TWar’s In-Depth Football Analysis

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

One wherein you are not comparable to a premier league striker, or even a championship level one.

So any player that hasn't played championship level or above in "very low level" in your eyes then. Interested to hear what level that makes you then.

[TWar]

6 minutes ago, Turkish said:

So any player that hasn't played championship level or above in "very low level" in your eyes then. Interested to hear what level that makes you then.

Yeah, compared to professional footballers on millions a year, a very low level. Obviously. Did I burst your bubble that you and Adam Armstrong were peers? 

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

Yeah, compared to professional footballers on millions a year, a very low level. Obviously. Did I burst your bubble that you and Adam Armstrong were peers? 

What on earth are you going on about now?!!  

 

 

[TWar]

12 minutes ago, Turkish said:

What on earth are you going on about now?!!  

 

 

What level did you play at?

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

What level did you play at?

a far better level than you, that I am certain of

[Dman]

3 minutes ago, TWar said:

What level did you play at?

Does it actually matter. 

Anyone who has played from tyro - the champions league would be able to tell you that Armstrong’s chance was a sitter which he should be scoring. That’s ultimately what this argument has come from. 

if you honestly believe that his attempt was simply unlucky, because it hit the post, that says a lot about your knowledge of football. Or agenda… 

[TWar]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

a far better level than you, that I am certain of

Predictably evasive.

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

Predictably evasive.

Tell me otherwise then, what level did you play at?

[TWar]

Just now, Turkish said:

Tell me otherwise then, what level did you play at?

I don't claim level of play is correllated to football knowledge (below full time professional footballer), you do.

If you are going to do the "listen to me guys, I'd be much better in a kick about than you so I REALLY understand the sport" card, which is pretty silly regardless, you might as well atleast give a reason why you believe this.

[TWar]

6 minutes ago, Dman said:

Does it actually matter. 

Anyone who has played from tyro - the champions league would be able to tell you that Armstrong’s chance was a sitter which he should be scoring. That’s ultimately what this argument has come from. 

if you honestly believe that his attempt was simply unlucky, because it hit the post, that says a lot about your knowledge of football. Or agenda… 

At that angle there is no way the shot has an xG of over 0.5. Can't find data as it's the cup, but I guarentee it isn't a "should be scoring" chance.

[Dman]

Just now, TWar said:

At that angle there is no way the shot has an xG of over 0.5. Can't find data as it's the cup, but I guarentee it isn't a "should be scoring" chance.

Hang on, just to get this correct. You do not think that this (photo below, just as he was about the strike the ball is a “should be scoring chance?” 
 

LMFAO. They don’t get any easier. 

[TWar]

Just now, Dman said:

Hang on, just to get this correct. You do not think that this (photo below, just as he was about the strike the ball is a “should be scoring chance?” 
 

LMFAO. They don’t get any easier. 

They are quite clearly easier more centrally. 

[badgerx16]

6 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Tell me otherwise then, what level did you play at?

 

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

I don't claim level of play is correllated to football knowledge (below full time professional footballer), you do.

If you are going to do the "listen to me guys, I'd be much better in a kick about than you so I REALLY understand the sport" card, which is pretty silly regardless, you might as well atleast give a reason why you believe this.

Just tell him you played in the Southern League - he'll never know if it's true or not.

[Dman]

Just now, TWar said:

They are quite clearly easier more centrally. 

Should he have scored that, yes or no? 

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, Dman said:

Should he have scored that, yes or no? 

I have watched George Best put the ball over the bar from a central position on the edge of the goal area, any chance can be missed.

Edited 21 March, 2022 by badgerx16

[TWar]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

 

Just tell him you played in the Southern League - he'll never know if it's true or not.

He's probably working out whether it is easier to lie and say he was a high flying pro and have people call it as obvious bollocks or tell the truth and have people realise the entire reason for his opinion being valid is that he once had a trial at some 4th tier side before they passed him over 30 odd years ago.

[Dman]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

I have watched George Best put the ball over the bar from the edge of the goal area, any chance can be missed.

I wonder what the XG was of that attempt. 

[OttawaSaint]

Just now, TWar said:

I don't claim level of play is correllated to football knowledge (below full time professional footballer), you do.

If you are going to do the "listen to me guys, I'd be much better in a kick about than you so I REALLY understand the sport" card, which is pretty silly regardless, you might as well atleast give a reason why you believe this.

I think you are still missing the point entirely. I'll spell it out.

1) There are certain aspects of the game like formation, tactics, shape and movement that people who watch the game a lot, can study, quantify and understand. These people have good insight into the potential outcome of the game or why certain things worked and didn't against other teams. Etc.

2) Then there are people who actively play the game, they have a better insight into how it actually feels to play the game, what is easy, what is more difficult, how nerves and confidence effect the game. 

I simply pointed out that from what you had said about AA being unlucky is that you likely fit into bracket 1. It wasn't a slight or snub, but I realized that if you'd actually played the game to a decent enough level that it was a bad miss and not unlucky. Yes it hit the post, but in this circumstance it wasn't unlucky. The lad clearly had no confidence and and tried to force the ball in and it ended up hitting his heal. I know because I've done it myself when I wasn't confident. For a striker playing well, that chance was an easy one.

Sometimes on Canadian TV we get shows with "miss-play of the day". Football is growing here but hockey etc. are sports that people are more familiar with and play. Often these show will show a footballer spooning an effort over the bar and say "OMG what a terrible miss" but many times the chance itself was to those with playing knowledge a really tough chance, the ball was at pace, he's stretching trying to reach the ball and there are 2 defenders closing in. But the presenters would in these cases probably say, "ohhh AA hit the post, how unlucky and, uggh that other guy missed an easy one". However, if they'd played the game they'd know that AAs was an easy chance and the other more difficult.

In conclusion, no-one is saying you don't know your stuff about xG etc. only that your perspective for certain situations seems to be off and I think shows you haven't really played the game.

[TWar]

14 minutes ago, Dman said:

Should he have scored that, yes or no? 

No. It probably had about a 25% chance of going in at most. Here is Danny Ings taking on a similar shot against Arsenal in 2019/20 similar angle and distance out, other side. This chance is easier for a right footer but is the most comparable one I can find without spending loads of time.

This had an xG of 0.27. Therefore 3/4 times this would be expected to miss. Fans think these always go in because of confirmation bias. You remember the ones that do and forget those that don't.

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[OttawaSaint]

12 minutes ago, TWar said:

They are quite clearly easier more centrally. 

You'd be surprised. I certainly prefer a slight angle because it gives you more options.

[TWar]

2 minutes ago, OttawaSaint said:

I think you are still missing the point entirely. I'll spell it out.

1) There are certain aspects of the game like formation, tactics, shape and movement that people who watch the game a lot, can study, quantify and understand. These people have good insight into the potential outcome of the game or why certain things worked and didn't against other teams. Etc.

2) Then there are people who actively play the game, they have a better insight into how it actually feels to play the game, what is easy, what is more difficult, how nerves and confidence effect the game. 

I simply pointed out that from what you had said about AA being unlucky is that you likely fit into bracket 1. It wasn't a slight or snub, but I realized that if you'd actually played the game to a decent enough level that it was a bad miss and not unlucky. Yes it hit the post, but in this circumstance it wasn't unlucky. The lad clearly had no confidence and and tried to force the ball in and it ended up hitting his heal. I know because I've done it myself when I wasn't confident. For a striker playing well, that chance was an easy one.

Sometimes on Canadian TV we get shows with "miss-play of the day". Football is growing here but hockey etc. are sports that people are more familiar with and play. Often these show will show a footballer spooning an effort over the bar and say "OMG what a terrible miss" but many times the chance itself was to those with playing knowledge a really tough chance, the ball was at pace, he's stretching trying to reach the ball and there are 2 defenders closing in. But the presenters would in these cases probably say, "ohhh AA hit the post, how unlucky and, uggh that other guy missed an easy one". However, if they'd played the game they'd know that AAs was an easy chance and the other more difficult.

In conclusion, no-one is saying you don't know your stuff about xG etc. only that your perspective for certain situations seems to be off and I think shows you haven't really played the game.

I disagree, what is easy against a amateur goalkeeper and a premier league keeper is a completely different ballpark to the point that these are not remotely comparable. xG is much more valuable as it compares players of the same level. Applying your knowledge of what is easy down the park is about as valuable as applying your knowledge of making beans on toast when running a michelin star kitchen for an evening.

[Dman]

6 minutes ago, TWar said:

No. It probably had about a 25% chance of going in at most. Here is Danny Ings taking on a similar shot against Arsenal in 2019/20 similar angle and distance out, other side.

This had an xG of 0.27. Therefore 3/4 times this would be expected to miss. Fans think these always go in because of confirmation bias. You remember the ones that do and forget those that don't.

Those two chances aren’t even remotely similar. 
 

1. look at the keepers position. Very good from Ramsdale, poor from the city keeper.

2. look at the defenders around Ings and sliding towards the back post, which is where he’d have to hit the ball to score. Unless you’ve got the ability to whip it near post (very hard finish).

3. Ings you’d need to take a touch bend in the corner. Armstrong was running onto the ball and could easily put his foot through it. 
 

Poor argument to try and justify your weak argument. 

Edited 21 March, 2022 by Dman

[hypochondriac]

59 minutes ago, TWar said:

Yeah, compared to professional footballers on millions a year, a very low level. Obviously. Did I burst your bubble that you and Adam Armstrong were peers? 

My brother in law played regularly in league 2 and a bit in league 1. Played a number of times at St Mary's too. I wouldn't say he was a very low level, he is ridiculously good when he plays for my five a side team. 

[OttawaSaint]

23 minutes ago, TWar said:

No. It probably had about a 25% chance of going in at most. Here is Danny Ings taking on a similar shot against Arsenal in 2019/20 similar angle and distance out, other side.

This had an xG of 0.27. Therefore 3/4 times this would be expected to miss. Fans think these always go in because of confirmation bias. You remember the ones that do and forget those that don't.

This one is much harder, he has #21 breathing down hos neck, the player in the center looking to lunge and there is far less goal to go for on the far side. Ideally he'd want to curl it with his right just inside the far post but that lunging defender in his eyeline makes it tricky so he'd have top go top corner. 

Edited 21 March, 2022 by OttawaSaint

[Alanh]

24 minutes ago, Dman said:

Hang on, just to get this correct. You do not think that this (photo below, just as he was about the strike the ball is a “should be scoring chance?” 
 

LMFAO. They don’t get any easier. 

In the exact same situation another 10 times I reckon he would have scored 3 or 4 at the most.  That's reflection of both the difficulty of the chance and AA's ability.  Harry Kane in the same situation gets more than 3 or 4.  The photo doesn't tell us enough as you can't tell the relative direction of movement of the player or ball.  My recollection is AA was a bit off balance and the ball got stuck under his feet.  He had to adjust to get anything on the shot.  He could / should have done better but it's never a sitter.

IMO piling into TWar for having a different opinion and being prepared to defend it in a variety of ways is pretty pointless on an interent forum.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

19 minutes ago, TWar said:

No. It probably had about a 25% chance of going in at most. Here is Danny Ings taking on a similar shot against Arsenal in 2019/20 similar angle and distance out, other side. This chance is easier for a right footer but is the most comparable one I can find without spending loads of time.

This had an xG of 0.27. Therefore 3/4 times this would be expected to miss. Fans think these always go in because of confirmation bias. You remember the ones that do and forget those that don't.

The keeper has narrowed the angle far, far better here than in the other one

[TWar]

17 minutes ago, Dman said:

Those two chances aren’t even remotely similar. 
 

1. look at the keepers position. Very good from Ramsdale, poor from the city keeper.

2. look at the defenders around Ings and sliding towards the back post, which is where he’d have to hit the ball to score. Unless you’ve got the ability to whip it near post (very hard finish).

3. Ings you’d need to take a touch bend in the corner. Armstrong was running onto the ball and could easily put his foot through it. 
 

Poor argument to try and justify your weak argument. 

1. The City keeper was positioned fine, he was covering his near post. Leno (not Ramsdale) was not, he was beaten at the near post

2. The ball was past the defender before they had got in position to block so it didn't effect the shot

3. Ings is running onto his own touch, Armstrong is hitting it first time, the latter is definitely harder

If you don't like that though, here is Redmond against bournemouth. Again, very similar position, xG 0.18. I don't see how you could say that the Armstrong chance is three times as likely as this one in order to make it even a 50/50 to score.

 

It's confirmation bias, people remember the goals and forget the misses.

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[TWar]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

My brother in law played regularly in league 2 and a bit in league 1. Played a number of times at St Mary's too. I wouldn't say he was a very low level, he is ridiculously good when he plays for my five a side team. 

All relative init. To you hes quality, to the likes of Saints and City he would look hilarously out of his depth. 

[OttawaSaint]

15 minutes ago, TWar said:

I disagree, what is easy against a amateur goalkeeper and a premier league keeper is a completely different ballpark to the point that these are not remotely comparable. xG is much more valuable as it compares players of the same level. Applying your knowledge of what is easy down the park is about as valuable as applying your knowledge of making beans on toast when running a michelin star kitchen for an evening.

False equivalence there.

For your analogy. Lets say we are watching Gordon Ramsay and he says something like the texture of this dish is all wrong, it needs to be crisper and not so soggy. 

A person who had worked in a restaurant kitchen would understand, "ah yes, he needed to broil it with a bit of glaze, it does give him the taste and texture that Gordon wanted".

The person that watched youtube videos of others cooking and doesn't cook themselves might know what to do but not know what that texture feels like or how it should taste.

[Dman]

4 minutes ago, Alanh said:

In the exact same situation another 10 times I reckon he would have scored 3 or 4 at the most.  That's reflection of both the difficulty of the chance and AA's ability.  Harry Kane in the same situation gets more than 3 or 4.  The photo doesn't tell us enough as you can't tell the relative direction of movement of the player or ball.  My recollection is AA was a bit off balance and the ball got stuck under his feet.  He had to adjust to get anything on the shot.  He could / should have done better but it's never a sitter.

IMO piling into TWar for having a different opinion and being prepared to defend it in a variety of ways is pretty pointless on an interent forum.

Watch it back. AA was running on the the ball, it was perfectly weighted. 

Any striker worth their salt puts that away 8 or 9 times out of 10. 

AA being off balance and the ball getting stuck under his feet is an indication of his ability, not the difficultly of the chance. 
 

As for Twar, he thinks he knows best constantly. Never willing to admit he’s wrong. He made a ridiculous statement about Adam Armstrong’s ‘ceiling’ and has been scrambling weekly to try and justify it. It’s got to the point where it’s almost laughable. 

[TWar]

6 minutes ago, OttawaSaint said:

False equivalence there.

For your analogy. Lets say we are watching Gordon Ramsay and he says something like the texture of this dish is all wrong, it needs to be crisper and not so soggy. 

A person who had worked in a restaurant kitchen would understand, "ah yes, he needed to broil it with a bit of glaze, it does give him the taste and texture that Gordon wanted".

The person that watched youtube videos of others cooking and doesn't cook themselves might know what to do but not know what that texture feels like or how it should taste.

You don't think youtube videos would tell you more crispy and less soggy would mean broil it with a bit of glaze? Seems like an easy thing to communicate. Similarly it is reasonably easy to work out if a striker should be scoring or not to a decent level using knowledge and/or stats. I don't think I'd ever think "well, when I did that same thing down the park it was pretty easy so Armstrong should do better" because I realise it's comparing treehouses to palaces, it's just not relevant.

"I've watched a bunch of games and/or am aware of the stats and most premier league level, multi millionaire strikers who spend their lives learning their craft put that away"

is definitively better than

"When I make that shot against builders and painters who play as a goalkeeper for fun it's pretty easy so I don't know why our forward can't put it away"

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[TWar]

7 minutes ago, Dman said:

Watch it back. AA was running on the the ball, it was perfectly weighted. 

Any striker worth their salt puts that away 8 or 9 times out of 10. 

AA being off balance and the ball getting stuck under his feet is an indication of his ability, not the difficultly of the chance. 
 

As for Twar, he thinks he knows best constantly. Never willing to admit he’s wrong. He made a ridiculous statement about Adam Armstrong’s ‘ceiling’ and has been scrambling weekly to try and justify it. It’s got to the point where it’s almost laughable. 

You know a penalty only has a 85% chance of going in? You think that is the same difficulty as a pen?

Speaking of admitting you are wrong, any comment on your take that we'd finish dead bottom and Ralph would be gone by September? I seem to remember you laughed at someone for predicting 10-14th, do you stand by that?

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[Dman]

5 minutes ago, TWar said:

1. The City keeper was positioned fine, he was covering his near post. Leno (not Ramsdale) was not, he was beaten at the near post

2. The ball was past the defender before they had got in position to block so it didn't effect the shot

3. Ings is running onto his own touch, Armstrong is hitting it first time, the latter is definitely harder

If you don't like that though, here is Redmond against bournemouth. Again, very similar position, xG 0.18. I don't see how you could say that the Armstrong chance is three times as likely as this one in order to make it even a 50/50 to score.

 

It's confirmation bias, people remember the goals and forget the misses.

You’re trying to justify why he shouldn’t have scored by showing examples of 2 similar chances that were errr…. scored? 
 

what was Djenepo XG for his goal in that game, a similar opportunity to Armstrong, another goal. 

[TWar]

1 minute ago, Dman said:

You’re trying to justify why he shouldn’t have scored by showing examples of 2 similar chances that were errr…. scored? 
 

what was Djenepo XG for his goal in that game, a similar opportunity to Armstrong, another goal. 

0.23. Less than a 1/4 chance.

And yeah I'm showing the goals, I don't remember the misses, that is literally my point.

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[Dman]

3 minutes ago, TWar said:

You know a penalty only has a 85% chance of going in? You think that is the same difficulty as a pen?

Wtf are you rambling on about now? 

[Alanh]

5 minutes ago, Dman said:

Watch it back. AA was running on the the ball, it was perfectly weighted. 

Any striker worth their salt puts that away 8 or 9 times out of 10. 

AA being off balance and the ball getting stuck under his feet is an indication of his ability, not the difficultly of the chance. 
 

As for Twar, he thinks he knows best constantly. Never willing to admit he’s wrong. He made a ridiculous statement about Adam Armstrong’s ‘ceiling’ and has been scrambling weekly to try and justify it. It’s got to the point where it’s almost laughable. 

Agreed it was a perfectly weighted ball but he had to wrap his foot around it and he got the timing / connection wrong.  He might have scored it last season for Blackburn but he's low on confidence at the moment so he missed - a reflection of his current ability.

I still think it's pointless piling into TWar.  He's got an opion which he attempts to back up in a variety of ways - stats / comparable images etc.  That's got to be better than someone who resorts to whataboutery or insults.  Not specifically referring to you.

[Dman]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

Speaking of admitting you are wrong, any comment on your take that we'd finish dead bottom and Ralph would be gone by September? I seem to remember you laughed at someone for predicting 10-14th, do you stand by that?

Yep, happy to hold my hands up and admit I was wrong in that respect. We signed a top striker, who was better than anyone expected who’s pushed us up the league. 

[TWar]

4 minutes ago, Dman said:

Yep, happy to hold my hands up and admit I was wrong in that respect. We signed a top striker, who was better than anyone expected who’s pushed us up the league. 

He isn't even our top scorer. Che is, any comment on your view that he is championship quality?

We had a "bad takes" amnesty thread the other day, I think you missed it because you were banned for 2 weeks for being overly aggressive and unpleasant, maybe you could give it a visit as you have more bad takes than anyone I've seen on here. Not even mentioning your views on JWP, Jankewitz, San Marino, Pompey...

It's weird you'd call someone out for being "Never willing to admit he’s wrong" when you still have those howlers to your name.

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[OttawaSaint]

12 minutes ago, TWar said:

You don't think youtube videos would tell you more crispy and less soggy would mean broil it with a bit of glaze? Seems like an easy thing to communicate. 

So actually working in a kitchen environment and constantly tasting food and using the various techniques and equipment gives you the same level of understanding as just reading a book or watching a video. Got it!

[TWar]

5 minutes ago, OttawaSaint said:

So actually working in a kitchen environment and constantly tasting food and using the various techniques and equipment gives you the same level of understanding as just reading a book or watching a video. Got it!

In this analogy though you don't "work in a kitchen environment", you once made a cheese sandwich. "Working in a kitchen environment" would be playing in a professional, competitive side under a trained manager amongst other full time professional players. Playing a bit of Sunday league is just wildly wildly unrepresentative. I think we can go back and forth on that point with different analogies that bagging a hatrick against a pub team makes you more qualified to assess pro players but I simply don't think it does. We'll have to agree to disagree at that point.

Edited 21 March, 2022 by TWar

[Dman]

5 minutes ago, TWar said:

He isn't even our top scorer. Che is, any comment on your view that he is championship quality?

We had a "bad takes" amnesty thread the other day, I think you missed it because you were banned for 2 weeks for being overly aggressive and unpleasant, maybe you could give it a visit as you have more bad takes than anyone I've seen on here. Not even mentioning your views on JWP, Jankewitz, San Marino, Pompey...

It's weird you'd call someone out for being "Never willing to admit he’s wrong" when you still have those howlers to your name.

This same line comes out every time you’re losing a debate. 

There’s a thread dedicated to your utter nonsense pal.. I think that says a lot. 

[OttawaSaint]

14 minutes ago, TWar said:

"I've watched a bunch of games and/or am aware of the stats and most premier league level, multi millionaire strikers who spend their lives learning their craft put that away"

is definitively better than

"When I make that shot against builders and painters who play as a goalkeeper for fun it's pretty easy so I don't know why our forward can't put it away"

I see I'm not going to get through to you. 

But I'll leave you with this. When I came to Canada I got really into (ice) hockey and the Ottawa Senators. I have been to many games, watch almost every game on TV, I play the video games, play fantasy hockey etc. 

When I'm with my friends watching I can reel off the stats etc. and describe the "trap" formation and powerplay strategies etc. until the moose come home. But when it comes to the technical aspects of skating, passing and shooting I defer to them. Initially I'd yell. "oh god what a miss!!!" when I was watching but my friends who actually play the game, and yes, vs Dave the maple syrup farmer, they will say, actually, on the backhand there, in that tight at that speed is really tough. They should know, they play the game, they are not pros, nor do they play against pros and pros would absolutely destroy them but they have played so much they know what is a difficult finish that looks easy and also an easy finish that looks difficult. They have a perspective that I just don't have.

[TWar]

1 minute ago, Dman said:

This same line comes out every time you’re losing a debate. 

There’s a thread dedicated to your utter nonsense pal.. I think that says a lot. 

It's not about "losing", you dredge up any old post that you think makes me look incorrect, like me overrating Armstrong which I did, admittedly. But you don't like it when I point out your multiple more aggregious old posts like that we would finish bottom and that Ralph, Che, JWP were all shite and Jankewitz, San Marino, and Pompey were class. Also some shite about Bednarek being better pre-Ralph when he didn't start a single game. I could go on but that's just off the top of my head.

I don't say this to prove you don't know much, although it doesn't look great, I do it to point out that when you discuss football as often as we do on this forum you are going to make bad takes, I did overrate Armstrong and it was a bad take. That doesn't invalidate future analysis because if it did, after all the shite you've said, you would be about as credible as someone who had just watched their first game.

[OttawaSaint]

3 minutes ago, TWar said:

In this analogy though you don't "work in a kitchen environment", you once made a cheese sandwich. "Working in a kitchen environment" would be playing in a professional, competitive side under a trained manager amongst other full time professional players. Playing a bit of Sunday league is just wildly wildly unrepresentative. I think we can go back and forth on that point with different analogies that bagging a hatrick against a pub team makes you more qualified to assess pro players but I simply don't think it does. We'll have to agree to disagree at that point.

Once made a sandwich? So I've played football once?

I've played the game since I was a kid, I'm now 48 and play indoor and outdoor in organized leagues with refs and linos. I've played 1000s and 1000s of games. Sorry if it reminds you of being picked last in PE but I can't help that. That chance of AAs was a very easy chance. .75 on the xG. It simply was and if you ask Adam he'll tell you that himself, he's probably pretty down about it saying to himself, "i usually slot those in in my sleep". Sorry if this offends you. I hope he will bounce back and be a force for us, I really do.

[TWar]

Just now, OttawaSaint said:

Once made a sandwich? So I've played football once?

I've played the game since I was a kid, I'm now 48 and play indoor and outdoor in organized leagues with refs and linos. I've played 1000s and 1000s of games. Sorry if it reminds you of being picked last in PE but I can't help that. That chance of AAs was a very easy chance. .75 on the xG. It simply was and if you ask Adam he'll tell you that himself, he's probably pretty down about it saying to himself, "i usually slot those in in my sleep". Sorry if this offends you. I hope he will bounce back and be a force for us, I really do.

It objectively wasn't 0.75 on the xG, that's crazy, a pure 1v1 without anyone there, dead central, with time to control it is like 0.65. 

You played in "organised leagues", I mean great, I have too, I don't think this makes me more equiped to comment on pro football because those "organised leagues" contained plummers and electricians and not people who get paid millions to spend their life perfecting football under arguably the best manager in the world, in this case. If you don't like the "Once made a sandwich" replace with regularly made sandwiches, it aint giving you any cred on your "how to run a michelin star kitchen" ledger, but having a good theoretical knowledge would certainly be better than nothing.

[Dman]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

It's not about "losing", you dredge up any old post that you think makes me look incorrect, like me overrating Armstrong which I did, admittedly. But you don't like it when I point out your multiple more aggregious old posts like that we would finish bottom and that Ralph, Che, JWP were all shite and Jankewitz, San Marino, and Pompey were class. Also some shite about Bednarek being better pre-Ralph when he didn't start a single game. I could go on but that's just off the top of my head.

I don't say this to prove you don't know much, although it doesn't look great, I do it to point out that when you discuss football as often as we do on this forum you are going to make bad takes, I did overrate Armstrong and it was a bad take. That doesn't invalidate future analysis because if it did, after all the shite you've said, you would be about as credible as someone who had just watched their first game.

You specifically ignored Armstrong’s chance from your list of 3 big mistakes that cost us, which has started this mass debate. 

To me, that is because of 1 of 2 reasons. 
1. Because you’ve been banging on about Armstrong for the past 2 weeks and don’t want to lose ground in your assault of Broja.

2. You’re just absolutely clueless when it comes to football other than reading %’s from a spreadsheet. 
 

Please provide any posts where I have said San Marino, Jankowiz or Pompey were class? I tell you what, don’t bother looking cos that’s a lie to try and deflect the argument and won’t find any. I cba to get into that debate again. 
 

Note you still haven’t acknowledged that Armstrong should have scored, despite demonstrating 2 other, harder, opportunities where scored 😂😂

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, TWar said:

He's probably working out whether it is easier to lie and say he was a high flying pro and have people call it as obvious bollocks or tell the truth and have people realise the entire reason for his opinion being valid is that he once had a trial at some 4th tier side before they passed him over 30 odd years ago.

I never said j was a high flying pro. You’re making that up just like you made up Id only played pub standard and that you’d upset by saying i wasn’t as good as Adam Armstrong and didn’t understand XGs. All utter nonsense because you’re struggling to come to terms with the fact most people have realised when it comes to understand what’s going on on the field of play, not on a spreadsheet youre regularly embarrassed 

[TWar]

2 minutes ago, Dman said:

You specifically ignored Armstrong’s chance from your list of 3 big mistakes that cost us, which has started this mass debate. 

To me, that is because of 1 of 2 reasons. 
1. Because you’ve been banging on about Armstrong for the past 2 weeks and don’t want to lose ground in your assault of Broja.

2. You’re just absolutely clueless when it comes to football other than reading %’s from a spreadsheet. 
 

Please provide any posts where I have said San Marino, Jankowiz or Pompey were class? I tell you what, don’t bother looking cos that’s a lie to try and deflect the argument and won’t find any. I cba to get into that debate again. 
 

Note you still haven’t acknowledged that Armstrong should have scored, despite demonstrating 2 other, harder, opportunities where scored 😂😂

It's because it wasn't a big mistake. It was about a 25% chance of scoring at most.

Those chances I was showing you the xG, which is the chance of them going in, whether they actually did or not is irrelevant.

[Dman]

3 minutes ago, TWar said:

It objectively wasn't 0.75 on the xG, that's crazy, a pure 1v1 without anyone there, dead central, with time to control it is like 0.65. 

You played in "organised leagues", I mean great, I have too, I don't think this makes me more equiped to comment on pro football because those "organised leagues" contained plummers and electricians and not people who get paid millions to spend their life perfecting football under arguably the best manager in the world, in this case.

The keeper didn’t even save it, he didn’t need to, it was never going in and was extremely lucky to hit the post, such was the spin on the ball after he scuffed it. So I don’t understand the relevance in this respect. 
 

AA had so Much space he even time to take a touch and drill It in the bottom corner past the keeper. 

[TWar]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

I never said j was a high flying pro. You’re making that up just like you made up Id only played pub standard and that you’d upset by saying i wasn’t as good as Adam Armstrong and didn’t understand XGs. All utter nonsense because you’re struggling to come to terms with the fact most people have realised when it comes to understand what’s going on on the field of play, not on a spreadsheet youre regularly embarrassed 

You never said anything, you implied you were a good player and when I asked what level you avoided answering it. And continue to do so. What level are you that makes you think you are better equiped to judge than others?