I do have one slight quibble with the Argentina/Brazil comparison. It feels neat, but are we underplaying Argentina's performance?
Michael's xG maps compare 90 mins of Argentina with 120 mins for Brazil; Opta's race chart (I know all xG models aren't alike so this isn't an exact comparison) shows Brazil with under 1.5 xG in 90 mins, with another 1.2-ish xG coming in ET.
I agree with the overall point -- that 1.4-ish xG in 90 mins was enough to win the match against difficult opposition and Brazil's overall plan wasn't a bad one -- but I wonder if, by comparing them like that, we're doing Argentina a disservice. Brazil created one really good chance in 90 mins; Argentina created three. You could easily argue that scoring that first chance made it easier to create the others, and I'd totally accept that! But it feels like, even without the confirmation bias of the results, Argentina were ultimately more effective than Brazil.
I do have one slight quibble with the Argentina/Brazil comparison. It feels neat, but are we underplaying Argentina's performance?
Michael's xG maps compare 90 mins of Argentina with 120 mins for Brazil; Opta's race chart (I know all xG models aren't alike so this isn't an exact comparison) shows Brazil with under 1.5 xG in 90 mins, with another 1.2-ish xG coming in ET.
I agree with the overall point -- that 1.4-ish xG in 90 mins was enough to win the match against difficult opposition and Brazil's overall plan wasn't a bad one -- but I wonder if, by comparing them like that, we're doing Argentina a disservice. Brazil created one really good chance in 90 mins; Argentina created three. You could easily argue that scoring that first chance made it easier to create the others, and I'd totally accept that! But it feels like, even without the confirmation bias of the results, Argentina were ultimately more effective than Brazil.