Given that they were the home team and were in possession of the ball for less than a third of the playing time (in the first half) then whoever generated that crock of shit was either pissed or Tom Hanks.The last 24 hours has really made me realise just how far people have gone down the rabbit hole of xG. It is a useful stat to look at a sides performance over a prolonged period of games and really should only be analysed in combination with other metrics. However for some it seems to have replaced the actual watching of the football itself in regards to how they interpret the game.
I saw on a youtube vid earlier two lads discussing the game and the words "Game of two halves", "It was all Villa in the first half", "Villa could have been 1 or 2 up at half time" and "4-0 flattered Spurs". All this coming from the sole fact that the xG was Villa 1.2 - 2.2 Spurs. However, surely anyone who watched the game would know that this is not how the game felt.
And that's the issue, it's not a statistic it's a made up metric based on someone's opinion .
It's accuracy is exposed by the fact that in the entire game they had one shot on target ( that if Vicario had suddenly been abducted by aliens - might have gone in!)