AndyinLiverpool

I still miss getting up to switch over 😊

My wife thinks I'm quaintly old-fashioned for still calling them 'sides'. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one.

My wife thinks I'm quaintly old-fashioned for still calling them 'sides'. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one.

400 sovs- blimey.
They definitely won't fall apart quicker than a fraudulent university either.

A much better picture of what? Whether I'm likely to enjoy a game? It seems to me it's only useful for coaching and betting. If you do neither, it gives a picture of nothing.
Yet Live broadcasters yum this stuff up, despite the fact that anyone who wants this info can go to their bookie's website.

there's still time

there's still time

there's still time

CBT anonymous 

We've got ourselves a slow typer.

You clearly haven't been to Ireland for a while

I've never heard of TNT sports

I've never heard of TNT sports

The bookies themselves rely on such analysis quite a lot. They are big subscribers. On the other side, Matthew Benham, amongst other sports bettors, also relied heavily on stat analysis. He used xG in it's earliest guises to trade on football on the betting exchanges and made enough doing so to fund Matchbook, his own betting exchange. Matchbook's success in turn, allowed him to buy Brentford. 
On a general note, I'm not going to involve myself in this debate as sides are clearly de-marked already, but I would say that the way some are assuming statistical analysis is used in sport is fundamentally inaccurate. It is meant to supplement and complement other tools, such as video and live scouting and even form analysis, not replace them wholesale.

Rod stewart-a-like Alan Biley

Every week. Clubs dip in and out of form, move up and down the table. Ultimately come May the teams over the season are ranked 1 to 24 where they deserve to be.

I understand the technical and statistical value of xG for coaches, analysts, gamblers etc, but I've never needed xG to tell me that x player couldn't hit a cow's a*se with a banjo.
 

A much better picture of what? Whether I'm likely to enjoy a game? It seems to me it's only useful for coaching and betting. If you do neither, it gives a picture of nothing.
Yet Live broadcasters yum this stuff up, despite the fact that anyone who wants this info can go to their bookie's website.

I don't understand this. Expected goals is more representative than actual goals? What are they more represetative of?

uninterested

What was the xg?

A ref is disinterested, as in unbiased. Not an ionterest in one side or another.

uninterested

Don’t know about “disinterested” but he certainly looks “uninterested” 😝