All my FM pain in one place

[SMV90]

       

My total shots: 131
My total goals: 3

The opponents total shots: 42
My opponents total goals: 9

Three times more goals for (as good as) three times less the shots. If I had to find a modicum, the most miniscule of positivity from this, I guess I can look at is: across a whole season of football, it was only 6 games where I felt genuinely and truly FM'd (the 1-0 loss to Wolves where Cunha scored wasn't so much an FM-ing, but still annoying)

Edited June 7, 2023 by SMV90

[JordanMilly]

What you'd be better looking at is your shots on target and your XG from those, and the opponent's XG from their shots on target. It might be that your players are making speculative shots, with most well off target, and those that are on target are from poor positions where the goalkeeper has a better chance of pulling off the save (tight angles, etc).

[higofagundes]

9 minutos atrás, JordanMilly disse:

What you'd be better looking at is your shots on target and your XG from those, and the opponent's XG from their shots on target. It might be that your players are making speculative shots, with most well off target, and those that are on target are from poor positions where the goalkeeper has a better chance of pulling off the save (tight angles, etc).

sorry, I'm not the guy who created the post and I don't mean to be rude but I could use the same argument about the opponent, take a look at the xg on the opponent too:
0.41 = 2 goals
0.15 = 1 goal
0.80 = 2 goals

why are they so accurate on goal then and we are not?

Can you provide any hints on whether a "touchline shouts" or tactical instruction could help our team be more accurate in the face of goal?

please don't tell me to use "work ball into box" or that my players bad. 

[JordanMilly]

Just now, higofagundes said:

sorry, I'm not the guy who created the post and I don't mean to be rude but I could use the same argument about the opponent, take a look at the xg on the opponent too:
0.41 = 2 goals
0.15 = 1 goal
0.80 = 2 goals

why are they so accurate on goal then and we are not?

Can you provide any hints on whether a "touchline shouts" or tactical instruction could help our team be more accurate in the face of goal?

please don't tell me to use "work ball into box" or that my players bad. 

It entirely depends on where they're getting the shots off from, position of defenders, etc. xG can very quickly become inflated with getting tonnes of shots off, and if the majority of his on-target shots are, for example, like this, where the keeper nearly has the ball anyway and it's basically just being kicked into him:


or from tight angles with little chance of success: 

then sure, you'll get shots on target, but the chances of those shots ever having gone in are slim to none. Meanwhile, if the opposition is getting decent space to get a shot off from in front of the goal where they have the largest surface area to hit in order to score, and where defenders may be blocking the goalkeeper's initial sight of the shot, he'll have a better chance of scoring, like this:

So it's about checking out the shot maps, the heat maps for your player's movement, etc, to see where any potential issue is arising in them getting into the best position to score.

[SMV90]

On 07/06/2023 at 14:15, JordanMilly said:

What you'd be better looking at is your shots on target and your XG from those, and the opponent's XG from their shots on target. It might be that your players are making speculative shots, with most well off target, and those that are on target are from poor positions where the goalkeeper has a better chance of pulling off the save (tight angles, etc).

Hey, Milly.

I did have a brief look around some of those matches and some shots were... ambitious, but a lot of them were genuinely good chances. It wasn't even necessarily a post to complain (not sure if it came across that way, it wasn't intended) just more a showing of some our incredibly unfortunate luck.

But, as you know with FM, we take the good with the bad. Sometimes the cookie crumbles favourably, other times, not so.

[wazzaflow10]

On 07/06/2023 at 09:15, JordanMilly said:

What you'd be better looking at is your shots on target and your XG from those, and the opponent's XG from their shots on target. It might be that your players are making speculative shots, with most well off target, and those that are on target are from poor positions where the goalkeeper has a better chance of pulling off the save (tight angles, etc).

 

Quote

it entirely depends on where they're getting the shots off from, position of defenders, etc. xG can very quickly become inflated with getting tonnes of shots off, and if the majority of his on-target shots are, for example, like this, where the keeper nearly has the ball anyway and it's basically just being kicked into him:

 

While 7 games isn't enough to call it a trend or expect it to "balance out" in that short window generating 2 or 3 expected goals is still generating 2 or 3 expected goals. It is a little misleading statistically to say "check where you're shooting from". It would be much more beneficial to say if you're shooting from a lot from long range there's likely going to be more variance in your actual goals compared to your expected goals. Thus, you're going to have more games where you get "FM'd". This is similar to NBA teams who's strategy is to shoot 3 pointers repeatedly. An off night means you might only score 85 while an on night you might score 130+ while generating 110 points for both games. 

What the "xG can very quickly become inflated with getting tonnes of shots off" line of thinking proposes (unintentionally) is that there is an inequality present in the distribution of goals from the ME based on if you're a high shot/low quality team vs a low shot/high quality team given xG is equal. If you ran a trial of multiple seasons half of whom are high shot teams and the other half are low shot teams but generate equal xG they should, as a group, end up with no statistically significant difference in the number of actual goals scored. However the high shot team might have a wider distribution of actual goals scored on a game by game basis than the low shot team hence unequal variance and therefore possibly more inconsistency in results. 

in the long run there should  be no fundamental difference in actual goals whether you employ a high shot or low shot strategy if xG is equal.