xG Timelines

New Forest Cherry said:
I actually agree with you!! :love:
a free header that close should be min 60%
Click to expand...

When I was first introduced to xG I was surprised by the low individual scores but when you add them up they come out okay.

I think it's worth remembering that it's not the attempt that's given the score it's the opportunity. Madine made the opportunity look easier by doing so well with it. Even though Lowe's chance was 60% I don't think you see many chances above 50%.
 
It's interesting that after Weds game we thought we were by far the better team and we'll worth a comfortable win yet Birmingham came out on top in xG. Then at the weekend it felt like Blackpool should have murdered us but we were ahead on xG.

I don't question either the perceptions or the stats, they're just different ways of looking at the same game.
 
kirsikka said:
It's interesting that after Weds game we thought we were by far the better team and we'll worth a comfortable win yet Birmingham came out on top in xG. Then at the weekend it felt like Blackpool should have murdered us but we were ahead on xG.

I don't question either the perceptions or the stats, they're just different ways of looking at the same game.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think this is the best way to view them, as complementary to everything else. On the radio is sounded like we were under lots of pressure, but when you analyse just the 3 biggest chances, if you didn't know what happened, would you have preferred ?

1) A penalty, a shot from the edge of the six yard box (no defenders blocking the shot) and one from near the corner of a six yard box (no defenders blocking the shot) or

2) A header 6 yards out (no defenders in the way), a shot from the edge of the box, largely with no defenders in the way and another shot from the edge of the box, with some players in the way.

I think it would be 1) although our last two coming in the 86th min and later distorts the view we would have formed before this.

Vs Birmingham, the top 3 were

1) A shot against the keeper from near the penalty spot, a header about 8 yards out, and a shot about 8 yards out with a few defenders blocking the goal.

2) A free attempt from 7 yards out, a free shot about 8 yards out, and a shot about 10 yards out with defenders in the way.

These choices are much less clear cut.

When looking at what were the top 3, I've noticed the figures have been tweaked. This regularly happens, but I post the first set to get them fairly after the game. It was AFCB 1.27, Brum 1.46, but it is now AFCB 1.30, Brum 1.42. It wouldn't surprise me to see Madine's header on Saturday have the rating increased.

For me, it just shows how many games were a lot closer than may have appeared initially. With error in the stats and the randomness of football (none of Dom's goal against Brum, or Hernandez's goal for Brum, or Bowler's goal for Blackpool were in their team's top 3 rated chances and these games weren't full of attempts) I'd expect that any of the three results were reasonable possibility whilst the xGs were within about 1.5 of each other.

For me at least, knowing how close many games are means that I don't get too excited on winning runs, nor too downbeat on losing ones. On other days, the results could have been reversed.
 
The expected line colour of the Blackpool line being blue (1 in 7), and Bournemouth being orange (1 in 100)
 
Here's the xG timeline for Saturday's game.

The first half looks as free of attacking intent from both sides as it sounded on the radio. At half time the xGs were AFCB 0.27 and Stoke 0.18. They had scored a brilliantly finished goal in this period, after Mepham had made what looked a crucial block. There was a contentious red card on 32 minutes which contributed to Stoke shutting up shop and frustrating our attacks.

There were 5 'big' chances in the second half, 4 to The Cherries and 1 to Stoke. On 51 minutes Billing received the ball at an awkward height and put it over (although he claimed a corner), this was rated 2 in 3. The next big chance was an unchallenged header from Harewood-Bellis, rated 3 in 10, he was also in a good position but controlled it so poorly that it doesn't register on xG. Then came the AFCB goals, Solanke nodding in at the back post following Kelly's looped header across the box. It was rated 52% which seems low. The next two big chances came in the same incident, with Solanke making a mess of Zemura's cross (3 in 5) and the ball coming back to Jamal Lowe who put it in (2 in 3). What had been a dark day listening on the radio turned into a much happier one.

Stoke.JPG
 
It shows the pattern of the second half too, started the half fast, tailed off a bit in the middle and stoke came back into the game, then picked up the pace and pressure to the end.
 
' Solanke making a mess of Zemura's cross'

Hang on a minute just seen it back again and the cross is behind him.
If he hadn't got anything on it , there was no-one behind him and we may havd ended up with only z draw.
So for me , that's a definite assist .
:utc:
 
AFCB Ironman said:
' Solanke making a mess of Zemura's cross'

Hang on a minute just seen it back again and the cross is behind him.
If he hadn't got anything on it , there was no-one behind him and we may havd ended up with only z draw.
So for me , that's a definite assist .
:utc:
Click to expand...

If I was Dom, I'd be definitely claiming an assist bonus. :)
The commentator says 'Solanke got his feet all wrong' and it does look inelegant when it hits your standing leg. But all's well that ends well :utc:
 
AFCB Ironman said:
' Solanke making a mess of Zemura's cross'

Hang on a minute just seen it back again and the cross is behind him.
If he hadn't got anything on it , there was no-one behind him and we may havd ended up with only z draw.
So for me , that's a definite assist .
:utc:
Click to expand...

When it’s a goal it’s a goal and “they all count”, but I guess assists should be deliberate well weighted passes to count?!
 
I managed to make this game. When putting this together, it was interesting that 'the event' of a day out with an 8 year old, distracted me from seeing what a dull game it was in terms of clear chances. There was only one chance rated above 1 in 10, this being our goal, which was 76%. However, this seems low as I'd have backed most of the travelling fans to have scored from the position once Lowe had taken it round the keeper.

There isn't much to comment on, chances-wise. Archer's equaliser squirming through Kelly and Phillips challenges, and in off the post was rated 1 in 16. Philips doing very well with a hard chance (1 in 25) that Iverson excellently clawed away, and then their winner, (also 1 in 25) with Travers looked suspiciously close to his near post when the shot was taken (but I'm not a keeper, and he has been excellent). Iverson's save was spectacular, and I thought it was in, although I still think Henderson's save from Fraser at Bramall Lane was better.

On another day, the ref may have blown for the fouls in the build-up to both Preston goals, I'm not so sure for the challenge on Cantwell, although they are regularly given, but the one on Billing was undeniable. It felt like we were worth a point live, but I'm trying to be philosophical, with no late goals (>88 mins), we'd have 3 points from the last 3, but we took 6.

Preston.JPG
 
Quite insightful. We simply didn't do enough to deserve to win that game so cannot claim to be particularly unlucky. We've been bailed out by heroics from Travers and last minute goals of late, so what goes around comes around.

I know there are plenty of xG haters out there, but the way I see it, it proves that we're just not creating enough and so are very dependent on taking the chances we do create.

To use a cricket analogy, good teams bowl consistently in the right places which ultimately creates enough chances so that dropped catches matter less. Same for us, if we get the ball in to good areas and create multiple chances, we've got the quality to make it count. But tapping it around safely in defence and midfield is just a waste of the talent we do have and levels the playing field. It's not like we're tiring out the opposition with that play if it's all in front of them.

Next 3 games we really need to let the handbrake off and trust that we have the quality to make it count.
 
Thanks Matt, definitely felt like a 0-1 game spoilt by the fouls. You can understand why the players, manager and (most) fans feel aggrieved.

One of the psychological tricks that gets me too is that a goal scored makes it seem like that shot could only ever result in a goal.
 
Matt Stevenson said:
I managed to make this game. When putting this together, it was interesting that 'the event' of a day out with an 8 year old, distracted me from seeing what a dull game it was in terms of clear chances. There was only one chance rated above 1 in 10, this being our goal, which was 76%. However, this seems low as I'd have backed most of the travelling fans to have scored from the position once Lowe had taken it round the keeper.

There isn't much to comment on, chances-wise. Archer's equaliser squirming through Kelly and Phillips challenges, and in off the post was rated 1 in 16. Philips doing very well with a hard chance (1 in 25) that Iverson excellently clawed away, and then their winner, (also 1 in 25) with Travers looked suspiciously close to his near post when the shot was taken (but I'm not a keeper, and he has been excellent). Iverson's save was spectacular, and I thought it was in, although I still think Henderson's save from Fraser at Bramall Lane was better.

On another day, the ref may have blown for the fouls in the build-up to both Preston goals, I'm not so sure for the challenge on Cantwell, although they are regularly given, but the one on Billing was undeniable. It felt like we were worth a point live, but I'm trying to be philosophical, with no late goals (>88 mins), we'd have 3 points from the last 3, but we took 6.

View attachment 7328
Click to expand...

Thanks Matt, I've stuck this on the front page in all of its unedifying glory.

Man of the match poll also included - https://bournemouth.vitalfootball.co.uk/preston-v-afcb-xg-timeline/
 
Thanks Matt. Clear to see why Parker thought he'd be right in grinding out a point and hoping for 3 with a bit of luck. Just doesn't take into account things like fouls not given, our own fumbled touch on the ball or misplaced pass etc. Probably evens out recent games.

We'll need more creativity and chances in upcoming home games.
 
Here's the xG timeline from last night, which represents an independent view of the chances created. At half time I'd texted a friend saying we couldn't hit a barn door. For reference, when Huddersfield recently be Peterborough 3-0 the xG was 1.18 vs 0.46. On another night our chances go in, and the atmosphere immediately changes.

We had more shots than in any recent game, although in contrast to our normal approach many were low percentage (<5%). There were 3 really big chances (rated better than 1 in 3) in the game, two for us and one for Peterborough. Ours came in the first 10 minutes, as Billing put one wide that earlier in the season he would have scored (3 in 5) and Solanke dragged one wide on the turn (about 1 in 3). Peterborough's key effort was the goal, I haven't seen the right camera angle, but I suspect Zemura played Marriott onside. In terms of chances greater than 1 in 10, we had Nat Phillips' second effort from a corner, and three efforts from Solanke (all 1 in 9) the last of which hit Lowe when it looked like it could go in. Peterborough had one shot from the D also 1 in 9. Christie's goal was rated 1 in 11, with the keeper strangely flat-footed.

Whilst we are all frustrated by the result, looking coldly in the aftermath, we really should have won the game given the chances we created. I don't think it's lack of effort from the players, just a bad day at the office in front of goal. Let's hope they put their shooting boots on against Derby. UTCIAD

PBoro.JPG
 
Bumstead crosses....Dickie Dowsetts Emblematic Head misses....and the ball falls to Coxon...who feeds it back in with a spin on it...this time Dickie makes no mistake and dinks it home...and the baying 12, 000 go bananas !
 
My enduring memory of the first half, lots of desperate shots after a couple of big misses but that only started in the later part of the first half (20-45 minutes) perhaps in response to fan pressure intensified by their (very fortunate) goal.
 
Sometimes you have to look at the trend rather than an individual game and so I don't think it was an isolated bad day in front of goal. Off the top of my head, in the last four games I can only remember the opposition keeper making one noteworthy save, and that was to prevent a centre back scoring a header from a corner.

We're either creating little or, when we do make an opening, not showing the composure to get a decent effort in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;