Anyone who has any interest in AI will have heard of game trees - the number of permutations how a game can play out from a certain situation. It's a fundamental principle when teaching computers how to play chess, poker, go etc. That got me thinking about how football matches tend to play out when a side races into an early lead. Basically, there are three main outcomes. 1) The match develops into a hammering of 5/6+ goals. 2) The side who is losing mounts a comeback. 3) Nothing much happens for the rest of the game - no more scoring or just a consolation goal. Now, I have no statistics for this, but I wouldn't mind betting that scenario 1 is easily the least common, with most matches playing out like scenario 3. I might be wrong about how relatively common 1 and 2 are, but I'm very confident in my assertions about 3, which is why I fully expected the final 70 minutes yesterday to be an absolute non-event. Yes, it would have been nice to hit 6 or 7, but most important was not to let them back into the game. If we'd done that it would have turned into a proper scrap, which is the last thing we needed considering the sheer volume of games between now and the end of March.
I’ve always wondered how my individual presence at a match might influence the result? can you work that out for me, John? Ta..
Depends where you sit. And what you're wearing. If you're sat behind the goals dressed as a giant chicken, I can imagine there might be a higher number of wayward shots.
There seems to be this general opinion that we took the foot off the gas and coasted for the remaining 70 minutes. Some of it would have been game management. We actually only had 2 fewer shots in the second half to the first half. If you listen to the Accrington commentator just after our 3rd goal, he actually says that the game is over and its a case of damage limitation for Accrington. Accrington did seem to sit a bit deeper, and take fewer risks in an attempt to limit the number of goals they conceded. They had a bit of a spell just after the 3rd goal, which they were always likely to have. The referee didn't help either. He was very niggly, giving a decision for so many 50/50's. Shortly before we scored our 3rd, I messaged my brother saying the game had gone very flat. There'd been an injury (Phillips iirc) which seemed to knock us out of our stride a little. It's a combination of things, but as you say, unless you're Man City, a team rarely goes 3 up inside 20 minutes and goes on to score 5+ goals.
Well, my record this season is p3, w3, d0, l0, f9, a2. Not too bad! Next game I'll be at is probably Derby, although if you'll pay for my transport and tickets I might consider some others before then!
Just looking at a Footy stats site and according to that this season we are most likely to score in the first 20 mins and concede 10 mins so either side of 1/2 time and last 10 minutes. Not sure how much yesterday throws that but it does suggest we are unlikely to hit teams for 6
Interesting stats. So it seems that getting an early goal really is vital as far as our chances of winning go.
Am old saying but the first goal is massively important. Even the best teams in a league struggle to win games from losing positions. I'd point out we've not won a game when conceding first. Indeed only one point gained when we've done so from 9 games where its happened...
