But from an expected goals point of view

a 2v1 break where an attacker f**ks it up with a s**t final pass, will surely result in more goals on average than a 30 yard shot that dribbles through to the keeper?

Whatever semantics you use for what is or isn't a chance, XG isn't reflecting the expected goals accurately if it's counting one situation and not the other.

Posted By: Mecagoenti on October 22nd 2022 at 17:13:48

Message Thread

Lukcy to come away with a point in the end. (n/m) (NCFC) - AstroCanary, Oct 22, 16:58:05
- How do you work that out Einstein? We missed a penalty and could easily have won it (n/m) (NCFC) - Boyer, Oct 22, 17:01:47
  - Erm….I’m guessing it’s a reference to mcburnie missing a sitter in injury time? (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Oct 22, 17:03:43
    - And we got smashed on xG even with the pen award (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 22, 17:04:51
      - I think that's a bit misleading today (NCFC) - Mecagoenti, Oct 22, 17:07:34
        
        We had loads of great breaks (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 22, 17:10:55
        
        They're not chances (NCFC) - jamesward, Oct 22, 17:09:14
        
        But from an expected goals point of view (NCFC) - Mecagoenti, Oct 22, 17:13:48
        
        It counts the shots (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 22, 17:16:49
        
        I know - but I think that's why it can sometimes be misleading (NCFC) - Mecagoenti, Oct 22, 17:23:55
        
        That pen would have very high xG (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 22, 17:39:28

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.