• 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

***Tottenham versus West Ham****

Danishfurniturelover said:
it is not about us but the opposition, they come to Wembley and sit behind the ball
Click to expand...

I think apart from Chelsea, we should have won our Wembley games this season. We had chances to be out of sight when 1-0 up against Burnley and, whilst not as creative against Swansea, we still hit the bar and should have had a penalty, as well as a couple of other chances that on another day might have been taken. And that's whilst they had 0 shots on target themselves.

So I think, even against sides that want to come and defend, we will start getting the results soon. Just need a little bit of luck and a touch more ruthlessness. If we'd have got 1 against Swansea, we'd have got 3 or 4 imo and we should have done the same to Burnley once we got the first.
 
3265.jpg
 
StephenH said:
Wembley has a footballing folklore air to it. Forget all the hullabaloo about Wembley and treat it as say London Stadium “west” just another football pitch we are renting!
Click to expand...
So how does one go about doing that and how do you know we aren't already? I would imagine we go through the same routune for pretty much any game that we play. Our performances there have been fine. We have dominated all 3 PL games there. We just haven't got the results we have deserved. If we carry on as we are then it will happen. I am sure.
 
Rorschach said:
A different pitch size may have an minor impact on team play but the fact that the the pitches at the training center have been resized to match will negate that, or it already has. It is just some grass and white lines at the end of the day.
Click to expand...
Two of our three away wins this season and most of them last season were on a pitch the same size as Wembley.
 
SteveAWOL said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/911584200784039937
Click to expand...
I don't get how our expected goals was only 1.6? Kane's 2nd goal was a shoe in, that is 1 straight away. I think his first was also close to a chance that would be scored every time. Is the problem with XG that it just looks at the position the player is in when they have the chance and ignores the position that the opponents are in? Kane's 2nd for example. A shot from there might normally yield 1 goal from every 2 or 3 attempts, but that assumes the keeper is in a position to save it as opposed to lying on the floor leaving an open goal.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I don't get how our expected goals was only 1.6? Kane's 2nd goal was a shoe in, that is 1 straight away. I think his first was also close to a chance that would be scored every time. Is the problem with XG that it just looks at the position the player is in when they have the chance and ignores the position that the opponents are in? Kane's 2nd for example. A shot from there might normally yield 1 goal from every 2 or 3 attempts, but that assumes the keeper is in a position to save it as opposed to lying on the floor leaving an open goal.
Click to expand...
Kane's 1st goal is incredible! I doubt it's more than a 15% chance of scoring from there. The touch on the head has to be very precise. The second one is harder than it looks. If you see it from behind, there is quite a narrow gap he needs to hit. That combined that it's a 1st touch volley with weaker foot, makes the xG quite low for that one too.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Kane's 1st goal is incredible! I doubt it's more than a 15% chance of scoring from there. The touch on the head has to be very precise. The second one is harder than it looks. If you see it from behind, there is quite a narrow gap he needs to hit. That combined that it's a 1st touch volley with weaker foot, makes the xG quite low for that one too.
Click to expand...
yeah if you've played that position you know how difficult a glancing header is at that speed and angle. it was noothing less than perfect. alli made it as hard as it could be from that position, much easier and a sure bet to drive a grounder across goal
 
Kandi1977 said:
Kane's 1st goal is incredible! I doubt it's more than a 15% chance of scoring from there. The touch on the head has to be very precise. The second one is harder than it looks. If you see it from behind, there is quite a narrow gap he needs to hit. That combined that it's a 1st touch volley with weaker foot, makes the xG quite low for that one too.
Click to expand...

Indeed! If Dele could head the ball as accurately as that, then we probably would've taken the 3pts against Swansea the previous weekend.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I don't get how our expected goals was only 1.6? Kane's 2nd goal was a shoe in, that is 1 straight away. I think his first was also close to a chance that would be scored every time. Is the problem with XG that it just looks at the position the player is in when they have the chance and ignores the position that the opponents are in? Kane's 2nd for example. A shot from there might normally yield 1 goal from every 2 or 3 attempts, but that assumes the keeper is in a position to save it as opposed to lying on the floor leaving an open goal.
Click to expand...
Yes, xG is very, very crude. It doesn't take into account whether you have the ball on the floor and no defence and no keeper and 5 seconds to kick it, or the ball rising upwards at 100mph into your throat with 10 men on the line.
Statisticians will tell you that this doesn't matter because over time, on balance, most attempts from that point will even out and thus the xG is a repeatable and verifiable stat and I do agree with that but when you take 1 chance or 3 chances (like xG does for each match) it does stretch the stats further than they are supposed to go.

xG works over several seasons but when you try to calculate xG on 4 opportunities or whatever, it falls down badly IMO.
 
metalgear said:
yeah if you've played that position you know how difficult a glancing header is at that speed and angle. it was noothing less than perfect. alli made it as hard as it could be from that position, much easier and a sure bet to drive a grounder across goal
Click to expand...
He didn't need to score by glancing it though. He also could've gone back across the keeper. I disagree about the ball in from Ali, I thought it was inch perfect, Kane didn't have to break stride and there was no need for him to have to sort his feet out or anything like that.
 
I thought it was a bit too high for him and he had to really stretch for it - and made the finish all the better for it.

Haven't watched the game or goals back again though tbf
 
the dza said:
I think apart from Chelsea, we should have won our Wembley games this season. We had chances to be out of sight when 1-0 up against Burnley and, whilst not as creative against Swansea, we still hit the bar and should have had a penalty, as well as a couple of other chances that on another day might have been taken. And that's whilst they had 0 shots on target themselves.

So I think, even against sides that want to come and defend, we will start getting the results soon. Just need a little bit of luck and a touch more ruthlessness. If we'd have got 1 against Swansea, we'd have got 3 or 4 imo and we should have done the same to Burnley once we got the first.
Click to expand...

This.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back