It's as if it's impossible to get past 5XG in the game despite the number of chances or goals.
#match?mid=6373986&stats
It's a record in ie of all seasons this one is there.

It's true that with such a great opponent, this must go down as one of VF🤣's major moments.

Ancelloti: C'est comme s'il est impossible de dépasser 5XG dans le jeu malgré les nombres d'occasions ni des buts.
#match?mid=6373986&stats
C'est un record en ie de toute les saisons celle est là.

Yes, the game is blocked at 5 or so

With 44 members in agreement, don't they have anything better than an inactive member at 14 ng?
Points distribution

lens59: Avec 44 membres entente ils n'ont pas mieux qu'un inactif à 14 ng ?
Distribution de points

And 11 days without a connection. How did the club propose or accept the IE match so far in advance? 🤔

bubulateigne8AnsAprès: Et 11j sans connexion. Il a fait comment le club pour proposer ou accepter le match IE autant à l’avance? 🤔

The €1M question

It's just that his last IE was three days ago. So he was on schedule 11 days ago.

Fougch: C’est juste que son dernier IE a eu lieu il y a trois jours. Donc il était dans les temps il y a 11j pour le programmer

So the deadline depends on the time between 2 scheduled EIs and not on the 'absolute' day of the season?
By this I mean that if it's 4 August and I don't have an IE scheduled, I can only offer or accept until 13 August but if I have one scheduled on 8 August, I can accept or schedule on 16 or 17 August?
Thanks for your reply in any case🙂

No, I don't think so, I just think that we can accept or schedule free days between the following day and D+9.
In this case, since his last IE was on August 1, he was able to schedule it on July 23 (as a reminder, there are 31 days in July). And 23 July was 12 days ago. He's been offline for 11 days, i.e. 24 July, and was able to schedule all his IEs.

Well, I'm not a rocket scientist, I'll have to check, but it makes sense to me 😅

It seems quite possible to go beyond 5 XG
#match?mid=6396106&score

How about that?
Having an xg at 0.09 each ... having 5 occasions at 0!
Having the text mode is funny when you then see the XG 😆
Or the commentator AND the audience are blind

I don't know whether we can go beyond 5 XGs or not. Personally, I'm one of those people who think that XGs should disappear from this game. They're useless, they don't represent the matches! The only thing they add is frustration. You can even get the same number of chances on both sides and have an xG twice as strong as your opponent!
It does everyone a world of good to see that they should have won.
And to top it all off, there's even a league table with the XGs! How's that for pointless provocation?

I think that the xg are calculated according to the opportunities there are opportunities that are very clear and others that are far from bringing a goal but I do not know if the game takes that into account. The game I shared with you 12-0 doesn't reach 5XG, the other game we've just shared with you 3-0 5.18 XG, what does it actually take into account when calculating these XG?

Ancelloti: Je pense que les xg sont calculés en fonction des occas il y'a des occas qui sont très claires et d'autres qui sont loin d'apporter un but mais je sais pas si le jeu prend en compte cela. Le match dont je vous ai partagé 12-0 il n'atteint pas le 5XG, l'autre match qu'on vient de nous partager 3-0 5.18 XG ça prend en compte quoi finalement pour calculer ces XG?

No, XGs are not calculated according to the occasion. It's really independent of the mdm.

Even if it's unlikely, you could have an XG of 1.0 and have 0 opportunities.

I find the xG system quite coherent. It depends on the quality of each occasion.

It's just that fouls/cards sometimes add a bit of xG, which isn't very clear. But otherwise for chances, if you understand a bit how it works, you can guess your xG before the end of the match (to within 0.1).

Ced90: Je trouve le système de xG plutôt cohérent. Il dépend de la qualité de chaques occasions.

Il y a juste les fautes/cartons qui parfois ajoute un peu de xG c’est pas très clair. Mais sinon pour les occasions si tu comprends un peu comment ça fonctionne, tu peux deviner ta xG avant la fin du match (à 0,1 près)

Not at all.
It's all a matter of chance! #doigtmouillé

Hydilik: Non, les XG ne sont pas calculés en fonction des occasions. C'est vraiment indépendant du mdm.

Même si c'est peu probable, tu pourrais avoir un XG de 1.0 et avoir 0 occasion.

Well, it's just a slightly less variable indicator than goals.

It reflects the tactical balance of power in a match rather than the final score. But it's still subject to probabilities, with all that goes with that, especially since it makes sense with a large sample of matches.

The problem isn't the xGs, it's the way some people interpret them.

That's the whole problem with probabilities, which are sometimes counter-intuitive.

Thank you Galy, thank you Galy, thank you
Thank you Galy, thank you Galy, thank you.

Galywat: Bah c'est juste un indicateur un peu moins variant que les buts.

Ça reflète un peu plus le rapport de force tactique au cours d'un match que le score final. Mais c'est quand même soumis aux probabilités donc avec tout ce qui va avec, notamment que ça prend tout son sens avec un échantillon élevé de matchs.

Le problème c'est pas les xG c'est l'interprétation que certains en font.

Tout le problème des probabilités, parfois contre intuitives.

Yes, I agree, that's why it's useless as an indicator, except to increase frustration.

Hydilik: Oui, je suis d'accord, c'est pour ça qu'il n'a aucun intérêt comme indicateur, sauf à augmenter la frustration.

Of course it's useful as an indicator of the relevance of the strategy we've put in place. On the scale of a match, and on the scale of a season.

It's the reading of the indicator that's flawed, not the indicator itself.

I totally agree that it's pointless and even very often misleading in its translation for certain matches, particularly in terms of the % chances of winning / drawing / losing.

For example, you open the scoring at the very start of the match and then you bet like crazy with 500 in defence without creating the slightest chance and your opponent no more than one or two because, despite having much better overall stats, he can only muster 300 in attack.

At the end of the match, you'll have a very low Xg like your opponent, with a 10 or 15% chance of winning and a 60 or 70% chance of drawing, whereas your real chance of winning was probably close to 80% and the % of drawing was 10 or 15%.

Now, everyone is entitled to believe that this is a great indicator if they want to. And then everyone has the right to believe that they've been the victim of an injustice by fixating on this indicator and then come whining that the actual ranking of their championship doesn't correspond to the corrected ranking where they were well ahead.

Hydilik: Oui, je suis d'accord, c'est pour ça qu'il n'a aucun intérêt comme indicateur, sauf à augmenter la frustration.

Well, I don't see why it should be removed. If some people are frustrated with it, they should just ignore it.

Personally, I think it's quite appropriate. You just have to take it for what it is.

WITH 5 ATTACKERS XG NORMALLY EXPLODE 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Eden Hzrd: AVEC 5 ATTAQUANTS LES XG EXPLOSENT NORMALEMENT 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

With 5 GAC I stop everything

Soon you won't be allowed to do anything,
4-4-2 or 3-5-2 no other option 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

I misspoke.

You know what the word indicator means. The reality is that I see more of the opposite on the forum. These days, many clubs put forward xGs on a defeat because they should have won 3-0 with a 50% chance.

This remains my opinion, but I have the impression that many clubs give importance to an indicator that is independent of the match engine.

That's still my opinion, but I don't think it brings any more dissatisfaction or incomprehension to clubs starting out.

Hydilik: Je me suis sans doute mal exprimé.

Tu sais ce que signifie le mot indicateur. La réalité, c'est que je constate plus l'inverse sur le forum. Aujourd'hui, nombreux sont les clubs qui mettent en avant les xG sur une défaite car ils auraient dû gagner 3 à 0 avec 50 % de chance.

Cela reste mon avis, mais j'ai l'impression que nombreux sont les clubs à donner de l'importance à un indicateur indépendant du moteur de match.

Cela reste mon avis, mais je pense que cela n'apporte plus d'insatisfact...

It's not really independent of the match engine. It's just another transcription of the actions that appear in the live game.

(I preferred it when it updated during the match, but because some people just didn't understand its meaning it's been removed).

The constant race to the bottom, frankly no thanks.

Galywat: Il est pas vraiment indépendant du moteur de match. C'est juste une autre transcription des actions qui apparaissent (ou pas) dans le live.

(Je préférais quand ça s'actualisait pendant le match, mais parce que certains comprenaient juste pas sa signification ça a été retiré). Si on retire encore le bilan post match, bof...

Le nivellement par le bas constant, franchement non merci.

I don't think the same as you. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think he's using the same factors to analyse the match.

MDM analyses by sector of play, whereas xG take a more global view. In short, you have higher values in defence, midfield and especially attack, so you have a better chance of winning.

On the other hand, the MDM can give victory to a weaker team, which is impossible for xGs. The xGs are always more important for the stronger team.

Hydilik: Je ne pense pas la même chose que toi. Peut-être que je me trompe, mais je pense qu'il n'utilise pas les mêmes facteurs pour analyser la rencontre.

MDM analyse par secteur de jeu alors que les xG ont une vue plus globale. En résumé, tu as des valeurs plus importantes en défense, au milieu et surtout en attaque, donc tu as plus de chances de gagner.

À l'inverse, le MDM peut donner la victoire à une équipe plus faible, chose impossible pour les xG. Les xG sont toujours plus importants pour l'...

Well, no, xGs don't always favour the strongest team.

Just like having more chances doesn't mean you were necessarily stronger.

It's very similar. You could see it very clearly in the old days, when you could see the evolution of xG over the course of a match.

Incidentally, you can still see part of it now by downloading the excel spreadsheets (I can't remember which file) ==> you can see the xG at the time of the action in question. If you cross-reference it with the match in question you'll see that it works in the same way as a goal or a chance. In fact, the big xG gains almost always correspond to a chance/goal.

I have matches with different xG and with a significant difference with the same number of chances. Obviously, if the teams are similar by more or less a certain value, the xG won't translate. But I'd say that if the xG difference is more than 100 points, the stronger team will automatically be declared the winner, whereas the weaker team can win the match (fortunately).

Hydilik: J'ai des rencontres avec des xG différents et avec une différence significative avec le même nombre d'occasions. Évidemment, si les équipes sont similaires à plus ou moins une certaine valeur, les xG ne vont pas se traduire. Mais je dirais qu'au-delà de 100 points de différence xG, l'équipe la plus forte sera automatiquement déclarée gagnante, alors que le match peut donner gagnant la plus faible equipe (heureusement).

It's just that opportunities or actions don't generate the same number of xg. You can have an opportunity/goal with few xg generated or, on the contrary, an opportunity/goal with a large xG.

in fact, everything displayed by the MDM generates XGs to a greater or lesser extent. For example, a guy who makes a lot of mistakes will have a few

Not at all. The mdm generates xg continuously, just like in the old days when you could see it rising little by little. It's just that it's no longer displayed, following comments from people who don't understand how a computer programme works, or what expected goals are.

Trying to understand the basis of the XGs provided by the mdm is complicated when you base your explanations on different statistics that are clear or understandable to you. It's complicated to explain them in the same way for every match you analyse.

Ancelloti: Vouloir comprendre sur quoi et basé les XG que nous sort le mdm c'est compliqué quand l'on se base sur différents statistiques qui nous sont claires ou compréhensible pour essayer d'expliquer les xg fournis par le mdm c'est compliqué de l'expliquer de la même manière à chaque match qu'on pourrait analyser

It's not complicated, it's just that most of those who complain don't understand that an 80% chance of scoring against 20 for the opposition at any given moment doesn't mean that the opposition will never score.

Demi-cerveau: Pas du tout. Le mdm génère de la xg en continu, comme à l'époque où on la voyait monter petit à petit. C'est juste que ça ne s'affiche plus désormais, suite à des remarques de personnes qui ne comprennent ni comment fonctionne un programme informatique, ni ce que sont les expected goals.

That's it. You generate them as the match goes on, and sometimes there are chances or goals that just generate more (in general, you can score a goal with 0.05 xG).

For those of you who are wondering, there's more here:

#matchs?export

"Match actions" --> you can see the evolution of the match's xG at the time of each action (foul/chance/goal). It's not as accurate as a minute-by-minute view, but you can still see what's going on.