Set Pieces

[scaramanga]

All this talk of corners being ineffective (it's clear as day that they are, of course), it'd be interesting to see stats that would indicate what means of attack are considered the most effective. Sure, a lot of teams waste a lot of corners, but could you find similar statistics to other means of attack? If you look at the chances created vs chances scored ratio there are bound to be a lot of attack strategies that have similar stats to corners, I imagine. In general, most teams are ineffective, so most means of attack will be ineffective (perhaps with the exception of penalties?).

Through balls off the top of my head are very effective.

As are the Lennon style cut backs from where the penalty box meets the goal line.

Mainly balls to feet in and around the penalty spot where the scorer doesn't have to turn the ball 90 degrees. Ted Knutson has some good charts on xG based on where the scorer receives the ball and in what manner.

 

[Pirate55]

What then do you think about the 20 corners no goals piece of the puzzle being just a statistical outlier? I really struggle to make sense of your previous statement about goals from corners and number of corners.

Education or knowledge or not I just don't get why you think that's a fair criticism.

I do think we practice corners to some extent. What I don't get is why exactly you think spending more time on that is superior to spending more time on other areas...

I don't think the two are incompatible. I don't see how spending some time on corners compromises all the other good work Poch and the coaching team do.

I think the benefit of a first class education is that you learn to think for yourself and not rely on statistics - especially those produced by third parties where the basis of their assumptions hasn't been fully interrogated. For example, what do they consider "a shot from a corner" (their words) to actually be? Is it :

Phase 1: a direct header or shot from a corner i.e. one touch.
Phase 2: a header or shot from a corner resulting from two touches - i.e. is it only a considered "a goal from a corner" if the attackers take those two touches? Some (like Steff )do not consider Chelsea's third goal against us as coming from a corner - would these be included in their stats
Phase 3: a short corner which then goes in to the penalty area and has one or two touches
Phase 4: a corner which has three or more touches in the penalty area before a goal results

Or, do they calculate it as a time basis - i.e. the number of seconds from a corner to when the ball crosses the line?

So many questions before we can even begin to consider the merit of their analysis.

 

[Jordinho]

Monaco and Wycombe were cup games.

We still scored from corners.

 

[billyiddo]

we must train more for corners in cup games than we do in league games, it's the only logical explanation

 

[milo]

Exactly this. I really hope we score a critical corner against the Scum today for their importance to be fully appreciated.

A goal in one game does not prove anything and to appreciate how ineffective corners are you need to look at a large number of games. When you do, it is pretty clear cut.

 

[scaramanga]

I don't think the two are incompatible. I don't see how spending some time on corners compromises all the other good work Poch and the coaching team do.

It's not that complicated.

Time we can spend in training is finite.
We have yet to perfect the other, more effective methods of scoring
Our best chance of increasing our likelihood of scoring is to concentrate on those other methods.

I think the benefit of a first class education is that you learn to think for yourself and not rely on statistics

If that was your education then you should ask for your money back.

What should be done is to evaluate and analyse all sources. What we have here is a comparison of received wisdom from the like of Alan Shearer, against a good sample size of consistent, neutral and repeatable statistics. If you look at those two sources and decide you want to lump your opinion in with Shearer et al, then that's up to you. Just don't expect anyone to take your opinion seriously if you do.

- especially those produced by third parties where the basis of their assumptions hasn't been fully interrogated. For example, what do they consider "a shot from a corner" (their words) to actually be? Is it :

Phase 1: a direct header or shot from a corner i.e. one touch.
Phase 2: a header or shot from a corner resulting from two touches - i.e. is it only a considered "a goal from a corner" if the attackers take those two touches? Some (like Steff )do not consider Chelsea's third goal against us as coming from a corner - would these be included in their stats
Phase 3: a short corner which then goes in to the penalty area and has one or two touches
Phase 4: a corner which has three or more touches in the penalty area before a goal results

Or, do they calculate it as a time basis - i.e. the number of seconds from a corner to when the ball crosses the line?

So many questions before we can even begin to consider the merit of their analysis.

Those methods are applied evenly across all teams, so for comparative purposes the definitions don't matter.

The standard method to determine the source of a goal is the preceding 3 touches (multiple touches by one person counting as one). I seem to recall reading that from a season long sample, it was an accurate method to 2σ.

 

[milo]

I don't think the two are incompatible. I don't see how spending some time on corners compromises all the other good work Poch and the coaching team do.

I think the benefit of a first class education is that you learn to think for yourself and not rely on statistics - especially those produced by third parties where the basis of their assumptions hasn't been fully interrogated. For example, what do they consider "a shot from a corner" (their words) to actually be? Is it :

Phase 1: a direct header or shot from a corner i.e. one touch.
Phase 2: a header or shot from a corner resulting from two touches - i.e. is it only a considered "a goal from a corner" if the attackers take those two touches? Some (like Steff )do not consider Chelsea's third goal against us as coming from a corner - would these be included in their stats
Phase 3: a short corner which then goes in to the penalty area and has one or two touches
Phase 4: a corner which has three or more touches in the penalty area before a goal results

Or, do they calculate it as a time basis - i.e. the number of seconds from a corner to when the ball crosses the line?

So many questions before we can even begin to consider the merit of their analysis.

If you were interested, it is reasonably easy to find out how they define each. Opta, for instance, publish their event definitions, they are the source of Squawka's data which you have chosen to selectively disregard. Here is their definition for set pieces:

Pattern of play for Goals/Attempts

Set Piece goals/attempts are those where the ball starts from a dead ball situation such as a corner, a free kick, a penalty or a Throw-in and results in a shot before the phase of play has broken down into open play.

The exact point at which it becomes open play is usually clear but set pieces which are cleared and then the ball is put straight back into the penalty area are still deemed to be part of the set piece as the defending team is still positioned to deal with the set play.

- See more at: http://optasports.com/news-area/blog-optas-event-definitions.aspx#sthash.TSN9EwRZ.dpuf​

 

[Pirate55]

A goal in one game does not prove anything and to appreciate how ineffective corners are you need to look at a large number of games. When you do, it is pretty clear cut.

Getting your excuses in early I see !

From the top of my head, corners resulted in winning goals against Palace at home ( Wanyama ) 1-0 as well as crucially breaking the deadlock in other games and getting us on our way ( Dier against Burnley -if indeed that was credited from a corner - and Dembele against Bournemouth). Others ensured we had a comfortable victory. Do not undersestimate their importance.

 

[milo]

Getting your excuses in early I see !

From the top of my head, corners resulted in winning goals against Palace at home ( Wanyama ) 1-0 as well as crucially breaking the deadlock in other games and getting us on our way ( Dier against Burnley -if indeed that was credited from a corner - and Dembele against Bournemouth). Others ensured we had a comfortable victory. Do not undersestimate their importance.

Not at all. I will be delighted if we score by any means today but a goal from a corner does not prove your point any more than a failure to score from one disproves it.

No one has ever argued that goals do not come from corners or that they can be decisive. What you have failed to show is that spending more time on them in training would be productive, which is a shame because that seems to be your preoccupation. I seriously think that you are trolling.

 

[metalgear]

coming back to corners perhaps there's a psychological edge to it.

• physically being there longer in the opponents half
• pegging almost everyone back in front of goal
• the sustained fans cheering an attack (if they do)...the suspense

and with more shots on goal ...it does have its purpose

 

[milo]

coming back to corners perhaps there's a psychological edge to it.

• physically being there longer in the opponents half
• pegging almost everyone back in front of goal
• the sustained fans cheering an attack (if they do)...the suspense

and with more shots on goal ...it does have its purpose

There doesn't appear to be. The defending side are nearly as likely to score on the break than the attacking side are from the corner. Unless you take a short corner, you are unlikely to retain possession and peg a team back too. I agree that fans like them but fans like all sorts of things that are counter productive.

 

[Pirate55]

Not at all. I will be delighted if we score by any means today but a goal from a corner does not prove your point any more than a failure to score from one disproves it.

No one has ever argued that goals do not come from corners or that they can be decisive. What you have failed to show is that spending more time on them in training would be productive, which is a shame because that seems to be your preoccupation. I seriously think that you are trolling.

If you want an answer to that question, you surely have to factor in how long teams practice corners in training to see if there is any real correlation here. None of us are privy to that information. However, relying on the evidence of ones eyes, I think we can be sure some teams spend more on this aspect than us.

I still reject Scaras assertion that training time is absolutely finite. And a zero sum game. I do not think for one minute that practicing corners necessarily prejudices our work in other areas. Indeed, as I think it was Raziel said earlier, as the season goes on, we surely need to spend less time on fitness matters, which thereby inevitably leads to more time for practicing other areas , such as corners.

 

[Jordinho]

If you want an answer to that question, you surely have to factor in how long teams practice corners in training to see if there is any real correlation here. None of us are privy to that information. However, relying on the evidence of ones eyes, I think we can be sure some teams spend more on this aspect than us.

I still reject Scaras assertion that training time is absolutely finite. And a zero sum game. I do not think for one minute that practicing corners necessarily prejudices our work in other areas. Indeed, as I think it was Raziel said earlier, as the season goes on, we surely need to spend less time on fitness matters, which thereby inevitably leads to more time for practicing other areas , such as corners.

Usually reflected in their inability to play football at a decent level.

 

[milo]

If you want an answer to that question, you surely have to factor in how long teams practice corners in training to see if there is any real correlation here. None of us are privy to that information. However, relying on the evidence of ones eyes, I think we can be sure some teams spend more on this aspect than us.

I still reject Scaras assertion that training time is absolutely finite. And a zero sum game. I do not think for one minute that practicing corners necessarily prejudices our work in other areas. Indeed, as I think it was Raziel said earlier, as the season goes on, we surely need to spend less time on fitness matters, which thereby inevitably leads to more time for practicing other areas , such as corners.

What you can do though is look at the performance of teams over multiple seasons. If you are right, you would expect to see teams get a similar return from corners year on year.

The chart below shows the number of goals scored each season for the past five seasons for each of the teams that have been in the PL throughout this time.

You can see that teams return on corners fluctuates a fair bit. Now obviously, managers do not hang around long but you would expect to see more consistency if training had a big impact on the number of goals scored from corners.

If we look at Arsenal for instance, you can see that they went from the highest scorers in 12/13 to second lowest in 13/14. It is possible that this is because Wenger and Bould changed their approach in training but it seems unlikely.

 

[Jordinho]

We've obviously wasted time on it this week to come up with two players standing by the corner flag.

 

[Spur of the moment]

As one who has voiced frustration in the past at the number of near-post corners I have to say yesterday's NLD was an eye-opener. Okay we did not manage to score from any of them but my! did we come close.

First Aldereiweld got onto an early header that went just over. Then in the second half his header brought a cracking save out of Cech who desperately managed to fend his fierce header away.

Back to the first half and it was Jan's turn to latch onto a clearance from a near-post corner to bring out a diving save from Cech low down to his left-hand post. That was followed by a similar attempt from a clearance second half that stung Cech's gloves in an equally spectacular save.

Son also got in a fierce shot following a corner second half but that one went the wrong side of the near post. Then there was the handball incident that should have led to a penalty with Sanchez laughably pointing to his chest when replays showed clearly it went nowhere near but struck his upraised arms and nothing else.

There may even have been other attempts but I got so caught up in the excitement it's all I can remember right now.

Someone claimed in the OMT towards HT our corners had been crap. Well all I can say is if that's what he calls crap I look forward to the day when they're what he calls quality!

Kudos to Eriksen who for once yesterday regularly managed to find a Tottenham head at the near post rather than an opposition one which has been the case a few times to often in the past.

 

[braineclipse]

I don't think the two are incompatible. I don't see how spending some time on corners compromises all the other good work Poch and the coaching team do.

I think the benefit of a first class education is that you learn to think for yourself and not rely on statistics - especially those produced by third parties where the basis of their assumptions hasn't been fully interrogated. For example, what do they consider "a shot from a corner" (their words) to actually be? Is it :

Phase 1: a direct header or shot from a corner i.e. one touch.
Phase 2: a header or shot from a corner resulting from two touches - i.e. is it only a considered "a goal from a corner" if the attackers take those two touches? Some (like Steff )do not consider Chelsea's third goal against us as coming from a corner - would these be included in their stats
Phase 3: a short corner which then goes in to the penalty area and has one or two touches
Phase 4: a corner which has three or more touches in the penalty area before a goal results

Or, do they calculate it as a time basis - i.e. the number of seconds from a corner to when the ball crosses the line?

So many questions before we can even begin to consider the merit of their analysis.

Did I claim that spending some time on corners would compromise all the other work on the training ground? Where are you getting this from?

 

[braineclipse]

If you want an answer to that question, you surely have to factor in how long teams practice corners in training to see if there is any real correlation here. None of us are privy to that information. However, relying on the evidence of ones eyes, I think we can be sure some teams spend more on this aspect than us.

I still reject Scaras assertion that training time is absolutely finite. And a zero sum game. I do not think for one minute that practicing corners necessarily prejudices our work in other areas. Indeed, as I think it was Raziel said earlier, as the season goes on, we surely need to spend less time on fitness matters, which thereby inevitably leads to more time for practicing other areas , such as corners.

What do you mean training time isn't absolutely finite? You're saying that we can just increase the time spent on the training ground and use that on corners?

What do you mean by zero sum game in this context?

Do you disagree that if Pochettino followed your advice and spent more time on corners at the training ground that's time he could have spent practicing other things instead?

 

[Pirate55]

What do you mean training time isn't absolutely finite? You're saying that we can just increase the time spent on the training ground and use that on corners?

What do you mean by zero sum game in this context?

Do you disagree that if Pochettino followed your advice and spent more time on corners at the training ground that's time he could have spent practicing other things instead?

1. I dont believe the tine on the training ground is absolutely finite. Do you? Do you really think it is say 3 hours per day and not a minute more or a minute less? Do you think if we spent say 2 hours 50 minutes or 3 hours 10 minutes the sky would suddenly fall in or we would suddenly be playing Pulis-ball? Do you not see videos of our players generally messing around - trying to re-create spectacular goals, trying to beat world records for volleys or nutmegs, doing keepy- uppies, etc, Is this part of your "finite" period for training?

2. I do not believe that if we spend a small amount of time on practicing corners the rest of our in-game playing would be affected in any way.

3. I do believe that if we are going to get say 7-10 corners per game, this is an aspect worth spending some time on. Indeed, Poch and the coaching team now (at last) seem to be agreeing with this as well. Against Arsenal, we showed a much greater variety and variation in corners which I am sure you will agree must have been rehearsed and practiced. Sometimes we went short, sometimes long, sometimes we took a short corner and sometimes we varied the actual corner kicker (Eriksen and Davies). As a direct result, we looked much more dangerous from corners and indeed created 4 good chances from them (Toby 2 and Verts 2). On another day, and without Cech's brilliance, we could have had one or two goals from corners.

Did you not see Chelsea's well worked goal attempt from a corner against Everton last week. It was an interesting variation and had obviously been worked on at the training ground. So it seems Conte also recognises that it is worth devoting some time to as well.

Now that we also seem to have taken this on board and have thereby improved our corner taking variation, I am confident that our conversion rate will now increase. I sincerely hope we get one tonight against the Spammers!

 

[milo]

1. I dont believe the tine on the training ground is absolutely finite. Do you? Do you really think it is say 3 hours per day and not a minute more or a minute less? Do you think if we spent say 2 hours 50 minutes or 3 hours 10 minutes the sky would suddenly fall in or we would suddenly be playing Pulis-ball? Do you not see videos of our players generally messing around - trying to re-create spectacular goals, trying to beat world records for volleys or nutmegs, doing keepy- uppies, etc, Is this part of your "finite" period for training?

2. I do not believe that if we spend a small amount of time on practicing corners the rest of our in-game playing would be affected in any way.

3. I do believe that if we are going to get say 7-10 corners per game, this is an aspect worth spending some time on. Indeed, Poch and the coaching team now (at last) seem to be agreeing with this as well. Against Arsenal, we showed a much greater variety and variation in corners which I am sure you will agree must have been rehearsed and practiced. Sometimes we went short, sometimes long, sometimes we took a short corner and sometimes we varied the actual corner kicker (Eriksen and Davies). As a direct result, we looked much more dangerous from corners and indeed created 4 good chances from them (Toby 2 and Verts 2). On another day, and without Cech's brilliance, we could have had one or two goals from corners.

Did you not see Chelsea's well worked goal attempt from a corner against Everton last week. It was an interesting variation and had obviously been worked on at the training ground. So it seems Conte also recognises that it is worth devoting some time to as well.

Now that we also seem to have taken this on board and have thereby improved our corner taking variation, I am confident that our conversion rate will now increase. I sincerely hope we get one tonight against the Spammers!

Two points on this:

1. Aren't you arguing against yourself by saying that it is evident that we are spending more time practicing corners in training, in that we have a lower return from them this season than last. If you are right about our training, then the conclusion must be that practicing corners is ineffective.

2. I don't agree that there is any evidence that we are spending more time practicing corners. I think that this is a classic case of confirmation bias.