Hibs with Least Shots on Target in League So Far

[LaMotta]

Some worrying stats about shots on target so far in the league:

Scottish Premiership Shots On Target Table (Average per game so far)..

1. Celtic ~ 7.25
2. Rangers ~ 6.25
3. Dundee ~ 5.5
4. St Johnstone ~ 5.25
5. Aberdeen ~ 5.0
6. Ross County ~ 4.25
7. Motherwell ~ 4.0
8. St Mirren ~ 3.75
9. Dundee Utd ~ 3.0
10. Hearts ~ 2.75
11. Kilmarnock ~ 2.25
12. Hibs ~ 1.75

https://x.com/GerryTaylorTips/status/1830918933706113269?t=***4ZJPNSZmI4VnKG4llKQ&s=19

Obviously we have played Celtic, and hopefully new midfielders will make a difference plus Hoilett and Youan to come in. But worrying so far.

[ancient hibee]

Goals scored are more important.

[LaMotta]

Goals scored are more important.

Yes of course but you can't score goals without shots on target.....

[SHODAN]

Quick calculation of goals scored per shots on target:

1. Dundee Utd ~ 0.50
2. Hibs ~ 0.43
3. Celtic ~ 0.41
3. Dundee ~ 0.41
5. Aberdeen ~ 0.40
5. St Mirren ~ 0.40
7. Motherwell ~ 0.38
8. Rangers ~ 0.32
9. St Johnstone ~ 0.24
10. Hearts ~ 0.18
11. Kilmarnock ~ 0.11
12. Ross County ~ 0.06

Clinical!

[ancient hibee]

Yes of course but you can't score goals without shots on target.....
I guessed that:greengrin but suspect our ratio of goals from shots on target might be better than some.

[worcesterhibby]

Early days. We played St Mirren with a desperately out of form Vente up front ( Myko only got last 10 mins) then played Celtic. So we really only have the Dundee and Kilmarnock games to judge the stats on. We have also hit the bar at least twice on those two games, which count as off target, but were probably far better efforts on goal than half the “on target” sklaffs that trundle to the goalie, that other teams will have in their stats. Let’s see where things stand after everyone has played each other home and away.

[worcesterhibby]

Quick calculation of goals scored per shots on target:

1. Dundee Utd ~ 0.50
2. Hibs ~ 0.43
3. Celtic ~ 0.41
3. Dundee ~ 0.41
5. Aberdeen ~ 0.40
5. St Mirren ~ 0.40
7. Motherwell ~ 0.38
8. Rangers ~ 0.32
9. St Johnstone ~ 0.24
10. Hearts ~ 0.18
11. Kilmarnock ~ 0.11
12. Ross County ~ 0.06

Clinical!

brilliant, love this and the perfect example of why stats tell you very little in isolation.

[Cooshed Kid]

Some worrying stats about shots on target so far in the league:

Scottish Premiership Shots On Target Table (Average per game so far)..

1. Celtic ~ 7.25
2. Rangers ~ 6.25
3. Dundee ~ 5.5
4. St Johnstone ~ 5.25
5. Aberdeen ~ 5.0
6. Ross County ~ 4.25
7. Motherwell ~ 4.0
8. St Mirren ~ 3.75
9. Dundee Utd ~ 3.0
10. Hearts ~ 2.75
11. Kilmarnock ~ 2.25
12. Hibs ~ 1.75

https://x.com/GerryTaylorTips/status/1830918933706113269?t=***4ZJPNSZmI4VnKG4llKQ&s=19

Obviously we have played Celtic, and hopefully new midfielders will make a difference plus Hoilett and Youan to come in. But worrying so far.

We offer for the connoisseur the authentic Scottish footballing experience as seen at Euro 2024. We can charge a premium on regular ticket prices.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Yes of course but you can't score goals without shots on target.....

we do strive for that :)

[Viva_Palmeiras]

brilliant, love this and the perfect example of why stats tell you very little in isolation.

my take on stats

- 62.07% are made up.
- in an era where attack is blunted and perhaps defenses dominate what use is possession without end product (goal) … ?
- bin xG as a comfort blanket.

[LaMotta]

Quick calculation of goals scored per shots on target:

1. Dundee Utd ~ 0.50
2. Hibs ~ 0.43
3. Celtic ~ 0.41
3. Dundee ~ 0.41
5. Aberdeen ~ 0.40
5. St Mirren ~ 0.40
7. Motherwell ~ 0.38
8. Rangers ~ 0.32
9. St Johnstone ~ 0.24
10. Hearts ~ 0.18
11. Kilmarnock ~ 0.11
12. Ross County ~ 0.06

Clinical!

Excellent- we are going to rocket up the league when start creating more chances!::greengrin

[MWHIBBIES]

Goals scored are more important.

In 1 game, yes. Over 38? Most shots will equal most goals.

[LaMotta]

Quick calculation of goals scored per shots on target:

1. Dundee Utd ~ 0.50
2. Hibs ~ 0.43
3. Celtic ~ 0.41
3. Dundee ~ 0.41
5. Aberdeen ~ 0.40
5. St Mirren ~ 0.40
7. Motherwell ~ 0.38
8. Rangers ~ 0.32
9. St Johnstone ~ 0.24
10. Hearts ~ 0.18
11. Kilmarnock ~ 0.11
12. Ross County ~ 0.06

Clinical!


brilliant, love this and the perfect example of why stats tell you very little in isolation.

To be fair those stats are mainly pretty close ( barely anything it between 2nd and 7th) so what that tells you is that the number of shots you get at goal is vital.

Most teams are scoring with approx 40% of their shots on target. So if we up shots on target, then we will score more often. I think we will start to soon.

[Hibees1973]

Was final straw for Montgomery.

He was always going on about possession stats and our XG being the 3rd the the league.

Gray says he has learned from previous managers he worked with. Expect he has learned not to go down this road.

[CapitalGreen]

The fact we still haven’t scored from open play in 5 games against top flight opposition should be a concern.

[Smartie]

The fact we still haven’t scored from open play in 5 games against top flight opposition should be a concern.

It definitely should... but as has been done above, that can probably be manipulated into a positive that we're carrying a big threat from set pieces.

[CapitalGreen]

It definitely should... but as has been done above, that can probably be manipulated into a positive that we're carrying a big threat from set pieces.

It could be but considering we are currently sitting on 1 point out of 12 this season I think it’s safe to say that threat isn’t enough on its own to translate into results. Aberdeen have as many league goals from set pieces as we do but are creating and scoring plenty from open play too.

[MWHIBBIES]

Was final straw for Montgomery.

He was always going on about possession stats and our XG being the 3rd the the league.

Gray says he has learned from previous managers he worked with. Expect he has learned not to go down this road.

Those thing are important, though.

[Pretty Boy]

I like stats but ultimately football is best viewed and judged with the eye. Hibs have been pretty clueless and disjointed up top this season and the stats back that up but there is mitigation when you look at some of the opposition we have faced and the personnel we had available. I daresay the stats could be twisted, indeed as they have been in a tongue in cheek manner on this thread, to show we are actually pretty clinical and don't need lot of chances or shots to score.

As an example the stats from the Celtic v Rangers game on Sunday showed 52v48% possession in Celtic's favour, 4 shots on target each, 14v13 total shots in Celtic's favour, 7v4 in favour of Celtic for corners and an xG (cringe) of 1.33 v 1.32 in favour of Rangers. That must have been a close, tightly contested game right? All those stats are pretty even and indeed Rangers with the slightly higher xG might even have had the better chances. Yet anyone who watched it saw that aside from a 10 minute spell at the start it was a procession for Celtic. Not a single Rangers fan is placated after a 3-0 humping because they had the slightly better xG.

There have been small hints of hope in our performances over the last couple of weeks that might not quite be showing up in broad stats just yet. Anyone watching could surely see a difference between the 2nd half at St Mirren and the 2nd half v Dundee though.

[hibstag]

Yes of course but you can't score goals without shots on target.....

But you can score 3 goals from 3 shots on target and have scored 0 from 16 shots on target it is a bit of a mute stat...

I'm sure hibs have 'won' loads of games with 'shots on target' goals is the stat goals

[hibstag]

Quick calculation of goals scored per shots on target:

1. Dundee Utd ~ 0.50
2. Hibs ~ 0.43
3. Celtic ~ 0.41
3. Dundee ~ 0.41
5. Aberdeen ~ 0.40
5. St Mirren ~ 0.40
7. Motherwell ~ 0.38
8. Rangers ~ 0.32
9. St Johnstone ~ 0.24
10. Hearts ~ 0.18
11. Kilmarnock ~ 0.11
12. Ross County ~ 0.06

Clinical!

Should have read the whole thread before posting
Thread closed

[LaMotta]

But you can score 3 goals from 3 shots on target and have scored 0 from 16 shots on target it is a bit of a mute stat...

I'm sure hibs have 'won' loads of games with 'shots on target' goals is the stat goals

It's not a mute stat, because over time the stats will show that (with perhaps a few exceptions) that the more shots at goal a team has, the more goals they will score.

[greenlex]

In 1 game, yes. Over 38? Most shots will equal most goals.
But not necessarily more points.

[LaMotta]

Should have read the whole thread before posting
Thread closed

I think you still need to read the whole thing because you aren't understanding those stats properly. Those stats from Shodan show that most teams in the league score with about 40% of their shots at target. Hibs are high up, but in reality very similar to 5 other teams with shot conversion ratio.

We are miles behind a lot of teams in actual shots at goal. Which means when you combine both sets of stats, other teams are scoring more goals than us.

[greenlex]

I like stats but ultimately football is best viewed and judged with the eye. Hibs have been pretty clueless and disjointed up top this season and the stats back that up but there is mitigation when you look at some of the opposition we have faced and the personnel we had available. I daresay the stats could be twisted, indeed as they have been in a tongue in cheek manner on this thread, to show we are actually pretty clinical and don't need lot of chances or shots to score.

As an example the stats from the Celtic v Rangers game on Sunday showed 52v48% possession in Celtic's favour, 4 shots on target each, 14v13 total shots in Celtic's favour, 7v4 in favour of Celtic for corners and an xG (cringe) of 1.33 v 1.32 in favour of Rangers. That must have been a close, tightly contested game right? All those stats are pretty even and indeed Rangers with the slightly higher xG might even have had the better chances. Yet anyone who watched it saw that aside from a 10 minute spell at the start it was a procession for Celtic. Not a single Rangers fan is placated after a 3-0 humping because they had the slightly better xG.

There have been small hints of hope in our performances over the last couple of weeks that might not quite be showing up in broad stats just yet. Anyone watching could surely see a difference between the 2nd half at St Mirren and the 2nd half v Dundee though.
Clement was hiding behind the stats after the game.

[LaMotta]

But not necessarily more points.

Well that majorly depends a lot on how your team can defend, which is a separate piece of analysis altogether ( so far not good for us!)

[Donegal Hibby]

Clement was hiding behind the stats after the game.

Sourness too . Talksport about the OF game , thought Souness was digging a hole for himself in this …..

Stats can be misleading at times like the OF , Man U v Liverpool games .

https://youtu.be/dB_VDNGOyGU?si=jyw9TAGve90KBh9p

[LaMotta]

Sourness too . Talksport about the OF game , thought Souness was digging a hole for himself in this …..

Stats can be misleading at times like the OF , Man U v Liverpool games .

https://youtu.be/dB_VDNGOyGU?si=jyw9TAGve90KBh9p

Stats can be misleading I agree. But also it can be dangerous to dismiss stats as meaningless. Not suggesting you are btw! I think its obvious we need to up our shots at goal, I dont think anyone can really argue against that.

[matty_f]

The fact we still haven’t scored from open play in 5 games against top flight opposition should be a concern.

Sunday? Ball was in play after the corner, so we’ve got one.

[hibstag]

I think you still need to read the whole thing because you aren't understanding those stats properly. Those stats from Shodan show that most teams in the league score with about 40% of their shots at target. Hibs are high up, but in reality very similar to 5 other teams with shot conversion ratio.

We are miles behind a lot of teams in actual shots at goal. Which means when you combine both sets of stats, other teams are scoring more goals than us.

Football is not a game of percentages though is it

I understand football perfectly you shoot at goal and it goes in.... Sometimes it doesn't
Hibs have battered teams and lost to the oppositions only shot on goal. It bloody frustrating, how many times you shoot make no odds, it's scoring and not conceding that counts,

[Ringothedog]

Sunday? Ball was in play after the corner, so we’ve got one.

Bowie’s call against Dundee is another

[LaMotta]

Football is not a game of percentages though is it

I understand football perfectly you shoot at goal and it goes in.... Sometimes it doesn't
Hibs have battered teams and lost to the oppositions only shot on goal


Of course that can happen, but over time the stats will give a decent reflection of what is going on. Just dismissing stats because sometimes they don't ring true isn't sensible!

I'm sure we can all agree that if we get more shots on goal regularly this season than we have done so far, we will start to score more goals.

[JimBHibees]

The fact we still haven’t scored from open play in 5 games against top flight opposition should be a concern.

Killie goal was from open play as was Bowies imo

[Brightside]

Some worrying stats about shots on target so far in the league:

Scottish Premiership Shots On Target Table (Average per game so far)..

1. Celtic ~ 7.25
2. Rangers ~ 6.25
3. Dundee ~ 5.5
4. St Johnstone ~ 5.25
5. Aberdeen ~ 5.0
6. Ross County ~ 4.25
7. Motherwell ~ 4.0
8. St Mirren ~ 3.75
9. Dundee Utd ~ 3.0
10. Hearts ~ 2.75
11. Kilmarnock ~ 2.25
12. Hibs ~ 1.75

https://x.com/GerryTaylorTips/status/1830918933706113269?t=***4ZJPNSZmI4VnKG4llKQ&s=19

Obviously we have played Celtic, and hopefully new midfielders will make a difference plus Hoilett and Youan to come in. But worrying so far.

You just need eyes to see we aren't creating much at the moment. Really hope its just work in progress but if our season is all about "2nd balls" etc it could be a tough watch.

[Brightside]

Was final straw for Montgomery.

He was always going on about possession stats and our XG being the 3rd the the league.

Gray says he has learned from previous managers he worked with. Expect he has learned not to go down this road.

Hopefully he hasn't learned that creating chances is a bad thing..... that would be a bit mental.

[erin go bragh]

The fact we still haven’t scored from open play in 5 games against top flight opposition should be a concern.

Newall scored from open play, as did Bowie.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

As the late not so great be-wellied Ebbe Skovdahl said :

Statistics are like mini-skirts. They give you good ideas but hide the most important things" is a quote attributed to Ebbe Skovdahl, the former manager of Aberdeen.

[CapitalGreen]

Newall scored from open play, as did Bowie.


Sunday? Ball was in play after the corner, so we’ve got one.


Killie goal was from open play as was Bowies imo

The goal on Sunday was a short corner routine where an overhit cross ended up in the back of the net.


Bowie’s call against Dundee is another

Bowie scored after receiving the ball from a long throw.

[ancient hibee]

It could be but considering we are currently sitting on 1 point out of 12 this season I think it’s safe to say that threat isn’t enough on its own to translate into results. Aberdeen have as many league goals from set pieces as we do but are creating and scoring plenty from open play too.

I expect most of us know we’re sitting on 2 points.

[ancient hibee]

The goal on Sunday was a short corner routine where an overhit cross ended up in the back of the net.



Bowie scored after receiving the ball from a long throw.

Pretty pathetic defence of not being open play.

[CapitalGreen]

Pretty pathetic defence of not being open play.

It’s not a defence, the reality is neither throw ins or corner kicks are open play situations.

28142

[worcesterhibby]

It’s not a defence, the reality is neither throw ins or corner kicks are open play situations.

28142

the fact that we have been so much improved from set plays is hugely encouraging, don’t you think ?

[B.H.F.C]

Not concerned by it at this point.

First game we were all over the place but missed two really good chances. Second game was against Celtic and in the last two we’ve been in winning positions going in to injury time.

Youan and Hoilett haven’t kicked a ball yet and Bowie is yet to start a game. As that changes, we’ll score more goals.

[LunasBoots]

We're only a couple games in, let's see the stats in say a few months, the team needs time to try and gel, we've played some pretty tough matches recently against teams who are expected to be above us.

[Crab apple]

Goals scored are more important.

Spot on. I remember one of Monty's post match interviews last season after our latest defeat when he went on about how our XG stats were really good.

[Mcbizz1998]

Bowie’s call against Dundee is another

Thought I was going mad on both the goals!

So that’s just a nonsense stat.

[LaMotta]

Thought I was going mad on both the goals!

So that’s just a nonsense stat.

Well I thought originally they were open play goals, but on reflection I think they are set piece goals.

Both goals have come directly from set pieces. If a corner is thrown into the box and Marv heads it in, then that is a set piece goal. Same if Miller throws a long throw and it bounces to Myko who turns it in. If they are set pieces goals (which I think most people would agree with) then surely Bowie and Newell's are?

[Bobby's Cinema]

Not surprised in the slightest.

Every one of our goals this season have come from individual moments of quality in amongst long spells of not testing keepers. Not from creating chances in general play.

I do think the break will do us good and we will start seeing something developing next time out at ER.

[matty_f]

Well I thought originally they were open play goals, but on reflection I think they are set piece goals.

Both goals have come directly from set pieces. If a corner is thrown into the box and Marv heads it in, then that is a set piece goal. Same if Miller throws a long throw and it bounces to Myko who turns it in. If they are set pieces goals (which I think most people would agree with) then surely Bowie and Newell's are?

How many touches after a corner is it a set piece goal? For me, the ball is in play, Newell can be tackled, caught offside etc so it’s not a set piece imho.

[CapitalGreen]

How many touches after a corner is it a set piece goal? For me, the ball is in play, Newell can be tackled, caught offside etc so it’s not a set piece imho.

You’re conflating “in play” with “open play”. The ball must be in play before any goal is scored.

It’s not about number of touches, the short corner to Boyle who laid it back to Newell to cross was clearly part of a pre-planned set piece routine.

[worcesterhibby]

How many touches after a corner is it a set piece goal? For me, the ball is in play, Newell can be tackled, caught offside etc so it’s not a set piece imho.

and with the Bowie one he takes the ball, works his way into the box, outmuscles and goes past two defenders before getting his shot away. It’s all semantics. If we take a bye kick and pass it straight to Boyler who runs the length of the field, beating 6 players and rounding the goalkeeper, is that a goal from a set piece ?

[LaMotta]

How many touches after a corner is it a set piece goal? For me, the ball is in play, Newell can be tackled, caught offside etc so it’s not a set piece imho.

If we swing a corner in and Marv headers and ball hits the post, it rebounds to Rudi who slots it home, would you describe that as a goal from a set piece? Rudi could be tackled, caught offside etc too. I don't think its really much different from Newell's in terms of touches and how it originated - I think most people would say in that scenario it was a set piece goal and not from open play.:dunno:

[Donegal Hibby]

Stats can be misleading I agree. But also it can be dangerous to dismiss stats as meaningless. Not suggesting you are btw! I think its obvious we need to up our shots at goal, I dont think anyone can really argue against that.

We can’t really judge stats I think in our two games against Celtic as it’s not a level playing field though it is interesting when we played them there we only had 4 shot , 2 on target with 39% possession while the huns had 13 , 4 on target and 47% possession yet we scored and they didn’t.

When Gray was appointed the way he was talking I had figured we would have more shots and less possession than our previous manager.

How many games over the years have we seen Hibs dominate , have more shots and look much the better team only to be left thinking at the end of the game .. how the f*** did we lose that one !! .

I do agree it would be good if we could get our shot tally up and be more clinical which hopefully will happen with Kwon and Triantis in midfield plus Youan and Hoilett being available to play soon .

[Paulie Walnuts]

How many touches after a corner is it a set piece goal? For me, the ball is in play, Newell can be tackled, caught offside etc so it’s not a set piece imho.

That’s the way I’d look at it and tbh I’ve never really thought much about it, I just presumed everyone had the same definition of ‘open play’ as me. :greengrin

I do see where other posters are coming from, but that Newell one was absolutely open play imo. I can’t actually for the life of me remember the build up to Bowies goal but again, from remembering him getting the better of the defenders etc, it was definitely open play for me.

What I would say is that if neither of them are ‘open play’ then the lack of open play goals becomes less of an issue than if we were going by what alot of folk would, as far as I knew anyway, had deemed to be open play.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Of course that can happen, but over time the stats will give a decent reflection of what is going on. Just dismissing stats because sometimes they don't ring true isn't sensible!

I'm sure we can all agree that if we get more shots on goal regularly this season than we have done so far, we will start to score more goals.

disclaimer - was scarred twice by stats at Uni :) but my understanding.

Probability means that something is more or less likely but not guaranteed.

It’s like the weather 5% chance of rain means it’s less probable but it still can happen.

Peoples height is a “normal” distribution - a bell curve and yet Hibs is skewed to taller this season.

xG as I understand it is like the normal distribution - for all teams getting into this position on the pitch has the probability/likelihood of resulting in a goal. For me the issue is that Hibs reality and the quality/ composure of the player means they fluff the chance. So like the height example, we don’t confirm to the norm - we are skewed (to less goals resulting).

So the normal distribution doesn’t apply to us - so to your point it doesn’t t mean for Hibs more shots = more goals.

And that’s killed us prob forever but certainly post Jack Ross.

[Unseen work]

When Bowie, Youan and Hoilett are fit and starting games I expect that stat to change quite significantly

[Viva_Palmeiras]

When Bowie, Youan and Hoilett are fit and starting games I expect that stat to change quite significantly

kwality. And on further reflection perhaps the pls stat is screaming out - we get into positions but don’t convert so can we improve the current players to upgrade ;)

[LaMotta]

disclaimer - was scarred twice by stats at Uni :) but my understanding.

Probability means that something is more or less likely but not guaranteed.

It’s like the weather 5% chance of rain means it’s less probable but it still can happen.

Peoples height is a “normal” distribution - a bell curve and yet Hibs is skewed to taller this season.

xG as I understand it is like the normal distribution - for all teams getting into this position on the pitch has the probability/likelihood of resulting in a goal. For me the issue is that Hibs reality and the quality/ composure of the player means they fluff the chance. So like the height example, we don’t confirm to the norm - we are skewed (to less goals resulting).

So the normal distribution doesn’t apply to us - so to your point it doesn’t t mean for Hibs more shots = more goals.

And that’s killed us prob forever but certainly post Jack Ross.

You are overthinking this way too much, it's not that deep :greengrin.

If we have 10 shots at goal, 10 games in a row, then the chances are we are going to have scored more goals than if we only have only 2 shots at goal for those 10 games.

Of course it is possible we score the same or more with the 2 shots at goal example, but its extremely unlikely. So Its in our interest to get in more positions where we can have more shots at goal, because that is probably going to lead to more goals. That's just common sense based on probability!

[Greenio]

Call me crazy, but I'm feeling pretty positive about things following the wekeend.

Kwon and Nectar are quality
Miko is full of confidence
Miller is looking better every game
Jair (sorry to single folk out but he was utter pap) is away
The bench is stronger

We got 2 points when we should have had 6

But if you look closely, the gel is forming in this team, the way they support each other off the ball is telling.

I'm thinking Boyle hits form, Bowie starts and shows more of what were all seeing, Rudi continues his progression. Levitt - who knows, there is a player in there! Others on the bench have potential for sure

So, aye, shots on target after 4 games, whatevs.

I think we'll surprise a lot of folk this season

Come at me...! ;)

[PatHead]

Some worrying stats about shots on target so far in the league:

Scottish Premiership Shots On Target Table (Average per game so far)..

1. Celtic ~ 7.25
2. Rangers ~ 6.25
3. Dundee ~ 5.5
4. St Johnstone ~ 5.25
5. Aberdeen ~ 5.0
6. Ross County ~ 4.25
7. Motherwell ~ 4.0
8. St Mirren ~ 3.75
9. Dundee Utd ~ 3.0
10. Hearts ~ 2.75
11. Kilmarnock ~ 2.25
12. Hibs ~ 1.75

https://x.com/GerryTaylorTips/status/1830918933706113269?t=***4ZJPNSZmI4VnKG4llKQ&s=19

Obviously we have played Celtic, and hopefully new midfielders will make a difference plus Hoilett and Youan to come in. But worrying so far.

According to the BBC website reports we had 3 on target v St Mirren, 0 on target v Celtic, 2 on target v Dundee and 4 on target v Killie.

How does that work out at 1.75 per game?

[Oscar T Grouch]

According to the BBC website reports we had 3 on target v St Mirren, 0 on target v Celtic, 2 on target v Dundee and 4 on target v Killie.

How does that work out at 1.75 per game?

It doesn't the original tweeter mixed Killie and Hibs numbers up.

[mcohibs]

It's not a mute stat, because over time the stats will show that (with perhaps a few exceptions) that the more shots at goal a team has, the more goals they will score.

Moot point but there’s no such thing as a mute stat :greengrin

[LaMotta]

Moot point but there’s no such thing as a mute stat :greengrin

Ha exactly, I was quoting previous poster :greengrin

[Callum_62]

Sunday? Ball was in play after the corner, so we’ve got one.Bowie Vs Dundee too surely?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk