• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

thfcsteff said:
The frustrating thing is we are so close. Between starters and prospects, we are literally a couple of key ingredients away.
Click to expand...
And that’s were time for squad building and youth development need to align
Arsenal have brought in Nwaneri to replace the guy they sold to Fulham
That’s smart
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Yep with the same chances
a 0.1 chance means 1 out of every 10 times that shot goes in, right?
So you need to amen the exact same shot 10 times to score 1
That’s how I learned stats when I did it at uni. The conditions have to be same for the chance to be the same
Change the condition e.g a different shot and the chance changes
Hence why accumulating them doesn’t work
Click to expand...
You're approaching it backwards
If 1000 shots are taken from that spot, in that situation, about 10 goals would go in. So we work down from there and say 1 goal from 100 shots or roughly 0.1 goals per shot from that spot, in that situation.

If Son took 1000 shots from that spot, in that situation, he might score 25.
If Skipp took 1000 shots from that spot, in that situation, he might score 5.

Accumulating them does work, but the big variable is which player is taking those chances.
Haaland presumably outperforms XG, so he might score 25 whereas Foden in his current funk might score 5.
 
Bullet said:
You're approaching it backwards
If 1000 shots are taken from that spot, in that situation, about 10 goals would go in. So we work down from there and say 1 goal from 100 shots or roughly 0.1 goals per shot from that spot, in that situation.

If Son took 1000 shots from that spot, in that situation, he might score 25.
If Skipp took 1000 shots from that spot, in that situation, he might score 5.

Accumulating them does work, but the big variable is which player is taking those chances.
Haaland presumably outperforms XG, so he might score 25 whereas Foden in his current funk might score 5.
Click to expand...

You mean the same shot though every time ?
And players out according Xg changes the Xg next time don’t forget (depending on the Xg model)
I fully agree a better finisher will score higher than the Xg than a lesser one
But cumulatively adding up different types of shots with different XGA doesn’t increase the chance one them goes in. If for example a 0.1 Xg is scored that means the next 9 of the same shot wouldn’t be scored for that to be valid as a %
And I agree the variable is the player (and many other things such as timing of the game, weather, opposition keeper) but that is specific to that one shot at that time
 
You're approaching it backwards. A shot doesn't make the next one more or less likely, but that doesn't mean what you think it means.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I think we are 2 to 3 windows away from that. Until then I think we’ll probably sign 1 ready made, proven player and a few VERY promising young players in the summer and 1 player somewhere between those two categories in the January window. If we continue as we are now then I think summer 2026 is the one when we’ll sign a couple of ready made, in their prime players who cost almost all of the budget.
Click to expand...
By that time postecoglu will be sacked and we will have a rebuild and sell off any player that has done anything of promise on the pitch
 
thfcsteff said:
A great conversation to have IMO, because I disagree :)...I think against Ipswich we needed our leader group to step up and take charge of the game. They didn't. Perhaps it was a learning curve, but had we had (for example) a player such as Gallagher who drives and harries and carries and drives again, that energy and desire to win might well have been the difference/catalyst in a game such as Ipswich. Who knows, it's a fun thing to discuss though.
Click to expand...
Remember Lamela being great at that...

I think we have those profiles in our squad already. Solanke, Kulusevski, Sarr, Bentancur, both starting full backs if they aren't run into the ground.

I think very rarely has the problem been that we lack harrying, energy and desire. Second half vs Brighton perhaps, but that was just one of multiple problems.

Where I think we (mostly) lack leadership/character is when we're struggling to play out from the back (Palace, Brighton second half) and when the game gets frustrating for us (Ipswich, Brighton, Palace).

What we miss then imo is more someone to calm things down, try to reestablish control of the game. The confidence and belief that although this is difficult we can play our game and be successful at it.

The best at that (at his best) in our squad is Maddison. Like when he kept dropping deep when City pressed us high. A fully on form Maddison fixes most of those issues. Our other midfielders don't. I don't think Gallagher would either.

But we really could do with one more player capable of being that deep playmaker type at times at least.
 
thfcsteff said:
We shall see. All opinions my friend, non are simplistic at all :)...I think Nusa was a great fit for us at 20 mill and still wonder why it didn't happen (maybe the failed medical is true?).





I think not signing Neto was a major ingredient in this signing, yes. We already committed to Werner on the left, as Sonny's back-up I presume albeit they play the position differently of course. So Neto would've been the Johnson option (again, I am not a huge fan of his but Ange apparently was). Odobert is versatile I suppose in the sense he can play either wing. He just measures up as the sort of signing we tend to make these days. Mid-range fee, young, should hold his value if we want to cut our losses, and not too expensive in the wage dept. When it works out we look like ledges of course. And maybe he will!!! Time will tell I suppose...FWIW Moore's rapid ascent has been both excellent and encouraging!
Click to expand...
I think (certainly can't know) Nusa choosing Brentford over us (an understandable decision) meant we just weren't going to go back in for him any time soon. Ange has been really clear on only wanting players that really want to come here.

I like Neto, but too injury prone. We simply can't go for a player like that for big money. Not in our situation and not playing with our intensity.
 
billyiddo said:
Don't know why Odobert should be considered a shortlist punt - he looks every bit an Ange style winger and from the little we have seen he looks ready to make an impact as a rotational/back up option to Son off the left. I don't recall any other LWF being targeted or linked in the summer that would suggest he was not top of the list for that position.

Maybe missing out on Neto for the right hand side freed up a bit of budget to pursue this transfer (which may have been on the back burner given Burnley are in the champ and could have waited till next summer?) maybe there was money to do both? But given they play on opposite wings i don't see them as 1st priority vs 2nd priority (or lower) for the same position, if that's the angle? - I think we'll still be in for a RWF in the coming windows.
Click to expand...
Fully agreed.

As others have pointed out there was a reported interest in Doue, but he quickly went to PSG. Neto imo too injury prone.

I guess Odobert was easier to get and a bit cheaper due to Burnley getting relegated. But he was far from a cheap option. I'm guessing he was quite high up the list of targets. And I think being able to play both sides was an important thing for us.
 
thfcsteff said:
The frustrating thing is we are so close. Between starters and prospects, we are literally a couple of key ingredients away.
Click to expand...
Agreed. As you pointed out in a different post, both with regards to player quality and mentality/leadership/whatever. Not always easy to find that right ingredient.

For me... Backup GK, rotation left back, starting 6/DM, one quality wide player, option for Maddison centrally and a backup/rotation striker that isn't as injury prone?

Then depending on if/what younger players step up some of those could solve themselves. Which would also help with home grown numbers and all that.

If that happens we're quite close and January + this summer could wash away quite a lot of that frustration. If all of those have to be fixed in the transfer market, while also getting some "mentality improving" players in the door and with our HG issues it's a bigger fix.
 
braineclipse said:
Remember Lamela being great at that...

I think we have those profiles in our squad already. Solanke, Kulusevski, Sarr, Bentancur, both starting full backs if they aren't run into the ground.

I think very rarely has the problem been that we lack harrying, energy and desire. Second half vs Brighton perhaps, but that was just one of multiple problems.

Where I think we (mostly) lack leadership/character is when we're struggling to play out from the back (Palace, Brighton second half) and when the game gets frustrating for us (Ipswich, Brighton, Palace).

What we miss then imo is more someone to calm things down, try to reestablish control of the game. The confidence and belief that although this is difficult we can play our game and be successful at it.

The best at that (at his best) in our squad is Maddison. Like when he kept dropping deep when City pressed us high. A fully on form Maddison fixes most of those issues. Our other midfielders don't. I don't think Gallagher would either.

But we really could do with one more player capable of being that deep playmaker type at times at least.
Click to expand...

That's exactly my issue with Maddison. When he is 'on' he is excellent, and I was impressed by his off the ball work and leadership v City. Can he be that week in week out? I have my doubts and hopes...
 
thfcsteff said:
That's exactly my issue with Maddison. When he is 'on' he is excellent, and I was impressed by his off the ball work and leadership v City. Can he be that week in week out? I have my doubts and hopes...
Click to expand...
Maddison was apparently injured so didn’t start today
Came on and was pretty poor
Odd for a player with the clear ability
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Maddison was apparently injured so didn’t start today
Came on and was pretty poor
Odd for a player with the clear ability
Click to expand...

Wow again! Strange. Injured? I suppose he only came on because he had to then??? I wish we'd left Sarr on, we currently really miss him when he isn't playing. But he needs managing with minutes too I suppose...
 
thfcsteff said:
Wow again! Strange. Injured? I suppose he only came on because he had to then??? I wish we'd left Sarr on, we currently really miss him when he isn't playing. But he needs managing with minutes too I suppose...
Click to expand...
I think everyone is gonna need subbing in the coming month otherwise more people are gonna be dropping
 
I wanted/expected the midfield triangle to have 2 deep and 1 forward (rather than the opposite).

I forget the specifics, but can someone remind me please?

Was it Bentancur sitting with Sarr b2b and Deki further forwards...
Then subs...
Biss for Sarr and Madds for Johnson on 68 so Deki went up wide right where Johnson was.

Biss sitting deep like a 4141 like we did at City... ? So Madds and Bentancur in midfield, with Bentancur charging up wildly to press the keeper?!
Then Bergvall for Bents at 77.

Could have made a 5th sub but it's all a blur. Checking.... only 12 year old children left on the bench, plus Udogie who could have replaced Gray or allowed Gray to go infield with Biss maybe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back