Nottingham Forest 1-0 West Ham Utd (14/8/22)

Relive every moment of every first team game since the beginning of the 2005/06 season. Our archive of matchday threads originally posted in the General Discussion Forum.

Moderator: Gnome

Post Reply
Online
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32135
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1788 likes
Total likes: 2073 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

Colours never run wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 9:43 pm Which means what? :eh:
It's just word soup from video gamers.
User avatar
Danny's Dyer Acting
Posts: 8983
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:37 pm
Has liked: 642 likes
Total likes: 1853 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Danny's Dyer Acting »

Colours never run wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 9:43 pm Which means what? :eh:
We created plenty of good chances to score but finishing let us down wasn't good enough. This also won't take into account the chance from the disallowed goal.

Assuming we don't just have a squad of bad players then the type of attacking performance we saw on Sunday would see us win that game more often than not.
User avatar
Bubbles Fortuna
Posts: 17824
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:25 pm
Has liked: 1934 likes
Total likes: 4635 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Bubbles Fortuna »

Colours never run wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 9:43 pm Which means what? :eh:
It gives each shot a decimal chance of leading to a goal based on distance from the goal and some other things, then adds all of those together to estimate how many goals you 'should' have scored.

Essentially on average with the chances we had we should have scored 2.65 goals.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
Posts: 14692
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: on parole
Has liked: 917 likes
Total likes: 1919 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Doc H Ball »

Whoever calculates those stats hasn’t watched us for long.

There’s certain games when you can just sniff the air and know for sure we’re not scoring.

I’d rather we employed a witch doctor than a statistician.
User avatar
iLoveLasagne
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:17 am
Has liked: 204 likes
Total likes: 216 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by iLoveLasagne »

Doc H Ball wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:37 pm Whoever calculates those stats hasn’t watched us for long.

There’s certain games when you can just sniff the air and know for sure we’re not scoring.

I’d rather we employed a witch doctor than a statistician.
Or better yet, employ a striker. But a witch doctor won't hurt.
User avatar
sendô
Posts: 44309
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:41 pm
Location: rubbing my eyes in disbelief - we've won a European trophy!
Has liked: 2426 likes
Total likes: 2637 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by sendô »

xG is largely a load of subjective b*llocks that should be taken with a healthy grain of salt, but nonetheless having an xG of 2.65 or whatever is a fair indication that we created a lot of good chances.

It's not at all comforting of course. How often did we do similar last season? Burnley away springs immediately to mind, plus Brentford home, Leeds home.
User avatar
Colours never run
Posts: 25386
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:46 am
Location: "Be in no doubt, we are part of the most successful stadium migration in history"
Has liked: 6811 likes
Total likes: 2363 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Colours never run »

iLoveLasagne wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:44 pm Or better yet, employ a striker. But a witch doctor won't hurt.
No witch doctor arrived as of yet but will a witch director, do?
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66972
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2437 likes
Total likes: 4293 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by bubbles1966 »

Another site reckon our xG was 2.09 and Forest's was almost identical.

FWIW. the professional gamblers/bookmakers/traders running clubs like Brighton and Brentford, and outperforming the market, think xG is a load of cobblers according to some article I read a while back.
User avatar
Colours never run
Posts: 25386
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:46 am
Location: "Be in no doubt, we are part of the most successful stadium migration in history"
Has liked: 6811 likes
Total likes: 2363 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Colours never run »

Of course it's a load of old b*llocks. Means bugger all.
User avatar
Bubbles Fortuna
Posts: 17824
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:25 pm
Has liked: 1934 likes
Total likes: 4635 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Bubbles Fortuna »

It is mostly nonsense as it doesn't take into account the quality of the shooter or the goalkeeper, I'm also not sure it's sophisticated enough to distinguish between a header from a floated cross vs a driven one and the like.
User avatar
Colours never run
Posts: 25386
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:46 am
Location: "Be in no doubt, we are part of the most successful stadium migration in history"
Has liked: 6811 likes
Total likes: 2363 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Colours never run »

It also doesn't take in to account Ref and VAR f*** ups either.
Online
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32135
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1788 likes
Total likes: 2073 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

(Un)fortunately the league table uses real goals, not the xbox variety.
Crouchend_Hammer
Posts: 26349
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:31 am
Location: Forest Gate
Has liked: 137 likes
Total likes: 2357 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Crouchend_Hammer »

Does anyone know how the 2.75 was comprised?
Apart from the penalty and Soucek's header I can't think of any real clear cut chances hwere the XG would be that high
Yes we hit the bar twice but the xg for those would be low as they were not clear cut chances

Knowing the silliness of it, the calculation probably includes the Soucek effort blocked and the penalty which is nonsensical
User avatar
Bubbles Fortuna
Posts: 17824
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:25 pm
Has liked: 1934 likes
Total likes: 4635 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Bubbles Fortuna »

Crouchend_Hammer wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 11:52 pm Does anyone know how the 2.75 was comprised?
Apart from the penalty and Soucek's header I can't think of any real clear cut chances hwere the XG would be that high
Yes we hit the bar twice but the xg for those would be low as they were not clear cut chances

Knowing the silliness of it, the calculation probably includes the Soucek effort blocked and the penalty which is nonsensical
I think the penalty is worth 0.75 on its own.
User avatar
HammerMan2004
Posts: 26788
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:01 pm
Location: I have no idea.
Has liked: 500 likes
Total likes: 1275 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by HammerMan2004 »

Crouchend_Hammer wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 11:52 pm Does anyone know how the 2.75 was comprised?
Apart from the penalty and Soucek's header I can't think of any real clear cut chances hwere the XG would be that high
Yes we hit the bar twice but the xg for those would be low as they were not clear cut chances

Knowing the silliness of it, the calculation probably includes the Soucek effort blocked and the penalty which is nonsensical
Zouma’s header cleared off the line for one.
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 40715
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
Has liked: 1905 likes
Total likes: 1614 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Cuenca 'ammer »

didn't Benni have a shot on target, the keeper parried it away only for Tom and their defender to get into a scramble on the goal line and it went for a corner ??

:chin:
Crouchend_Hammer
Posts: 26349
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:31 am
Location: Forest Gate
Has liked: 137 likes
Total likes: 2357 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Crouchend_Hammer »

I get the Zouma one, but the Benny shot would have been a low XG
It would be interesting to see a break down of the 2.75 and the score each 'chance' was assigned
User avatar
Danny's Dyer Acting
Posts: 8983
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:37 pm
Has liked: 642 likes
Total likes: 1853 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by Danny's Dyer Acting »

Crouchend_Hammer wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 6:59 am I get the Zouma one, but the Benny shot would have been a low XG
It would be interesting to see a break down of the 2.75 and the score each 'chance' was assigned
This is the version used in the tweet on the last page - https://www.infogol.net/en/matches/resu ... -14/954113

Might not be the same site as bubbles mentioned but this one clearly uses the same model as it has the same lower number - https://understat.com/match/18219

Interesting point on both is that neither of them include the Benrahma disallowed goal or the Soucek shot that led to the penalty. Both would be very high value chances.

None of this is meant as a perfect tool to say "we should have won that game" - we deservedly lost because our finishing was poor - but it does add weight to the argument that the overall performance shouldn't be of huge concern.
User avatar
sutts07
Posts: 13066
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Block 112, a far cry from CR1
Has liked: 24 likes
Total likes: 539 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by sutts07 »

xG isn't all subjective bollox at all. It gives a very good indication of how many goals a team 'should' have scored in a game.
We should have scored two or three goals in that game from the chances created and the xG numbers back that up.

We had 19 shots
10 from inside the box
5 on target - Soucek x2, Zouma, Benrahma and Rice
Keeper saved 4 and 1 was blocked

Coming away from the game, we were all saying that Soucek should have scored his header and Rice should have scored the pen. We were also unlucky not to have either of the efforts off the bar creep in and Zouma was unlucky with his one off the line.

Could easily have scored 3 or 4 on another day. Just didn't drop for us.
Last edited by sutts07 on Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
El brooko79
Posts: 9428
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:38 am
Has liked: 2962 likes
Total likes: 1975 likes

Re: ⚽ Nottingham Forest v West Ham United: match thread

Post by El brooko79 »

sendô wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:50 pm xG is largely a load of subjective b*llocks that should be taken with a healthy grain of salt, but nonetheless having an xG of 2.65 or whatever is a fair indication that we created a lot of good chances.

It's not at all comforting of course. How often did we do similar last season? Burnley away springs immediately to mind, plus Brentford home, Leeds home.
Yep I have a big question mark about someone producing comparable stats from subjective data.
How can the xG of a ball dropping to Coufal outside the box be really compared to one dropping to De Bruyne outside the box.
Too many variables to have the same expected result.

I
Post Reply