[Albion] Premier League 16/04/25

[Uh_huh_him]

We couldn’t lay a glove on Palace

And yet we've beaten Newcastle twice at their place.

Funny old season, this one.

 

[Justice]

And yet we've beaten Newcastle twice at their place.

Funny old season, this one.

Indeed it is

 

[Uh_huh_him]

3 own goals for Marc Guehi this season.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Just had to dig out the highlights to watch that Eze penalty.

Worth it.

 

[Weststander]

Just had to dig out the highlights to watch that Eze penalty.

Worth it.

Pope won the mind games with the feigned dive the other way, Eze wrongly thought he could just roll it in.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Pope won the mind games with the feigned dive the other way, Eze wrongly thought he could just roll it in.

Yeah, but also he clearly doesn't really know how to execute that type of penalty.
He pretty much stops, which should be illegal, before rolling the ball at the goal.

It's dreadful execution from start to (non) finish.

 

[Albion my Albion]

Damn, I had Newcastle 4 - 0 Crapstal Palarsch. It never goes for me.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Palace get a good old fashioned beating, which is fair enough. But can we now say XG is absolutely bollocks. Newcastle XG 1.39 palace XG 2.0…so how does that measure with a 5.0 thrashing ??

Having seen the highlights, no idea how Newcastle's xg got tallied up to just 1.39.
5-0 looks a bit of a lucky result.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Bloody hell, I bet palace didn't see conceding ten goals in the rest of the game and the next one next when they were two up after half an hour against Man city. That's quite a calamitous fall off. I hope this sends them into a losing spiral*. At least until the game after the semi.






*Just seen they've got bournemouth next. Maybe they could draw that and then re-embark on the conceding five a game losing spiral.

 

[oldboyroy]

Palace concentrating on Fa cup now then.

 

[Brian Munich]

Confirming, yet again, that xG is essentially bollocks

Not at all. What this confirms is that Palace have shit strikers and a shit keeper.

 

[bhafc99]

With it being a double game week in FPL for Newcastle and Palace, pleased that Isak and Murphy scooped up plenty of points for me. But - having swallowed bitterly and for the first time ever put Palace players in my squad - fecked off that the likes of Munoz got -1 across two fecking games. Never ever again.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Palace have an Xg of 2.0
Highlights I saw, showed three decent chances and 5 goals for Newcastle from their xg of 1.4 from 14 shouts

Take Palace's missed pen out of their xg and you're looking at 0.13 per shot (30% better than Newcastle's average xg per shot)
And yet none of them made the highlights?

Something doesn't add up.

 

[mwrpoole]

Bloody hell, I bet palace didn't see conceding ten goals in the rest of the game and the next one next when they were two up after half an hour against Man city. That's quite a calamitous fall off. I hope this sends them into a losing spiral*. At least until the game after the semi.






*Just seen they've got bournemouth next. Maybe they could draw that and then re-embark on the conceding five a game losing spiral.

I was just reading that Palace aren’t very happy with the PL. Semi final weekend they were due to play Arsenal at Emirates & that fixture now been rearranged for next Wednesday, a few days before their day out at Wembley. I sense the five a game spiral could start again!

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I was just reading that Palace aren’t very happy with the PL. Semi final weekend they were due to play Arsenal at Emirates & that fixture now been rearranged for next Wednesday, a few days before their day out at Wembley. I sense the five a game spiral could start again!

yeah I bet they aren't.

I wasn't happy about having to play Forest/Villa/Palace in a week after most of our players came back from international matches all over the world, and Palace had only played 3 matches in the month prior.

Oh well.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

That was brilliant: Wharton on the edge of the Newcastle box, looking for space to shoot and tripped over his own feet

Don't get the hype with that kid. Pacy and clever but gives it away so much.

Adam Wharton? PACY? I'm not sure you are thinking of the right player.

He's like a less good, younger, English, Pascal Groß. If he WAS pacy, he'd be at a bigger club than Palace.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

 

[nickbrighton]

As a measure of what the score should have been, yes it's bollocks.
As a way of measuring the effectiveness of the attacking team, it's a pretty decent measure.

How does that measure any effectiveness? in our 7-0 thrashing the xG was 3.23-0.8 in Forests favour. so they out performed the xG by 100%. In the 3-0 t0 Chelsea it was 1.7-0.57, so we out performed by near 100%, Southampton it was 0.13-4.01. There are numerous examples from all teams where the xG is so far out from final score it just beggars belief that its taken seriously by anyone.
All it shows us is that xG bears virtually no relationship to actual score- sometimes (southampton) its spot on, but more often its way off. So with zero consistency the methodology used to work it out is demonstrably wrong, if it were anything like right then in the vast majority of games it would be fairly close to the actual results-and it isnt . The only thing it says with any certainty is that the team with the most chances is more LIKLEY to win, and any damn fool can tell you that, and it doesn't even guarantee that

There are simply too many factors involved in getting the ball in the net for it ever to be anything other than a rough guestimate, from sudden gusts of wind, a slippery patch of grass, a divot, a slight twinge in a muscle, all sorts.

 

[Simster]

Just bouncing this. Worth it for the mesmerizingly shit penalty miss just in case anyone on here missed it.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

How does that measure any effectiveness? in our 7-0 thrashing the xG was 3.23-0.8 in Forests favour. so they out performed the xG by 100%. In the 3-0 t0 Chelsea it was 1.7-0.57, so we out performed by near 100%, Southampton it was 0.13-4.01. There are numerous examples from all teams where the xG is so far out from final score it just beggars belief that its taken seriously by anyone.
All it shows us is that xG bears virtually no relationship to actual score- sometimes (southampton) its spot on, but more often its way off. So with zero consistency the methodology used to work it out is demonstrably wrong, if it were anything like right then in the vast majority of games it would be fairly close to the actual results-and it isnt . The only thing it says with any certainty is that the team with the most chances is more LIKLEY to win, and any damn fool can tell you that, and it doesn't even guarantee that

There are simply too many factors involved in getting the ball in the net for it ever to be anything other than a rough guestimate, from sudden gusts of wind, a slippery patch of grass, a divot, a slight twinge in a muscle, all sorts.

That's all well and true. However, who is claiming XG is directly related to the score?