• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Set Pieces

Before you cast meaningless assertions, as an Economist I read statistics as part of my undergraduate course at one of the leading Universities in the world. As Hemant said above, statistics only have limited usefulness in this context, due to definitions taken and multiple other variables . Anyone who has studied statistics should know to be wary of their applicability and always adopt a healthy scepticism - especially when they don't agree with other hypotheses.

Regarding your other point, while time for training is indeed not infinite, I should more accurately have stated that it is not finite either. How long do you think it would take to practice and implement say three or four differnt corner variations? We are talking about professional footballers here who have how many hours a day available?

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...
 
Very interesting and technical discussion.

There are a lot of statistical techniques around and very easy to generate all manner of figures and inferences from them. In the medical world it is complicated enough (where cause and effect are better established) but in the sporting world there are other even more complicating factors, such variation due to human behaviour, including irrational behaviour, fashion changes, e.g. Attacking players lining up in a clump at corners then going to different positions, strength of selected players e.g. swansea can be vulnerable in the air if Llorente or Fer are not available but they can be more potent if they are. More important in this context is how players read the trajectory of the ball, and predict where they should go.

Statistical analysis is ok for mathematicians and sports scientists but sometimes you have to go with the evidence of your eye and adapt on the pitch for the peculiar circumstances of the game situation.

This is what allows all of us non-einsteins to play and comment.

Yes there are limitations to what statistics can tell us about football. Yes there's a lot of absolute rubbish being claimed based on small sample poorly analyzed stats by people with at best a very limited understanding of statistics in the football world.

But here we actually have a piece written by people with a decent understanding. A good sample size and asking specific questions that can actually be answered by the stats in question. I find cliches about the general shortcomings of stats in football less than useful in a case like this.

They actually used statistics in a useful way and were themselves surprised by their finding. They present their expectations based on "the evidence of their eyes" and found a solid way to test those expectations.

Can anyone here claim to have predicted with a high level of certainty, before reading the pages, that the number of corners isn't correlated with the number of goals a team scores? That statistical test of a specific hypothesis seems factual enough. I think that can be used along with what one sees with one's eyes when trying to think about, evaluate and analyze football. If one is interested in that kind of thing.
 
well we should be comparing our stats on cornders against all the other prem league clubs
then it would be fair and comparable. i still think we are the worst at clearing the first defender, and would like to see some evidence to be sure
 
well we should be comparing our stats on cornders against all the other prem league clubs
then it would be fair and comparable. i still think we are the worst at clearing the first defender, and would like to see some evidence to be sure

That's what we've been doing. Our goals from corners is bang on the league average this season, last season we scored the second most in the league.

I haven't seen any stats on clearing the first man and I doubt that there are any around but the technique for near post corners is really difficult. This article from the Guardian does a good job of explaining why

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...fence-of-the-corner-a-much-maligned-set-piece
 
Before you cast meaningless assertions, as an Economist I read statistics as part of my undergraduate course at one of the leading Universities in the world. As Hemant said above, statistics only have limited usefulness in this context, due to definitions taken and multiple other variables . Anyone who has studied statistics should know to be wary of their applicability and always adopt a healthy scepticism - especially when they don't agree with other hypotheses.

Regarding your other point, while time for training is indeed not infinite, I should more accurately have stated that it is not finite either. How long do you think it would take to practice and implement say three or four differnt corner variations? We are talking about professional footballers here who have how many hours a day available?

Do you know how our training sessions are broken down?
 
That's what we've been doing. Our goals from corners is bang on the league average this season, last season we scored the second most in the league.

I haven't seen any stats on clearing the first man and I doubt that there are any around but the technique for near post corners is really difficult. This article from the Guardian does a good job of explaining why

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...fence-of-the-corner-a-much-maligned-set-piece

i'm happy with our goals from corners then.
consequently not too fussed about not clearing the first defender, so long as we are "average" here and excellent in others.
 
i'm happy with our goals from corners then.
consequently not too fussed about not clearing the first defender, so long as we are "average" here and excellent in others.

Personally, I think that scoring from corners is a bit of a lottery. Going back over several seasons data, you never see one club consistently score above average.
 
Personally, I think that scoring from corners is a bit of a lottery. Going back over several seasons data, you never see one club consistently score above average.
i think that taller teams have the advantage, if they train for it.
however there's always a trade off and i would rather watch a team that is assembled and trained to play football on the ground than in the air,
 
i think that taller teams have the advantage, if they train for it.
however there's always a trade off and i would rather watch a team that is assembled and trained to play football on the ground than in the air,

According to this blog post, height advantage only makes a marginal difference.

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

This extract on the effectiveness of corners is worth reading too
 
Last edited:
I actually think this argument might just boil down to another aspect of Match of the Day Syndrome. I wouldn't presume to speak for anyone on here, but people in general probably only see highlights of the majority of games they take in, so they're looking at a biased sample and when they see goals coming from corners, they equate that with corners leading to goals. If they had to sit through every corner that doesn't lead to a goal one after the other, they might get the point more often.
 
That's what we've been doing. Our goals from corners is bang on the league average this season, last season we scored the second most in the league.

I haven't seen any stats on clearing the first man and I doubt that there are any around but the technique for near post corners is really difficult. This article from the Guardian does a good job of explaining why

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...fence-of-the-corner-a-much-maligned-set-piece

You keep saying we are bang on the league average for corners this season, but have consistently failed to identify the six goals we have apparently scored from corners this season in the PL. Can you now address this specific point.
 
I actually think this argument might just boil down to another aspect of Match of the Day Syndrome. I wouldn't presume to speak for anyone on here, but people in general probably only see highlights of the majority of games they take in, so they're looking at a biased sample and when they see goals coming from corners, they equate that with corners leading to goals. If they had to sit through every corner that doesn't lead to a goal one after the other, they might get the point more often.
I agree with this BUT "often" we see "most" of the goals on any given day scored from set pieces.

E.g. There are "often" games where top teams can't break each other down, until a set piece.

Bluntly, if freekicks and corners only result in a goal every 73 attempts... but they account for half (e.g.) of all 'breakthrough' goals (when teams are drawing) then they should indeed be looked at...
 
Crystal Palace - Wanyama (Kane)
Monaco - Alderweireld (Lamela)
Southampton - Kane (Eriksen)
Wycombe - Son (Trippier)
Stoke - Kane (Eriksen)
Burnley - Dier
 
I agree with this BUT "often" we see "most" of the goals on any given day scored from set pieces.

E.g. There are "often" games where top teams can't break each other down, until a set piece.

Bluntly, if freekicks and corners only result in a goal every 73 attempts... but they account for half (e.g.) of all 'breakthrough' goals (when teams are drawing) then they should indeed be looked at...
Or teams have yet to learn and and are still taking very high volumes of low outcome opportunities.
 
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?).
 
I agree with this BUT "often" we see "most" of the goals on any given day scored from set pieces.

E.g. There are "often" games where top teams can't break each other down, until a set piece.

Bluntly, if freekicks and corners only result in a goal every 73 attempts... but they account for half (e.g.) of all 'breakthrough' goals (when teams are drawing) then they should indeed be looked at...

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