Set Pieces

[milo]

In response,

1. Agreed, but this "natural variation" has been going on long enough for reasonable conclusions to be drawn.

2. We do not under-commit numbers on corners.

3. I would take issue with this.Toby, Dier, Kane and Dele are all good in the air. Verts isn't too bad either. Wanyama and Dembele are monsters.Properly drilled, this fire-power should be good enough to out gun virtually all opponents. We don't need to change any players, just utilise what we have much better.

....and Cahill has just scored Chelsea's likely winner tonight..following a corner!!!!

1. You are right. Last season we scored the second most goals from corners in the Premier League. One behind Palace.

2. The positioning and approach of players at corners could also be driven by this consideration.

3. I agree that they are good in the air.

You expect clusters in stats and it is a mistake to extrapolate from a game or two. Chelsea could go ten games without scoring from a corner now or they could score one in the next game. Including tonight, they have only scored two more goals from corners than us this season, having played a game more. It is entirely possible that we could be level with them by this time tomorrow night.

 

[milo]

Just to be clear, I am using the data from Squawka on goals from corners.

http://www.squawka.com/football-tea...ny#any#season#1#all-matches#corner#desc#total

 

[thfcsteff]

Oh my life. Come on man!

If we had scored from a set-piece, of course it is effective!
BUT don't tell me you cannot see how an early (deserved) card for Alonso, Kante and Luiz (who was also getting away with persistent fouling) does not give us an advantage. It means they cannot get away with the fouling anymore. Which allows us to bomb on more, which allows...oh whatever! You either get that or you don't.

And given all the football we play, and all the set-pieces we get, do you genuinely believe that Mauricio Pochettino does not 'give proper attention to detail in this area'? Do you genuinely believe that he and his staff take a look and say, 'lads, it's lunchtime, I know we were going to work on corners today but sod it, let's get lunch instead and hope that one of the 10 or well will get results in something spiffy'???????

I thought we played well on Saturday and unfortunately didn't get the rub of the green. Chelsea scored from three dead ball situations and a worldie. Not much we could do about that (apart from not unnecessarily conceding them in the first place). I think we didn't get much help from the referee but I also said earlier that Emirates Marketing Project had much more to complain about their ref than we did. Have you ever refereed? It is a damn sight harder than it looks and refs only get one look at it in real time. Yes he could (and should) have booked Alonso and Kante earlier, but I don't feel that would have had as much effect as if we had scored from one of our set pieces.

As I continue to say, in finely balanced games (such as this one) we need to give ourselves every competitive advantage. While our corner variation has improved this season, on Saturday it went back to the same old , same old. We didn't create as much as half a chance from the 11 corners we had.
To give a golfing analogy. Corners are much like putting. They are a game within a game. You can be virtually certain that in every game we will have a few corners. To not give ourselves the optimum chance of scoring from them is much the same as a golfer not practicing his putting. It is a specialist area, where we still fall well short, not just of our rivals, but also the mean for the division. All I am saying is that we need to give proper attention to detail in this area, where we have hitherto been sorely lacking.

Indeed, as we are one of the most exciting and attacking sides in the country, we can surely anticipate that we will have above the average number of corners in a game. All I am saying is that we need to give ourselves the best possible advantage to capitalise on that situation. Not to do so would be negligent, no?

 

[Pirate55]

Just to be clear, I am using the data from Squawka on goals from corners.

http://www.squawka.com/football-tea...ny#any#season#1#all-matches#corner#desc#total

I would challenge you (or anyone else) to identify the 6 goals we have supposedly scored from corners in the Premier League this season. And indeed the alleged 10 we are supposed to have scored last season.

 

[milo]

I would challenge you (or anyone else) to identify the 6 goals we have supposedly scored from corners in the Premier League this season. And indeed the alleged 10 we are supposed to have scored last season.

I'd challenge you to find reputable independent evidence to support your argument rather than fall back on anecdotes.

 

[Pirate55]

Oh my life. Come on man!

If we had scored from a set-piece, of course it is effective!
BUT don't tell me you cannot see how an early (deserved) card for Alonso, Kante and Luiz (who was also getting away with persistent fouling) does not give us an advantage. It means they cannot get away with the fouling anymore. Which allows us to bomb on more, which allows...oh whatever! You either get that or you don't.

And given all the football we play, and all the set-pieces we get, do you genuinely believe that Mauricio Pochettino does not 'give proper attention to detail in this area'? Do you genuinely believe that he and his staff take a look and say, 'lads, it's lunchtime, I know we were going to work on corners today but sod it, let's get lunch instead and hope that one of the 10 or well will get results in something spiffy'???????

As I previously said, I am encouraged by the increased variation in our corners this season. However, on Saturday against Chelsea when it really mattered, we just seemed to revert to our usual attempted near post delivery with hardly any deviation.

I am not convinced that the coaching team as a whole do pay enough attention to this aspect. I remember being surprised and amazed at the fracas between Son and Lamela over who would take the penalty against City. I was even more surprised, given Poch's attention to detail, at his comments afterwards, which confirmed that he hadn't addressed this issue before the game.

 

[milo]

As I previously said, I am encouraged by the increased variation in our corners this season. However, on Saturday against Chelsea when it really mattered, we just seemed to revert to our usual attempted near post delivery with hardly any deviation.

I am not convinced that the coaching team as a whole do pay enough attention to this aspect. I remember being surprised and amazed at the fracas between Son and Lamela over who would take the penalty against City. I was even more surprised, given Poch's attention to detail, at his comments afterwards, which confirmed that he hadn't addressed this issue before the game.

Were you similarly surprised that Conte had to tell Willian to take Chelsea's penalty on Saturday?

 

[Pirate55]

I'd challenge you to find reputable independent evidence to support your argument rather than fall back on anecdotes.

I refer you to Steveawols post on 1st April (#193 in the Corners thread). As at that date, we had scored only three corners from 199, the third lowest conversion rate in the League. West Brom had scored 14, Chelsea 7 and Liverpool 6.

Since that date, we have to the best of my recollection, only scored one more from a corner ( Dembele v Bournemouth). That would still give us a conversion rate of less than 2 %, and still the third lowest in the league.

I do not recognise where you get 6 goals from corners ( still less 10 last year). I prefer to rely on my own eyes. I note you haven't tried to identify these 6 goals. As you well know, statistics can be extremely misleading.

I don't get why you guys obstinately refuse to admit we are lousy at corners and improvement in this area would be most welcome. It is these small margins which can be the difference between success and failure. I don't want to see us continue to be bridesmaids. I would suggest a significant improvement in our conversion rate from corners will give us a significant competitive edge. I fail to see how anyone can think otherwise.

 

[milo]

I refer you to Steveawols post on 1st April (#193 in the Corners thread). As at that date, we had scored only three corners from 199, the third lowest conversion rate in the League. West Brom had scored 14, Chelsea 7 and Liverpool 6.

Since that date, we have to the best of my recollection, only scored one more from a corner ( Dembele v Bournemouth). That would still give us a conversion rate of less than 2 %, and still the third lowest in the league.

I do not recognise where you get 6 goals from corners ( still less 10 last year). I prefer to rely on my own eyes. I note you haven't tried to identify these 6 goals. As you well know, statistics can be extremely misleading.

I don't get why you guys obstinately refuse to admit we are lousy at corners and improvement in this area would be most welcome. It is these small margins which can be the difference between success and failure. I don't want to see us continue to be bridesmaids. I would suggest a significant improvement in our conversion rate from corners will give us a significant competitive edge. I fail to see how anyone can think otherwise.

It's funny isn't it that the rest of the data in that table is aligned with the up to date Squawka figures but you don't like that because it doesn't support your argument.

I get the figure of six goals from Squawka because it is the best and most up to date data that I have been able to find online. If you can find something else, then I would be happy to use that. I prefer to use data because I do not trust my eyes or my memory, both will tell me what I want to see, rather than what is happening.

I don't get why you dismiss out of hand anything that does not support your preconceptions. Corners are a low return passage of play, the number of corners won has no correlation with the number of goals scored from corners and that the range in the number of goals scored by a club from corners each season can easily be explained by a natural variation in the data.

I have scanned a few pages from The Numbers Game: Why Everything You Know About Football Is Wrong on corners. It is a good book, I recommend it.

 

[thfcsteff]

As I previously said, I am encouraged by the increased variation in our corners this season. However, on Saturday against Chelsea when it really mattered, we just seemed to revert to our usual attempted near post delivery with hardly any deviation.

I am not convinced that the coaching team as a whole do pay enough attention to this aspect. I remember being surprised and amazed at the fracas between Son and Lamela over who would take the penalty against City. I was even more surprised, given Poch's attention to detail, at his comments afterwards, which confirmed that he hadn't addressed this issue before the game.

On the first point I disagree. We just didn't score from any of them. I don't personally believe Chelski scored from theirs BTW.
On the second point, the match you're referring to was early season. I don't believe that we have seen the same situation since. I also believe that bar Hazza's foot being sent skywards by that nasty sod at St Marys, our pens have been pretty good (I only remember one other miss which I cant quite place right now).As for the first bit of your thought on that, I remain alarmed that you think Poch and co do not pay enough attention to dead ball situations!

 

[Baleforce]

<heads off to amazon to buy the numbers game>

 

[Pirate55]

It's funny isn't it that the rest of the data in that table is aligned with the up to date Squawka figures but you don't like that because it doesn't support your argument.

I get the figure of six goals from Squawka because it is the best and most up to date data that I have been able to find online. If you can find something else, then I would be happy to use that. I prefer to use data because I do not trust my eyes or my memory, both will tell me what I want to see, rather than what is happening.

I don't get why you dismiss out of hand anything that does not support your preconceptions. Corners are a low return passage of play, the number of corners won has no correlation with the number of goals scored from corners and that the range in the number of goals scored by a club from corners each season can easily be explained by a natural variation in the data.

I have scanned a few pages from The Numbers Game: Why Everything You Know About Football Is Wrong on corners. It is a good book, I recommend it.

Thanks for posting, an interesting read. However, unlike Barcelona and Spain, who apparently just want to retain possession from corners, I think you will at least agree that we do TRY and score from corners!,

I would like you and Steff to tel me which of these statements you disagree with:

1. We currently have a poor conversion rate from corners ( at present the third lowest in the division, I believe)
2. An increased conversion rate, would lead to us scoring more goals
3. More goals can lead to more points
4. More points can increase our chance of a PL title
5. We can improve our conversion rate from corners.
6. Eriksen's delivery can be improved.
7. Our set up from corners,with 5 or more players in the opponents 6 yard box ( as evidenced in virtually every corner against Crystal Palace, ) is not most conducive to scoring goals as it doesn't allow our players to attack the balls adequately and gives the corner taker virtually no margin for error.
8. We all want to give Spurs the best possible competitive edge ( no matter how small you believe those margins may be).
9. Everything that can be done to help us improve, should be done. it's what separates winners from losers when the margins are so fine.

 

[milo]

Thanks for posting, an interesting read. However, unlike Barcelona and Spain, who apparently just want to retain possession from corners, I think you will at least agree that we do TRY and score from corners!,

I would like you and Steff to tel me which of these statements you disagree with:

1. We currently have a poor conversion rate from corners ( at present the third lowest in the division, I believe)
2. An increased conversion rate, would lead to us scoring more goals
3. More goals can lead to more points
4. More points can increase our chance of a PL title
5. We can improve our conversion rate from corners.
6. Eriksen's delivery can be improved.
7. Our set up from corners,with 5 or more players in the opponents 6 yard box ( as evidenced in virtually every corner against Crystal Palace, ) is not most conducive to scoring goals as it doesn't allow our players to attack the balls adequately and gives the corner taker virtually no margin for error.
8. We all want to give Spurs the best possible competitive edge ( no matter how small you believe those margins may be).
9. Everything that can be done to help us improve, should be done. it's what separates winners from losers when the margins are so fine.

Did you read the bit in the Numbers Game where they explained how there was no correlation between corners awarded and goals scored?

 

[Pirate55]

Did you read the bit in the Numbers Game where they explained how there was no correlation between corners awarded and goals scored?

If you believe what you read rather than what logic dictates then there is nothing further to discuss.

It just cannot be correct that the number of goals a team scores from corners doesn't correlate to the number of corners. In addition, I find their terminology somewhat strange, when they talk about "shots from corners". Does this include headers for example. Be wary of stats.

BTW you haven't answered my question. Which of the nine points I set out don't you agree with?

 

[milo]

If you believe what you read rather than what logic dictates then there is nothing further to discuss.

It just cannot be correct that the number of goals a team scores from corners doesn't correlate to the number of corners. In addition, I find their terminology somewhat strange, when they talk about "shots from corners". Does this include headers for example. Be wary of stats.

BTW you haven't answered my question. Which of the nine points I set out don't you agree with?

I think that the analysis in the book is more comprehensive than either you or I have done and they have access to larger datasets than us. I'm inclined to believe it until better evidence is available. If you doubt it, then the best way of showing that it is wrong is by finding reliable, independent data and repeating their analysis.

I will come back to your questions later.

 

[milo]

This blog post on corners is an interesting read. It was prompted by the Guardian article last month, that we have discussed before. His conclusions on short vs long corners and the chances of conceding a goal on the break after taking a corner are particularly interesting. He also addresses the phases of play question after a corner is taken.

http://www.goodfirsttouch.com/2017/3/corner-kicks-kicking-screaming

 

[Bullet]

This blog post on corners is an interesting read. It was prompted by the Guardian article last month, that we have discussed before. His conclusions on short vs long corners and the chances of conceding a goal on the break after taking a corner are particularly interesting. He also addresses the phases of play question after a corner is taken.

http://www.goodfirsttouch.com/2017/3/corner-kicks-kicking-screaming

Thanks Milo, that is a cracking article, very interesting. Particularly the conclusion at the end.

I fully understand the stats and the conclusions and that a short corner makes more sense than long... but it is definitely one of those things that I struggle to believe, even though I've seen the evidence which is presumably correct.

PS - just as an aside, I felt that choosing 60 seconds or 90 seconds for a counter attack is a VERY long time to wait, I would choose 15 seconds I think for a genuine counter attack i.e. before the defenders can get back into shape






At the end of the day, we will get corners. So we can either take them short, or long. And if we take them long the worst things we can do are (1) float it to the keeper OR (2) always hit the first man, as it means we are very vulnerable to a counter attack. We should aim for the penalty spot and have 4 big men running to meet it around about that spot

 

[90291Spur]

Thanks Milo, that is a cracking article, very interesting. Particularly the conclusion at the end.

I fully understand the stats and the conclusions and that a short corner makes more sense than long... but it is definitely one of those things that I struggle to believe, even though I've seen the evidence which is presumably correct.

PS - just as an aside, I felt that choosing 60 seconds or 90 seconds for a counter attack is a VERY long time to wait, I would choose 15 seconds I think for a genuine counter attack i.e. before the defenders can get back into shape






At the end of the day, we will get corners. So we can either take them short, or long. And if we take them long the worst things we can do are (1) float it to the keeper OR (2) always hit the first man, as it means we are very vulnerable to a counter attack. We should aim for the penalty spot and have 4 big men running to meet it around about that spot

I like how Bournemouth placed their attackers in a line before one of their corners the other day.

 

[Spur of the moment]

Fascinating studies, thanks milo.

Probably only a minor point but I don't recall any mention in those analyses of corners aimed solely at running down the clock / retaining possession / forcing another corner etc. How many corners did Sissoko & co force in the final minutes on Wednesday night? I lost count, but it hardly looked like we were trying to score from any of them.

The analysis around the height of players was also interesting. The stats seem to show that the deliberate use of taller players has only a marginal impact overall. Cannot remember how many goals West Brom have scored from corners this season except the number was a bit freaky. Would be interesting to see a close analysis that attempts to isolate the main reasons why Pulis' teams appear to achieve significantly more success from corners than the average.

 

[scaramanga]

Thanks for posting, an interesting read. However, unlike Barcelona and Spain, who apparently just want to retain possession from corners, I think you will at least agree that we do TRY and score from corners!,

I would like you and Steff to tel me which of these statements you disagree with:

1. We currently have a poor conversion rate from corners ( at present the third lowest in the division, I believe)

Or the same number as most teams in the PL when you use a margin of error (as you have to on a sample of this size)

2. An increased conversion rate, would lead to us scoring more goals
3. More goals can lead to more points
4. More points can increase our chance of a PL title

All true but not relevant to this discussion

5. We can improve our conversion rate from corners.

Evidence suggests that's unlikely without doing a Pulis. I don't want to do a Pulis.

6. Eriksen's delivery can be improved.

Not to the point where it will make corners a worthwhile objective

7. Our set up from corners,with 5 or more players in the opponents 6 yard box ( as evidenced in virtually every corner against Crystal Palace, ) is not most conducive to scoring goals as it doesn't allow our players to attack the balls adequately and gives the corner taker virtually no margin for error.

Palace didn't set up the way we did, how many goals did they score the other night?

What proportion of corners do you think we'd score from if we set up another way?

8. We all want to give Spurs the best possible competitive edge ( no matter how small you believe those margins may be).
9. Everything that can be done to help us improve, should be done. it's what separates winners from losers when the margins are so fine.

Then we should be taking short corners and avoiding crosses wherever possible.