Brentford vs Aston Villa pre match ramblings

[Monty]

xG isn't *total* bollocks, but it's almost always used wrongly, especially by great trembling boxes of oat milk like Tifo.

[Clampy]

Any mention of xg in future should result in an instant ban and a ruddy good punch on the bottom.

[pauliewalnuts]

But no worries, just something else for Emery to tick off his list. I can see Frank and Emery getting on quite well off the pitch. Nerdy Emery will help Frank with his scouting homework while hip dude Frank will introduce Unai to Swedish 21 year olds.

"Unai, have you ever combined drugsh and fucking?"

[Brend'Watkins]

xG isn't *total* bollocks, but it's almost always used wrongly, especially by great trembling boxes of oat milk like Tifo.

Fair enough, 95% bollocks then. How can we have the xG of 2... something goals when we've scored 3 hit the woodwork twice, had shots saved and blocked and.....fuck it, it's 100% bollocks.

[Monty]

It's bollocks for teams yeah. I read that the big idea was to measure how good strikers are at finishing individually, and that it just can't really be applied to teams.

[Brazilian Villain]

He also looks like "I know the face, but I can't recall his name" actor, Mark Benton.

Nah, Mark Benton is likeable (especially in Early Doors) but I'd never tire of punching Joe Devine's mush even though I only watched the first 15 seconds.

[German James]

Joe Devine almost makes Ricky fucking Gervais seem bearable.

[Brend'Watkins]

It's bollocks for teams yeah. I read that the big idea was to measure how good strikers are at finishing individually, and that it just can't really be applied to teams.

That would make more sense if it's just for strikers.  What do they do when the likes of Man City are without Haaland and don't have an out and out striker?

[Risso]

It's bollocks for teams yeah. I read that the big idea was to measure how good strikers are at finishing individually, and that it just can't really be applied to teams.

That would make more sense if it's just for strikers.  What do they do when the likes of Man City are without Haaland and don't have an out and out striker?

It changes to xTT (expected tippy tappy).

[Bad English]

xG isn't *total* bollocks, but it's almost always used wrongly, especially by great trembling boxes of oat milk like Tifo.

Oat so simple.

[Baldy]

Football is played on grass with goalposts. Not on a keyboard with monitor!!

Xg is a load of artificial crap.

VAR is trying to get rid of a referee on the pitch and Xg is replacing the players. In the future we won't need football grounds we can just sit at home and and a computer will calculate who has won, lost and drawn.

Artificial football is very artificial!!

[DennisHodgetts]

It matters not what the XG says. Only one stat matters and that is points, and Villa are surprisingly good at amassing those stats at the moment, and long may it continue.

[pauliewalnuts]

Football is played on grass with goalposts. Not on a keyboard with monitor!!

Don't let Emery hear you say that, he uses keyboards and screens very much in his work, it plays a massive role in his team management by all accounts.

[paul_e]

xG is neither bullshit, artificial or perfect and no one is trying to use it to replace the players (which is a particularly bizarre comment). It's data, nothing more and nothing less.

An important thing about data is that it's always there, it exists whether you like it or not, it just needs to be collected and analysed to see if it can be useful. Useless data generally stops being collected and certainly doesn't evolve into a multi-million pound industry that major clubs across the world rely on.

The other thing about data is that it's value relies on the quality of the analyst(s) using it and very few people who work in the press or who have football podcasts have ever properly worked with football data to create real world benefits, unlike the people in the clubs who actually understand it and how it can be used.

There's a comment about hitting the post counting more for xG and, without wanting to be twat or belittle anyone, that's exactly the sort of thing that shows how poorly understood xG really is.

Every single shot has a chance to be scored but clearly a wild swing from 40 yards is less likely to be than a tap in to an open goal inside the 6 yard box. All xG is really doing is using historical data to say how likely (between 0 and 1) each shot is to result in a goal. The value doesn't change if a goal is scored, if it hits the corner flag or if the goalkeeper pulls off the greatest save of all time.


It doesn't even care who the ball is falling to, so a shot by Haaland gets exactly the same score as a shot by a 17 year old centre half on his debut, all things being equal, but clearly Haaland is more likely to score.

Looking at an individual chance is ok, mostly in a bumping the confidence of someone who thinks he's missed a sitter aspect.
Looking at the average score for chances is very useful (the higher the better because it means you creating high quality chances).
Looking at an individual players score over a season is useful for tracking confidence and efficiency, it can also highlight areas where they do well and others where they could do with more training/practice.

Looking at the total score for the team over the season is of little value.
Looking at the total score for the team in a specific match is of even less value.
Using either of those to claim a team has over or under-achieved is utterly pointless.

However with that I'm going to try to stop talking about it because there are clearly people who aren't interested and we have bene babbling on for most of the week at this point.

[LeeB]

It's just a measurement. The only problem with it is how it's used.