Statistical Domination

[Midlands Yellow 3,986]

15 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Don't leave me in suspense! Did you find something remotely interesting? Are you an xG convert now?

Learn to know how to take a compliment, the crowd demand more on this topic. 

[shefcanary 2,409]

18 minutes ago, Barham Blitz said:

Or are we just not seeing his runs early enough and getting the ball to him as accurately and quickly (or even at all !) as used to be the case ?

I was thinking along these lines too - until Monday, where he had plenty of chances but then screwed up big time.

Opposition (it was "only" Rovrum) have him sussed, lack of confidence (potentially spreading like a disease across our strikers), or age catching up with him? I'd prefer the middle one, but think it is a combination of the first and last.

[canarydan23 4,060]

20 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I was thinking along these lines too - until Monday, where he had plenty of chances but then screwed up big time.

Opposition (it was "only" Rovrum) have him sussed, lack of confidence (potentially spreading like a disease across our strikers), or age catching up with him? I'd prefer the middle one, but think it is a combination of the first and last.

If the rumours are true about Sheff Utd, I ****ing hope it's the last! I love Pukki, definitely in the running for my favourite ever player, but if he joins then I hope he never scores another goal!

[Robert N. LiM 4,360]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Interesting (but not that surprising!).

surely it's the lack of decline this season (contrary to most people's eye test) that's the interesting and surprising bit (though @repman's comment about his lower-value chances being illustrative of a decline is well-made)?

I thought that was a perfect example of how xG stats can illuminate a discussion: it really made me question my assumptions about Pukki this season. (Obviously it's up to individuals to make up their own mind on what they find interesting.)

Edited April 12, 2023 by Robert N. LiM

[king canary 7,607]

1 minute ago, Robert N. LiM said:

surely it's the lack of decline this season (contrary to most people's eye test) that's the interesting and surprising bit (though @repman's comment about his lower-value chances being illustrative of a decline is well-made)?

I thought that was a perfect example of how xG stats can illuminate a discussion: it really made me question my assumptions about Pukki this season. (Obviously it's up to individuals to make up their own mind on what they find interesting.)

As mentioned before it is just an indicator though. You have to combine that stat with the 'eye test' so to speak.

Is it just that the team isn't creating chances for Pukki? Or is it that he's not getting into the positions he needs to be? Or is his decision making slowing down? Has his burst of short yardage pace dropped off, meaning he can't get away from defenders to make his half chances something better?

Take the big moment for him v Rotherham- Sara plays a perfect ball over the top, Pukki gets on it but dithers, gets tackled before a shot can happen, doesn't show up on XG.

I think it is both true the team aren't supplying him how they were before, understandable when we lost Emi and Todd's form dropped off a cliff, but also that he isn't making the most of his opportunities as he was before. There was another moment v Rotherham where he got the ball around the penalty spot, back to goal and Marquinos in acres of space next to him. Instead of shifting the ball out wide he shot on the turn while having a defender right next to him who easily blocked it. I think peak Pukki would have had the awareness to move it out wide and either create a shot for Marquinos or put him in a position to create a better chance for Pukki. 

[Robert N. LiM 4,360]

27 minutes ago, king canary said:

As mentioned before it is just an indicator though. You have to combine that stat with the 'eye test' so to speak.

Is it just that the team isn't creating chances for Pukki? Or is it that he's not getting into the positions he needs to be? Or is his decision making slowing down? Has his burst of short yardage pace dropped off, meaning he can't get away from defenders to make his half chances something better?

Take the big moment for him v Rotherham- Sara plays a perfect ball over the top, Pukki gets on it but dithers, gets tackled before a shot can happen, doesn't show up on XG.

I think it is both true the team aren't supplying him how they were before, understandable when we lost Emi and Todd's form dropped off a cliff, but also that he isn't making the most of his opportunities as he was before. There was another moment v Rotherham where he got the ball around the penalty spot, back to goal and Marquinos in acres of space next to him. Instead of shifting the ball out wide he shot on the turn while having a defender right next to him who easily blocked it. I think peak Pukki would have had the awareness to move it out wide and either create a shot for Marquinos or put him in a position to create a better chance for Pukki. 

Yes, agree entirely (and didn't mean to suggest otherwise). You definitely have to interpret xG stats, which is personally exactly why I find them interesting. As long as people don't overplay them and suggest that they're gospel truth or that they're worth more than an informed 'eye test' view, then I think they can prompt and inform a very interesting discussion, of which there is a lot on this thread. In my humble opinion, of course.

[repman 635]

49 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

surely it's the lack of decline this season (contrary to most people's eye test) that's the interesting and surprising bit (though @repman's comment about his lower-value chances being illustrative of a decline is well-made)?

I thought that was a perfect example of how xG stats can illuminate a discussion: it really made me question my assumptions about Pukki this season. (Obviously it's up to individuals to make up their own mind on what they find interesting.)

I think it's probably the case that both things can be true. Pukki has declined a bit, he's 33 which is well beyond what you'd consider his prime age years. But it's also the case that we are not creating the chances in a similar manner to his 2 previous championship seasons. 

 

[canarybubbles 1,915]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Take the big moment for him v Rotherham- Sara plays a perfect ball over the top, Pukki gets on it but dithers, gets tackled before a shot can happen, doesn't show up on XG.

I think it is both true the team aren't supplying him how they were before, understandable when we lost Emi and Todd's form dropped off a cliff, but also that he isn't making the most of his opportunities as he was before. There was another moment v Rotherham where he got the ball around the penalty spot, back to goal and Marquinos in acres of space next to him. Instead of shifting the ball out wide he shot on the turn while having a defender right next to him who easily blocked it. I think peak Pukki would have had the awareness to move it out wide and either create a shot for Marquinos or put him in a position to create a better chance for Pukki. 

I assume you are talking about the moment when he broke free and had quite a bit of space between him and the defenders. First, I'd like to point out how fantastically well he brought that ball down. But then, as you said, he dithered just for a split second, and the defender had caught up with him. I don't think the confident Pukki of two years ago would have dithered that way.

I agree that he has become a bit more selfish lately and is snatching at shots he normally wouldn't snatch at - I just think his confidence is low and he is desperate for a goal.

[Barham Blitz 653]

5 hours ago, shefcanary said:

I was thinking along these lines too - until Monday, where he had plenty of chances but then screwed up big time.

Opposition (it was "only" Rovrum) have him sussed, lack of confidence (potentially spreading like a disease across our strikers), or age catching up with him? I'd prefer the middle one, but think it is a combination of the first and last.

I haven't seen any of the Rotherham game but I don't doubt what you say.  He has seemed a little leggy for a few months now.  But there is definitely a difference for a striker when he expects or even knows a pass is coming his way if he makes a run, and when he makes a run more in hope than expectation as has been the case for much of the last season and a half ...

I hope he gets a few between now and the end of the season though to sign off in the style we've grown accustomed to over the rest of his City career.

[king canary 7,607]

15 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Yes, agree entirely (and didn't mean to suggest otherwise). You definitely have to interpret xG stats, which is personally exactly why I find them interesting. As long as people don't overplay them and suggest that they're gospel truth or that they're worth more than an informed 'eye test' view, then I think they can prompt and inform a very interesting discussion, of which there is a lot on this thread. In my humble opinion, of course.

Yeah I misread your post initally, apologies!

Totally agree with your view of stats. Too many people want them to be something they aren't. 

[king canary 7,607]

14 hours ago, canarybubbles said:

I assume you are talking about the moment when he broke free and had quite a bit of space between him and the defenders. First, I'd like to point out how fantastically well he brought that ball down. But then, as you said, he dithered just for a split second, and the defender had caught up with him. I don't think the confident Pukki of two years ago would have dithered that way.

I agree that he has become a bit more selfish lately and is snatching at shots he normally wouldn't snatch at - I just think his confidence is low and he is desperate for a goal.

I agree he's clearly a bit desperate for a goal right now. I wonder if his confidence is fading though because he recognises some of his physical abilities have faded too.

We're in an odd position with Pukki. Even with everything I've said above I still think he's our best striker. However his skills demand we play a very particular way and I don't think he's good enough to justify building our whole style of play around him anymore.

Also, with 5 games left and a chance at top 6, it doesn't make sense to play someone low on confidence, snatching at chances and who limits the way the rest of the team play, especially when we know he won't be here next season. 

[hogesar 9,676]

16 minutes ago, king canary said:

I agree he's clearly a bit desperate for a goal right now. I wonder if his confidence is fading though because he recognises some of his physical abilities have faded too.

We're in an odd position with Pukki. Even with everything I've said above I still think he's our best striker. However his skills demand we play a very particular way and I don't think he's good enough to justify building our whole style of play around him anymore.

Also, with 5 games left and a chance at top 6, it doesn't make sense to play someone low on confidence, snatching at chances and who limits the way the rest of the team play, especially when we know he won't be here next season. 

Apparently Nunez is potentially back, and Rowe. I would much rather see Nunez behind Sargent or as part of a midfield three, and he's blown hot and cold. No slight on Pukki, he'll score goals somewhere else I'm sure but until Dowell's back I don't think we'll see the best of him (I thought Pukki and him linked up really well under early Wagner)

[king canary 7,607]

Just now, hogesar said:

Apparently Nunez is potentially back, and Rowe. I would much rather see Nunez behind Sargent or as part of a midfield three, and he's blown hot and cold. No slight on Pukki, he'll score goals somewhere else I'm sure but until Dowell's back I don't think we'll see the best of him (I thought Pukki and him linked up really well under early Wagner)

I wonder if it isn't just 'give him a number 10 to play through balls' but if he needs more than one player like that.

When he's been at his best he's had two or three players all getting forward, interchanging around him, creating space and playing short quick passes. It worked brilliantly when you had Cantwell and Buendia coming narrow, Aarons overlapping and even Vrancic and McLean pushing up from deeper positions, all on the same wavelength. That is hugely difficult to achieve. With everyone fit there is an argument playing Dowell, Nunez and Sara all together with overlaps from Dimi and Aarons could recreate it but I'm not sure. 

[hogesar 9,676]

6 minutes ago, king canary said:

I wonder if it isn't just 'give him a number 10 to play through balls' but if he needs more than one player like that.

When he's been at his best he's had two or three players all getting forward, interchanging around him, creating space and playing short quick passes. It worked brilliantly when you had Cantwell and Buendia coming narrow, Aarons overlapping and even Vrancic and McLean pushing up from deeper positions, all on the same wavelength. That is hugely difficult to achieve. With everyone fit there is an argument playing Dowell, Nunez and Sara all together with overlaps from Dimi and Aarons could recreate it but I'm not sure. 

Well you're probably right - You can play a number 10 but a singular number 10 at this level can be quite easily marked out of a game in a busy midfield. You either have to be exceptional (Buendia) or have other players create space for you, and probably not from a natural 10 position but drifting in when the space exists (Cantwell). 

Dowell on the right of a front 3 behind Pukki looked good against the likes of Preston away. They linked up well and whilst Pukki didn't score lots he got a couple assists and was far more useful in play.

[shefcanary 2,409]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

I wonder if it isn't just 'give him a number 10 to play through balls' but if he needs more than one player like that.

When he's been at his best he's had two or three players all getting forward, interchanging around him, creating space and playing short quick passes. It worked brilliantly when you had Cantwell and Buendia coming narrow, Aarons overlapping and even Vrancic and McLean pushing up from deeper positions, all on the same wavelength. That is hugely difficult to achieve. With everyone fit there is an argument playing Dowell, Nunez and Sara all together with overlaps from Dimi and Aarons could recreate it but I'm not sure. 

I enjoy reading Ben Lee's tactical analysis. The focus he implies we put on the five vertical spaces is I feel a little restricting. Under Farke, you saw our forward players forever revolving in fluid motion across the edge of the penalty area, bamboozling the opposition. We haven't seen that kind of fluidity for a long time and Pukki is suffering from the lack of time and space this gave him, as well as the lack of supply from the back. It's reflected in his Xg score being much reduced (heresy to bring that up I know). Sargent and Idah are not fluid forwards, they're target men.

Wagner if he plays Pukki has to leave Idah and Sargent on the bench and play more mobile players up there. Rowe and Nunez may provide a way out for him. Otherwise focus on one of Idah or Sargent up front with Pukki benched but to come on late in the game to exploit tiring defences.

[hogesar 9,676]

11 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I enjoy reading Ben Lee's tactical analysis. The focus he implies we put on the five vertical spaces is I feel a little restricting. Under Farke, you saw our forward players forever revolving in fluid motion across the edge of the penalty area, bamboozling the opposition. We haven't seen that kind of fluidity for a long time and Pukki is suffering from the lack of time and space this gave him, as well as the lack of supply from the back. It's reflected in his Xg score being much reduced (heresy to bring that up I know). Sargent and Idah are not fluid forwards, they're target men.

Wagner if he plays Pukki has to leave Idah and Sargent on the bench and play more mobile players up there. Rowe and Nunez may provide a way out for him. Otherwise focus on one of Idah or Sargent up front with Pukki benched but to come on late in the game to exploit tiring defences.

Because we don't have enough players capable of doing that anymore. It's not Onel's game, it's definitely not Idah's game. It certainly used to be Pukki, Buendia, Cantwell and Dowells game.

[Jim Smith 2,319]

21 hours ago, repman said:

I think the point about comparing us and Brentford going into last season is more that their greater xG numbers suggested they may perform better against stronger competition, definitely in a defensive sense.

I think West Brom will possibly be better next year but their xG has certainly been inflated by the fact they haven't been leading in so many games. This was certainly true earlier in the season I'm not sure now but I'd imagine its similar. Their keeper was the worst performer in the league in terms of xG to goals conceded, that meant they were playing many games having given the opposition a 1-0 headstart. That's always going to lead to them creating more chances and the opposition creating less.

People look season by season because that's what matters in sport, if you can look at your xG and say oh well we were a bit unlucky maybe that's going to give you more hope for next year, which is what every fan wants. xG is not a perfect predictor, it has an r of about 0.7 I believe which is better than anything else such as shots or possession. 

West Brom are a better side than their league position has suggested all season save in respect of their finishing. Every time I see them play they miss loads of chances and don’t win games they really should be winning.

The point for me with them and the Xg is that it suggests that they only need a tweak at both ends to become real contenders. One more reliable new striker in reality and perhaps a better goalkeeper. 
 

As has been mentioned the Xg stars for us and Brentford when we went up hinted at what was to come because our stats reflected our defences/midfields tendency to give the ball away or not mark very well and thus present the opposition with easy chances in almost every game (it’s just they missed mostly). Attacking wise they would have hinted at us doing better but then they would not have accounted for selling Buendia and I suspect our Xg in games without him in that promotion season was way lower. 

 

[sonyc 5,520]

49 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Wagner if he plays Pukki has to leave Idah and Sargent on the bench and play more mobile players up there. Rowe and Nunez may provide a way out for him. Otherwise focus on one of Idah or Sargent up front with Pukki benched but to come on late in the game to exploit tiring defences.

An interesting point there. I actually felt that we had uncovered a new striker in Nunez when he was played more upfront. He looked to have quite an instinct for being in the right place. I was excited to see what might happen with the movement of Nunez alongside Pukki. But it was not repeated (was it Wagner swapping stuff around again or injury?).

Anyway, the points made about fluidity of movement up front is bang on for me. It's why we have dominated many games and yet struggled as we get to the final third. In our promotion seasons we had so many options.

In the Burnley team now you can see it. They pen the opposition in (it's the Man City Pep Guardiola influence on Company) and just break teams down. Their front players are always moving. It CAN be coached. 

I would like to see how Rowe and Nunez might take on these roles next year. With Gibbs, Sara too, there is quite some potential there.

[canarybubbles 1,915]

1 hour ago, sonyc said:

An interesting point there. I actually felt that we had uncovered a new striker in Nunez when he was played more upfront. He looked to have quite an instinct for being in the right place. I was excited to see what might happen with the movement of Nunez alongside Pukki. But it was not repeated (was it Wagner swapping stuff around again or injury?).

Anyway, the points made about fluidity of movement up front is bang on for me. It's why we have dominated many games and yet struggled as we get to the final third. In our promotion seasons we had so many options.

In the Burnley team now you can see it. They pen the opposition in (it's the Man City Pep Guardiola influence on Company) and just break teams down. Their front players are always moving. It CAN be coached. 

I would like to see how Rowe and Nunez might take on these roles next year. With Gibbs, Sara too, there is quite some potential there.

I've liked what you said, but my caveat would be that I'm not sure Sargent and Idah have the skills necessary for this kind of fluidity up front. It requires not only movement, but also technical ball skills and quick thinking.

Edited April 13, 2023 by canarybubbles

[repman 635]

3 hours ago, king canary said:

I wonder if it isn't just 'give him a number 10 to play through balls' but if he needs more than one player like that.

When he's been at his best he's had two or three players all getting forward, interchanging around him, creating space and playing short quick passes. It worked brilliantly when you had Cantwell and Buendia coming narrow, Aarons overlapping and even Vrancic and McLean pushing up from deeper positions, all on the same wavelength. That is hugely difficult to achieve. With everyone fit there is an argument playing Dowell, Nunez and Sara all together with overlaps from Dimi and Aarons could recreate it but I'm not sure. 

I think the problem is that we haven't had any of those types in the side. Of the 3 behind Pukki against Rotherham, both Onel and Marquinhos are wide players who would rather receive on the touchline instead of a pocket of space inside. There was one moment in the 2nd half when Onel came inside and received a pass on the half turn from Sorensen (I think) and we attacked quickly from there, that's something we haven't seen much of at all this year. Sargent (and Idah) is a pretty classic striker when the ball is played into feet, doesn't ever receive on the back foot as he's so used to having a defender on his back. Even when he is in that no10 position with space he still plays as if he is a striker holding up the ball.

Dowell and Nunez are the obvious candidates to do this, Sara looks so settled in his current role I'd keep him to it. I think we saw at Blackburn that Gibbs could probably do it, but he is also capable of being the player passing it into these dangerous areas, that skill from deep is more sought after right now for us, particularly with Kenny injured.

[sonyc 5,520]

16 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

I've liked what you said, but my caveat would be that I'm not sure Sargent and Idah have the skills necessary for this kind of fluidity up front. It requires not only movement, but also technical ball skills and quick thinking.

Yes, and thanks. I must own up here that I had not mentioned them - quite intentionally. I totally agree that those two are different types of striker....still hopeful Adam comes good and he really kicks on. But can't help my doubts . Same with Sarge. My comment therefore was really about thinking of different kinds of attack.  I remain unconvinced that Idah / Sargent are what we need post-Teemu. I like both players but somehow feel they might suit a different kind of play. Who knows.

It was interesting to see Nunez further up. I really hope we see it again.

[king canary 7,607]

34 minutes ago, repman said:

I think the problem is that we haven't had any of those types in the side. Of the 3 behind Pukki against Rotherham, both Onel and Marquinhos are wide players who would rather receive on the touchline instead of a pocket of space inside. There was one moment in the 2nd half when Onel came inside and received a pass on the half turn from Sorensen (I think) and we attacked quickly from there, that's something we haven't seen much of at all this year. Sargent (and Idah) is a pretty classic striker when the ball is played into feet, doesn't ever receive on the back foot as he's so used to having a defender on his back. Even when he is in that no10 position with space he still plays as if he is a striker holding up the ball.

Dowell and Nunez are the obvious candidates to do this, Sara looks so settled in his current role I'd keep him to it. I think we saw at Blackburn that Gibbs could probably do it, but he is also capable of being the player passing it into these dangerous areas, that skill from deep is more sought after right now for us, particularly with Kenny injured.

I partly agree but even if games where we've had Nunez in there we haven't seen that kind of link up between him and Pukki as I think one player can be marked out of the game quite easily as @hogesar says above.

[hogesar 9,676]

 

So uh, I don't really want to watch the highlights again but I'm surprised Ramsey's goal has such a low xG - I believe the cross meant he was in front of the goal with no obstacle or goalkeeper to really worry about.

Ignoring that, the main things to note is Middlesbrough didn't create the amount of chances you'd normally expect in a 5-1 game, an xG of 1.7 shows you just how clinical they were (or us so awful defensively).

Looking back, we have had higher xG's against us but we haven't had the number of good quality chances (0.4 +) against us in the league this season. We certainly miss Hanley / Gibson / Mclean (all or some of them) as part of our defensive setup to at least pressure the opposition into having a slightly less-good chance. 

Also worth noting that all our "good" chances were better chances than the goal we actually scored from. It was quality from Sargent but it does defy belief when he misses much easier opportunities.

I think if you take a step back it was never really a 5-1 game but for the suicidal defending (not just Sorensen, Omo made individual errors and both McCallum and Aarons struggled defensively) - Aarons probably the best of the back 4. I thought Gibbs was also guilty of not positioning himself well enough to make him an option in pressured situations - something I feel Mclean does at this level.

 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,431]

9 minutes ago, hogesar said:

 

So uh, I don't really want to watch the highlights again but I'm surprised Ramsey's goal has such a low xG - I believe the cross meant he was in front of the goal with no obstacle or goalkeeper to really worry about.

Ignoring that, the main things to note is Middlesbrough didn't create the amount of chances you'd normally expect in a 5-1 game, an xG of 1.7 shows you just how clinical they were (or us so awful defensively).

Looking back, we have had higher xG's against us but we haven't had the number of good quality chances (0.4 +) against us in the league this season. We certainly miss Hanley / Gibson / Mclean (all or some of them) as part of our defensive setup to at least pressure the opposition into having a slightly less-good chance. 

Also worth noting that all our "good" chances were better chances than the goal we actually scored from. It was quality from Sargent but it does defy belief when he misses much easier opportunities.

I think if you take a step back it was never really a 5-1 game but for the suicidal defending (not just Sorensen, Omo made individual errors and both McCallum and Aarons struggled defensively) - Aarons probably the best of the back 4. I thought Gibbs was also guilty of not positioning himself well enough to make him an option in pressured situations - something I feel Mclean does at this level.

 

I think at one point Boro had 4 goals from 4 shots? I’d turned off by then , but that was doing the rounds on Twitter ?!

[repman 635]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

 

So uh, I don't really want to watch the highlights again but I'm surprised Ramsey's goal has such a low xG - I believe the cross meant he was in front of the goal with no obstacle or goalkeeper to really worry about.

Ignoring that, the main things to note is Middlesbrough didn't create the amount of chances you'd normally expect in a 5-1 game, an xG of 1.7 shows you just how clinical they were (or us so awful defensively).

Looking back, we have had higher xG's against us but we haven't had the number of good quality chances (0.4 +) against us in the league this season. We certainly miss Hanley / Gibson / Mclean (all or some of them) as part of our defensive setup to at least pressure the opposition into having a slightly less-good chance. 

Also worth noting that all our "good" chances were better chances than the goal we actually scored from. It was quality from Sargent but it does defy belief when he misses much easier opportunities.

I think if you take a step back it was never really a 5-1 game but for the suicidal defending (not just Sorensen, Omo made individual errors and both McCallum and Aarons struggled defensively) - Aarons probably the best of the back 4. I thought Gibbs was also guilty of not positioning himself well enough to make him an option in pressured situations - something I feel Mclean does at this level.

 

The xG for Middlesbrough does seem low overall, particularly the Ramsey goal as you say. On fbref the shot is registered as 0.84xG which feels much closer to what it should be. 

I think the guy who creates those timelines uses his own xG model, and considering he's been doing this for a while now maybe his model is a bit outdated. It might just be a simple model that takes into account shot location but no other factors such as opposition positioning or whether it's a header or a shot on the ground.

Fbref has the overall xG for Boro as 2.7 and us at 0.8.

[hogesar 9,676]

15 minutes ago, repman said:

The xG for Middlesbrough does seem low overall, particularly the Ramsey goal as you say. On fbref the shot is registered as 0.84xG which feels much closer to what it should be. 

I think the guy who creates those timelines uses his own xG model, and considering he's been doing this for a while now maybe his model is a bit outdated. It might just be a simple model that takes into account shot location but no other factors such as opposition positioning or whether it's a header or a shot on the ground.

Fbref has the overall xG for Boro as 2.7 and us at 0.8.

Yes, that feels much closer to the quality of chance. Unfortunately it would be wrong to take fbref data for the purposes of this thread as I was desperate for consistency of source. Either way I think the key bit is they were able to create really good quality chances, albeit they were very clinical with those chances.

1 hour ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

I think at one point Boro had 4 goals from 4 shots? I’d turned off by then , but that was doing the rounds on Twitter ?!

Yes, and then I think it was 5 goals from 6 shots too. Pretty unheard of at Championship level! And more pertinently, a long, long way from where we have been over recent weeks where we've generally been really wasteful.

[Robert N. LiM 4,360]

50 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Unfortunately it would be wrong to take fbref data for the purposes of this thread as I was desperate for consistency of source.

Maybe consider a change in provider for next season's xG thread. A number of people are already looking forward to it 😉

[king canary 7,607]

24 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yes, that feels much closer to the quality of chance. Unfortunately it would be wrong to take fbref data for the purposes of this thread as I was desperate for consistency of source. Either way I think the key bit is they were able to create really good quality chances, albeit they were very clinical with those chances.

Yes, and then I think it was 5 goals from 6 shots too. Pretty unheard of at Championship level! And more pertinently, a long, long way from where we have been over recent weeks where we've generally been really wasteful.

It was an incredibly strange game where each of the goals with the exception of the second stemmed from individual silly errors. 

1. Sorenson goes chasing after the ball, pulls everyone out of position and is absolutely powderpuff in the tackle. Concerning though that Gibbs is the only midfielder who is back in shot by the time the goal goes in. Aarons left totally exposed by Marquinos all game.
2. More of team issue- switching off due to the injury and then just dropping too deep as a collective. Saying that, it is an excellent finish.
3. Sara plays a stupid quick freekick with nobody in position leading to us easily getting pulled apart.
4. McCallum falls on his **** when the ball comes in and Sara pokes it straight to a striker rather than just getting it clear
5. Sorenson plays a poor ball, Sara (again!) flat footed and beaten to the second ball far too easily. 

It really is a concern that Boro scored 5 and not once did they have to pull us apart- we gave them everything.

[hogesar 9,676]

19 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Maybe consider a change in provider for next season's xG thread. A number of people are already looking forward to it 😉

I think the forum would really warm to me starting a pre-game and post-game xG thread on each match day. Dont you think?

[hogesar 9,676]

10 minutes ago, king canary said:

It was an incredibly strange game where each of the goals with the exception of the second stemmed from individual silly errors. 

1. Sorenson goes chasing after the ball, pulls everyone out of position and is absolutely powderpuff in the tackle. Concerning though that Gibbs is the only midfielder who is back in shot by the time the goal goes in. Aarons left totally exposed by Marquinos all game.
2. More of team issue- switching off due to the injury and then just dropping too deep as a collective. Saying that, it is an excellent finish.
3. Sara plays a stupid quick freekick with nobody in position leading to us easily getting pulled apart.
4. McCallum falls on his **** when the ball comes in and Sara pokes it straight to a striker rather than just getting it clear
5. Sorenson plays a poor ball, Sara (again!) flat footed and beaten to the second ball far too easily. 

It really is a concern that Boro scored 5 and not once did they have to pull us apart- we gave them everything.

Yes, good summary.

You have to say, for all the raw attributes Sara has, he has not once looked like playing the "match". I've not seen him adapt for different scenarios and he doesn't seem to have the instinct to do the right things when it needs to be simple. The quick free kick is an obvious one.