AFC Bournemouth v Birmingham City

Matt Stevenson said:
All fair points. Some comments, again with the caveat that I'm certainly not an expert. I like looking at stats to try and help me understand the game more and enjoy reading people's considered take on it, always happy to learn. I also realise that stats can't distil moments of genius such as Maradona's goal in 86 vs England.

Agree with Brooks' recent form, the first minute chance vs Shef W was partly due to him trying a trick in a dangerous position. Stacey seems to bomb down the right and be overlooked or the ball is delayed too often. Disclaimer, we like Stacey, my son must be one of the few to have 'Stacey 17' on one of his kits. The stats on assists and defensive attributes did make me reconsider whether the left back position was our biggest weakness as we all thought. It is easy to get carried away with preconceptions in the heat of the game. A comment in the secret footballer book that stayed with me is that when the crowd groan when a midfielder plays it into space to no-one, it is more likely to have been because a man hasn't made the run that had been worked on in training, not because the person playing the ball (who gets the stick) was at fault.

Re Bego, maybe 'below our initial expectations', is better phrasing than 'false position', although it depends whether you think his form is sustainable, or whether we've been lucky. For instance, for that first minute chance versus Wednesday, was it more good goalkeeping or bad finishing? Whichever, I'd imagine that if we'd have known at the start of the season that Bego would be our most often man of the match up to February we'd have been worried.

We are all probably biased, screaming for a pen if our man is tackled whilst telling the opposition player to get up in identical circumstances. That's why I like xG so much, it does give some objective view of who the better team, was and what was a 'fair' result. I've thought of another 'interesting' plot, I'll add to the next post.

I haven't heard of an idea pass and it seems hard to measure, but obviously sounds a better bet (apart from if we lose the ball in a dangerous position) than the safe side to side. Subjective stats don't help much IMO. There was a subjective measure on football critic that I didn't post last time, but according
to them our highest ranked player has been Mepham which didn't chime with what I've been watching. (Bego 2nd, S Cook 3rd).
Click to expand...

I decided it might be interesting to look at how our xG predicted points tallied with what we actually got. It's a crude analysis as

1) Penalties not given (Brooks vs Swansea), bad refereeing decisions or men barely missing crosses aren't incorporated.
2) xG are based on average players skills
3) xG will have error within them.
4) I rounded to the nearest goal in the initial analysis. So xGs of 2.2 and 1.6 would be treated as a 2-2 draw.

To counter 4), I redid the analysis looking at the difference between the scores and then rounding this, so 2.2 and 1.6 would be a win to the team with 2.2.

So here are two plots, the first naively rounding both scores. In both, we appear to have either got more than we deserved, or pretty much what we deserved. I had anticipated a better outcome, which shows I must have been biased. :(

xG points.JPG

xG points2.JPG
 
Matt Stevenson said:
I decided it might be interesting to look at how our xG predicted points tallied with what we actually got. It's a crude analysis as

1) Penalties not given (Brooks vs Swansea), bad refereeing decisions or men barely missing crosses aren't incorporated.
2) xG are based on average players skills
3) xG will have error within them.
4) I rounded to the nearest goal in the initial analysis. So xGs of 2.2 and 1.6 would be treated as a 2-2 draw.

To counter 4), I redid the analysis looking at the difference between the scores and then rounding this, so 2.2 and 1.6 would be a win to the team with 2.2.

So here are two plots, the first naively rounding both scores. In both, we appear to have either got more than we deserved, or pretty much what we deserved. I had anticipated a better outcome, which shows I must have been biased. :(

View attachment 5027

View attachment 5028
Click to expand...

Apart from Barnsley and Huddersfield (and a few others) we've been depressing to watch so the xG graphs showing we are close to predicted makes sense, unfortunately.
 
On the basis Stan and Dom might be injured:

Begovic
Stacey CVV Cook Zemura

Pearson Cook

Smith Brooks Danjuma

Long

Bench: Dennis, Rico, Kelly, Billing, Lerma, Roro, Surridge, Dom, Stan

I'd like to see smith at right wing, we know he can get forward and make things happen and quite frankly play down the right recently has been shambles, he'd also offer better defensive cover than brooks.
 
Lee90 said:
On the basis Stan and Dom might be injured:

Begovic
Stacey CVV Cook Zemura

Pearson Cook

Smith Brooks Danjuma

Long

Bench: Dennis, Rico, Kelly, Billing, Lerma, Roro, Surridge, Dom, Stan

I'd like to see smith at right wing, we know he can get forward and make things happen and quite frankly play down the right recently has been shambles, he'd also offer better defensive cover than brooks.
Click to expand...
I actually like the look of that. Only question mark would be Zemura but I think he does deserve a chance since others have been disappointing in that position lately. Give the youth a chance ( like at the start of the season ), I say.

Goals could come from Brooks, Danjuma or Long. Should be enough to win most games.
 
thegazzyb said:
I actually like the look of that. Only question mark would be Zemura but I think he does deserve a chance since others have been disappointing in that position lately. Give the youth a chance ( like at the start of the season ), I say.

Goals could come from Brooks, Danjuma or Long. Should be enough to win most games.
Click to expand...

Rico once a menace on the overlap with a god tier cross has forgotten how to football apparently and whilst I like Kelly, he doesn't mind the ball at his feet and is versatile with positions, he is just seems to slow play down.
 
I'm surprised at how many people want Zemura to come in. Kelly is joint top second for assists, so it isn't as though he's not been contributing. Yes, he turns back too often, but I'd still prefer this to Cook's aimless punts, and he hasn't done a Mepham yet.

As was posted, it may be more of a case of having the midfield options to play to. I'd give a Kelly a run in the team.
 
Assume no Stanislas or Solanke, although a bonus if fit.

--------Begovic
Stacey CCV Cook Kelly
Lerma Cook Pearson
Long Surridge Danjuma

Narrow front 3, get the full backs to provide width, industrious central midfield to cover the full backs when they go forward.

If more creativity from midfield is needed then Brooks and Wilshere come on second half.
 
Based on Dom and Stan being doubts so I'll put them on the bench:

Begovic
Smith Cook Kelly Rico
Cook Lerma Pearson
Wilshere
Long Surridge

Dennis Stacey Mepham CCV Billing Stanislas Brooks Danjuma Solanke

Think we need to drop a few of the big name players for some of the more hungry ones.

Also, think we should play more narrow and get numbers in midfield as we've been losing too many second balls and 50/50s.

Surridge knocking them on for Longy to chase excites me too.

Uppa' Chez
 
It was on the cards when Solanke had that early injury in the first half and then substituted at half-time, that he was a possible doubt. It probably affected his game for the rest of that half.

Stanislas also had a knock in the first half but played on for most of the game and scored our only goal with a well taken penalty.
 
preston south end said:
I actually don’t think Shane Long will score a single goal for us this season, even at championship level.

There, I’ve said it.
(Gosh, I hope that works out !!!!)
Click to expand...
He will run and stretch teams and we have missed that .
Wilson was great at running into the channels as an outlet .
It is fine as long as the centre halves don’t just keep hoofing it forward
 
With a cup game in midweek, I think there won't be as much pressure to put Zemura in but actually giving the message that he will start in both might allow him to relax knowing it's not one and done.

I think Cook and Pearson would be a good partnership with Wilshere or Brooks ahead of them centrally.

Surridge possibly misses out unless we are convinced we are going to mix it up and get crosses in, otherwise Long.

Based on JW comments about forming them into a team, will he name a new captain to take charge of the dressing room and pitch?
 
Matt Stevenson said:
I'm surprised at how many people want Zemura to come in. Kelly is joint top second for assists, so it isn't as though he's not been contributing. Yes, he turns back too often, but I'd still prefer this to Cook's aimless punts, and he hasn't done a Mepham yet.
As was posted, it may be more of a case of having the midfield options to play to. I'd give a Kelly a run in the team.
Click to expand...

Kelly doesn't run he strolls.
 
Da Bomb said:
Probably not given he signalled out cook in the presser as someone to lead
Click to expand...
Thanks - just listened to full conf not just reported snippet.

Two observations - might be that he threw the names Bego and Cookie in to back the point of maturity rather than because that rubber stamps Cook. Sometimes making a younger player captain matures them so guess we will see.

He also said he had told players the team so that must rule out Dom and Stan from starting if he can't be sure. Defeats the point of naming a team early if it's riddled with ifs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;