GWT: Champions League - Semifinals

[cgf]

But that's not what Xg should be about?

If the reality is that goals get scored in certain situations because teams get constantly "lucky", then the formula should be adjusted to reflect the reality more accurately how likely goals are scored in those type of situations, alas to include what you called "luck".

Some teams are just better at being lucky than others. BMG didn't outscore their xG every year they had Raffael and Stindl by accident, but that doesn't mean that most teams would have outscored their xG with those same exact chances.

 

[jniklast]

It's more useful the bigger sample size you have, but there are some obvious flaws in judging a game purely by xG

- It treats all the players the same: Kylian Mbappe and Emre Can generate the same xG from the same chance, when one is obviously more likely to go in.
- It treats all goalkeepers the same.
- It heavily relies on relies on where the shot was taken, and ignores things like defender position between the ball and the goal, what kind of a stance the attacker is shooting from etc.
- xG only generates from shots and not possession. So let's say a team gets a 3 on 1 attack, but fumbles the ball and never manages to take a shot: it's zero xG, which obviously isn't on par with reality.

Sometimes the xG is in line with what happened in the game, sometimes it's not. But it tends to even out in the long run.

Also what about PSG's two successive posts in the first leg? How is that counted? If both xG values are just added, you'd probably get a value well over 1, when in reality the second shot obviously doesn't happen if a goal is scored on the first.

In the end xG is really only somewhat meaningful over very large sample sizes. 12 games certainly is not enough, as there are many potential variables that can still significantly influence it and don't even out over that time yet.

 

[bluesfan94]

Also what about PSG's two successive posts in the first leg? How is that counted? If both xG values are just added, you'd probably get a value well over 1, when in reality the second shot obviously doesn't happen if a goal is scored on the first.

In the end xG is really only somewhat meaningful over very large sample sizes. 12 games certainly is not enough, as there are many potential variables that can still significantly influence it and don't even out over that time yet.

Right, but the point is that they did have two chances to score that goal and missed it twice.

 

[jniklast]

Right, but the point is that they did have two chances to score that goal and missed it twice.

Yes, so it should be a combined xG value somewhere around 0.8 or so, but never above 1.0.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Agree with the above that xGOT or PSxG or whichever name you want to call it is more useful.

What I've always wanted (but it would take ENORMOUS datasets and would only be statistically significant for high level shooters) is player-level adjusted xG.

A shot is 0.3xG because 30% of the time it goes in, but if there's a player who consistently scores, say, 60% of the time from that spot that's also something I'm interested in. I think it would be useful in understanding players who CONSISTENTLY outperform/underperform xG. I'm just as curious about a Harry Kane expected goal as I am about a broader expected goal.

 

[luiginb]

Only suprise there is the video is only 8 minutes long

 

[JoVel]

Agree with the above that xGOT or PSxG or whichever name you want to call it is more useful.

What I've always wanted (but it would take ENORMOUS datasets and would only be statistically significant for high level shooters) is player-level adjusted xG.

A shot is 0.3xG because 30% of the time it goes in, but if there's a player who consistently scores, say, 60% of the time from that spot that's also something I'm interested in. I think it would be useful in understanding players who CONSISTENTLY outperform/underperform xG. I'm just as curious about a Harry Kane expected goal as I am about a broader expected goal.

This exists in hockey so surely it must exist in football as well? I've never really properly looked at any football advanced stats though.

 

[cgf]

Agree with the above that xGOT or PSxG or whichever name you want to call it is more useful.

What I've always wanted (but it would take ENORMOUS datasets and would only be statistically significant for high level shooters) is player-level adjusted xG.

A shot is 0.3xG because 30% of the time it goes in, but if there's a player who consistently scores, say, 60% of the time from that spot that's also something I'm interested in. I think it would be useful in understanding players who CONSISTENTLY outperform/underperform xG. I'm just as curious about a Harry Kane expected goal as I am about a broader expected goal.

Problem is that once you put something like that together you get hired by a club or consulting firm and stop publishing it to the public

 

[hatterson]

Also what about PSG's two successive posts in the first leg? How is that counted? If both xG values are just added, you'd probably get a value well over 1, when in reality the second shot obviously doesn't happen if a goal is scored on the first.

In the end xG is really only somewhat meaningful over very large sample sizes. 12 games certainly is not enough, as there are many potential variables that can still significantly influence it and don't even out over that time yet.

It depends on the models. Some will combine successive chances and create a sort of combo xG based on the probability that one of them would score. So if you have a .5 xG and a .6xG chance within 2 seconds of each other they might record that simply as a single .8xG event since there was only a 20% chance that neither of them went in.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

Only suprise there is the video is only 8 minutes long

The whining from you and others is pathetic. I could easily find a video made by a Madrid account showing bad calls going in Barca's favor.

That clown John Honesty (same kind of fan account @Evilo used as "proof") spent like two weeks posting videos and photos about Barca being corrupt and benefiting from all the calls prior the El Clasico. Saying that La Liga was trying to make sure Barca finishes at least second so they make the Super Cup so the league makes more money. Saying Barca are the ones who voted against goal line technology while we voted yes. All kind of stuff that just made me roll my eyes.

You could easily do that for many, many, many clubs. All it is is whining by people having a loser mentality. That's why I was disappointed when we posted that stupid "Barca are the real fascists" video last year. What does it accomplish? Nothing. It is whining and makes you look like a loser. Good thing Carlo Ancelotti does not have that mentality. We are Real f***ing Madrid, we should be above excuse making. Heck, you are f***ing Barca, you should be above that too. The little brother mentality is what pushed Barca to mismanage the club the way they have in the last 5 years. You deserve better.

 

[luiginb]

 

[Evilo]

Lol... Easy thing to say when the video evidence is clear as day and one way traffic.
With fair reffing Real would have half their trophies.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

The whining from you and others is pathetic. I could easily find a video made by a Madrid account showing bad calls going in Barca's favor.

That clown John Honesty (same kind of fan account @Evilo used as "proof") spent like two weeks posting videos and photos about Barca being corrupt and benefiting from all the calls prior the El Clasico. Saying that La Liga was trying to make sure Barca finishes at least second so they make the Super Cup so the league makes more money. Saying Barca are the ones who voted against goal line technology while we voted yes. All kind of stuff that just made me roll my eyes.

You could easily do that for many, many, many clubs. All it is is whining by people having a loser mentality. That's why I was disappointed when we posted that stupid "Barca are the real fascists" video last year. What does it accomplish? Nothing. It is whining and makes you look like a loser. Good thing Carlo Ancelotti does not have that mentality. We are Real f***ing Madrid, we should be above excuse making. Heck, you are f***ing Barca, you should be above that too. The little brother mentality is what pushed Barca to mismanage the club the way they have in the last 5 years. You deserve better.

I don't know why you're wasting your time with a dude who said with the most complete seriousness that Barca paid off refs just to get fair reffing and 75 percent of his posts are a variation of 'The refs are in the bag for Real' and another who thinks it's a conspiracy against a French club the instant someone sneezes in the stadium.

You're not going to get anywhere when you're dealing with that sort of maturity level.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

Lol... Easy thing to say when the video evidence is clear as day and one way traffic.
With fair reffing Real would have half their trophies.

I just said I could easily post video evidence of bad calls helping other clubs.

Everything can look like a conspiracy when you cherry pick.

People do it to every succesful team in any sport. It is really a loser mentality, I am sorry.

 

[Tony Romo]

nvm

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Three Moroccans playing key roles on teams headed to each of the European finals.

Brahim Diaz - Real Madrid
Amine Adli - Bayer Leverkusen
Ayoub El Kaabi - Olympiacos

And other guys on semi-finalists like Hakimi, Mazraoui, Harit, Ounahi.

Let's go.

 

[Corto]

I referenced this above, but some xG models (like Opta) do include defender and keeper position data as well as things like phase of play (counter vs established possession vs set piece, etc)


Granted your point about defender position in between is valid since statistically a block is not credited as a shot and thus is automatically 0 xG in a shot based xG model.

I get all that, but to me xG is (please don't take this the wrong way, friends) and attempt at "americanization" of football.
US pro sports are very stats friendly - baseball, football, basketball... Hockey not as much.... But all these advanced stats (to me) just seem like tools for people who don't actually watch the games.

NOTHING replaces actually watching the games.

And I've had numerous discussions with people who are entrenched in a certain opinion cause it was posted by Opta or whatever.
I just don't get it. Why not just watch the games lol...

 

[Evilo]

I just said I could easily post video evidence of bad calls helping other clubs.

Everything can look like a conspiracy when you cherry pick.

People do it to every succesful team in any sport. It is really a loser mentality, I am sorry.

Nah it's just that you feel entitled and act as if it's not a problem.
I'm not even talking about liga there, the list is way too long.
No, other teams don't get this kind of HUGE help, especially in the knockout stage. Consistently. Even with VAR. It's not even new, EVERYONE can see it.

Please list me the obvious ref mistakes that have favoured say PSG (because I've watched all their CL games) in the knockout stage? Not even video proofs, just give me the incidents.
Lots of teams have favourable and unfavourable ref mistakes. With Real, it's 90/10. And I'm only talking about big decisions. When you factor all the small decisions always going their way, the 50/50 calls, the Casemiro phantom cards, etc... it's crazy.

Your post reminds me a lot of the reactions after PSG loss at Barca or the loss at Real (both remontadas).
If the ref was fair, neither game would have been remontadas. Both times PSG would have gone through (I don't think it's controversial to say this, both ref mistakes are easily admitted). This could have changed the whole complexion of their CL campaigns both times.
Of course both times PSG shat themselves. But part of it is because they knew they'd be killed by bad calls, and they were.
The losers would have been winners, and your whole post is exactly what's wrong about it.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

Nah it's just that you feel entitled and act as if it's not a problem.
I'm not even talking about liga there, the list is way too long.
No, other teams don't get this kind of HUGE help, especially in the knockout stage. Consistently. Even with VAR. It's not even new, EVERYONE can see it.

Please list me the obvious ref mistakes that have favoured say PSG (because I've watched all their CL games) in the knockout stage? Not even video proofs, just give me the incidents.
Lots of teams have favourable and unfavourable ref mistakes. With Real, it's 90/10. And I'm only talking about big decisions. When you factor all the small decisions always going their way, the 50/50 calls, the Casemiro phantom cards, etc... it's crazy.

Your post reminds me a lot of the reactions after PSG loss at Barca or the loss at Real (both remontadas).
If the ref was fair, neither game would have been remontadas. Both times PSG would have gone through (I don't think it's controversial to say this, both ref mistakes are easily admitted). This could have changed the whole complexion of their CL campaigns both times.
Of course both times PSG shat themselves. But part of it is because they knew they'd be killed by bad calls, and they were.
The losers would have been winners, and your whole post is exactly what's wrong about it.

So you overaching point, which I think I can somewhat agree with, is that refs often suck which impacts the results too much? Cause that is facts, not conspiracy about one team getting all the calls.

 

[cgf]

I get all that, but to me xG is (please don't take this the wrong way, friends) and attempt at "americanization" of football.
US pro sports are very stats friendly - baseball, football, basketball... Hockey not as much.... But all these advanced stats (to me) just seem like tools for people who don't actually watch the games.

NOTHING replaces actually watching the games.

And I've had numerous discussions with people who are entrenched in a certain opinion cause it was posted by Opta or whatever.
I just don't get it. Why not just watch the games lol...

Anyone using them as a replacement for watching games is an idiot. But having advanced metrics to check against what you are seeing is very useful in guarding against confirmation bias.

The problem with football is all of the really good models get bought up and either get stuck behind a paywall or become clubs' property knowledge in no time...like does anyone remember when "packing" was the new hotness?

Whereas in the NBA you can have some models like EPM & DARKO that are still publicly available and useful to use in conjunction with watching games and other metrics.

 

[Evilo]

So you overaching point, which I think I can somewhat agree with, is that refs often suck which impacts the results too much? Cause that is facts, not conspiracy about one team getting all the calls.

Were games bought? Sure, they have, for the last 40+ years I would say.
But that was never my point about Real. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, I don't know.
I'm simply saying that they get 90/10 calls when most other teams get 50/50.

 

[luiginb]

The linesman who made the "mistake" that got Real to the final is a nepo baby, his father used to be the president of the Polish federation.

 

[lidstromiscool]

The linesman who made the "mistake" that got Real to the final is a nepo baby, his father used to be the president of the Polish federation.

This is delusional. Madrid players stopped playing after the flag went up, before the whistle. Two actions before De Ligt shot the ball. Militao would have easily stepped in and disrupted his possession. Lunin would have also saved the original shot. Not to mention that it was correctly called offsides. The hate some posters have for Madrid on this board is both hilarious and pathetic.

 

[maclean]

This is delusional. Madrid players stopped playing after the flag went up, before the whistle. Two actions before De Ligt shot the ball. Militao would have easily stepped in and disrupted his possession. Lunin would have also saved the original shot. Not to mention that it was correctly called offsides. The hate some posters have for Madrid on this board is both hilarious and pathetic.

Which is why they can't just automatically flip the call and rule it a goal, yes. The fact remains, for quite some time now the rule has been to let play continue and check offside after, often even when the offside is clear as day. Calling a fast offside like that is unheard of in today's game. It boggles the mind and you can hardly blame people for posing the question of why when something like that is at stake.

 

[Evilo]

Which is why they can't just automatically flip the call and rule it a goal, yes. The fact remains, for quite some time now the rule has been to let play continue and check offside after, often even when the offside is clear as day. Calling a fast offside like that is unheard of in today's game. It boggles the mind and you can hardly blame people for posing the question of why when something like that is at stake.

Especially since it's a habit in Bernabeu.