Magpie Circle Altrincham Preview

[ncfcog]

If the ball is sitting on the goal line with a striker closing in and no defender in sight, that would be an expected goal score of 1. If someone takes a shot from 60 yards that would be an expected goal figure of 0.0000 something.

(The first example is copyright infringement of ncfcog speaking on the Magpie Talk podcast!)

I base my fair score stats on the xG data I have available to me. The club will have much greater detail in their data than I do to deduce their fair score.

Essentially it’s a metric used to determine performance vs results and to identify where improvements can be made to make sure good performances are always rewarded.

I mentioned on the Notts County Talk pod that Neal Ardley actually recorded 7 points more than expected based on performances this season. That would suggest we overachieved in several games and that this is not actually sustainable.

If you look at Ian Burchnall’s first 8 games he’s recorded 7 points but performances actually suggest that should have been 15 points. He’s been let down by poor finishing, defensive mistakes and some fantastic saves by opposition goal keepers. The margins are so small which is why data plays such a big part in the modern game.

[Woodypie]

A fair few on here should be absolutely delighted if it's introduced after all the past comments about how defensive and boring were last season when we were the leagues joint 2nd top scores(?!).

And of course how lucky we've been all season to get the results we have, let's go with expected and deserved rather than actual.

Actual goals, scorelines and results were conveniently ignored by some because we didn't look like scoring in games or didn't deserve the win or draw.

Sigh.

You forgot to mention Ardley's whimpering exit from the Football League, the humiliating playoff final defeat, the humiliating cup semi final defeat, his baffling formations, playing players regardless of their performance standards, playing players totally out of position and their comfort zone, his tippy tappy belief that his donkeys were the non-league Man City, post match interviews with ridiculous excuses and his repeated belief that he couldn't influence the team.

Two sides to every story?

But don't over exert yourself thinking of excuses for The Burch. He will probably be gone by the New Year!

[queenslandpie]

I base my fair score stats on the xG data I have available to me. The club will have much greater detail in their data than I do to deduce their fair score.

Essentially it’s a metric used to determine performance vs results and to identify where improvements can be made to make sure good performances are always rewarded.

I mentioned on the Notts County Talk pod that Neal Ardley actually recorded 7 points more than expected based on performances this season. That would suggest we overachieved in several games and that this is not actually sustainable.

If you look at Ian Burchnall’s first 8 games he’s recorded 7 points but performances actually suggest that should have been 15 points. He’s been let down by poor finishing, defensive mistakes and some fantastic saves by opposition goal keepers. The margins are so small which is why data plays such a big part in the modern game.

So what you are saying is that over the course of the season luck evens itself out. Whoever would have thought that! keep feeding my brain anyway I enjoy the stats.

[countygump]

Only just watched this, but as a non statto, I must admit I found it very interesting.

[ncfcog]

So what you are saying is that over the course of the season luck evens itself out. Whoever would have thought that! keep feeding my brain anyway I enjoy the stats.

There were several games we should never have won earlier in the season, Weymouth, Barnet and Stockport spring to mind.

[magpie_mania]

I base my fair score stats on the xG data I have available to me. The club will have much greater detail in their data than I do to deduce their fair score.

Essentially it’s a metric used to determine performance vs results and to identify where improvements can be made to make sure good performances are always rewarded.

I mentioned on the Notts County Talk pod that Neal Ardley actually recorded 7 points more than expected based on performances this season. That would suggest we overachieved in several games and that this is not actually sustainable.

If you look at Ian Burchnall’s first 8 games he’s recorded 7 points but performances actually suggest that should have been 15 points. He’s been let down by poor finishing, defensive mistakes and some fantastic saves by opposition goal keepers. The margins are so small which is why data plays such a big part in the modern game.

This is a genuine question - at the end of the season - which would we prefer?

Over-achieving in the xG data and getting promoted.
Under-achieving in the xG data and missing out.

I suppose that over a season, like penalties etc it should even itself out - I'm sure there must be data available to give results. It does seem though that often teams get promoted by winning games when they don't play well.

We obviously need to over-achieve when xG is low and achieve when it's good. I agree though that relying on the first over a long period is simply not sustainable. But is 7 points really that much? It's only winning 2 and drawing 1 you didn't deserve to based on 'fair play'

[laddo]

You forgot to mention Ardley's whimpering exit from the Football League, the humiliating playoff final defeat, the humiliating cup semi final defeat, his baffling formations, playing players regardless of their performance standards, playing players totally out of position and their comfort zone, his tippy tappy belief that his donkeys were the non-league Man City, post match interviews with ridiculous excuses and his repeated belief that he couldn't influence the team.

Two sides to every story?

But don't over exert yourself thinking of excuses for The Burch. He will probably be gone by the New Year!

Just a little off target there Woody. This hasn't anything to do with the relegation season, the play off final or whether Ardley should have been sacked etc. They've all been covered numerous times as you know.


If you take another look you will notice this topic is different, this is currently about expected goals Vs actual goals and fair score as opposed to actual score.

We scored the 2nd most actual goals last season but obviously we didn't create much expected goals. This season under Ardley we got actual results, points on the board but again we are told we were very lucky on numerous occasions, never unlucky.

If Burchnall is gone by the New Year as you say you can pass on more 'words of wisdom' like "pull your finger out" to the next Notts manager. Lol.

Maybe the same message could go to the players who have underperformed under IB and NA. Just a thought

[ncfcog]

This is a genuine question - at the end of the season - which would we prefer?

Over-achieving in the xG data and getting promoted.
Under-achieving in the xG data and missing out.

I suppose that over a season, like penalties etc it should even itself out - I'm sure there must be data available to give results. It does seem though that often teams get promoted by winning games when they don't play well.

We obviously need to over-achieve when xG is low and achieve when it's good. I agree though that relying on the first over a long period is simply not sustainable. But is 7 points really that much? It's only winning 2 and drawing 1 you didn't deserve to based on 'fair play'

Don’t shoot the messenger

Joking aside you are of course right, as a fan I just want to see us win games regardless of performance. However, as I’m now entrenched in the football statistics world I do now view the game in a slightly different way.

Ultimately xG and other fair score metrics are essentially there to assist managers and coaches in identifying areas that require improvement, How many people on here during their working lives have had to make changes to the way they work because their company have been recording key performance indicators (KPIs)? It’s the same thing.

One thing is obvious though, performances from an attacking perspective have without doubt improved, unfortunately we need to start taking our chances, do that and the defensive issues won’t matter so much and will become fewer as time progresses.

[laddo]

Oh and there is always two sides to every story, I call it "balance not bias"

[LaxtonLad]

I base my fair score stats on the xG data I have available to me. The club will have much greater detail in their data than I do to deduce their fair score.

Essentially it’s a metric used to determine performance vs results and to identify where improvements can be made to make sure good performances are always rewarded.

I mentioned on the Notts County Talk pod that Neal Ardley actually recorded 7 points more than expected based on performances this season. That would suggest we overachieved in several games and that this is not actually sustainable.

If you look at Ian Burchnall’s first 8 games he’s recorded 7 points but performances actually suggest that should have been 15 points. He’s been let down by poor finishing, defensive mistakes and some fantastic saves by opposition goal keepers. The margins are so small which is why data plays such a big part in the modern game.

Very interesting, ncfcog. It may explain Burchinall insisting we dominated a game yet conceded two goals, following this line of reasoning it doesn't look as bad as it looks. Does it take into account individual talent or the performance of the team as a whole?

Would it be fair to say that he was unlucky in his eight games? If you would say that then he does deserve more time to settle, or perhaps luck doesn't come into it.

I wonder if these fair results would improve if teams were playing in front of a crowd?