Match Thread Everton v Leeds United - Preview, Match Report and MotM Poll

[LeedsW5]

Boring [Poor language removed].

Found your mobile number on the Brentford forum you post on so might sign you up for some questionable websites if you carry on.

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.

Surely a team under-performing their XG is a sign they are not clinical and struggling to score. Finishing is a key part of top flight football and if a team are poor in both boxes, then they will struggle. I'm not sure Fulham and Burnley under-scoring is a sign things are about to turn round for them. It's just telling us what we already probably knew, they lack quality in front of goal.

I've never been a huge fan of XG for various reasons. It can be interesting, but like all stats, the interpretation is as important as the actual stat.

I don't necessarily agree this game will be quite as open as people seem to think. I think it could be pretty close and can see us nicking it 2-1.

So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Boring [Poor language removed].

Found your mobile number on the Brentford forum you post on so might sign you up for some questionable websites if you carry on.

Send it my way lad I love a sexy Yorkshire accent ♡

 

[ToffeeTim]

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.


So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

Some players are good finishers, some players are not. There is obvious reason to it.

Players can have purple patches of course, but Kane is a tremendous finisher, whilst Jesus is not. So Kane will outscore Jesus over the longer term, as he has done consistently, regardless of service or the teams they play in.

You can't downplay finishing. It's literally one of the most important things in football.

I try to not overthink football as much as I can. There are fundamentals that good teams do well and bad teams do badly. You need to be good in both boxes, good on the transition in defence and attack, and be good from set pieces at either end. If you can get those fundamentals right, you will do well. What happens in between the boxes is much less important a lot of the time.

 

[Bungle]

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.


So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

Suspect that's probably why you're communicating with me.

 

[Blues Harp]

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.


So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

How far can you shoot your "xg" then? Not far I'll bet. What a load of useless statistical rubbish.
Mind you, some on here will love your "analysis"
lol

 

[MikeH72]

I am not being patted on the head by supporters of Leeds United, no thank you sir. Not today, not ever.

 

[LeedsW5]

Some players are good finishers, some players are not. There is obvious reason to it.

Players can have purple patches of course, but Kane is a tremendous finisher, whilst Jesus is not. So Kane will outscore Jesus over the longer term, as he has done consistently, regardless of service or the teams they play in.

You can't downplay finishing. It's literally one of the most important things in football.

I try to not overthink football as much as I can. There are fundamentals that good teams do well and bad teams do badly. You need to be good in both boxes, good on the transition in defence and attack, and be good from set pieces at either end. If you can get those fundamentals right, you will do well. What happens in between the boxes is much less important a lot of the time.

It is, no denying that, but there's no consistent performance of finishing by any player. In the last few seasons Salah, Vardy, Firmino, Aguero, Sanchez, Alli, Mane and de Bruyne have all gone from overshooting to undershooting and back again, most with a stop at 'about right' where they hit their xG.

The only player to consistent exceed their xG in the league is Harry Kane, and even he (by far and away the best striker in the league, one of the best in the world) goes from overshooting slightly to overshooting massively.

So in general, a team having a problem with finishing only goes so far as an analysis - and it is usually something that will even itself out over the course of a season.

 

[MikeH72]

How far can you shoot your "xg" then? Not far I'll bet. What a load of useless statistical rubbish.
Mind you, some on here will love your "analysis"
lol

The direct result of being brainwashed by a pseudo-intellectual hipster biff of a manager who’s never touched a trophy in his career.

 

[COYBL25]

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.


So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

I`ve just been messaged by two of our older members, who`ve just woken up from their mid morning nap @Joey66 (91)yrs and @Methuselah (88 yrs)

They have no idea what you`re talking about and they find it very hard to stay awake at the best of times, without having to read all this xG bollocks.

Can you please start posting in plain English for them, otherwise they may never wake up from the next boredom induced coma that you put them into.

Thanks in advance x

 

[toffeepie1878]

It's Everton though so nothing surprises me, we clung to a win against a terrible Fulham so I'm not getting my hopes up. If this Leeds fan is indicative of their fanbase though then I'll take great delight in watching their season fall to pieces.

who is this Leeds fan we speak of, I clearly missed a few posts

but yes, its Everton so a defeat should not surprise any fans but we can mitigate that by leaving Sigs and Mina at home

 

[UptheTofees]

So we are all being taught about football by a Leeds fan in our own forum?

lol

 

[Pootsy]

There is another site that supports their own theories based on stats that they have interpreted themselves. Sounds very similar to this xG thing. Its the Alternative Premier League Table.

 

[Methuselah]

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.


So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

I played for Leeds United Colts in the early 1950's. Raich Carter was manager but I don't remember any of the above crap. Tackling from behind and getting your studs into the area just behind their knee was encouraged.

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

Try it and see where that gets you. If you're getting this riled up from an explanation of xG then you must be about 10.


So finishing is a really statistically interesting part of the game, in that you can't find a rhyme of reason to it. We think of some players 'good finishers', but there's little underlying that. A player like Kane will go from overshooting to undershooting his xG season-to-season. Salah, Firmino and Jesus all undershot their xG last season, while Danny Ings massively overshot his. Bamford has gone from undershooting his xG in the EFL by 9 goals last season to overshooting it by 1.5 in the PL this.

A more sound analysis is that if a team is generating good chances and not finishing them this is either due to a. bad luck, which will right itself long term, b. having a game plan that creates a large aggregate xG but few high-xG chances (e.g. taking loads of pot-shots from 30yards) or having chances funneled towards a player who is unsuited to the gameplan or of significantly lower quality from the rest of the team.

Similarly with teams underpforming their xG conceded, this will usually show poor performance from a keeper (e.g. Matt Ryan is having a stinker at Brighton so far) but will also be a luck element if opponents are finishing low-probability chances. There's also a stylistic element to the game - Leeds defend by having the ball and committing men forward to pen the opponent back. However, when that breaks down with men committed forward it will usually result in concession of a high-xG chance.

Surely, though, if the means of calculating xG involves the probability of them finishing their chances, and historical data is used in that calculation, then all strikers are bound to over/underperform slightly on a rotating basis as more data accumulates? Unless they have a mad purple patch or their form drops off a cliff in a very short space of time.

It's all a bit self-fulfilling.

It's also muck.

 

[royalblue66]

I`ve just been messaged by two of our older members, who`ve just woken up from their mid morning nap @Joey66 (91)yrs and @Methuselah (88 yrs)

They have no idea what you`re talking about and they find it very hard to stay awake at the best of times, without having to read all this xG bollocks.

Can you please start posting in plain English for them, otherwise they may never wake up from the next boredom induced coma that you put them into.

Thanks in advance x

Thank you