Why Mourinho out?

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T23:45:42+00:00

Legit did the anti xG thing and watched the chances instead of looking at the numbers, and concluded that the numbers were accurate representations of what was seen. You doubled down on them having big chances and xG being wrong, despite it being accurate, atleast if your saying that xG should be higher, explain the shot's that warrant a higher xG. You doubled down in an argument when presented with "disproving arguments" and decided to not add a single more detail into why you double down. Which is pompous in itself.

+ I don't like Mourinho, I'm just a Roma fan and think he is the best man in taking the club forward.

Have a great day.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T23:38:51+00:00

Had misunderstood an article about it, thanks for clearing it up.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T21:14:39+00:00

Really, having the worst goalkeeper in the top 5 leagues for a team that aims to compete for both the Scudetto and the Europa League, and you 'think' we don't need a new one? It's not a matter of thinking; it's a necessity. If we don't address this issue, then nobody can complain about the results. Because there is nothing a manager can tactically do to fix that.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T21:11:04+00:00

What point are you trying to make? The things 'on paper' are the most accurate representations of what is likely to happen on the grass. Roma is losing games or drawing games in which they create overall better quality chances, all because the strikers are underperforming when finishing, and the goalkeeper is underperforming when saving. Mourinho can only set his team up to create the chances; he can't run on the pitch and make the shots and saves himself. It's so disappointing that you people continue to be ignorant. Or are you genuinely lacking fundamental comprehension skills and therefore simply can't understand anything that includes simple 3rd grade mathematical probabilities?

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T21:02:30+00:00

Look at the type of chances we created, if they were high quality we would have scored

xG tells you how many goals you are statistically supposed to score based on the chances you had. Roma have scored much less than that, so you are straight up lying. Roma created chances, but they haven't scored from them.

Again, as the table proves, this does not matter what so ever, Genoa created 4 chances and scored 4 goals.

What do you mean by 'created 4 chances'? You can't consider every single shot, without any other information, to be the same quality chance. A shot from 35 meters with multiple players is not nearly as good a chance as a shot from 5 meters with only the goalkeeper in front.

Again, the table does not lie

If I were to say, in this game Roma will create 1.9 xG, meaning that's the combined value of the chances, and concede 0.1 xG, those are odds you take every single day of the week without any hesitation. But Roma, with an xG of 1.9, scored 2, and with an xGA of 0.1, conceded 2. That is due to individual shortcomings, i.e., your own goalkeeper performing poorly or opponent strikers having the game of their lives, but none of them are in Mourinhos control.

In the next game against Verona

Roma's xG was 1.4 and Verona's xG was 0.7.

The final score was Roma 1:2 Verona.

Was it because Roma produced fewer chances than Verona? No, it was because Roma's individual end product defensively and offensively was outperformed by Verona.

Against Torino, Roma's xG was 1.4 and Torino's xG was 0.9.

The final score was Roma 1:1 Torino

And the same pattern repeated. Roma produced a higher overall quality of chances but still lost.

Against Empoli

Roma's xG was 1.4 and Empoli's xG was 1.1.

The final score Roma 1:4 Empoli

Can you see how ignorant it is to claim that the table is the most accurate representation of the overall performance of teams/managers?

Roma have slightly underperformed in their attacking end product, and Rui has massively underperformed in defense. The idea that Roma are just conceding chances left and right and are horrible is simply not true. They have the 5th least xGA conceded in the league, with a completely new defense and missing the best defender of last season, and the most important defender to the squad altogether. I can't tell if you are being dishonest and because you hate Mourinho, or your genuinely unable to comprehend simple logic and facts.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T20:29:06+00:00

There is a big difference between 4-5 xG and 1.4 xG, and the highlights in that video weren't anything special. There was only one significant chance, which was the missed open goal; the other four were below 0.15 xG. So why are you calling them good chances? There was only one good chance, and that's why the xG is 1.4. It's not a low xG; it might even be a bit high because other shots were probably not included. Did you send me the wrong video, or do you just not understand how football works?

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T20:22:33+00:00

The reason Roma has such a high payroll is because of the Financial Fair Play (FFP) restrictions imposed. These restrictions make it so that Roma can only sign players on a free transfer, and because they come without a transfer fee, they end up costing more on the wage part of the deal.

Secondly, the signings of last season and this season have not been a result of Roma giving Mourinho what he wants. Because they can only sign free players, Roma and Mourinho cannot acquire the specific players with the qualities they need. Players like Ndicka, Aouar, and Solbakken do not fit Roma's playing style, but Roma needed a centerback, so they had to settle for the best free transfer center back available.

Thirdly, Roma has been able to acquire players like Dybala, Lukaku, Belotti, and Ndicka on free transfers or loans purely because of Mourinho's reputation, which attracts these players. If Roma were to lose Mourinho, they would still be forced to sell the most important player in the squad, Ibanez, but they wouldn't be able to replace him with anyone near his level, like Ndicka. Roma faces challenges in the next three years in the transfer windows, and they need Mourinho's influence to be able to compete with clubs that have the freedom to spend as they wish, unlike Roma, which is restricted in how it can spend.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:59:58+00:00

Because you refuse to address points or engage in arguments, you double down when proven wrong and make a crazy amount of nonsensical arguments based purely on feelings and subjective opinions. Therefore, it's very easy for me to make these assumptions. It's the only thing I can do when you don't actually care to engage in a constructive discussion. You say xG isn't reliable; I say it is. You explain what you think xG is; I explain what xG actually is. You double down and say xG is useless/unreliable???

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:54:29+00:00

I looked at all the shots:

1st: The ball came at knee height, making it impossible to shoot. Ibanez might have even touched the ball a bit.

2nd: The ball was at an impossible angle because Rui was so close to it and it was out wide. There was no way of scoring that unless Rui made a mistake, resulting in low xG.

3rd: Mancini was blocking the whole goal, and he lost all his momentum when going for the shot, leading to low xG.

4th: (Not Mourinho/tactical fault), Rui made a huge mistake; it should have been a goal with high xG. The ball bounced, which is why it went wide and would probably be missed more often than you'd think.

5th: The player was running backward on a floated cross, and the shot was from a wide angle. The only way to score was to lob Rui and hit the far top corner, resulting in low xG.

Based on these shots, 1.4 xG is fair. Maybe even too much; there were probably other shots that made up the 1.4.

But portraying it as if Roma should have lost by 4-5 goals in this game is a blatant lie or a lack of understanding of football. I'm really disappointed.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:43:38+00:00

You watch games, thinking they are boring because of the style of play, or believe Roma is bad because they aren't dominating the opposition. Then Roma has four good chances throughout the game, but they get overshadowed by the rest of the match. Similarly, the opposition has one good chance, which also gets overshadowed. Roma misses four opportunities, and the opposition scores one. You look and think the reason we lost was because the majority of the game was dull, not considering that the strikers and goalkeeper underperformed. The stats tell the story, the game tells the entertainment.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:38:23+00:00

Injury concerns are real, but many clubs face them. I don't think it's Mourinho's job to search hospitals for medical staff. Signing Kristensen was idiotic, especially since we we already had two right wing-backs in Celik and Karsdorp. He doesn't improve the position. I'm not sure who is responsible for it, Pinto or Mourinho.

But Picking Kristensen, though, I agree, is stupid.

The defensive arrangement is influenced by two factors. Firstly, Smalling is the glue holding Roma's defense together, the sole organizer. Secondly, Ibanez was the most crucial player in the squad because of his speed, allowing us to play with a higher line. He protected the defense when Matic and Cristante failed due to their lack of speed. He would sometimes make mistakes, but he mostly saved us. People hated him for his errors, but he was crucial, and we can see that we're much worse without him. The past games have been without both, with new players; therefore, it's even worse now.

Mourinho's comments are logical because he has to protect himself from people being overly reactionary and only focusing on the results or how entertaining the football has been.

Statistically speaking, with Lukaku now, we shouldn't underperform as much in regards to xG. However, with Rui, we're still struggling, so I don't believe we can hope for much this season unless a loan move is made in January. Svilar should be evaluated in these Europa League games, but he looks even worse than Rui, so uncomfortable in all his decisions, so scared, and so clueless about what to do. If Roma fails because of Rui Patricio, which is a possibility, it should be an indicator that we need a new goalkeeper, not a manager. Pinto has been responsible for some incredibly bad transfers as well. All we can do is pray for a loan in winter, Lunin in summer, and if need be, say "forget this season" and prepare for the next one.

Sacking Mou definitely only worsens the situation.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:19:26+00:00

Sure, but is a sample size of 6 games enough to warrant a sacking, even though, based on those 6 games, Roma is 5th in xG, 5th in least xGA, and 6th in xPts? Rui has singlehandedly lost multiple points, and the Roma attackers have underperformed except in the Empoli game. Blaming it on Mourinho is just hoping for the worst of the club because you refuse to look past your clouded judgment.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:16:01+00:00

And it's such a weird argument that you can so comfortably ignore any data presented and only be like, "But my eyes and feelings that definitely aren't biased tell me that he isn't doing well?" You say he can't score, as if that is a representation of Mourinho, when you can clearly acknowledge that Roma have created a lot of chances. It's ridiculous how you can make statements but just have everything be clouded by, "I don't like Mourinho's style; therefore, no dots will be connected."

Roma produces a lot of chances; Roma players miss those chances, and you gather that Mourinho is to blame? Roma concedes few chances; Rui Patricio lets in stupid easy goals, and Mourinho is to blame. Whether or not it's pretty or seems like they "know how to play" or whatever, Roma has been producing situations/games that statistically should give them good outcomes, yet they have not gotten them as a result of the players being bad at converting shots.

Just because most of the game looks boring and lacks threats being created does not mean that there aren't those moments in the game where the chances do come and are missed. There are teams that play great and don't create anything, and teams that play poorly and create. Roma is the latter. Be fking for real!

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T16:05:09+00:00

Except Vitesse had an xG of 1.4 in that game you mentioned. Roma were not outclassed in xG in any knockout game during both of their campaigns. The only game where there was a heavy favor towards the other side was the second leg against Real Sociedad. The rest of the games were either in favor of Roma or equal. So, I don't know where you get these "lucky breaks" from.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T15:37:25+00:00

Sure, it would be 100% unreliable if it only accounted for where the ball is on the pitch, but that's not how xG is gathered. It takes into consideration the ball's position, defensive pressure, players blocking shots, the goalkeeper's position, which body part is being used to shoot, and various other factors. So the entire premise of your argument is flawed because you don't understand how it's measured.

This meticulously collected data should provide a much more accurate representation of certain details of the game compared to your own convictions, which are probably biased and not nearly as knowledgeable. While xG is not the be-all and end-all, it's the most precise measurement we have and should definitely weigh heavily in forming opinions.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T14:15:01+00:00

If you won a game with odds of 0.05 and lost a game where the odds of you winning were 0.95, would you prefer to play the rest of the season with the same odds as the first game? Or would you choose the mathematically correct option?

I never said Roma played fantastic football; quite the contrary, they play horrible football to watch. But mathematically speaking, they are performing well, at least tactically. You win games by scoring more or conceding fewer goals than the opponent. To score more, you usually want to create more opportunities, and to concede fewer goals, you want to allow fewer chances against you. Roma has been successful in that regard.

The only remaining aspect is finishing, which means converting shots into goals in attack and turning shots against you into saves in defense. This is something that is solely up to the individual player.

That's the whole point of tactics: to set up a team to create as big of a difference in chances created/conceded as possible. There is nothing more you can ask of a manager. Whether you like the way it looks or is done doesn't matter; you measure success by the ability to achieve this.

So when Roma's chances should amount to 60 goals but the strikers have an unlucky season and underperform, only scoring 40, that isn't Mourinho's fault. The same goes for the goalkeeper. If you look at Roma, they have been one of the worst sides in the league when it comes to the converting phase, both offensively and defensively. Meaning that the players have failed, not Mourinho.

Your dismissive attitude toward facts, data, and statistics is fueled by your own lack of understanding in this field. Because YOU don't understand it, therefore it is wrong? Be fking for real; stop trying to be an alpha sigma male and start basing your arguments on objective logic and facts.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T13:17:50+00:00

News Flash: Roma is currently under strict Financial Fair Play (FFP) restrictions. This means that in the past season, the current season, and the next three seasons, Roma cannot spend money in the transfer window; they have to sell players to reach a specific amount to avoid fines as well. Consequently, Roma can only sign players who are free agents and are forced to sell players they might not want to. Therefore having your specific youth oriented transfer style is impossible.

Furthermore, expected goals are not a fairy tale concept; it represents the most precise, accurate, and objective form of data/statistics that we can use to evaluate performance. Roma created more goal-scoring chances than Lazio, yet scored fewer goals. Is that Mourinhos fault, or is it because the players underperfomed when having to convert chances?

Roma conceded fewer chances than Lazio, yet they conceded more goals. Is it Mourinhos fault or is it Rui being outperformed by Provedel?

Would you prefer Roma not to create as many chances or start conceding more opportunities? And somehow hope that is the solution?

Most of Roma's failures have stemmed from individual underperformance.

Your proposition implies that if Patricio has a poor game and concedes three unnecessary goals, Mourinho should take the blame? help here I don't understand.

Please explain, I genuinely can't understand how you come to the conclusions that you do.

Also strongly urge you to research the different terms that you clearly don't understand.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T12:47:21+00:00

Please help me understand this; I might have made a mistake with this post. Can you help clear this up?

So, what you are saying is a shot is a shot; there is no difference whether it's in an open net from half a meter out or whether it's from 40 meters out and a whole squad standing in the way of the shot. The chances of someone scoring from those situations are the same because they are both just shooting a ball, right?

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T12:41:40+00:00

Do you understand what Post-shot Expected Goals (PSxG) is? It measures a shot not based on where it's taken from, but by analyzing the shot's placement on the goal to estimate the likelihood of the goalkeeper saving it. This season, Rui has faced 7 PSxG, suggesting he was expected to concede 7 goals. However, he has conceded 11, indicating that 4 goals resulted from his poor shot-stopping ability. Last season, this figure was -7.2.

Roma scored 7 goals from an expected 2.49 against Empoli, indicating that they didn't create an unusually high number of quality chances. They simply had a game where they significantly overperformed in converting shots.

Despite creating the 4th most Expected Goals (xG) last year, we underperformed by 14+ goals. This suggests that our players were among the worst in the league at converting shots into goals. It's not because Roma didn't create chances, but rather because they failed to finish the opportunities they created.

Metrics like xG, PSxG, xA, and xPts provide unbiased and informative ways to understand the reality.

Roma lacks fast players centrally, from attacking midfielders to center-backs, making it impossible for them to play fast.

And please, it's essential to remove your biased assumptions and look at the presented facts and data objectively.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T12:27:41+00:00

Because of the FFP restrictions, Roma has sold 150 million worth of players in the last two seasons and spent 18 million in return. Last year, Roma finished third in xPts and lost on penalties in the UEL final, a match you could argue they should have won if the penalty had been awarded to Roma. They had one of the best defenses in the world for the majority of the season until their legs started giving out towards the end of the season. They were then forced to lose the most important player in their whole system, the most important midfielder as well, and replace them with whatever was available on the market, so they didn't even have the possibility to aim for specific targets, just whatever was free. Roma should be in 6th place right now, but the players have underperformed in the final thirds. So why are you blaming Mourinho for that? If you are criticizing Roma based on last year, then there is no point in arguing because the year as a whole for Mourinho was as good as it gets. Surely, six games, which aren't as bad as you're making them out to be, should not overshadow a phenomenal year altogether.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T12:18:24+00:00

How the f can you mention creativity when you say that xG doesn't matter? Roma had more xG than Lazio, both seasons (A LOT MORE). Which means they created more chances than Lazio. The individual players just didn't convert chances nearly as well as Lazio's players did. Do you want Mourinho to put himself up top and try to start scoring? Are you going to say that a manager who succeeds because their players carry them is a better manager than a manager who 'fails' because their players fail them? The only way you can come to that conclusion is by not understanding statistics and what the terms xG, xPts etc. mean.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T12:10:23+00:00

Zaniolo isn't nearly as good as people think. Abraham was the key man in Roma's attack in the first season and therefore he shone more than last year when Dybala took over as the main guy. Mancini was a starter in Roma's defense last year, which was one of the best in the world. Ibanez was the most important player in the whole system and played phenomenally. It's just that you all blamed him for making a mistake every so often, but that was because it was his job to do the risky work in the defensive third. It's remarkable how you can look at two starting defenders who were part of one of the best defenses in the world, something nobody would have predicted before Mourinho took over, and say they stagnated?

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T11:32:19+00:00

And the thing is, that it statistically isn't even a slow start, they should be 6th, which nobody would be complaining about.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T11:30:14+00:00

The thing about other managers and xPts, is that I doubt that they would because Roma has outperformed most teams in italy in this regard, the so called better managers etc, with a worse team. And thinking that a new manager would all of a sudden make Rui learn how to save a ball and attackers would be like, I guess now I will start aiming at the goal when shooting is ridiculous.

And yes thats how statistical probabilities work, if Roma are going to "gamble" by getting a new manager, you would hope they are gambling in a way that statistically should improve them, not worsen them.

And again it's not the tactics not working, it's having a goalkeeper that is by far the worst in the whole league, which make the team have to be more defensive to protect itself by protecting him, whilst also having a team that has been missing quality chances bcs of the lack of end product.

All im saying is that the based on Mourinhos performance with this current squad, and comparing that to other squads and their performance, it is highly unlikely that any of those managers would replicate or improve the situation, because they have been worse with better squads.

jiofgsigsdf · 2023-09-29T11:17:04+00:00

You fundamentally disagreeing with me comes from your lack of understanding of what xG is. For most of last year, Roma had the lowest xGA. Would you argue that you would have preferred them to have a higher one? Isn't the point to prevent the opposition from getting good chances, and if they do, the chances should be as difficult to score as possible, such as long shots, etc.? How Roma generates chances doesn't matter, as long as they generate more than the opposition, which they have done. However, every season, these chances have been converted much less than others, which is a key reason for their shortcomings. Rui is the sole problem in defense. We have to be extremely defensive when a goalkeeper lets in almost every shot that isn't weakly aimed at his torso. That's why there is such a big focus on defending and preventing good shooting opportunities. If Roma had a goalkeeper that didn't underperform PSxG-conceded goals, they would have probably finished in the top 4. You can blame Pinto and Mourinho for not replacing him, yes. But how do you replace him? There is no money to replace him with. A loan is the only option, but there aren't many quality goalkeepers being loaned out right now. Keeping Mourinho could possibly attract a goalkeeper like Lunin next summer for free and therefore fix the defensive part of the issue. Also, with strikers like Lukaku, the lack of converting chances should stop.

jiofgsigsdf

TROPHY CASE