SKC Postmatch

[Ulrich]

I definitely would say its a good chance, but it is a shot that wasn't good enough in the end.

I'm not sure why, but it always bothers me when I hear announcers talk about the goalposts bailing a keeper out or being their friend - when in reality, its just as simple as the shot not being good enough (even if it was pretty good to be that close).

It's no different of a chance than a shot that misses by a foot. A good chance is a shot that is on frame and would score a goal if the Keeper doesn't block it either intentionally or inadvertently, a defender doesn't block the shot, or Khiry blocks it from going in.

I look at it as I'm not rewarding a player with kudos for a shot that isn't going to score. I'll sing their praises for good runs into position to take a shot/receive a pass/make a pass, but bad shooting is "bad" shooting whether hitting the post or hitting the Supporters section. And in my definition, bad shooting is a shot that cannot score.

 

[SoupInNYC]

It's no different of a chance than a shot that misses by a foot. A good chance is a shot that is on frame and would score a goal if the Keeper doesn't block it either intentionally or inadvertently, a defender doesn't block the shot, or Khiry blocks it from going in.

I look at it as I'm not rewarding a player with kudos for a shot that isn't going to score. I'll sing their praises for good runs into position to take a shot/receive a pass/make a pass, but bad shooting is "bad" shooting whether hitting the post or hitting the Supporters section. And in my definition, bad shooting is a shot that cannot score.

I think we're somewhat on the same page (and really arguing nuances), but I would still call a shot off the post or a shot that misses by a foot, or even a sitter that is skied way over the bar as good chances. But they just end up as chances that were missed.

 

[Joseph Bianco]

I sure would like to know why Maxi and Andrea have No Chemistry at all ??

what do you mean. im pretty sure everyone is saying they played great together last night?

 

[Seth]

It's no different of a chance than a shot that misses by a foot. A good chance is a shot that is on frame and would score a goal if the Keeper doesn't block it either intentionally or inadvertently, a defender doesn't block the shot, or Khiry blocks it from going in.

I look at it as I'm not rewarding a player with kudos for a shot that isn't going to score. I'll sing their praises for good runs into position to take a shot/receive a pass/make a pass, but bad shooting is "bad" shooting whether hitting the post or hitting the Supporters section. And in my definition, bad shooting is a shot that cannot score.

I would agree with you if the posts were square. With a square post anything that hits anywhere on the front of it is not going in. So you'd be right: a post is as good as a miss by 20'. Thing is though the posts are round. If you graze the outside of the post it's going out, but if you hit the inside of the post it could go in. Because the posts are round a single millimeter difference in placement could make the difference between a goal and a carom. That's why I think a "close miss" off the post is very different from missing the goal by a foot.

#teamBang!OffThePost

 

[Joseph Bianco]

its just weird to me to say they arent good chances... if youre right in front of the net with nobody around you and you sky it a mile over the bar it was still a good chance at goal, you just fucked it up.

 

[LionNYC]

I thought one of the best moments was when Erik Palmer-Brown messed up on the pass back and the ball fell right to Maxi who tried to chip Melia. Melia got one hand on it and the ball went to the outside of the net. However, on the broadcast Joe Tolleson announced it was a goal then corrected himself.

Sorry Maxi, only David can bring the chips on this team and they must be from 50+ yards away.

 

[mgarbowski]

I'm mostly with Ulrich. A shot is either on target or not. Yes it can come down to millimeters but that's still a difference. And when it comes to scoring off target but really, really really close counts as little as off by 10 feet.

But. Sometimes a close but off-target shot makes the other team make a play and that leads to something good. Last night, TMac took a shot that was curling to the far post and I think would have missed. I could be wrong, it might have gone in. The point is Melia could not be sure either and he made a diving save and punch the ball to where RJ ran it down and served it to Jack. And we won. Had Tommy's shot been more on target maybe Melia catches it. Had it been off by 5 feet he lets it go for a goal kick. The close-but-probably-off shot helped win the game. So that was good. Circling back, if Melia misses and the shot clangs off the post, it was worthless. That's just how it goes.

 

[Tom in Fairfield CT]

I'm mostly with Ulrich. A shot is either on target or not. Yes it can come down to millimeters but that's still a difference. And when it comes to scoring off target but really, really really close counts as little as off by 10 feet.

But. Sometimes a close but off-target shot makes the other team make a play and that leads to something good. Last night, TMac took a shot that was curling to the far post and I think would have missed. I could be wrong, it might have gone in. The point is Melia could not be sure either and he made a diving save and punch the ball to where RJ ran it down and served it to Jack. And we won. Had Tommy's shot been more on target maybe Melia catches it. Had it been off by 5 feet he lets it go for a goal kick. The close-but-probably-off shot helped win the game. So that was good. Circling back, if Melia misses and the shot clangs off the post, it was worthless. That's just how it goes.

I think the disconnect is what you are evaluating saying whether it is a good chance or bad. Ulrich is evaluating whether the shot, as delivered, could be a goal. When I think of a good chance, I am thinking, did the shooter get into a high percentage location, are there defenders in place, is the keeper out of position?

If you beat the defense, make the keeper fall over with smooth moves, and shoot from the penalty spot, that is a good chance to me. If you hit the bar, it was still a good chance, but a bad shot.

 

[Ulrich]

I would agree with you if the posts were square. With a square post anything that hits anywhere on the front of it is not going in. So you'd be right: a post is as good as a miss by 20'. Thing is though the posts are round. If you graze the outside of the post it's going out, but if you hit the inside of the post it could go in. Because the posts are round a single millimeter difference in placement could make the difference between a goal and a carom. That's why I think a "close miss" off the post is very different from missing the goal by a foot.

#teamBang!OffThePost

Who cares if it's square or round? Did it go in or did it not go in?

 

[Ulrich]

I think the disconnect is what you are evaluating saying whether it is a good chance or bad. Ulrich is evaluating whether the shot, as delivered, could be a goal. When I think of a good chance, I am thinking, did the shooter get into a high percentage location, are there defenders in place, is the keeper out of position?

If you beat the defense, make the keeper fall over with smooth moves, and shoot from the penalty spot, that is a good chance to me. If you hit the bar, it was still a good chance, but a bad shot.

That's the Tom I remember! Nice to have you back making thoughtful and critical posts instead of gratuitous bashing of players

 

[canchon]

https://twitter.com/x/status/905883300597825536

Just thought I had to repost this here. Wow, look how far we've come, everybody.

 

[LionNYC]

I'm playing in the rain, I'm playing in the rain
What a glorious feeling, I'm being paid $6 million a year

https://twitter.com/x/status/905832364135329798

 

[NickA]

He's not at all lazy. It continually baffles me how far apart some of the expectation is in relationship to reality. Sean JUST LAST YEAR was the MVP and Golden Boot winner on the best team in USL. Nothing lazy about him. His play style is different. I don't know but I would expect that his instructions are different as well. He had a solid game last night and was really unlucky to not have a brace.

The rest of my post said his play style is different. I understand his role as a striker. It's obvious Viera wants him to hold play to let the fullbacks enter the attack. BUT. After he does that, he seems to be a few steps behind the play when he's supposed to be in the box. I wasn't even ragging on him. Just saying Villa makes him look lazy. That's not a crazy notion.

 

[EganSoccerWords]

The rest of my post said his play style is different. I understand his role as a striker. It's obvious Viera wants him to hold play to let the fullbacks enter the attack. BUT. After he does that, he seems to be a few steps behind the play when he's supposed to be in the box. I wasn't even ragging on him. Just saying Villa makes him look lazy. That's not a crazy notion.

There are somethings like timing that you can only build with significant game minutes. This was only Okoli's third start this season.

 

[Gotham Gator]

It's no different of a chance than a shot that misses by a foot. A good chance is a shot that is on frame and would score a goal if the Keeper doesn't block it either intentionally or inadvertently, a defender doesn't block the shot, or Khiry blocks it from going in.

I look at it as I'm not rewarding a player with kudos for a shot that isn't going to score. I'll sing their praises for good runs into position to take a shot/receive a pass/make a pass, but bad shooting is "bad" shooting whether hitting the post or hitting the Supporters section. And in my definition, bad shooting is a shot that cannot score.

By your standards, a shot that is rolled right to the goalkeeper was better than a shot that the attacker tried to place in the corner that ended up glancing off the post.

Look, if a team can get a ball within an inch or two of going in - in a spot where the keeper can't get to it - that's a really good chance and a really good shot. It's about as good as you can get without actually scoring, and it deserves to be noted as a sign that a team almost put one in.

 

[Ulrich]

By your standards, a shot that is rolled right to the goalkeeper was better than a shot that the attacker tried to place in the corner that ended up glancing off the post.

Look, if a team can get a ball within an inch or two of going in - in a spot where the keeper can't get to it - that's a really good chance and a really good shot. It's about as good as you can get without actually scoring, and it deserves to be noted as a sign that a team almost put one in.

You like playing horseshoes, don't you?

Riddle me this, wtf does it matter if somebody gets a pat on the back for being close if the score doesn't change and they still lose? Noting it doesn't change the score and the score is all that matters. I'll take a slow roller to the keeper any day over a post/bar shot because if the keeper slips or misjudged it, the ball is still headed in. That post is never moving and the shot is never scoring.

 

[Joseph Bianco]

You like playing horseshoes, don't you?

Riddle me this, wtf does it matter if somebody gets a pat on the back for being close if the score doesn't change and they still lose? Noting it doesn't change the score and the score is all that matters. I'll take a slow roller to the keeper any day over a post/bar shot because if the keeper slips or misjudged it, the ball is still headed in. That post is never moving and the shot is never scoring.

it can also come off the post back into play and become a goal. i get what youre saying that hitting the post isnt a goal and counts for nothing but that doesnt make it a bad chance. Hell i consider it a better chance than giving a keeper a routine save.

 

[Seven]

There are somethings like timing that you can only build with significant game minutes. This was only Okoli's third start this season.

Agreed, but he is going to need to make do with limited minutes. That's just the rub of playing backup to Villa.

 

[Gotham Gator]

You like playing horseshoes, don't you?

Riddle me this, wtf does it matter if somebody gets a pat on the back for being close if the score doesn't change and they still lose? Noting it doesn't change the score and the score is all that matters. I'll take a slow roller to the keeper any day over a post/bar shot because if the keeper slips or misjudged it, the ball is still headed in. That post is never moving and the shot is never scoring.

It tells you how the game is being played and which team is generating quality opportunities. Sure it doesn't change the outcome - very little does in soccer if you put it in these terms - but it is useful information if you want to know how the game was played and the relative performance of the teams.

 

[Ulrich]

It tells you how the game is being played and which team is generating quality opportunities. Sure it doesn't change the outcome - very little does in soccer if you put it in these terms - but it is useful information if you want to know how the game was played and the relative performance of the teams.

Show me two teams where one has 10 shots not on goal and the other has 5 shots that hit the post and I'll then show you two teams that each needs to spend an equal amount of time on shooting drills.

The relative performance of the team in your example is still a net zero.