我很惊讶我们的 U20 教练会认为对手的战术值得拿到 3 分，因此我把
[post=16521036.45] 翻译成中文。
[hr]
If I checked correctly, you had 4 headers (after min. 60 only 3), no
unpredictable, no technical, no quick (on SE relevant positions). So you
could only get the corner-head-SE, the wing-head-SE and the wing-scoring-SE.
如果我的确认是对的，你们有 4 位头球球员 (在 60 分钟之后只剩下 3 位), 没有不可
预测, 技术, 以及 (与 SE 相关位置) 的速度球员。所以你们可能只能够获得角球的头球
SE, 边路头球 SE 和边路得分 SE。
Taiwan had 4 headers, too, plus one technical forward and one quick forward,
giving Taiwan the edge on SE, especially since SE depend on possession.
台湾也有 4 位头球球员，并且加上一位技术型前锋与一位速度前锋，这些给了台湾 SE
的机会，尤其在 SE 依赖持球率的情况下。
OK, we can agree to disagree. In general, for an extreme CA with possession
as low as yours, you should have at least 60% defense on all sides. Since you
only got more than 60% on one of those three sides, scoring a regular goal
wasn't unlikely.
OK, 我们可以同意你的不同意。一般来说，一个低持球率的极端 CA，在每个防守点上必
需至少拥有 60%以上的防守率。因为你们只有一边远高于 60% 以及一个接近，普通的进
球得分并非不可能。
With 27% possession, you had to expect us to get all 5 exclusive and 5
regular chances (according to the koenigsblau calculator), while you only got
CA chances, no regular chances.
在只有 27% 的持球率的情况之下，你们应该期待我们得到所有 10 次的普通进攻机会 (
根据 koenigsblau calculator)，而你们只能获得 CA 的机率而没有任何普通机会。
Out of those 10 chances, 35% go through the center, which had a chance of
scoring of 24% on average, meaning an expected 0.84 goals through the middle.
在 10 次的机会当中，35%是由中路进攻并且拥有 24% 的得分机会，平均来讲，在中路进
攻的部分会得 0.84 分。
25% go through the right wing, which had a chance of scoring of 32%, meaning
an average 0.8 goals through the right wing.
25% 的机会是由右路进攻，并且拥有 32% 的得分机率，这个意思是在右路上会有 0.8 个
得分机会。
25% go through the weaker left wing, which only had a chance of 5%, meaning
an average of 0.13 goals on the weak wing.
还有 25% 是来自比较弱且只有 5%得分机会的左路进攻，这意思是平均只有 0.13 个得分
。
Summed together, the mathematical expectation was 2 regular goals going
through your defenses.
把这些数字加总起来，台湾约有 2 (1.77) 分的普通机会突破你们的防守。
Plus, in this match, Taiwan had better specs and 73% possession, so the
chance of Taiwan scoring an SE goal (quick, head or even tech-vs-head), which
your defense can't protect against, was also likely.
另外，台湾在这场比赛中拥有较优势的特技与 73% 的持球率，所以台湾有机会发动你们
的防守无法阻止的 SE 得分事件 (速度, 头球, 甚至技术对头球)。
You on the other hand had to count on your CA chances.
接下来必需计算你们 CA 的得分机会。
If statistical probability tells us that Taiwan gets 10 chances, makes 2
goals, that means 8 chances were blocked and could become CAs. Let's say, you
converted 3 out of those 8 chances into CAs (guessing, too lazy to check the
exact formula^^).
如果在统计上告诉我们台湾的10次进攻机会中会得2分，这代表有8球会被挡住并发动 CA
。我们以 3/8 的防守反击机会来计算好了(这只是猜测，太懒而不能确认正确的公式)。
Out of those 3 chances, 35% go through the center, which had a chance of
scoring of 35% on average, meaning an expected 0.37 goals through the middle.
在3次的防守反击机会中，有 35 % 发生在中路进攻，并且获得 0.37 的得分机会。
25% go through the right wing, which had a chance of scoring of 78%, meaning
an average 0.59 goals through the right wing.
有 25% 的右路进攻，并且有 78% 的得分机会，这表示平均有 0.59 球能从右路攻陷。
25% go through the weaker left wing, which only had a chance of 11%, meaning
an average of 0.08 goals on the weak wing.
会有 25% 是比较弱的左路进攻，只有11%的得分机会，也就是说平均只能获得 0.08 分。
Summed up, a total of 1.04 regular goals for your team to be expected.
把他加总起来，你们的球队将预期有 1.04 的普通得分机会。
So, mathematically speaking and not considering SE and SP, a Taiwan win with
a margin of 1 was the most likely result.
所以数学上来看，不包含 SE 和 SP 的影响，台湾领先一分是合理的结果。
Of course our lineup could have been better (after the game it's always easy
to say^^), but I don't think the win was lucky.
当然，我们的先发排安应该要更好 (在比赛之后总是比较容易这样说)，但我不认为这场
比赛是因为运气才赢球。
[hr]
注：最后一段和比赛分析无关就没翻译了。