Jump to content

Chop chop! Lets all gawp at Newcastle (again)


Jimzk5

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

That probably ought to be enough evidence to suggest that "xG" is bollocks. It had Newcastle bottom, and Liverpool's 18 point advantage was overturned to have them come second. 12th place Everton "should" have finished several positions above 6th place Tottenham. It's nonsense. 

You highlight one of the key problems with it. They have a good goalkeeper. Counts for nothing in the "xG" game. It assumes all strikers and goalkeepers perform at the average level. It's a bullshit stat. 

 

It’s not bullshit if you use it for what it’s meant to be used for. No one is saying xG means everything, and that good goalkeeping and clinical finishing is irrelevant. They are obviously crucial elements to being a good football team. XG does tell us something of interest about games, though. It’s awfully simplistic and luddite to argue otherwise. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Michelsen said:

It’s not bullshit if you use it for what it’s meant to be used for. No one is saying xG means everything, and that good goalkeeping and clinical finishing is irrelevant. They are obviously crucial elements to being a good football team. XG does tell us something of interest about games, though. It’s awfully simplistic and luddite to argue otherwise. 

It has some place in analysing how a team is doing creating chances and preventing the opponent from creating chances, but I'm getting sick to death of people treating it as the single greatest benchmark for how a match should have turned out, and I think you're wrong to claim "no one is saying xG means everything". Even a few posts above, Newcastle are apparently "lucky" over the course of a season, because they had a keeper in fine form, and clinical finishing? Nah. 

In my rage, I perhaps went a bit far, as you say, it has some uses. It's commonly being used as a far more important indicator of a team than it actually is though, IMO. 

Edited by Davkaus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

It has some place in analysing how a team is doing creating chances and preventing the opponent from creating chances, but I'm getting sick to death of people treating it as the single greatest benchmark for how a match should have turned out, and I think you're wrong to claim "no one is saying xG means everything". Even a few posts above, Newcastle are apparently "lucky" over the course of a season, because they had a keeper in fine form, and clinical finishing? Nah. 

Having watched Newcastle, though, they are a little bit lucky to be relatively safe. XG is a useful tool to quantify that. However, good on them for having a good keeper and striker. That’ll save Bruce’s bacon, probably. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith?

BLM?

:crylaugh:

Alex or Amy, please stop.

IMO Steve Bruce is a Representative for Wellingborough and a terrible terrible football manager. People like him will be gone from the game for good in 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhh, Brucie has been talking about us;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/55475530

"We'd all love to have what Everton have been able to do over the last two or three years and certainly, since I left Aston Villa, the spending power that has propelled them up the league.

dude... You spent the most of that not promoting us :lol:

 

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

Ahhh, Brucie has been talking about us;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/55475530

 

 

dude... You spent the most of that not promoting us :lol:

 

No Steve Having a good Manager has propelled us up the League. 

And the funds he has been given since is due to the fact he got us promoted after about 6 month's in the job. Something your heavily backed ass couldn't do in 3yrs. 

Edited by av1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I think you're wrong to claim "no one is saying xG means everything". Even a few posts above, Newcastle are apparently "lucky" over the course of a season, because they had a keeper in fine form, and clinical finishing? Nah

If you actually read my post I said I thought Newcastle were very lucky based on actually watching them last year, not because of xG. It seemed like more people missed chances and hit the woodwork against them in games they won by 1 goal than against anyone else.

In fact I didn't even mention xG.

But sure, me watching Newcastle and getting the impression that they were lucky at key moments "ought to be enough evidence to suggest that "xG" is bollocks" despite it having absolutely **** all to do with xG. :lol:

Clinical finishing had nothing to do with it either, they scored 38 goals from 36.5xG. Pretty much spot on.

Edited by YouUnastanFren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Oh I hate him. 

He had John Terry and Robert Snodgrass in the championship. Yeah no spending power for poor Steve Bruce.

10m Hogan

4m Lansbury 

3m Hourihane

Abraham on loan

Snodgrass on loan 

John Terry

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

He hasn’t though, that’s factual regardless of your opinion. Nobody is lying and I’ve literally no idea the relevance of BLM to this.

You perhaps should look at you own posts on the point re respect. 

He has. And you really need to stop attributing me opinions I have never said, which you admitted to doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone opinion is equally valid, my arse. A Professor of dentistry for 40yrs does not have a debate with some ejit that removes his teeth with string and a door

 

Dara O'Briain.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/12/2020 at 18:49, TrentVilla said:

No he hasn't, I haven't and I didn't. 

This is pointless, you've formed your opinion and refuse to acknowledge when people show you to be incorrect so for the 3rd time I'm done debating it with you.

The thousands of Newcastle fans must all be wrong and you must be right.

This is opinions you attributed to me, which I never wrote anywhere and you got them out of your head. I never said Bruce was a better manager than Benitez in general:

On 26/12/2020 at 22:24, TrentVilla said:

Ok.... you are right... Bruce is a better manager than Rafa 🤦‍♂️

On 26/12/2020 at 22:31, TrentVilla said:

I'm paraphrasing. To summarise your actual points though,

* There is no difference in the football of Bruce and Rafa - which is wrong

* You questioned who the tactical genius was of the two suggesting it was actually Bruce - which is wrong

* You claimed Bruce was out performing Rafa on points - which is wrong

 

Here you admit to "paraphrasing", which means attributing opinions to me that I have never stated. I never said they employ equal tactics. I said they both play defensive football. I never said anything about tactical football. But, I'll give you the last point because Bruce got one point less than Benitez. I still am adamant that Newcastle with Benitez had better offensive players (Ayoze Perez and Rondon) than Newcastle with Bruce last season (Joelinton). So, if I feel that Bruce has done a very good job points wise, than that is what the hard facts of the table says.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I last loaded this thread a day ago and somehow there's *four* unread pages :crylaugh:

Is Bruce a better manager than Rafa? No, of course not. Were Newcastle both defensive and frequently extremely boring to watch under Rafa? Definitely yes. Is Bruce doing a bad job? Well, 'yes' if you want good football, 'no' if you don't want to be relegated.

At the end of the day, Bruce has done a somewhat worse job than Benitez because, while the team finished in the same place in the league, the fans are unhappier now so he is performing worse at his real job, which is 'Mike Ashley's human shield'. They presumably like him less both because of who he is in comparison to who Rafa was, in terms of their success with the club and their CV's, and also because Bruce has them playing even more boring football. But to be clear, they were still both defensive and boring under Benitez.

I think with Benitez the thinking with the fans was probably that he could do a good job if he were backed more. As we're seeing with Bruce, you can throw £100m at him and your ceiling will always be midtable because tactics might as well be Samoan, it's that foreign to him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Keyblade said:

I think with Benitez the thinking with the fans was probably that he could do a good job if he were backed more. As we're seeing with Bruce, you can throw £100m at him and your ceiling will always be midtable because tactics might as well be Samoan, it's that foreign to him.

Agree with that, with Rafa there was potential there, might have been unrealistic but there was the thought that if you gave him money or they got new owners that they would get better

You don't think that with Bruce, you know what his ceiling is, they could give him the Saudi money finish 12th and be told to be happy with it 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â