- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Year of First Game
- 1998
Home Match Day Thread 01/11/2025 - MDT: Oxford United V Millwall
- Thread starter Carpy
- Start date
- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Stand
- South Upper
- Row Letter(s)
- ZZ
- Year of First Game
- 1987
I like the little "f**k you" fist pump towards the Millwall fans from Rowett at the end of the vid.
Nice to see, shows he cares.
- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Stand
- Jim Smith (East)
I suspect there was a vocal "f**k off" attached as well.
What next @holdsteady - half time scores displayed on a peg board with an alphabetic key to the matches in the programme? Now that's a way to get the prog sales up!!
I assume concrete is quite effective at blocking phone signals, that and the bandwidth issues aforementioned can account for the lack of reception.
On the disrespectful and now removed comment in the Rage report, thanks to @Boris for removing it and apologising: this lefty, at least, was shocked to read such a crass dismissal of an important annual occasion. Perhaps the writer has no family experience to help identify with the issue?
This is so much more interesting than all that "0.44 X.G" shite that the boffins seem to love these days.
This actually means something.
I was listening to 5Live on the way to the game on Saturday and smiled when ex Forest player Andy Reid laughed at the notion of Martin O'Neil embracing XG and a data lead approach.
I think it was on one of those "what is thing?" pages, but it showed a soccer or football stadium with little panels fixed vertically about a foot square every three or four rows at the end of each row of seats. Can't find the picture, but apparently it is a localised mobile phone signal booster. Very useful for match-day activations.
Someone will probably pipe-up and tell me I shouldn't be looking at my phone during the match.
Someone will probably pipe-up and tell me I shouldn't be looking at my phone during the match.
jaybeachjump
Level: Jamie Brooks
(53 Apps, 13 Gls)
I actually like this analysis too, but it's not foolproof because the squads have been changed since last year, and / or the situations behind the scenes are more significant [eg Norwich].
I get what you mean about xG. But it can be useful. Every time I see an xG score I immediately try to take it out of a statistical context. For me it simply means: which teams are best at giving the ball to players in the most likely scoring areas of the pitch?
I've looked at the bottom seven after thirteen games last season and at the end of the season.
| 13 games | 46 games | |
| Sheffield Wednesday | 18 | 12 |
| Oxford United | 19 | 17 |
| Preston North End | 20 | 20 |
| Luton Town | 21 | 22 |
| Plymouth Argyle | 22 | 23 |
| Queens Park Rangers | 23 | 15 |
| Portsmouth | 24 | 16 |
Only Wednesday got into the top half of the table, Plymouth and Luton were both relegated.
If you add in Stoke Cardiff and Hull who were the three teams directly above the bottom seven at this stage they also all finished in the bottom ten.
So of the bottom ten after 13 games, only one managed to get out of the bottom ten by the end of the season.
Obviously a finish anywhere from 14th to 21st would do just fine but assuming we'll just pick up points and be safe seems to be overlooking what can happen for instance like in [edit] 2005/06. Similarly Luton at New Year's Eve last year were four points clear of the bottom three (who all had one or two games in hand) but they ended up getting relegated.
Last edited:
WRox
Level: Callum O'Dowda
(106 Apps, 14 Gls)
I’m not sure if it’s a positive or a negative really, but the league has definitely concertinaed this year. There aren’t the stand outs at the top and I’d be surprised if clubs with revenues like Southampton, Norwich and Sheffield United don’t improve as well.
Does mean most likely 50+ will be needed, but if we go and get a smidge over a point a game from here, then regardless of whether it’s someone above us dropping or teams below us staying where they are, we’ll still stay up.
Paul B
Level: Callum O'Dowda
(106 Apps, 14 Gls)
Someone asked - “Where is Paul B when you need him?” & also, there was this comment - “harms Paul B's excellent reputation by association as it is under the Fans View banner.” Well thanks guys.
Here I am- I don’t do the Fan's View for the home games any more. Just the away ones, well most of them.
It has always been a Fan’s View. I.e. that of a single person. Not the view of anyone else. But of course, there are limits of what is, and isn’t, acceptable to publish. Although people will have different views of what those limits are.
I don’t normally get involved in the match day thread. But when a relative told me I’d been referenced I took a look. Started at page one – could easily have got involved in debating various opinions put out there about the football under GR, how we did against Millwall etc. Some well argued and some outrageously stupid imho. Probably / Possibly wind ups. But can’t ignore the old “everyone is entitled to their opinion” thing can we.
Then I came across the Remembrance Day issue. Up to then I’d not read the Fan’s View so then took a look. Got very confused and couldn’t quite see what all the fuss was about. Took me a minute or two to realise that the article I’d read had been edited. But having read that someone like Trevor L, who’s views I respect comments that it was a “crass dismissal of an important annual occasion” then that’s good enough for me.
For the record, I find the whole occasion necessary, incredibly moving and very worthwhile.
We move on.
Big games coming up.
Here I am- I don’t do the Fan's View for the home games any more. Just the away ones, well most of them.
It has always been a Fan’s View. I.e. that of a single person. Not the view of anyone else. But of course, there are limits of what is, and isn’t, acceptable to publish. Although people will have different views of what those limits are.
I don’t normally get involved in the match day thread. But when a relative told me I’d been referenced I took a look. Started at page one – could easily have got involved in debating various opinions put out there about the football under GR, how we did against Millwall etc. Some well argued and some outrageously stupid imho. Probably / Possibly wind ups. But can’t ignore the old “everyone is entitled to their opinion” thing can we.
Then I came across the Remembrance Day issue. Up to then I’d not read the Fan’s View so then took a look. Got very confused and couldn’t quite see what all the fuss was about. Took me a minute or two to realise that the article I’d read had been edited. But having read that someone like Trevor L, who’s views I respect comments that it was a “crass dismissal of an important annual occasion” then that’s good enough for me.
For the record, I find the whole occasion necessary, incredibly moving and very worthwhile.
We move on.
Big games coming up.
I think I could attend a 3-week beginners course on xG and still come away from it with absolutely no idea of what it means or why it matters.
However, your explanation was the closest thing to helpful so far.
- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Stand
- Jim Smith (East)
- Row Letter(s)
- U
- Seat Number
- 111
- Year of First Game
- 1986
My problem with xg is it, I am assuming, requires someone to evaluate how good of a goalscoring opportunity a chance was? So who did this? A master finisher like John Aldridge or some spotty nerd who can’t kick a ball? Even if it’s a computer using an algorithm still to many variables involved for me.
When I checked our score against Sheffield Wednesday the other day we were 2-0 up with an xg of 0.77, I know which figures I cared more about.
jaybeachjump
Level: Jamie Brooks
(53 Apps, 13 Gls)
This is most people's problem with xG, and I do understand why.
In the data scientists' defence, they ran the numbers over thousands of games to see how much of a difference a really good striker makes to the likelihood of scoring, say a high xG chance. The answer, statistically, is very little. The reason, they concluded, a striker like Ronaldo scores more goals is the consistent ability to find high quality positions and to take a higher volume of shots from those positions. Being good does impact the chance of finding the net, but only by about 2 or 3 extra goals over the course of a full season. The biggest and most significant factor is how many shots strikers take from really good positions. This is why Pep spends all that time on the whiteboard, and why he banned players from taking
shots from outside the area last season: he's looking for ways to get Haaland into the best areas for high xG scoring positions.
Your Sheffield Wednesday example hits the nail on the head. Xg doesn't accurately predict the likelihood of goals - just an idea of the likelihood of goals based on what has happened in the past. It is literally always wrong.
With that in mind, what's the point of it?? What's the point of knowing that there's a 94% chance that our next home attendance will be 11,304?? Maybe it will, maybe it won't.
I'm just confused as to why this absolute b*****s has suddenly become such an apparently important part of modern football.
- Season Ticket
- No
- Stand
- Don’t Attend Games
I'm sorry, but the statto in me can't help but think that this is a crazy way to do this comparison, and isn't going to give a fair reflection of where we stand.
Because you're counting the Derby, Portsmouth and Sheffield United results from last season twice in your analysis, but not counting Plymouth, Cardiff or Sunderland at all.
You want a fair comparison, you need to be comparing the six teams that are new to the division with the six teams that departed it. That way you will be accounting appropriately for the fact that the division got a lot stronger at the bottom, but somewhat weaker at the top. If we pretend we didn't play the crap Plymouth & Cardiff teams from last season, we're going to get overconfident about how we're doing!
This would mean that the 'Total last season' should actually be 16 points (4 from Cardiff, Plymouth & Luton, 3 from Sunderland, 1 from Burnley, 0 from Leeds).
I think we're going to struggle to match the total # of points against incoming clubs this season that we got against outgoing clubs last year, especially given how we've started. So we're going to have to do better in the identical comparative fixtures (which, to be fair, we are doing.......)
- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Stand
- Jim Smith (East)
- Row Letter(s)
- U
- Seat Number
- 111
- Year of First Game
- 1986
That’s an interesting reply.
They have done the study while I only have the eye test, but I struggle to believe the gap in finishing quality between Erling Haaland and Mark Harris is so narrow and that it’s all down to getting yourself in the right positions, but if that’s what the data says who am I to argue?
- Season Ticket
- No
- Stand
- Don’t Attend Games
To me, xG is really just a statistical measure of "Are you getting into good positions".
If your xG is much less than your actual goals scored - that generally means you're scoring a lot of worldies
If your xG is much higher than your actual goals scored (like, for instance, Southampton's is this season) - that generally means that your finishing is crap.
And that can be useful information for a manager. Because scoring worldies isn't typically a very sustainable route to success; meanwhile crap finishing helps inform the January transfer window.......
- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Stand
- Jim Smith (East)
- Row Letter(s)
- U
- Seat Number
- 111
- Year of First Game
- 1986
Not long ago though the stats were telling us teams didn’t score much from set pieces, long throws etc so it was better to keep possession, now that’s gone out of the window and Ben Futcher is set to make a comeback at Real Madrid, so interpretation of data is maybe an issue with stats.
I remember the same process at the Manor. The guy had a special stick to put the numbers on the hooks. Some times the game was almost over before we could see all the half time scores in the other games.
Yellow Dog
Level: Ricardinho
(39 Apps, 3 Gls)
No, you're wrong. It's a very accurate way of telling you exactly where we are now. We are +4 up in the 34 identical games to last season, and of the other games, we acheived 11 points. It really doesn't matter what those teams are, or how many games they are. Yes, last year was slightly different for this format, as we were one of the promoted teams, and only played 10 promoted & relegated sides, but it makes no difference whatsoever. I had to put the footnote on, because I knew some people wouldn't be able to grasp it.
This system will knit seamlessly with our end of the season points Total. This is exactly where we're at, right now.
My advice to you is, dont look at it anymore.
Last edited:
- Season Ticket
- No
- Stand
- Don’t Attend Games
I think it's just that a football season isn't long enough, and there's too many random variables, for anything to reach statistical significance. If you played a million games, then probably Goals scored would end up mapping pretty tightly to xG. But over the 46 games, it doesn't.
So anyone who only relies on the stats is going to be in a world of trouble.
But there's still useful information to be had there that can help point you towards where you might be doing well or struggling. Combine that with the eye test from just watching the games, and come up with some innovative strategies in training, and you're laughing.
(Baseball, on the other hand, where there's 162 games a season and far fewer variables......that's where Moneyball just straight up works!)
jaybeachjump
Level: Jamie Brooks
(53 Apps, 13 Gls)
xG does not look forward to make a prediction, it looks backwards to make an assessment. But it only really works over time. If you just look at the xG after one game, or even a group of games, it won't be enough to counteract the huge influence of luck, and also as holdsteady writes above, the difference in striker ability. That's why you get weird xG data that shows you should have won or lost a game that you didn't. But over the course of a season it tells you how good a job your entire team has done of creating statistically high quality chances.
xG data is designed to look backwards and show managers and boards whether they are doing the right things on the pitch. Hence why boards use it to decide whether to stick or twist with managers who are for example not winning enough games. Does our overall play indicate that the team has been unlucky, or are we genuinely s**t? The xG data will tell you the answer. A high xG but low volume of goals might suggest sticking with the manager [and buying a new striker]. A low xG but relatively high volume of goals [oufc last year] might tell you all kinds of things, but if you listened to what Rowett was saying in his end of season interviews he was adamant that recruitment needed to focus on signing players that could create different types of chances, at a higher volume. That tells me he was very focused on the xG number.
- Season Ticket
- No
- Stand
- Don’t Attend Games
Oh, I grasp it just fine. It's just idiotic.
You can't compare 34 identical games and pretend that the other 12 games don't exist.
If we finish +10 in the identical games, but don't win any more points against the six new sides, then we'll end up on 48 points and go down.
- Season Ticket
- Yes
- Stand
- South Lower
- Row Letter(s)
- ZZ
Spot on.
If people don't want to look at xg that is fine.
It can indicate trends and, seems to be used by clubs analysts, managers and many others.
It never should be used on its own. I listen to NTT20 and George/ Ali regularly use xg but in context and part of an overall assessment.
Yellow Dog
Level: Ricardinho
(39 Apps, 3 Gls)
No, that's wrong, you don't grasp it.
We would end up on 53 points and survive.
53 + 10 - 10 = 53 points.
If we didn't win another point in the new fixtures that would leave us with a minus 10 deficit on last season.
Yellow Dog
Level: Ricardinho
(39 Apps, 3 Gls)
- Season Ticket
- No
- Stand
- Don’t Attend Games
Sigh......deep breath. Let me try again and explain.
One of the reasons we stayed up last season was because we did really well - 3 wins, 3 draws - against the three relegated sides. In particular (for the purposes of this discussion), we beat Plymouth and Cardiff at home and drew with them away.
Your analysis doesn't include those results - you don't include them in the repeated fixtures (for good reason), but you don't include them in the promoted/relegated group either. You've totally ignored them, even though they were absolutely key in us getting to 53 points and safety.
Instead, you include Derby and Portsmouth's results from last season twice - once in the repeated fixtures, and once because you've included them in the promoted/relegated group as well. And because we did badly against them last season, it makes things seem rosier now than they really are.
You've created a false comparison.
To be an accurate projection, you need to be comparing all the results we got last season against all of the results we are getting this season. Not ignoring some, and double counting others because it fits your narrative.
So the total from the relegated/promoted group needs to be 16 not 11. Hence 53 + 10 - 16 + 1 (point from Leicester) = 48
maidenheadox
Level: Jamie Brooks
(53 Apps, 13 Gls)
By my reckoning we got 17 points from the non-identical games last season. W4 D5 L3. This season against the new teams we are D1 L2.Seriously.
They do exist and we acheived 11 points last season.
- Season Ticket
- No
- Stand
- Don’t Attend Games
My point exactly - although I have it as W4 D4 L4. We lost home and away to Leeds, away to Burnley and away to Sunderland.
Similar Threads
- Poll
Home Match Day Thread
04/11/2025 - MDT: Oxford United V Stoke City
