Jump to content
IGNORED

Latest worrying stat


Ivorguy

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, DaveF said:

None but its additional negativity which is what we love here on OTIB ?

The first requirement in improving the situation, which we all want, is a dose of realism as to where we are.  This stat provides that.

Edited by Ivorguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

What relevance does this have really . We’re miles off them in terms of finances & players. 

Don’t give our soft players an excuse, like the CEO did.

We are not even bothering to compete at the moment with teams that get paid more, the same, or less. I would truly fear a draw in the FA Cup against a non-league team at present.

An organised team with pace, power and passion can always fight well above their weight and be a success. Start point is to win your individual battles. Unfortunately, our lot can’t be arsed and not even Big Nige could fire them up.  
 

A very sorry state that’s been 4 years in the making. Joe and Bobby clearly knew the score and bombed out before the inevitable.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

Reported that Fulham have more points in championship than City in 2021 despite playing 24 fewer games.

is this correct?  Believe it is.  Oh dear if so

Fulham's owners have injected £508m (loans and stock) to cover debt & losses. Makes City look like paupers.

Now remind, what's worrying you?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, RedRock said:

Don’t give our soft players an excuse, like the CEO did.

We are not even bothering to compete at the moment with teams that get paid more, the same, or less. I would truly fear a draw in the FA Cup against a non-league team at present.

An organised team with pace, power and passion can always fight well above their weight and be a success. Start point is to win your individual battles. Unfortunately, our lot can’t be arsed and not even Big Nige could fire them up.  
 

A very sorry state that’s been 4 years in the making. Joe and Bobby clearly knew the score and bombed out before the inevitable.
 

Yes . I understand all that. You should of posted this on one of the other threads though . The stat  is irrelevant comparing where both clubs are at present 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might as well be saying Liverpool and Man City have both gained more points than Norwich in the past calendar year. 

I'm all for looking at stats, figures and facts but it's kind of irrelevant comparing a Championship club that has been on the decline for the past 12-18 months to a relegated Premiership club with parachute payments.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

Another interesting fact. The area around Craven Cottage was once woodland and was part of Anne Boleyn’s hunting grounds. What is the relevance to City - none 

And within what remains of Bishops Park lies the Church of All Saints which is where Father Brennen was dispatched by The Antichrist via means of a lightning rod in The Omen. And City, well, we've St Francis....

As the OP says, worryingly we can't live with them....

ScreamingBrennnan.jpg.c3d52b9892a1869886ab5e0e3444186f.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1968/69 March 1st we smashed Fulham 6-0 at home, a game I watched from the Enclosure..... and still have the prog for; they were also relegated that season as well.

Fulham have moved on a bit since then and look very likely to return to the top div again after a short absence, us we are still here...what have they done so right that we haven`t ? maybe this is what the op was getting at ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Roe said:

71 goals conceded despite our best player being a centre back and another of our rated players being the goalkeeper

Because stopping goals isn't just down to CBs and Goalies.

Re the OP's post. The Fulham points stat is about the least worrying, even if it's eye catching.

Far more worrying is that we currently allow 15 shots, 5 of which are on target, in every game. That is roughly what an average promotion side take every game. In return we take 10, 3 of which will be on 5 target. That's about what a promotion candidate allows in a game. So, in effect, we are allowing our average opponent to play as though they are promotion candidates.

Basically we literally are making Barnsley, Birmingham, Coventry etc look like Fulham and WBA. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, gl2 said:

1968/69 March 1st we smashed Fulham 6-0 at home, a game I watched from the Enclosure..... and still have the prog for; they were also relegated that season as well.

Fulham have moved on a bit since then and look very likely to return to the top div again after a short absence, us we are still here...what have they done so right that we haven`t ? maybe this is what the op was getting at ?

I think we played them in the cup and beat them 5-0 , Clive Walker the ex Chelsea player appeared for them..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, steviestevieneville said:

What relevance does this have really . We’re miles off them in terms of finances & players. 

Absolutely, I remember posting after the draw at our place that one of their subs, Cavaleiro (who came on in the 88th minute) cost them £15m.

One of their starting midfielders cost £24m & Mitrovic, on £60k a week, cost £22m.

I am far more concerned about our result on Saturday & losing to the likes of Millwall than crap like this.

These are our comparators, not sides that cost in excess of £100m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Yep. The whole team has to defend. Also teams are not conceding chances when they have the ball. We aren't a team that keeps the ball for very long.

Coventry keep the ball much better than us and also with 10 men 2nd half stopped us from creating much mainly because of their midfield 3 and front 2 working so well off the ball. We could not get the ball into the right areas of the pitch.

Yep. Goalkeeper is the last line of defence. He should be doing a minimal amount of work. 15 shots, 5 on target in 90 mins is a hell of a lot of work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yep. Goalkeeper is the last line of defence. He should be doing a minimal amount of work. 15 shots, 5 on target in 90 mins is a hell of a lot of work.

Remember last season and looking at shots against that were starting to increase, but early part we very much conceding long shots, 25 yards plus….with our defence on the edge of the penalty area.  I was ok with that.  Then over a series of games those shots crept closer and closer, now defending the penalty spot.  Teams then getting deflected goals, or ricochets that landed at forwards feet.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Remember last season and looking at shots against that were starting to increase, but early part we very much conceding long shots, 25 yards plus….with our defence on the edge of the penalty area.  I was ok with that.  Then over a series of games those shots crept closer and closer, now defending the penalty spot.  Teams then getting deflected goals, or ricochets that landed at forwards feet.

Where's that from? I don't track that...maybe should. Can't see it in your tableau either. Straight WyScout stuff? We are seeing higher xG values against us this term, both in aggregate and per shot, so that supports the idea that closer, better shots are being allowed by us.

Earlier in the season I was ok with a slight up tick in shots faced, as our shots for (and on target) was well up on last season (and in average for the whole season still is actually). I figured we'd sacrificed a little tightness in defence for an increase in attacking threat.

In recent games though even that has dropped back towards the nadir of last season. Averaging 8 (3 on target) over the last 6 games versus 11 (4)* over the previous 11. The difference between 3 and 4, or 5 shots on target might not feel like much, but in % terms it's huge.

Most goalies at our level have something between a 65 and 75% save rate. Increasing their work rate by 33% makes a huge difference. Bentley having to make 5 saves a match is a huge, huge ask.

Interestingly though, the number of shots required by an opponent to score against us is 10 (3 on target) this season, and was 10 (3) last. The difference this season is that the raw number of shots against per game is up by about 6%...and goals conceded per game is up by 7%. That's a pretty close track. To me that suggests that it really is 'simply' a case of reducing the number of shots to reduce the number of goals conceded. Sounds obvious but sometimes it isn't.

The above is me comparing numbers so far this season, to the averages for the whole of last, but I'm not sure that matters much.

Screen the defence, stop the shots, through balls, crosses and corners. Close them down, make them hesitate. Make them think. Stop the shots.

(All figures have been rounded to nearest integer.)

Edited by ExiledAjax
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Where's that from? I don't track that...maybe should

Purely looking manually on Wyscout last season.  Nothing extractable I’m afraid….there’s is average shot distance but it’s not granular and therefore not usable for any analysis imho.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You might have noticed I have a chart with that plotted….but it’s a bit busy.

Yes. I looked. It is a tad busy...possibly better as a scatter of our xg/shot against opponent xg/shot. Then if possible have the blob be a pie chart split between our total xg for and theirs?

Just a suggestion. 

Edited by ExiledAjax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes. I looked. It is a tad busy...possibly better as a scatter of our xg/shot against opponent xg/shot. Then if possible have the blob be a pie chart split between our total xg for and theirs?

Just a suggestion. 

Probably give them a big review over Xmas.  Want to streamline a lot of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats can paint many a flawed picture - like the one continually quoted on here by those who used to trumpet that we hadn’t won at home for an horrendous amount of months - when they conveniently included the months when we played zero games to exaggerate the bad run - another fave of mine is the triv question ‘which is the only club Barcelona has never beaten in European Competitions’ ? Answer - Dundee United, played 4 won 4 vs Barca ... stats can be accurate and informative but they can equally be amazing and misleading ... ??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Stats can paint many a flawed picture - like the one continually quoted on here by those who used to trumpet that we hadn’t won at home for an horrendous amount of months - when they conveniently included the months when we played zero games to exaggerate the bad run - another fave of mine is the triv question ‘which is the only club Barcelona has never beaten in European Competitions’ ? Answer - Dundee United, played 4 won 4 vs Barca ... stats can be accurate and informative but they can equally be amazing and misleading ... ??

Pretty sure you’ve done well to win none, when playing against a team whose all time highest scorer in Europe is the legendary Ralph Milne. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Stats can paint many a flawed picture - like the one continually quoted on here by those who used to trumpet that we hadn’t won at home for an horrendous amount of months - when they conveniently included the months when we played zero games to exaggerate the bad run - another fave of mine is the triv question ‘which is the only club Barcelona has never beaten in European Competitions’ ? Answer - Dundee United, played 4 won 4 vs Barca ... stats can be accurate and informative but they can equally be amazing and misleading ... ??

76% of stats are made up. 12% of people know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...