Not sure where the ‘No shots on goal’ is coming from?

Eze had a shot on target on 85 minutes? It was clearly a shot AND was on target, I’m not sure what criteria Sky are using to create their stats?!

Even by their own admission we had a Total of Four (4) shots but Sky then list both ‘Shots On Target’ & ‘Shots Off Target’ as Zero…go figure?!

Edited by Phil’s Barber (11 Mar 2023 8.48pm)

Attachment: 37263D21-4621-4B46-BBEF-7C1F6336E018.png (1,164.85Kb)

A shot on target is one that the keeper has to save. His shot was blocked so wasn’t on target…

Opta defines a shot on target as any goal attempt that:

Goes into the net regardless of intent - For Goals only.
Is a clear attempt to score that would have gone into the net but for being saved by the goalkeeper or is stopped by a player who is the last-man with the goalkeeper having no chance of preventing the goal (last line block).

Shots blocked by another player, who is not the last-man, are not counted as shots on target. Shots directly hitting the frame of the goal are not counted as shots on target, unless the ball goes in and is awarded as a goal.

It was Man City. Their 1st eleven cost them more than our entire squad.

So did their 2nd eleven....

Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

I went into the game yesterday fearing the worst - Man City hungry for points to close the gap on Arsenal, we had Decoure out on suspension, Luke was named in the starting 11 -

City, masters of a lot of good football, but equally masters of the dark arts, fouling & breaking up our attempts at counter with nudges, tripping & ganging up on the breaking player with impunity, throwing themselves on the floor at every opportunity & honestly if I was our doctor I would have sent out a box of tissues for the city players that hit the deck holding their face looking as though they were in floods of tears when in truth they tripped over their bootlaces -

I know we lost, another city player dropping to his knees (I will watch it on the replay later, so maybe I am being harsh on him)

Honestly I know we are struggling, we are shot & goal shy & haven't bloomed to fulfil our potential throughout the season & in some areas we have gone backwards , but I came away from the ground yesterday proud of the lads & the effort they put in to nullify this city threat, there were some big hearts out there yesterday - maybe I am alone in this but that's how it was for me -

I agree with these observations.
City were very cynical in their play and brought down our players whenever beaten even in not particularly dangerous areas.
Unlike other City teams in recent years they were not pleasing on the eye with little in the way of intricacy of approach.
More importantly on Palace , I agree there was much to commend in our performance but nothing from an attacking perspective.
I don’t know what the solution is.
Ahamada and Eze looked bright when they came on, but if we had started them we could have been 3 down at half time through being too open.
On the other hand Schlupp and Ayew both did good jobs for the team defensively, but we’re never going to trouble City offensively.
I watched Bournemouth beat Liverpool earlier before going to Palace.
They looked solid , but also carried a real threat with lots of pace and purpose and could easily have scored a few goals.
This is what we lack, and I think it’s a combination of poor coaching, tactical approach and lack of genuine pace in our attacking players.
I’m not sure how we fix this unless we either shake up the team or change the manager.
We’re not quite there in achieving results (we haven’t won at home since October) so something has to change.