don't think it does, the only "stat" that matters is goals scored the rest is just fodder for "experts" to chew on and confirm thier opinions.
Click to expand...
Some people like to analyse data to see whether patterns emerge. There's no more to it than that, really.
 
If xG was as scientific as it’s labelled by people who like to use it then it would be a set number. Different outlets report different xG for the same games so it can’t be accurate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back