Fulham under Meulensteen (statsbomb)

[lamby]

Another great article on StatsBomb - instigated by Richard Allen (Craven Cottage NewsRound):

http://www.statsbomb.com/2014/01/fulham-under-meulensteen/

---------------------
Fulham conceded more than twice as many shots as they gained, and their own poor shot quality combined with the above average quality of shots allowed mean that they conceded more than there times as many Prime location shots as they generated themselves.
They also shot far too often from Marginal Positions.

All in all, I firmly believe that Jol was lucky that his team only conceded 11 more non-penalty goals than they scored under his reign.  He really had Fulham playing abject football.

Jol was sacked on 1st December and was replaced by Rene Meulensteen with an almost immediate improvement in results and performances.  Although recent results, including a 6-0 tanking by the mighty Hull and a home defeat to Sunderland yesterday suggests that the "Rene impact" has been short lived.

For a start Fulham have had more shots under Meulensteen than they have conceded – so that's a clear improvement.  Their split of shots between zones is bang in line with the EPL average (37% from Prime and 34% from Secondary positions).
So I can answer Richard Allen's question by saying that Rene has improved the positions where Fulham have been shooting from and it's not a case that the increased shots are just superficially better.

From a defensive point of view, Fulham under Meulensteen have a huge problem with where they allow shots to be taken from.  Almost half of the shots they allow have come from the Prime Zone – that's a hole that will need to be rectified quickly if Fulham want to escape relegation.

However, even including that worrying defensive wrinkle I would suggest that Meulensteen has been most unfortunate to have conceded 21 goals from 121 shots.  That is virtually the same amount of goals (22) that Jol's Fulham conceded from a whopping 258 shots.

I had been pretty vocal all season that Fulham were atrocious under Jol and that their underlying numbers were much worse than the results they were getting.  Whether that was because of good fortune or variance we will never know, but his replacement Meulensteen is in the unfortunate position of being on the receiving end of the variance levelling itself out, ie the results he has been getting are not as good as the underlying stats would suggest.
Sometimes, that's just the way the dice rolls.

[ltd-ffc]

all teams have got sharper in front of goal as the season has gone on definitely

[Lighthouse]

Are we better now under Rene than we were before? Going forward yes because we are actually going forward. Defensively no because we allow shots to bombard us from the danger areas. Seems to make sense. Are we a better side to watch until we leak goals? Yes I think we clearly are.

[Burt]

Agree with Mr Lighthouse. I actually enjoy watching the team play once more. Heaps better than the stuff served up under Jol. I prefer to see us lose a battling performance like v. Spurs, Man City, and yes even Sunderland than see us whimp out with no fight, which seemed to be characteristic of the later stages of Jol's tenure.

Shore up the defence though, else we will go down whilst being relatively entertaining. Not a good combination  :dft011:

[ffc73]

Last Saturday we were the better side at 0-0 and again at 1-2.

Our strikers need to take their chances (WBA & Swansea at home are other prime examples) and our defence needs to stop making individual mistakes as these seem to be punished each and every time.

I have a Wigan friend who bemoaned the same failings in his side last season

[mangoputney]

Another great article on StatsBomb - instigated by Richard Allen (Craven Cottage NewsRound):

http://www.statsbomb.com/2014/01/fulham-under-meulensteen/

---------------------
Fulham conceded more than twice as many shots as they gained, and their own poor shot quality combined with the above average quality of shots allowed mean that they conceded more than there times as many Prime location shots as they generated themselves.
They also shot far too often from Marginal Positions.

All in all, I firmly believe that Jol was lucky that his team only conceded 11 more non-penalty goals than they scored under his reign.  He really had Fulham playing abject football.

Jol was sacked on 1st December and was replaced by Rene Meulensteen with an almost immediate improvement in results and performances.  Although recent results, including a 6-0 tanking by the mighty Hull and a home defeat to Sunderland yesterday suggests that the "Rene impact" has been short lived.

For a start Fulham have had more shots under Meulensteen than they have conceded – so that's a clear improvement.  Their split of shots between zones is bang in line with the EPL average (37% from Prime and 34% from Secondary positions).
So I can answer Richard Allen's question by saying that Rene has improved the positions where Fulham have been shooting from and it's not a case that the increased shots are just superficially better.

From a defensive point of view, Fulham under Meulensteen have a huge problem with where they allow shots to be taken from.  Almost half of the shots they allow have come from the Prime Zone – that's a hole that will need to be rectified quickly if Fulham want to escape relegation.

However, even including that worrying defensive wrinkle I would suggest that Meulensteen has been most unfortunate to have conceded 21 goals from 121 shots.  That is virtually the same amount of goals (22) that Jol's Fulham conceded from a whopping 258 shots.

I had been pretty vocal all season that Fulham were atrocious under Jol and that their underlying numbers were much worse than the results they were getting.  Whether that was because of good fortune or variance we will never know, but his replacement Meulensteen is in the unfortunate position of being on the receiving end of the variance levelling itself out, ie the results he has been getting are not as good as the underlying stats would suggest.
Sometimes, that's just the way the dice rolls.

good article... does seem that whenever the oppo pulls the trigger their scoring

how many shots did it take for our second against west ham, about 25+???

another stat from CCNR

Our record when scoring less than 2 goals:

TEAM          PLD   GF<2   W   D   L   F   A   GD   GFA   GAA       PPG   PTS
Fulham   20   15   2   1   12   9   35   -26   0.6   2.33       0.46   7

abysmal

[Bassey the warrior]

Are we better now under Rene than we were before? Going forward yes because we are actually going forward. Defensively no because we allow shots to bombard us from the danger areas. Seems to make sense. Are we a better side to watch until we leak goals? Yes I think we clearly are.

But are we worse defensively than under Jol? I don't really think so, it's just a case that the opposition have been more clinical against us. Poor, there's no question but not worse than before.
Ultimately we're in a similar position to Stoke, Rene is trying to implement a new system but we lack the right sort of players. The difference is they struggle more scoring goals than conceding them, yesterday aside, whereas we are the opposite although lately the goals have dried up.