As opposed to?
Trusting an algorithm to tell me how we played and if we looked like scoring.
It’s not that binary.
Obviously the eye test is important, but xG has a place in evaluating the long term trends, performance and potential of a side.
1 Like
Fair enough, it’s just not for me.
1 Like
Going back to the original question, I just read a piece in the paper about Southgate’s England in which it was pointed out that in proper matches - i.e. not like last night’s - he tends to play 5 at the back with two holding mid-fielders, just like we do. Counting the keeper, that is 8 defensively-minded players. In England’s case, the idea is to break quickly and England do have some nippy forwards who can do that. But Walsall do not, so we end up having endless possession between the defensive 7 or 8 players, usually ending with a hoof up the park.
Our best moments in matches are when we press at the front but Adebayo and Lavery can’t do all that and then run after the aimless long balls too.
1 Like
Strikers are naff even when faced with time in the box, Lavery struggles to stand up most of the time and Adebayo is still a work in progress.
Yes the midfield isn’t great, but there has been times when McDonald has delivered some quality and there’s rarely anything on the end of it.
Complicate it all you want but fact remains we are just not very good.
1 Like
At this low level I find that the most criminal and lax approach to final third.
Many limited teams from open play can rattle in about 10 goals a season from corners. Scarr must be the most useless giant CB out there for getting headers on target from corners, very frustrating.
1 Like