Expected Goals. There and back again
- Thread starter RobinHood
- Start date
the-ecstacy-of-eight
Well-Known Member
I look ridiculous?!
You're so tied up in knots pal it's untrue. I replied to the nonsense you'd posted earlier! (the things I put in quotes were your words from earlier in the thread, before I'd even joined the "conversation" - so you started this shit!)
You've got an opinion about something and in this thread you've demonstrated that your opinion is simply based on your own thoughts; not research, not discussion, just your gut feelings and angst.
People have gone out of their way to explain to you how the thing you hate may have importance and clarify why it is viewed by many as an interesting development in modern football analytics, yet you stick your fingers in your ears, refusing to even listen let alone be prepared to take on board anybody else's explanations or opinions.
Your opinion is set in stone despite my and others attempts to explain a different perspective, and you call me arrogant?!
Then you start throwing silly insults about.
You're the one who's unable to take it pal.
Anyway, I've been down this road with you before on the very same subject, and here we are, again, so it's obviously a waste of time even replying again.
I'm out!
Robanompivenov
Well-Known Member
Weird lie. ChatGPT literally says this about your literal question....you just wanted to fit woke into one of your responses didn't you?
The application of Expected Goals (xG) in football is one of the most impactful advances in performance analysis and match evaluation in recent years. Here's a breakdown of how xG contributes to the game:
What Is xG?
Expected Goals (xG) is a statistical metric that estimates the probability of a shot resulting in a goal, based on several variables such as:
- Shot location
- Shot type (e.g., header vs. footed shot)
- Angle to goal
- Defensive pressure
- Type of assist
- Match context (e.g., open play, counterattack, set piece)
An xG value ranges between 0 and 1. A shot with an xG of 0.3 has a 30% chance of resulting in a goal based on historical shot data.
Key Benefits of xG
1.
- xG gives a clearer picture of how well a team or player should have performed.
- A team might win 1–0, but if their xG is 0.5 while the opponent’s is 2.3, it suggests the victory may have been lucky.
2.
- Helps assess strikers: are they scoring more or fewer goals than expected?
- Identifies players who consistently generate high-quality chances, even if they’re not scoring yet (which may suggest future improvement).
3.
- Coaches use xG to evaluate attacking and defensive efficiency.
- It shows whether a tactic is generating high-probability chances or just shots for the sake of possession.
4.
- Provides a more nuanced narrative than “team A dominated” just based on possession or shots.
- xG tables and models help fans understand performance trends over a season.
Limitations of xG
1.
- Small sample sizes mean variance and randomness (e.g., wonder goals or errors) can distort match conclusions.
2.
- Team-level xG models might not fully capture defensive pressure, goalkeeper positioning, or player footedness.
- Models vary between providers (Opta, StatsBomb, etc.), so values can differ.
3.
- Football isn’t just about chances—it’s also about game management, set-piece routines, psychology, and momentum. xG is just one lens.
Future Directions and Enhancements
- Post-Shot xG (takes into account shot placement and trajectory).
- xT (Expected Threat) and xA (Expected Assists) for more granular creativity and danger analysis.
- Team-level xG chains to evaluate collective attacking sequences.
Final Verdict
xG is an excellent analytical tool when used in the right context—particularly for team and player evaluation over time. It doesn't replace traditional observation or tactical understanding, but it enhances them with objective insights. Its increasing adoption by top clubs, media, and analysts shows its long-term value in the modern football ecosystem.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 20,344
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
I agree with you about xG stats, but there is no need to be a **** about it
Do you really think Kompany thought he was 100% gonna score when he took that shot cs Leicester? Or do you think he saw it line up, knew we needed a goal and thought “if I get this right it *could* win us the title?”.
Kompany had played football for 15 years at that point, he knows how often a CB puts one in the net from 30 yards out compared to how often it’s tried.
xG is a probabilities model. It’s mapped millions of different shots and whether they went in or not, and with a big enough sample size you can eliminate outliers and individual skill levels and say “on average this shot results in a goal x% of the time”.
That’s all it is.
I would imagine when the coaches were with Sterling they were showing him an xG map.
Most xG models have the chances of scoring 1 yard inside the 6 yard box nearly 3x more likely than 1 yard outside, so you can use the model to motivate a player to run harder to get those 2 extra yards closer and get 3x as many goals. They aren’t going to see the big difference in probabilities from just watching old tape.
It’s hard to take offence when he’s so clearly making it up, as shown by the post from ChatGPT above.
Quote from the ChatGPT regarding the use of xG:
"It doesn't replace traditional observation or tactical understanding"
And why is that? Genuine question. Why is it not better than just watching and understanding the game?
Last edited:
What a genius idea. Try to encourage the attacking player to get closer to the ball before he kicks it. This is the level of stupidity we have reached.
Any experienced fan can see who's playing better.
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 12,843
Maybe you need to follow the trail to see the context. I never said Pep is ignoring the analysts, I said Pep ignores the XG number, he’ll fucking know he’s missed 3 one on ones 8 he’ll want the video analyst to show him.
The video & coaches told Sterling where he needed to be not the number. The number isn’t helpful, it could be a lead indicator for the analyst but at the end of the day it could be called missed chances & if you want to trawl further back you’ll see I question a team XG that doesn’t distinguish between Foden & Walker in the same shooting position.
So for the record, I like analytics but I find wanky names.
Look in the mirror, you dozy bollockbrain.
This.
It's basically changed how teams play football, so it's clearly not bollocks. Teams use it as part of their analytics when deciding on who to sign etc, so tell them that it's bollocks.
People do misunderstand and misuse the stat though, which can make it a little pointless at times. It's best looked at as a way of looking at past behaviour to predict future outcomes.
A right gaggle of thickos among the likes, too.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,437
Yeah you’re still showing you’ve no fucking clue what xG is about and how it’s used you fucking dinosaur.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,437
You’ve just made that up, weirdo.
I know exactly what xG is about. It uses subjective data and presents it as hard objective scientific fact. It's about as credible as Scientology and anyone who rates it is as thick as a brick.
I know exactly what xG is about. It uses subjective data and presents it as hard objective scientific fact. It's about as credible as Scientology and anyone who rates it is as thick as a brick
xG is just made up you thick prick.