[Classical Mechanic]

@Classical Mechanic Watch the highlight of the game again, in the 1st half 2 of arsenal's good chances came from our poor clearances(from Matic and Rojo), the only danger left we faced in this half was the kick from Lukaku. In the second half, Arsenal created 2 good chances, one led to the goal, the other led to De Gea's double saves. Sanchez, apart from the pass to Ramsey which is on Pogba as he should track Ramsey in that situation, did nothing special in this game. So your statement about Arsenal should win is arguable at best, the other was Lindelof did a bad job marking Sanchez is just simply wrong.

The goal was on Lindelof as much as Pogba, he didn’t get tight (which he failed to do too often) and Sanchez was allowed to turn and put the ball in. The gif is on the previous page. You have to get tight to players like Sanchez and make them play backwards or sideways.

 

[Lentwood]

Not perfect but another good performance. I’m still to be convinced that he can be world class but I’m starting to think he could at the very least be a good option in a back three

 

[We need an rvn]

Seriously people give a player one season before you judge him ffs

spot on. new coach / new league / new tactics / new team mates you need to understand how they play (and this ain't sunday league stuff). I'm a big fan and think he'll be a better defender than Jones / Smalling for us in the years to come. Always quote Vidic and Evra but that's my gut feeling.

 

[kaiz]

The goal was on Lindelof as much as Pogba, he didn’t get tight (which he failed to do too often) and Sanchez was allowed to turn and put the ball in. The gif is on the previous page. You have to get tight to players like Sanchez and make them play backwards or sideways.

Most people will say that you shouldn't get too tight to players like Sanchez or Aguero because these players can turn easily like Sanchez did when Smalling got tight to him and got a foul (although he dived). My point is Sanchez was ineffective this game and he mostly operated in Lindelof's area, so not bad performance from our cb at all.

 

[wiz4231]

A few shaky moments. Think he was best when we were down to 10, some very good headers and clearances, considering his aerial ability is considered weak

Header. Only one headed clearance

 

[ValenciasDrilledCrosses]

Header. Only one headed clearance

It was such a clusterfeck in there that I couldn't tell who was heading it half the time

 

[Grande]

The goal was on Lindelof as much as Pogba, he didn’t get tight (which he failed to do too often) and Sanchez was allowed to turn and put the ball in. The gif is on the previous page. You have to get tight to players like Sanchez and make them play backwards or sideways.

Actually disagree quite a bit there. Sanchez is in the box, so lindelof has to just stand him off so as not to allow a shot or give a pen. Sanchez has the ball outside of himself and does brilliantly to chip the ball into an area that should be heavily guarded. Pogba as noted leaves Ramsy to nobody, Rojo is ballwatching and Young inexplicably falls off to pick up nobody at our left side. Smalling is the one man in our team who could have gone closer in such a situation, as it’s one of his fortes, but you saw what Sanchez could do to him in another situation outside the box.

Actually (again), following Lindelof quite closely, I thought he was very good and succeeded in turning Sanchez away almost everytime, whereas when sanchez, roaming around and generalky being red hot, created a lot more danger in other areas.

 

[breakout67]

Some are really missing the obvious. Lindeloff's role in this game was to put pressure on Sanchez and cause a turnover. Considering that Sanchez lost the ball 34 times this game, and our 3rd goal came from a turnover from a Sanchez pass it was job well done.

 

[Cantonagotmehere]

Some are really missing the obvious. Lindeloff's role in this game was to put pressure on Sanchez and cause a turnover. Considering that Sanchez lost the ball 34 times this game, and our 3rd goal came from a turnover from a Sanchez pass it was job well done.

Thank you! So true.

Also, no way Jose hoped for Lindelof to be starting that game over Jones and Baily. I'm proud of how he filled in.

 

[Grande]

Some are really missing the obvious. Lindeloff's role in this game was to put pressure on Sanchez and cause a turnover. Considering that Sanchez lost the ball 34 times this game, and our 3rd goal came from a turnover from a Sanchez pass it was job well done.

Exactly.

 

[el3mel]

To trust Lindelof to man mark a player of the caliber as Sanchez, it shows how much trust Mourinho put into him and he didn't let his manager down. His confidence must be sky high at the moment and I can only see him getting even better now.

 

[Gusjaros]

I don’t agree. A high xG is indicative of the opposition getting into good goalscoring positions. We have sat in against other big sides and not conceded such a plethora of gilt edge chances. In fact, according to understat, that is the highest xG that any side has achieved against us since they started recording xG four years ago! That site has a slightly lower rating than Opta like your friend on Twitter.

Even shots with a one percent chance of producing a goal are added up in expected goals statistics. For an example. Lindelöf blocked five shots against Arsenal (he did most blocks in the team) and these blocked chances are actually added to the xG. I assume you believe that a defender blocking a shot is a good thing, but it contributes to the opponent's xG.

Do you have an example in which Manchester United sat in for 80 minutes against a team like Arsenal?

Header. Only one headed clearance

He did six headed clearances.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

Definite improvements but that isn't hard considering his first few games. He is doing the basics now. I would be nervous with him starting in the Derby.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Even shots with a one percent chance of producing a goal are added up in expected goals statistics, not just the high quality chances. For an example. Lindelöf blocked five shots against Arsenal (he did most blocks in the team) and these blocked chances are actually added to the xG. I assume you believe that a defender blocking a shot is a good thing, but it contributes to the opponent's xG.

Do you have an example in which Manchester United sat in for 80 minutes against a team like Arsenal?

He did six headed clearances.

I know you want to defend your fellow countryman tooth and nail but I have lost interest in this conversation. You can see all the xG stats for the past four seasons on this website.

https://understat.com/

You would have to go through it but I don't think we have even had a +3 xG against since those records began, let alone a +4.5 - 5 xG!

My position remains the same and is this: we won that game despite a poor defensive performance from our CBs and midfield. The reasons we won were threefold: 1. exceptionally efficient attacking play on our part 2. an exceptional goalkeeping performance from DDG and 3. profligate finishing from Arsenal.

If we play like that against City we will concede many goals. I hope that Jones and Bailly are back for that game and that Lindelof and Rojo are dropped because both are too weak, (for different reasons) for a game of that dimension in my opinion.

 

[Zlaatan]

I know you want to defend your fellow countryman tooth and nail but I have lost interest in this conversation. You can see all the xG stats for the past four seasons on this website.

https://understat.com/

You would have to go through it but I don't think we have even had a +3 xG against since those records began, let alone a +4.5 - 5 xG!

My position remains the same and is this: we won that game despite a poor defensive performance from our CBs and midfield. The reasons we won were threefold: 1. exceptionally efficient attacking play on our part 2. an exceptional goalkeeping performance from DDG and 3. profligate finishing from Arsenal.

If we play like that against City we will concede many goals. I hope that Jones and Bailly are back for that game and that Lindelof and Rojo are dropped because both are too weak, (for different reasons) for a game of that dimension in my opinion.

I agree with pretty much everything in this post except this xG stuff.. What has that specifically got to do with Lindelöf's performance? It's a bit like saying that Lukaku should have scored a hattrick because we had x amount of shots on goal.. I also don't get how failing to stop one of the best attacking players in the world from making one great lofted pass (when he's on his way out from the penalty area) is some kind of terrible defending?

 

[Classical Mechanic]

I agree with pretty much everything in this post except this xG stuff.. What has that specifically got to do with Lindelöf's performance? It's a bit like saying that Lukaku should have scored a hattrick because we had x amount of shots on goal.. I also don't get how failing to stop one of the best attacking players in the world from making one great lofted pass (when he's on his way out from the penalty area) is some kind of terrible defending?

xG reflects the quality of the chances conceded to the opposition. Lindelof didn't get tight enough to Sanchez too often for me and allowed him to play, therefore, in part, encouraging the attacking waves that led to us conceding more good chances to Arsenal than we have conceded to any team in the past four seasons.

It wasn't just Lindelof though, the whole defense were poor, except De Gea.

I'm out on this now. My position is clear, if others disagree, that is OK by me.

 

[haram]

Arsenal fans said Sanchez was terrible and he gave the ball away about 30 times.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Arsenal fans said Sanchez was terrible and he gave the ball away about 30 times.

I wonder why Arsenal would take a dim view of a player wanting to desperately leave them in light of a terrible result.

I thought he was Arsenal's most dangerous player and he made the pass of the game.

 

[haram]

I wonder why Arsenal would take a dim view of a player wanting to desperately leave them in light of a terrible result.

I thought he was Arsenal's most dangerous player and he made the pass of the game.

They said Ozil played well though...

 

[KM]

I wonder why Arsenal would take a dim view of a player wanting to desperately leave them in light of a terrible result.

I thought he was Arsenal's most dangerous player and he made the pass of the game.

Then why are they praising Ozil when both of them are in the same position.

From first accusing @Gusjaros from biased about Lindelof because of his nationality to saying that Arsenal fans didn't view Sanchez performance objectively due to him leaving, it seems that you're hellbent to show that you're the only objective person in this thread. You're not.

 

[KM]

Re: Lindelof, in the two previous games, Mourinho has trusted him to mark out the opposition's best player and he has done well in both of the games. Says a lot about the trust Mourinho has in him right now.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Then why are they praising Ozil when both of them are in the same position.

From first accusing @Gusjaros from biased about Lindelof because of his nationality to saying that Arsenal fans didn't view Sanchez performance objectively due to him leaving, it seems that you're hellbent to show that you're the only objective person in this thread. You're not.

I never said I was 100% objective, no one is. I think Lindelof was a pointless signing. He looks bang average to me and I would rather have seen Tuanzebe being promoted or TFM kept around. I am pro the academy.

 

[DCP]

I know you want to defend your fellow countryman tooth and nail but I have lost interest in this conversation. You can see all the xG stats for the past four seasons on this website.

https://understat.com/

You would have to go through it but I don't think we have even had a +3 xG against since those records began, let alone a +4.5 - 5 xG!

My position remains the same and is this: we won that game despite a poor defensive performance from our CBs and midfield. The reasons we won were threefold: 1. exceptionally efficient attacking play on our part 2. an exceptional goalkeeping performance from DDG and 3. profligate finishing from Arsenal.

If we play like that against City we will concede many goals. I hope that Jones and Bailly are back for that game and that Lindelof and Rojo are dropped because both are too weak, (for different reasons) for a game of that dimension in my opinion.

I'm not sure I'm a fan of the xG stuff. Statistically it should be a lot more accurate than it is. I get that it's objective but a counter attacking performance like Saturday can't go by similar metric and algorithms as a possession based team.

Sanchez was largely ineffective, the only times by heart when it to my mouth was when I ball was played over the top of our defence, it happened far too often and came from Lindelof's side.

 

[Gusjaros]

I know you want to defend your fellow countryman tooth and nail but I have lost interest in this conversation. You can see all the xG stats for the past four seasons on this website.

https://understat.com/

You would have to go through it but I don't think we have even had a +3 xG against since those records began, let alone a +4.5 - 5 xG!

My position remains the same and is this: we won that game despite a poor defensive performance from our CBs and midfield. The reasons we won were threefold: 1. exceptionally efficient attacking play on our part 2. an exceptional goalkeeping performance from DDG and 3. profligate finishing from Arsenal.

If we play like that against City we will concede many goals. I hope that Jones and Bailly are back for that game and that Lindelof and Rojo are dropped because both are too weak, (for different reasons) for a game of that dimension in my opinion.

It's up to you to prove your point. I'm pretty confident that Man Utd in the recent four years never have gotten a 2-0 lead against a top team after roughly 10 minutes of game time, heading into HT with a 2-0 lead to defend in the second half.

If Lindelöf blocks a shot inside the box did he do a good performance or not? If no, then you got the wrong idea of how to rate a defender. If yes, then you should now that the block is actually added up in the xG that you are using to discredit the performance of the defenders.

If Manchester United goes two goals up against Manchester City after just ten minutes then I'm pretty certain that they will try to hold on to that lead like against Arsenal rather than score more goals.

xG reflects the quality of the chances conceded to the opposition. Lindelof didn't get tight enough to Sanchez too often for me and allowed him to play, therefore, in part, encouraging the attacking waves that led to us conceding more good chances to Arsenal than we have conceded to any team in the past four seasons.

It wasn't just Lindelof though, the whole defense were poor, except De Gea.

I'm out on this now. My position is clear, if others disagree, that is OK by me.

Expected goals doesn't necessarily reflect the quality of the chances. If two teams have 1 in xG then one of the teams can have taken a couple of shots from outside the box while one team had a tap in inside the 6 yard box (and then nothing else).

 

[haram]

The argument that Lindelof was poor because Sanchez was good is a bad one because Sanchez wasn't that good.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Expected goals doesn't necessarily reflect the quality of the chances. If two teams have 1 in xG then one of the teams can have taken a couple of shots from outside the box while one team had a tap in inside the 6 yard box (and then nothing else).

A tap in from 6 yards with have something like a 95% chance of going in whilst a shot from even the best position outside the box is unlikely to have more than a 15% chance of going in. The quality of the chance in xG is determined by the % of goals scored from a given position so a high xG rating is indicative of a team getting into good goal scoring positions or by an unrealistic amount of shots from outside the box (to make you happy).

As for Lindelof or whoever blocking a shot, the quality of the block depends on the position of the defender and the shot. Not all blocks are equal you know.

 

[Zlaatan]

According to whoscored, out of all the attacking players for Arsenal that played the entire game (75min+ for Iwobi) everyone had a rating between 7.11-7.77 except Sanchez who got a 6.24 with a pass % about 20 points worse than everyone else except Lacazette, plus like everyone else have already said he lost the ball 30+ times.

I'd say the Arsenal fans are pretty spot on in their assessment of him and at least according to what I've seen on the meltdowns on AFTV he is still the player that gets the most praise when they lose, so that he gets more shit because he's on his way out is just not true.

 

[AR87]

I actually think the xG is skewed by the forced shift in Arsenal's formation after we went up 2-0 with Mustafi getting hurt. They then switched to a 4-3-3 and always had an extra man in midfield until Mourinho brought Herrera on at which point Arsenal's threat was much diminished.

Lindelof played the best of the 3 CBs IMO and if you look at all of Arsenal's best chances they came in zones outside of his control. It wasn't an amazing display on his part, but I thought he was solid. Our isses in defense were more a result of our formation being setup to nullify Arsenal's original shape, which worked perfectly, but failing to adjust for a long period after Mustafi went out.

Funny enough, I believe that if he hadn't been injured in that incident this would have gone down as a Mourinho tactical masterclass. I actually messaged my friend at halftime and said that I thought Herrera would come in for Martial, but I think Mourinho wanted to give him and the starting XI a chance to come to grips with Arsenal after halftime instructions before making the change. Bringing Herrera on solidified us in midfield and freed up Pogba even more to get forward on the counter without leaving us exposed, which ultimately resulted in the 3rd goal.

 

[Gusjaros]

A tap in from 6 yards with have something like a 95% chance of going in whilst a shot from even the best position outside the box is unlikely to have more than a 15% chance of going in. The quality of the chance in xG is determined by the % of goals scored from a given position so a high xG rating is indicative of a team getting into good goal scoring positions or by an unrealistic amount of shots from outside the box (to make you happy).

As for Lindelof or whoever blocking a shot, the quality of the block depends on the position of the defender and the shot. Not all blocks are equal you know.

Lindelöf did five good blocks, but they contribute to Arsenals xG which you are using to tell everyone what a horrible centre back he is.

According to whoscored, out of all the attacking players for Arsenal that played the entire game (75min+ for Iwobi) everyone had a rating between 7.11-7.77 except Sanchez who got a 6.24 with a pass % about 20 points worse than everyone else except Lacazette, plus like everyone else have already said he lost the ball 30+ times.

I'd say the Arsenal fans are pretty spot on in their assessment of him and at least according to what I've seen on the meltdowns on AFTV he is still the player that gets the most praise when they lose, so that he gets more shit because he's on his way out is just not true.

This is quite off topic but I think Opta based rating systems are interesting but they should be taken with a grain of salt, because for one they tend to fail to differentiate what's intentional from unintentional.

For instance WhoScored gave De Bruyne a 9 and MoM against Southampton. Statistically that might be seen as sensible because he got one goal and an assist. But in reality he just got lucky. Because the goal and assist weren't intentional. It just so happens that his free kick deflected into goal, and that Sterling got a lucky hit outside the box after receiving a normal sideways short pass from De Bruyne.

 

[Zlaatan]

Lindelöf did five good blocks, but they contribute to Arsenals xG which you are using to tell everyone what a horrible centre back he is.

This is quite off topic but I think Opta based rating systems are interesting but they should be taken with a grain of salt, because for one they tend to fail to differentiate what's intentional from unintentional.

For instance WhoScored gave De Bruyne a 9 and MoM against Southampton. Statistically that might be seen as sensible because he got one goal and an assist. But in reality he just got lucky. Because the goal and assist weren't intentional. It just so happens that his free kick deflected into goal, and that Sterling got a lucky hit outside the box after receiving a normal sideways short pass from De Bruyne.

I just used it to show that there is very little that points to the fact that Sanchez had a good game and that it's a stretch, to say the least, that the Arsenal fans who said he was poor did so based on the fact that they are bitter that he might leave them soon.

 

[andersj]

I actually think the xG is skewed by the forced shift in Arsenal's formation after we went up 2-0 with Mustafi getting hurt. They then switched to a 4-3-3 and always had an extra man in midfield until Mourinho brought Herrera on at which point Arsenal's threat was much diminished.

Lindelof played the best of the 3 CBs IMO and if you look at all of Arsenal's best chances they came in zones outside of his control. It wasn't an amazing display on his part, but I thought he was solid. Our isses in defense were more a result of our formation being setup to nullify Arsenal's original shape, which worked perfectly, but failing to adjust for a long period after Mustafi went out.

Funny enough, I believe that if he hadn't been injured in that incident this would have gone down as a Mourinho tactical masterclass. I actually messaged my friend at halftime and said that I thought Herrera would come in for Martial, but I think Mourinho wanted to give him and the starting XI a chance to come to grips with Arsenal after halftime instructions before making the change. Bringing Herrera on solidified us in midfield and freed up Pogba even more to get forward on the counter without leaving us exposed, which ultimately resulted in the 3rd goal.

An xpG of 4 is very, very high. I hate to say it but we were lucky. Or lucky that we have de Gea anyway.

After watching the game summary again I would blame Rojo for almost all of their big chances, including their goal. Probably did not have the best support from Young and Martial on one occasion either.

He had a very difficult game, but was very clumpsy when we needed him. Clearly lacking games still.

I hope Jones is ready for this one. Regarding Lindelof, I’m not sure he put a foot wrong the entire game. Did he?

I would love to see him alongside Bailly and Jones at some point.

 

[AR87]

An xpG of 4 is very, very high. I hate to say it but we were lucky. Or lucky that we have de Gea anyway.

After watching the game summary again I would blame Rojo for almost all of their big chances, including their goal. Probably did not have the best support from Young and Martial on one occasion either.

He had a very difficult game, but was very clumpsy when we needed him. Clearly lacking games still.

I hope Jones is ready for this one. Regarding Lindelof, I’m not sure he put a foot wrong the entire game. Did he?

I would love to see him alongside Bailly and Jones at some point.

Sure we got lucky. My point was that the shift in the game IMO had more to do with how we were setup to nullify Arsenal's 3-4-3 and exploit a soft middle on the counter. After Mustafi went out, they were still often leaving huge spaces open with Xhaka and Ramsay pushing forward with little discipline, but Ozil was also playing in the middle then and Pogba and Matic were getting outnumbered. Lingard was having to drop deep to add numbers and Martial was also forced to track back more frequently, so we had only 1 outlet when we were able to clear our lines.

In a weird way, the injury may actually have played into Arsenal's hands and out of ours because of the formation shift it forced from Wenger. I'm skeptical that they'd have made such a switch without it being forced.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

@Gusjaros

Opta stats shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. Clubs pay Opta a lot of money for access to their data. Granted what the fans get is a much reduced set of data than the clubs but if the data is viewed in context then it is fine. Furthermore over the course of a season a website like whoscored will give you an idea of the on the ball strengths and weaknesses of a player through their data processing. Regarding De Bruyne, he is whoscored's highest rated player in the Premier League this season, not many people would disagree with that interpretation of his data by the website.

 

[A-man]

@Gusjaros

Opta stats shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. Clubs pay Opta a lot of money for access to their data. Granted what the fans get is a much reduced set of data than the clubs but if the data is viewed in context then it is fine. Furthermore over the course of a season a website like whoscored will give you an idea of the on the ball strengths and weaknesses of a player through their data processing. Regarding De Bruyne, he is whoscored's highest rated player in the Premier League this season, not many people would disagree with that interpretation of his data by the website.

Statistic data and interpretations over many games or a full season should reflect the reality well if the model is good. However in separate games to evaluate single players, there is a big chance that common sense and football knowledge is better for evaluation.

It is difficult to compare players in different positions and with different tasks. How to compare a goalkeeper like DDG with De Bruyne, or with a center back or forward in a poor team? Of course you can compare them with statistics, but never in a fair way.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Statistic data and interpretations over many games or a full season should reflect the reality well if the model is good. However in separate games to evaluate single players, there is a big chance that common sense and football knowledge is better for evaluation.

It is difficult to compare players in different positions and with different tasks. How to compare a goalkeeper like DDG with De Bruyne, or with a center back or forward in a poor team? Of course you can compare them with statistics, but never in a fair way.

That is what I mean by context. Regarding the position debate, you would compare goalkeepers against goalkeepers etc, there is little point in comparing a CF with a GK in any football debate.

Whoscored's model is attacker-centric but perhaps that is logical given that attacking players are the most highly valued in football.

I'm not sure that 'common sense' and 'football knowledge' does give you a better chance of interpretation, given the bias that people, especially partisan fan, are subject too.

Football clubs and all sports teams/athletes take statistics very seriously and invest in them accordingly. That is telling.

 

[Gusjaros]

@Gusjaros

Opta stats shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. Clubs pay Opta a lot of money for access to their data. Granted what the fans get is a much reduced set of data than the clubs but if the data is viewed in context then it is fine. Furthermore over the course of a season a website like whoscored will give you an idea of the on the ball strengths and weaknesses of a player through their data processing. Regarding De Bruyne, he is whoscored's highest rated player in the Premier League this season, not many people would disagree with that interpretation of his data by the website.

There's no question that rating systems based on Opta Stats should be taken with a grain of salt. De Bruyne was far, far from a nine and MoM against Southampton. It is really an undebatable fact if you actually saw the match.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

There's no question that rating systems based on Opta Stats should be taken with a grain of salt. De Bruyne was far, far from a nine and MoM against Southampton. It is really an undebatable fact if you actually saw the match.

Opta don’t generate the scores. Whoscored buy the raw data from Opta for their website and give the scores from their criteria. The stats from that game say he had 9 key passes too, which is a really really high amount. How good the quality of chances he created, that I don’t know as I can’t find an individual highlights for him.

 

[Ekeke]

Did okay today and in a circumstance I can understand his inclusion. When we are using Daley Blind too who defended better and passed as well if not better. When its not picking Lindelof over Blind, but instead using both of them then it makes sense that we have him. Blind made the most passes on the pitch tonight and Lindelof 2nd.

 

[Andersons Dietician]

Thought he was excellent today. Really showed his class. Really developing a partner ship with Smalling and I love that they are playing so high up the pitch recently, even venturing in to the oppos half to win the ball.

 

[IAmAWinner]

Another good performance, looking really confident now. City will be a huge test for him if Bailly or Jones aren't fit.