It is hard to think of a more pointless and less meaningful statistic in football than xG, which, disappointingly, appears to have crept its way into football commentary and punditry for good.
Even a brief analysis of a league’s xG data will uncover massive inconsistencies between the numbers, the comparable success of the teams and their current positions on the ladder.
No matter how hard the propeller heads attempt to convince us of the reliability of the metric, using measurements such as proximity and angle to goal, as well as the defensive presence and means of delivering the shot (ie either foot, head or body), makes the determined result as utterly unreliable as any statistic I have seen in world sport.
The saddest part of all is the penchant of certain A-League commentators to refer to the data in a manner which suggests the more reliable football knowledge of the professional coaches controlling the teams is insultingly of equal value to a metric based on obvious patterns even blind Freddy could observe.
When a football team has the ball often and presses forward into attacking positions, they are more likely to score than a team struggling to play out from the back and make inroads through a high press. Talk about stating the obvious.
That is what coaches talk about: moving the ball with proactive possession and getting into good areas, observing the number of occasions that occur and the frequency that wider and creative players achieve success in providing clear chances for the players likely to convert them.
That is football 101 and I doubt a coach anywhere in the world is surmising all of the above into a nonsensical xG statistic, as opposed to addressing the important and varied components that make up the new-fangled confection.
When teams head to the sheds at half time, coaches refer to speed of play, decision-making, control of the sphere, balls into the area and defensive shape when the opponent is on the front foot, amongst other things.
Ange Postecoglou, Manager of Tottenham Hotspur reacts during the Premier League match between Tottenham Hotspur and Aston Villa at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium on November 26, 2023 in London, England. (Photo by Justin Setterfield/Getty Images)
The science nerds intent on convincing us that xG is so valuable that managers like Ange Postecoglou, Pep Guardiola and Jurgen Klopp are walking into change sheds at the break and saying, “Well done boys, we had an excellent 0.70 xG for goals in that first 45 and the xGA (expected goals against) was only 0.45, so I think it is clear that we are well in front in this derby”, need new jobs and new goals in life.
It is simply mind-bogglingly stupid, bereft of real substance and flies in the face of the nuances of football and the sheer beauty, unpredictability and opportunistic nature of it.
Strangely, in an age where football supporters suffer the painful interventions of VAR and many long for its removal, commentators and pundits appear hypocritical in their willingness to adopt the xG statistic and another piece of science that does little else but detract from the most wonderful of games.
I’d prefer a commentator tell me about the team that looked to have built the most pressure, created the most chances and failed to capitalise on moments, as well as the lucky mob who snatched a winner on the counter.
Rather than tell me the xG predictions were wrong, as they frequently are, and the better team may have dropped the points on a day they could potentially have dominated.
If we ever reach that day; where punditry, speculation and commentary is jettisoned for a nonsensical statistic like xG, along with the rise of VAR and its problems, football could well be emotionally dead.
When A-League commentator Robbie Thomson reverts to the xG metric soon after half-time, I wonder if he has anything at all to say.
(Photo by Julian Finney/Getty Images)
He would probably argue that the reference backs up the prior commentary and half-time discussion. I’d argue it is tautological if that has indeed taken place and a simplistic summary based on a broad range of factors unable to create anything near a resounding factual conclusion.
Apparently, Manchester City’s Erling Haaland possesses an xG rating of 1.15 heading into the second half of the EPL season. Good for him I say.
Whilst some might argue that number tells us a great deal about the player and the team for which he plays, I’d argue differently.
The xG metric of Haaland tells us nothing more than that the team he plays for has plenty of money, wins everything most of the time and features a squad that results in the statistical domination of other teams.
Moreover, they create plenty of chances on goal, dominate possession and rarely lose. I do not need a clumsy and unreliable metric to tell me that and neither should A-League commentators.
Redondo
Roar Rookie
Well I provided a link to the A-League stats and you mentioned something you heard on the tele. I'll stick with my bubble.
TheSecretScout
Roar Guru
wrong like i said, adelaide is #1 in both categories - was mentioned on the broadcast last night as well
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
that could end up being inappropriate Stu, I am not going there!!
Stuart Thomas
Expert
I too am a lawnie. Love the game. Best terminology in world sport I say. A 'toucher', 'jack', 'end', 'head', 'weight', 'drive', 'doubles', 'triples', 'measure' and 'ditch'. Make up a sentence with those and see what you get.
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
Ohhhhh I can only imagine
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
mate are you going to tonight's Wanderers v City game, being the Unite round, you have the lot on your doorstep. Should be a cracking game this one
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
Ever been to Italy Stu? Even the Garbage men think they've got style in their fluoro vests
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
Johnston was approached by Jock Stein in the early 1980s with a view to him playing for Scotland as he was eligible through his father. Johnston declined Stein’s offer and also resisted calls to play for his country Australia in 1981 and 1984. He instead chose to represent England at under-21 and ‘B’ team level. Early in his career in England he had described playing football for Australia as “like surfing for England.” Johnston was also eligible to represent the South African national side due to being born there but was never approached or offered by the South African federation to play for them. Johnston was called up to the full England squad in November 1987 but did not make an appearance at that level.
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
his Australian home is just down there street from my oldies. He turned up at the street christmas party.
Football is Life
Roar Rookie
Nothing wrong with lawnies Stu. it's one of the world's great beer sports i.e. those that you are legal to play, with a cleansing beverage in your hand.
jbinnie
Roar Rookie
Grem - Sorry, got the wrong end of the stick there. Craig Johnstone has never been the figurehead to Aussie football he should . or could, have become, mainly I think because he chose not to represent Australia in international football. (You may or may not know that when playing with the great Liverpool side he could have played with England , South Africa or Australia. He chose not to play with SA or Australia and many here branded him a "traitor" when he finished without ever having represented any of those 3 countries. You mention skills and how they play a part in the game. They are namely 5 , ball control, shooting, tackling, passing and dribbling. Heading was included but medically I think the football hierarchy would like that "skill" to remain under the carpet and it is obviously a dying art when watching many of our younger players playing in a game. What you must also remember is that the game too changes and right now the emphasis shown in European football is to move a ball quickly and accurately forward to your front players. In the old days this used to be called "push and run) but when watching our A-League games it is obvious the thinking is still heavily weighted towards possession at all costs, no matter where the ball is being played, a system played some 10-15years ago by a top Barcelona team. jb
Grem
Roar Rookie
I wasn’t having a go at your thinking or ideas. I was responding to Stuart’s departing to bowls because of Americanisation. I’m open to change as I am a later to football follower – not a purist. I loved Craig Johnstone’s ideas to develop more ball skills in our younger players by having a more futsal style competition than traditional football. I think he was also proposing similar adult professional competitions for our A Leagues players to participate in to improve skills and be another competition people may watch. Tinkering with the offside rule would not concern me at all.
jbinnie
Roar Rookie
Grem - I suggest you get your thinking gear into action. My suggested change to the offside rule has nothing whatever to do with the "Australianisation" of our game. The offside rule has been with us far too long in it's present form and deserves to be looked at by those that claim to have the interests of the game at heart. People want to be entertained and most critics you talk to have one complaint in comment, not enough goals being scored. not because of the size of the goals but by the times the ball finds the net. Cheers jb.
Grem
Roar Rookie
And time outs would be too much? Perhaps a power play with only two defensive players allowed in their own half? Why not have two more posts outside the goals and you get half a goal? Or is this Australianising it too much?
mrl
Roar Rookie
On recent efforts, Adelaide are bound to hit the wood-work at some stage....with the ball bouncing back into general play. It is so frustrating!!
Grem
Roar Rookie
It was 1-4 a couple of days ago. Why so pessimistic now?
jbinnie
Roar Rookie
Stuart- this venture into stat analysis is as many suggested a complete and utter nonsense. I refer to the most hated and misused rule in football's handbook and wonder when the powers that be are going to do something to rid us of the fights, arguments, claims and counter claims that surround this ancient rule. The reason I call it "ancient" is obvious, despite today's billions of dollars being spent on making players, fitter, faster, bigger and stronger, and we are led to believe better, nothing has ever been done to better the "place of operation", the pitch. The analysts long ago decided the action areas numbered 3, the defensive, middle and attacking thirds, and yet few, if any. of the pundits. care to come up with suggestions that will increase the size of the middle third where stats show us, most of the action takes place. Now if only we could make the middle third bigger we would be creating more space for attacking players to attack and less space for defensive players to defend . How could this be done without a magnitude of world- wide spending? Extend the front 18 meter line out to touchlines, immediately creating the potential "action area" in front of each goal. This would result in more goals (all present offside stoppages would be reduced). An added benefit would be that the ultimate offside decision maker, the linesperson, would only be policing 18 meter "box" thus making it easier to keep up with the play When oh when is some pundit going to come up with a system that will nullify this tiresome "possession at all costs" dictum. This reduction in offside decisions would go a long way towards making our game brighter and better. jb
Stuart Thomas
Expert
He looks like he has style. I like him.
Stuart Thomas
Expert
Yep, keep it as simple and beautiful as possible. The day we have a captain's challenge and referees throw yellow flags I'll depart the game and work on my lawn bowls game.
Stuart Thomas
Expert
Nice analogy. Maybe next I'll have a crack at players cribbing a few metres at throw-ins, the lack of the use of the word 'parity' whenever scores are levelled or maybe my pet football hate, goal-keepers flopping on the ground with the ball to waste time. Grandpa Simpson signing out! :laughing: