This morning I find myself in a very awkward position - agreeing with Jamie Redknapp and Paul Merson.
At full-time after Newcastle United's 2-1 win over Wolverhampton Wanderers on Sunday, Jamie Redknapp went on a huge rant about something that has been irking me for a while as an ageing football fan and it was great to see it being called out as the big bag of balls that it is.
I'm not saying that xG is a completely useless metric, it definitely serves a purpose ... if you're a scout, but so many outlets, especially football YouTubers, put far too much stock into what is essentially an arbitrary statistic.
It's probably a nice bit of filler for a scouting report, but essentially, it means very little.
The explanation on Google of how xG is counted is: "xG uses a scale of 0 to 1, where 0 is an impossible chance and 1 is a guaranteed goal. The value is based on historical data from similar shots."
How is that useful, and to whom? It's a guess based on a myriad of players of varying qualities in very different circumstances and creating an average of whether or not those chances led to a goal to determine if this player will score or not. It's gubbins.
If I took that same shot that Harvey Barnes scored from yesterday I can almost guarantee I'd miss, wildly. So my horrendous shot would then factor into the calculation for xG the next time someone is in a similar position, regardless of the gulf in quality between myself and whoever is taking the shot. We shouldn't even be in the same conversation let alone the same reckoning for a stat that scouts use to determine if someone is good or not.
Granted that's a hyperbolic example, but you see what I mean? It's the roughest of rough guides but people have started putting so much stock into it and Jamie Redknapp has had enough.
When host David Jones brought up the point about xG at full-time, Redknapp immediately launched into a rant.
"I don't care. I couldn't care less about xG. It's nonsense all of that xG, because if you're a good striker of the ball and you've got an opportunity from 20-25 yards and you've got a bit of composure about you, you can strike a ball, have a shot. Are you going to tell Kevin De Bruyne you've got a 0.1 chance I wouldn't care."
Even Paul Merson made sense backing up Redknapp's point when Jones said "I suppose the point is you've got more chance of scoring from six yards than 20 yards" with Merse responding "Yeah but you're likely to have a lot more space to shoot from 20 yards".
I don't know, maybe we old geezers just can't keep up with the modern changes in the game, but I'll die on this hill that xG is nowt but gubbins.
Although, the fact that both Merson and Redknapp think it's pap could mean I'm on the wrong side of this one.
PL | GD | PTS | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
Liverpool
|
7 | 11 | 18 |
2 |
Manchester City
|
7 | 9 | 17 |
3 |
Arsenal
|
7 | 9 | 17 |
4 |
Chelsea
|
7 | 8 | 14 |
5 |
Aston Villa
|
7 | 3 | 14 |
6 |
Brighton
|
7 | 3 | 12 |
7 |
Newcastle United
|
7 | 1 | 12 |
8 |
Fulham
|
7 | 2 | 11 |
9 |
Tottenham Hotspur
|
7 | 6 | 10 |
10 |
Nottingham Forest
|
7 | 1 | 10 |
11 |
Brentford
|
7 | 0 | 10 |
12 |
West Ham United
|
7 | -1 | 8 |
13 |
Bournemouth
|
7 | -2 | 8 |
14 |
Manchester United
|
7 | -3 | 8 |
15 |
Leicester
|
7 | -3 | 6 |
16 |
Everton
|
7 | -8 | 5 |
17 |
Ipswich
|
7 | -8 | 4 |
18 |
Crystal Palace
|
7 | -5 | 3 |
19 |
Southampton
|
7 | -11 | 1 |
20 |
Wolves
|
7 | -12 | 1 |