Aston Villa 0 Watford 1 Post Match Thread

[Steve67]

My question is, has anyone worked out a statistic for expected VAR decisions in a sides favour? Ours would be non existent.

I dunno but apparently Manchester United are top of the table.

[LeonW]

Expected Goals is just a load of bollocks.

I doubt clubs and coaches would invest so much time and money into it if it was. Just because you don't understand it (and nor do I), that doesn't automatically make it bollocks.

We invested time and money in Ross McCormack.

We certainly didn’t do our homework on him that’s for sure. But then again, the side who are obsessed with standardising football to a fine art didn’t think to check up on their £100m investment prior to buying him.

[LeonW]

My question is, has anyone worked out a statistic for expected VAR decisions in a sides favour? Ours would be non existent.

I dunno but apparently Manchester United are top of the table.

They and Liverpool would definitely be up there. Someone else made the point that if that was Mo Salah in a scouse red shirt rather than Ings in a villa shirt he would have got a penalty at the weekend. 100% agree. Contrast how VAR tried any means possible to disallow Ings goal in the cup game against the Manchester Reds Vs how it was desperate to cancel out Watkins goal for offside at Newcastle.

[Smithy]

Expected Goals is just a load of bollocks.

I doubt clubs and coaches would invest so much time and money into it if it was. Just because you don't understand it (and nor do I), that doesn't automatically make it bollocks.

We invested time and money in Ross McCormack.

We certainly didn’t do our homework on him that’s for sure. But then again, the side who are obsessed with standardising football to a fine art didn’t think to check up on their £100m investment prior to buying him.

Not specifically McCormack related (though it does get there eventually, I promise), but rather something that made me think of him very recently.  Ben Foster has a podcast, it's pretty good (the episode with Neil Cutler is very good).  But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Anyway, I only mention it because it reminded me of the McCormack transfer, in that Fulham signed him on a five-year contract, and sold him to us after two years for pretty much what they paid for him (a small profit), and they did that after he scored over 40 goals for them in those two seasons.  CLEARLY they knew something we didn't, and it makes me think just how bad our risk assessments must have been back then.

[LeonW]

Expected Goals is just a load of bollocks.

I doubt clubs and coaches would invest so much time and money into it if it was. Just because you don't understand it (and nor do I), that doesn't automatically make it bollocks.

We invested time and money in Ross McCormack.

We certainly didn’t do our homework on him that’s for sure. But then again, the side who are obsessed with standardising football to a fine art didn’t think to check up on their £100m investment prior to buying him.

Not specifically McCormack related (though it does get there eventually, I promise), but rather something that made me think of him very recently.  Ben Foster has a podcast, it's pretty good (the episode with Neil Cutler is very good).  But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Anyway, I only mention it because it reminded me of the McCormack transfer, in that Fulham signed him on a five-year contract, and sold him to us after two years for pretty much what they paid for him (a small profit), and they did that after he scored over 40 goals for them in those two seasons.  CLEARLY they knew something we didn't, and it makes me think just how bad our risk assessments must have been back then.

Yeah that always didn’t add up that they were happy to sell to a rival. It was probably the same team that did a risk assessment on Micah Richards; the Benson & Hedges method.

[Brazilian Villain]

But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Possibly Emmanuel Petit.

[brontebilly]

Expected Goals is just a load of bollocks.

I doubt clubs and coaches would invest so much time and money into it if it was. Just because you don't understand it (and nor do I), that doesn't automatically make it bollocks.

We invested time and money in Ross McCormack.

We certainly didn’t do our homework on him that’s for sure. But then again, the side who are obsessed with standardising football to a fine art didn’t think to check up on their £100m investment prior to buying him.

Not specifically McCormack related (though it does get there eventually, I promise), but rather something that made me think of him very recently.  Ben Foster has a podcast, it's pretty good (the episode with Neil Cutler is very good).  But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Anyway, I only mention it because it reminded me of the McCormack transfer, in that Fulham signed him on a five-year contract, and sold him to us after two years for pretty much what they paid for him (a small profit), and they did that after he scored over 40 goals for them in those two seasons.  CLEARLY they knew something we didn't, and it makes me think just how bad our risk assessments must have been back then.

McCormack showing up to his shirt stretching announcement at least a stone overweight kind of set the alarm bells ringing.

[LeonW]

Expected Goals is just a load of bollocks.

I doubt clubs and coaches would invest so much time and money into it if it was. Just because you don't understand it (and nor do I), that doesn't automatically make it bollocks.

We invested time and money in Ross McCormack.

We certainly didn’t do our homework on him that’s for sure. But then again, the side who are obsessed with standardising football to a fine art didn’t think to check up on their £100m investment prior to buying him.

Not specifically McCormack related (though it does get there eventually, I promise), but rather something that made me think of him very recently.  Ben Foster has a podcast, it's pretty good (the episode with Neil Cutler is very good).  But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Anyway, I only mention it because it reminded me of the McCormack transfer, in that Fulham signed him on a five-year contract, and sold him to us after two years for pretty much what they paid for him (a small profit), and they did that after he scored over 40 goals for them in those two seasons.  CLEARLY they knew something we didn't, and it makes me think just how bad our risk assessments must have been back then.

McCormack showing up to his shirt stretching announcement at least a stone overweight kind of set the alarm bells ringing.

It was a sign that the Dr Tony revolution was in full swig.

[eamonn]

But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Possibly Emmanuel Petit.

I was thinking Santi Cazorla.

[alanclare]

Expected Goals is just a load of bollocks.

I doubt clubs and coaches would invest so much time and money into it if it was. Just because you don't understand it (and nor do I), that doesn't automatically make it bollocks.

We invested time and money in Ross McCormack.

We certainly didn’t do our homework on him that’s for sure. But then again, the side who are obsessed with standardising football to a fine art didn’t think to check up on their £100m investment prior to buying him.

Not specifically McCormack related (though it does get there eventually, I promise), but rather something that made me think of him very recently.  Ben Foster has a podcast, it's pretty good (the episode with Neil Cutler is very good).  But on one episode they were talking about medicals, and he had the old Arsenal physio in talking about them, and basically, they were saying the idea that players "fail" or "pass" medicals is a misnomer.  It's all about risk. The medical professionals go to the commercial side and say, we've found X, Y or Z (or not as the case may be), and the commercial/playing side decide if it's worth the risk based on that information.  He gave a very specific example (without naming the player), of Arsenal spending a few million on a midfielder, back when this was quite a lot, giving him a 5-year contract, despite the medical staff saying "his knees will be done in four years, tops". Wenger said "thanks for that information, but this is what we're doing".  They sold this player after two years, despite him being a regular first-team player, and popular with the fans.  His career petered out quickly and he was done playing two years after that.

Anyway, I only mention it because it reminded me of the McCormack transfer, in that Fulham signed him on a five-year contract, and sold him to us after two years for pretty much what they paid for him (a small profit), and they did that after he scored over 40 goals for them in those two seasons.  CLEARLY they knew something we didn't, and it makes me think just how bad our risk assessments must have been back then.

McCormack showing up to his shirt stretching announcement at least a stone overweight kind of set the alarm bells ringing.

It was a sign that the Dr Tony revolution was in full swig.

I’ve just read this thread - and it’s a load if bollocks.

[Mister E]

My question is, has anyone worked out a statistic for expected VAR decisions in a sides favour? Ours would be non existent.

I dunno but apparently Manchester United are top of the table.

They and Liverpool would definitely be up there. Someone else made the point that if that was Mo Salah in a scouse red shirt rather than Ings in a villa shirt he would have got a penalty at the weekend. 100% agree. Contrast how VAR tried any means possible to disallow Ings goal in the cup game against the Manchester Reds Vs how it was desperate to cancel out Watkins goal for offside at Newcastle.

Didn't Kane win one very similar off Cash at VP last season? Actually Kane's was more simulated than anything Ings did last weekend.