Our attacking intent

[WentToSchoolWith]

We are now bottom of the league for xG, with just 11.2 'expected' goals after 13 matches. I do not consider xG a perfect metric, but it represents us very well at the moment - we are expected to score less than a goal per game.

Worryingly, this has dropped off massively in the last 6 weeks or so. Since drawing at home to Millwall, we haven't managed to produce a single xG's worth of chances in a game (again, not a perfect metric, but look at the highlights of those games, and you'll notice our lack of clear cut opportunities), despite winning twice in that time.

Our goal today, both against Norwich, and Franco's against Blackburn were all moments of individual skill that cannot be relied upon moving forward.

I don't see Sheehan changing soon, is the problem. He sets us up well enough defensively, but we nearly always concede, and one goal is enough to beat us most weeks; two is practically a guarantee.

I'm so numb to watching our games at the moment, as I know exactly what to expect. People can defend Sheehan, and maybe he's somehow overperforming and we all overrate this squad, but I want my free time to be spent enjoying watching the Swans, and not gritting my teeth as we grind out a point away at Charlton or are absolutely battered by 21st place Southampton

 

[JackSomething]

I don't understand how they measure xG (and don't particularly care), but surely Key's chance near the end should have been practically a 1.0 on it's own, as that will surely be a goal most of the time.

 

[WentToSchoolWith]

I don't understand how they measure xG (and don't particularly care), but surely Key's chance near the end should have been practically a 1.0 on it's own, as that will surely be a goal most of the time.

Yeah, I'm surprised it's as low as it was. It considers defenders and keeper position, so it's basically impossible to get 1.0, that's the equivalent of a '100% chance' which just doesn't happen.

Think the Norwich equaliser from last week was 'only' like 0.95, and that was literally a tap in

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

Attacking is the hardest thing to get right. We have several new players up front and on the wing, and the existing players we already had we know can be very hit and miss. We probably need to persevere with some, but ship some of them on. And that's going to take time. I'm more than willing to give Sheehan until at least January to get that side of things right, maybe even the season.

Because at the other end, he has at least stopped us being the laughing stock we were under previous managers. I had started to become embarrassed about what we were under Williams and Martin. I'm not embarrassed anymore. And for me that's a start.

 

[monmouth]

Yeah, I'm surprised it's as low as it was. It considers defenders and keeper position, so it's basically impossible to get 1.0, that's the equivalent of a '100% chance' which just doesn't happen.

Think the Norwich equaliser from last week was 'only' like 0.95, and that was literally a tap in

I suppose, as Key proved, there was still a chance he could miss. Anyway, we don’t need XG or any such measure. Our own eyes will do. We create next to naff all. Idah’s goal yesterday and both Vip’s last week were all miracle hits. That can’t be relied on.

 

[Dillwyn the Dog]

I suppose, as Key proved, there was still a chance he could miss. Anyway, we don’t need XG or any such measure. Our own eyes will do. We create next to naff all. Idah’s goal yesterday and both Vip’s last week were all miracle hits. That can’t be relied on.

Created through the centre not pissing about on the wings only to eventually pass the ball back to the centre halves. Laudrups directness needed here

 

[Dillwyn the Dog]

I don't understand how they measure xG (and don't particularly care), but surely Key's chance near the end should have been practically a 1.0 on it's own, as that will surely be a goal most of the time.

I think XG refers directly to attacking intent, aggressive play and more shots, touches in the opposing box etc etc. We aren’t expected to score goals because we are so negative to start with

 

[swansvalleyjack]

Nice article in the Sunday Times about Robin Van Persie . In it is this Alex Ferguson special :


As a 72 yr old myself I can relate to this 100%.

 

[Swans Jack]

I think we have been guilty of going backwards when in attacking positions. But have also showed we want to attack at times. The problem is we are either not getting on end of them or no quality. It would be worse if Sheehan was unaware of this/ignorant to it, but seems every post match a player or him always highlight they need to work on this. Not saying that justifies it but just saying.

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

Nice article in the Sunday Times about Robin Van Persie . In it is this Alex Ferguson special :
View attachment 6948

As a 72 yr old myself I can relate to this 100%.

Arguably the greatest manager of all time saying that, think it says it all really. He must be bored shitless watching most modern football. From his pov, probably got out at the right time before it got taken over by pseudo science and the laptop brigade.

 

[Captain_Sham]

Brum are 4-0 up and thier xg is 0.6. Its a load of fking twaddle.

 

[sit_down_jack]

Brum are 4-0 up and thier xg is 0.6. It’s a load of fking twaddle.

Disagree, It doesn’t mean it’s a load of crap, it just tells you that they’ve either been clinical or they scored from fairly difficult areas. All it’s meant to indicate is the quality of chances that you create.

 

[Baron Goblet]

Not interested in XG. I am keen to see Ronald continue to improve. Am a tad concerned that Innoussa will be coached into a crustacean this season. Hope not.

 

[Malaga]

Not interested in XG. I am keen to see Ronald continue to improve. Am a tad concerned that Innoussa will be coached into a crustacean this season. Hope not.

He'll get plenty of support from the prawn sandwich brigade at least

 

[swan65split]

I hope theres some attacking intent this evening and we dont set up camp around our penalty area.