PaulC Posted October 4, 2015 Share Posted October 4, 2015 So how many Alexis going to get this year, 25, 30?Has 5 in two games now.That's why I just don't understand why people keep on banging about them signing another striker especially when their defence is always dropping clangers.If Alexis gets 25-30 and Theo and Giroud get 15 each with the likes of Cazorla and Ozil also chipping in how many goals do you need? Liverpool scored near enough 100 goals in 13/14 and still couldn't win the league. You need to be mentally strong aswell which Arsenal lack on occasions although they were bang on today.Yes if they of got Benzema though I think that would have given them the edge in the league and Europe. I'd like to see Gabriel given a good run at the back. I still think they will finish second to man City though but between the two of them as I don't United are good enough and Chelsea have lost too many games already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) Bellerin is a v.v.v.v. good FB Edited October 20, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 Great win for Arsenal. However Olympiakos late goal still makes it very difficult for them to quality imo. If they lose in Munich and Olympiakos beat Zagreb at home that's a 6 point gap with two games left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 Yes but a draw in Munich and win their final two game and that should be enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 Easy peasy....However one positibe is Arsenal are starting to get the knack of winning the big games ....cup final, tonight, defeated both Manchester teams home and away, just needs a home win v Chelsea now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 Yes for me they are the only serious challengers to Man City for the title Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) but wengers too defensively naive to win any of the big games?...Maybe the "knack" of winning the big games was more down to other teams having higher financial investment compared to them . Now they can compete in the market, shock wenger has got the "knack". (not aimed at you villachris, just the general thoughts of arsenal the past few years) Edited October 20, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 but wengers too defensively naive to win any of the big games?...Maybe the "knack" of winning the big games was more down to other teams having higher financial investment compared to them . Now they can compete in the market, shock wenger has got the "knack". (not aimed at you villachris, just the general thoughts of arsenal the past few years) Yes, that is why Monaco ripped them to shreds last year. It wasn't tactical naivety and going gung ho in the dying minutes of the first leg to secure a draw. It was because Monaco's squad had much more financial investment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Yes youre correct. Losing on away goals is a team getting "ripped to shreds". Giroud missing about 213432x chances in the first game. That game was so much down to variance. Monaco godmoding their counters whilst arsenal running very unlucky on their attacks . PerMer making a mistake aswell != tactical naivety from wnger.They sure got ripped to shreds... (xg = expected goals)https://gyazo.com/c0ab79e5ce3866494e5e05d321337e99.pngIf you honestly believe that monaco win that tie more often than arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics, youre crazy Edited October 21, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 fact is Monaco ripped them to shreds 3-1 and exposed them. They were woeful in Zagreb as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Yes youre correct. Losing on away goals is a team getting "ripped to shreds". Giroud missing about 213432x chances in the first game. That game was so much down to variance. Monaco godmoding their counters whilst arsenal running very unlucky on their attacks . PerMer making a mistake aswell != tactical naivety from wnger.They sure got ripped to shreds... (xg = expected goals)https://gyazo.com/c0ab79e5ce3866494e5e05d321337e99.pngIf you honestly believe that monaco win that tie more often than arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics, youre crazy They conceded 3 goals at home, in the champions league. That is called being ripped to shreds.Arsenal at 2-1 down with a full leg to play went all out for a draw, not tried to sneak a draw, not played patiently hoping to nick a draw....They went ALL OUT to get another goal. It was , perhaps, the single most naive and idiotic thing I have ever witnessed at the top level of footballAlso, I don't think modding exists IRL football. Monaco played the game to a tee and exposed what we all know exists at Arsenal since about 2003. Edited October 21, 2015 by rodders0223 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Yes youre correct. Losing on away goals is a team getting "ripped to shreds". Giroud missing about 213432x chances in the first game. That game was so much down to variance. Monaco godmoding their counters whilst arsenal running very unlucky on their attacks . PerMer making a mistake aswell != tactical naivety from wnger.They sure got ripped to shreds... (xg = expected goals)https://gyazo.com/c0ab79e5ce3866494e5e05d321337e99.pngIf you honestly believe that monaco win that tie more often than arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics, youre crazy They conceded 3 goals at home, in the champions league. That is called being ripped to shreds.Arsenal at 2-1 down with a full leg to play went all out for a draw, not tried to sneak a draw, not played patiently hoping to nick a draw....They went ALL OUT to get another goal. It was , perhaps, the single most naive and idiotic thing I have ever witnessed at the top level of footballAlso, I don't think modding exists IRL football. Monaco played the game to a tee and exposed what we all know exists at Arsenal since about 2003. Nothing like short term cherry-picked results orientated thinking to try prove a point. (mostly a reply to zatman comment)- BM lost to Arsenal? Pep is so tactically naive.- Chelsea lost to porto and drew kyiv? Dam that mourinho fella isnt going to win anything as a manager. So naive- Arsenal losing to BM/united/spurs/chelsea (CS, game in the league was false result) sure shows their naivety....oh wait.If you honestly believe wenger/arsenal last 2/3 seasons has been the same as pre-spending era then you either dont watch arsenal very often, or you have selective memory.What you mean modding doesnt exist? Is that a reply to my "godmode" comment?Also, teams are more likely to concede away than home. With monaco having one of the best defensive records in the world at the time and arsenal creating plenty of good goal-scoring opportunities in that first leg, dont think its that outrageous to go for the win/draw. Edited October 21, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Of course they aren't the same as the pre-spending era... they have proven that with two *cough* FA cup wins against Hull and Villa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 What's the formula for them always losing at Stoke gharperr? Even we've won up there twice in the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) What's the formula for them always losing at Stoke gharperr? Even we've won up there twice in the last few years. urmmmm ha. dont know. i guess if theres 19 other teams there will always be some kind of stat like that no matter what team you are (in terms of probability it probably isn't that hard to have an anomaly like that). Havent chelsea got some similar stat with newcastle? I doubt theres some magical thing happening that somehow makes pulis/MH have some supreme tactical advantage over wenger at stoke but somehow lose all this tactical advantage/ability when they go to emirates. I imagine wenger sets up his teams similar home/away against stoke Edited October 21, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 I'm just saying season in season out Arsenal always seem to lose the same type of games....Chelsea Stoke away etc that stop them winning or challenging properly for the league title...it can't always be we were unlucky or the ref was rubbish although Arsenal do have that excuse for Chelsea away this season.They are learning now and getting a few of those winless runs off their backs so with their squad and options they should be seriously challenging City right through to May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) i did try to google it earlier but couldnt find anything. But i always thought Arsenal always had more points or on par with the rest of the top 4 teams against lower opposition (which makes talking about them games semi pointless, e.g. stoke etc) but they would just never win a game against top 4/5. Now with that changing and they can actually compete, they will have a serious title challenge like you said. I do think a lot of people would focus on their losses against lower opposition a lot more compared to the other top 4 losses because of their inability to beat top 4, but dont think we will see the same bashing for it this season(could be wrong with points vs lower opposition compared to other top 4 teams) Edited October 21, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Last couple of seasons they had Flamini or Arteta in the defensive midfield role who have been found wanting in the bigger games, since Coquelin has played there results in these games have improved. Its not the only reason but its a big factor. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 They sure got ripped to shreds... (xg = expected goals)https://gyazo.com/c0ab79e5ce3866494e5e05d321337e99.pngIf you honestly believe that monaco win that tie more often than arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics, youre crazyMaybe they should ditch actual goals and start using 'expected goals' to decide who wins matches. Does it really matter who would win the tie more often? Monaco won it the only time that it mattered.Unless you're going to use the precise same logic to point out why Bayern would have won last night "more often than Arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) They sure got ripped to shreds... (xg = expected goals)https://gyazo.com/c0ab79e5ce3866494e5e05d321337e99.pngIf you honestly believe that monaco win that tie more often than arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics, youre crazy Maybe they should ditch actual goals and start using 'expected goals' to decide who wins matches. Does it really matter who would win the tie more often? Monaco won it the only time that it mattered.Unless you're going to use the precise same logic to point out why Bayern would have won last night "more often than Arsenal with the exact same setup/tactics"... Yes, of course it matters to look at long term when evaluating whether a team is good or bad, it reduces the effects of variables (which is what xg is essentially doing). If youre saying tactics/formation/team selection is good because you won the game, and its bad because you lost the game, then that line of thinking is incredibly flawed when it comes to analysing the game (e.g. monaco won the only time it mattered therefore wenger is naive/st00pid because he played high line/attacking) and predicting future results.Ill give ultra extreme example to help show the point: if aston villa played BM, and we played 11 strikers, BM had 1000 shots but hit the post everytime from 2 yards out, in the 90th minute, AV break, with BM only having 2 people at the back, our striker shoots our only shot of the game from 40yards, somehow scores and we win the game. Did Tim Sherwood get tactics right? and is Pep defensively naive because he only had two people at the back which didnt stop the shot and they lost 1-0? By your line of thinking "monaco won it the only time it mattered", then the answers to these questions would be yes. TS is a tactical genius and pep sucks. But i know you can see how flawed this is, of course pep didnt get it wrong, of course sherwood got it wrong (he could have set up the team which led to BM not dominating so much which means BM win less over the long run etc etc). BM expected goals would probably 700+, and AV expected goals would be 0.000001. The system pep used would dominate the system TS used way more often but the short term one game result of this 1 game doesnt show that so we try to use tools to get the real picture of the game.One way to get the "long term real picture" of the game is to use expected goals (and its pretty legit). You can do a quick google to learn about exactly what expected goals is. (the google will explain better than i)And yes we should ditch actual goals in a game and replace it with expected goals when were analysing teams performance as you will find out why if you google about xG, Given that its better at predicting future results and giving you the overall picture of previous results compared to actual full time goals stat. thats what were doing in this thread, analysing previous wenger games etc.Do i want it to be replaced in real life game? of course not, the variance in sport is exactly what makes sport fun. That random 30 yard screamer to win the game when you dont deserve to win is what gives the emotion of football and all the unknowns. But that doesnt mean we cant use other methods to analyse games after and see what went right/wrong.And if one method is proven to be better at analysing then why wouldnt you use it? People just have this weird phobia of stats. The funny thing about the xG stuff is that people do the exact same thing with their mates in the pub All the difference is that its put onto the map and the actual number for a shot is more legit and backed up. E.g. gabby should have scored 1 goal, so we should have won 1-0 (pub talk), whereas xG is saying gabby on average scores 60% of the time so villa should have won 0.6-0Im not very good at explaning and im sorry if i didnt make the points clear, and if its just tldr. I feel like some semi important points were missing (about the data behind the value of a shot in xG is the "long term") but didnt want to make too long Hope it helped a bit though.Final edit: Of course xG isnt everything in football, but its far more legit and unbiased compared to a random guy saying Arsenal got ripped apart so wenger is naive because they let in 3 goals in this one game. Edited October 22, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts