Jump to content
IGNORED

Tactical Genius?


Davefevs

Recommended Posts

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

  • Like 16
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a stat for the number of piece of piss 10 yard passes that get passed straight into touch? That’s a metric where Manning has succeeded in getting his message across tbf…….two home games in a row, thought I was watching Toolstation football tbh.

Edited by Numero Uno
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not sure I'm seeing some of the trends you point out tbh in those first 2 figures, to me it looks more like consistency has been lost and we are all over the place!

 

or it could be the beers...  the running net xG. is damning, though I do hate xG

Edited by DolmanGaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Wondered why you weren't watching Liverpool. Bet you don't post here for the next 45 mins !!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inspired by your stats Dave I've come up with my own boredness stats. 

0 = highly entertained 

10 = watching grass grow is more fun

QPR (a) 10

Boro (h) 4

Southampton (a) 6

Norwich 7.5

Huddersfield 8

Blackburn 7.5

Sunderland (h) 5

Hull 3

Watford 1

Birmingham 9

Millwall 8.5

Preston 8.5

Watford (h) 7

Coventry 4

Leeds 9

Boro (a) 2.5

Southampton 0

QPR (h) 9.5

Sheff W 9.5

Cardiff 9

Ipswich 5

Swansea 9

West Brom 9

Gives an average of 6.5

Edited by W-S-M Seagull
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

 

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Seriously that's good work - it proves what we think we know. It might be useful to get these stats in front of the Radio Bristol SOTC presenter and JP and Gary Owers.

Maybe an A3 sized print of the box heading the Running net xG column could be super-glued to BT's windscreen so he gets the picture as well (in case Ian Gay hasn't forwarded it on yet). I mean it sums everything up nicely. He doesn't even really have to look at the numbers to understand it.

Edited by Sleepy1968
sp
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

 

Seriously that's good work - it proves what we think we know. It might be useful to get these stats in front of the Radio Bristol SOTC presenter and JP and Gary Owers.

Maybe an A3 sized print of the box heading the Running net xG column could be super-glued to BT's windscreen so he gets the picture as well (in case Ian Gay hasn't forwarded it on yet). I mean it sums everything up nicely. He doesn't even really have to look at the numbers to understand it.

I do often wonder what Sids thoughts would be if he was on the outside looking in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Why start after Watford-rather arbitrary just to prove your point imo. Also no mention of injuries?

  • Facepalm 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Inspired by your stats Dave I've come up with my own boredness stats. 

0 = highly entertained 

10 = watching grass grow is more fun

QPR (a) 10

Boro (h) 4

Southampton (a) 6

Norwich 7.5

Huddersfield 8

Blackburn 7.5

Sunderland (h) 5

Hull 3

Watford 1

Birmingham 9

Millwall 8.5

Preston 8.5

Watford (h) 7

Coventry 4

Leeds 9

Boro (a) 2.5

Southampton 0

QPR (h) 9.5

Sheff W 9.5

Cardiff 9

Ipswich 5

Swansea 9

West Brom 9

Gives an average of 6.5

Sorry but Millwall H has to be a 10. Most boring game I have ever witnessed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

That last graphic is so telling, didn’t realise it was THAT bad. Would love a change now to hopefully give us some momentum going into the summer for a change but can’t see it happening. Oh to be a Bristol City fan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Condensed Version

We are shite 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

In fairness we went through terrible patches under Pearson when shots on goal were a rare treat - what’s depressing about Fevs analysis is very few sane people can see any way out when LM is pleased with the first half yesterday !

Not as bad as this, we didn't tend to go on drastically bad form too save for the short prriod when we had collapsed during Covid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, George Rs said:

That last graphic is so telling, didn’t realise it was THAT bad. Would love a change now to hopefully give us some momentum going into the summer for a change but can’t see it happening. Oh to be a Bristol City fan. 

6 game rolling average is quite interesting!

image.png.3737e052aa20bcb01950a69450353a59.png

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

image.png.78d4b0ef8e8bc89a48e95988164ef8c8.png

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!! 😮😮😮

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

image.png.5069db1515489569db1dffbd36669dfa.png

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

image.png.74c270403cbcc01ce24e2bd108e55bc9.png

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

image.png.53424b6706d28fa126e616d63827fc50.png

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

lines and lines and lines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, George Rs said:

To be completely honest i don’t really understand what these represent, all i know is that red is bad and i’m seeing a lot of it 😂

That’s the simplicity of pictures!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Why start after Watford-rather arbitrary just to prove your point imo. Also no mention of injuries?

Because it’s 14 games ago and we’ve picked up 12 points in that time. It’s not cherry picking when people point out you’ve been crap for nigh on three months or a third of a season. Many managers get fired for less. It also covers this year to date.

On the other hand if you want to use 26 points from 23 games to make a point what point are you making? As for injuries didn’t the previous regime with a better record this season have MORE injuries?

Edited by Numero Uno
  • Like 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Why start after Watford-rather arbitrary just to prove your point imo. Also no mention of injuries?

All of mannings 23 games is on that graphic why not look at what was posted

But of course you won't 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...