Set Pieces

[milo]

Is there a stat that shows the goals scored immediately after defending a corner? I bet Leicester have a few!

On the break? My recollection is that the chances of the defending team scoring from a break away after a corner are about the same as the attacking team scoring from the corner.

 

[milo]

Question: What is considered as a "goal from corner"?
Answer: In this project only "the second touch goals" is analysed.
That mean the simplest scheme: Cross from corner -> Shot. No 3rd touch. No intermediate passes. No direct goals from the corner spot.



There are hundred of goals in this guys stats that aren't included as goal from corners. He also hasn't taken out any of the short corners from the total.

If you are gonna do stats do them right.
Don't just use whatever brick dataset is available and come up with a wrong figure of goals from corners that goes all over the internet.
And try to hid the fact you hate corners, smugly calling them primitive while sitting in Moscow supporting Borussia Dortmund and Liverpool.

If he were to watch a season of Championship football, he'll see why English fans in English grounds gets excited when their teams get a corner.

You are right and we've discussed that too in this thread.

This is an interesting look at goals directly from a corner. Seeming as a lot of common criticism of corners is not beating the first man, that seems to be of at least passing interest.

 

[scaramanga]

On the break? My recollection is that the chances of the defending team scoring from a break away after a corner are about the same as the attacking team scoring from the corner.

Slightly lower, but close enough to make a direct corner a really bad idea.

Taking a direct corner is statistically similar to closing your eyes at kick off, having someone spin you around, and hoofing the ball at one of the goals without knowing which. There's a very low probability the ball will end up in either net, but one is almost as likely as the other.

 

[awesome dawson]

Slightly lower, but close enough to make a direct corner a really bad idea.

Taking a direct corner is statistically similar to closing your eyes at kick off, having someone spin you around, and hoofing the ball at one of the goals without knowing which. There's a very low probability the ball will end up in either net, but one is almost as likely as the other.

Depends on the quality of the delivery. If we could put the ball into a dangerous area (i.e. beat the first man and aim just in front of the penalty spot) I fail to see how this could be viewed as anything other than helpful to our cause.

 

[Hashegotthesackyet?]

On the break? My recollection is that the chances of the defending team scoring from a break away after a corner are about the same as the attacking team scoring from the corner.

Yeh, that was my point, as I'm pretty sure we've been done a few times like that,or at least it seems that way!

 

[milo]

Depends on the quality of the delivery. If we could put the ball into a dangerous area (i.e. beat the first man and aim just in front of the penalty spot) I fail to see how this could be viewed as anything other than helpful to our cause.

It's very difficult to do because you are aiming at a very narrow area in front of the near post. Any deeper and the keeper punches it away and you are defending a breakaway with half your players in your own penalty area.

 

[scaramanga]

Depends on the quality of the delivery. If we could put the ball into a dangerous area (i.e. beat the first man and aim just in front of the penalty spot) I fail to see how this could be viewed as anything other than helpful to our cause.

The only team able to stand out significantly in all that data is West Brom.

That's a team whose manager openly admits to spending large chunks of their training and focus on set pieces. A team set up to do little else than win a set piece and have some thugs bundle the ball into the net.

Not for me thanks.

 

[milo]

Yeh, that was my point, as I'm pretty sure we've been done a few times like that,or at least it seems that way!

I believe that Klopp reduced the amount of players they put forward to attack corners last season as a result of them conceding a few on the break.

 

[elltrev]

Have to agree with this. Wanyama, Trippier and Son clearly not 100% fit. Compare with ? Bakyoko whose first game back from injury didn't show at all. We clearly missed pace with our full backs as Jenas pointed out on MoTD. I now think we do need another pacy right back and should definitely buy Sessegnon from Fulham.

We also desperately need a pacy and tricky wide player. We really didn't make enough use of the space out wide.

Poch's subs were poor and badly timed (as usual) and to leave Wanyama on was plainly rediculous, especially as it appeared to me he asked him to play in the middle of the back three for the closing period.

And don't get me started on corners...............

Here's the stats from last season on goals from corners:

West Bromwich Albion 15
Chelsea 11
Arsenal 8
Everton 8
West Ham United 8
Hull City 7
Crystal Palace 6
Swansea City 6
Burnley 6
Tottenham Hotspur 5
Liverpool 5
Watford 5
Southampton 5
Middlesbrough 5
Emirates Marketing Project 4
Leicester City 4
Stoke City 4
Manchester United 3
AFC Bournemouth 2
Sunderland 2

Unfortunately I can't find stats on number of corners, so can't work out the ratio. But overall seems we're bang average - same as Liverpool, slightly better than Utd and City, and fair bit worse than Arsenal and (in particular) Chelsea.

Season before we were joint top on 8 with 4 other teams, including City.

I agree that our corners seem brick and ineffective, when watching us play. But stats indicate that might not be the case overall.

 

[Pirate55]

Here's the stats from last season on goals from corners:

West Bromwich Albion 15
Chelsea 11
Arsenal 8
Everton 8
West Ham United 8
Hull City 7
Crystal Palace 6
Swansea City 6
Burnley 6
Tottenham Hotspur 5
Liverpool 5
Watford 5
Southampton 5
Middlesbrough 5
Emirates Marketing Project 4
Leicester City 4
Stoke City 4
Manchester United 3
AFC Bournemouth 2
Sunderland 2

Unfortunately I can't find stats on number of corners, so can't work out the ratio. But overall seems we're bang average - same as Liverpool, slightly better than Utd and City, and fair bit worse than Arsenal and (in particular) Chelsea.

Season before we were joint top on 8 with 4 other teams, including City.

I agree that our corners seem brick and ineffective, when watching us play. But stats indicate that might not be the case overall.

As you said, the important stat is the percentage of stats converted that is more relevant. I would bet we are in the top four for the number of corners awarded last season. Which makes our return of 5 scored as derisory and would put us well below the average on conversion stats.

 

[elltrev]

As you said, the important stat is the percentage of stats converted that is more relevant. I would bet we are in the top four for the number of corners awarded last season. Which makes our return of 5 scored as derisory and would put us well below the average on conversion stats.

I don't know that we would have had loads more than Liverpool, Utd, and City. So I think 'derisory' is probably too strong a word. But I think you're right that it would put us towards the bottom of the top 6.

What's weird is that Eriksen's free kick delivery seems so good, whereas his corner delivery doesn't.

 

[milo]

I don't know that we would have had loads more than Liverpool, Utd, and City. So I think 'derisory' is probably too strong a word. But I think you're right that it would put us towards the bottom of the top 6.

What's weird is that Eriksen's free kick delivery seems so good, whereas his corner delivery doesn't.

There is no correlation between corners won and goals scored.

http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/community/threads/corners.5135/page-12#post-916840

 

[Gutter Boy]

What's weird is that Eriksen's free kick delivery seems so good, whereas his corner delivery doesn't.

Definitely. I think Lamela's a (slightly) better corner taker.

But really we've not had a consistently dangerous one since Anderton

 

[StephenH]

They only work if your playing Liverpool.
Nothing wrong with our corners or free kicks its the stuff of nonsense.

 

[elltrev]

There is no correlation between corners won and goals scored.

http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/community/threads/corners.5135/page-12#post-916840

I wasn't saying that there was. Indeed, surely the lack of correlation indicates that some teams are better at converting corners into goals than others (there would be perfect correlation if every team was exactly as good as each other at defending and attacking corners).

What point of mine were you disagreeing with, and/or what point of your own were you trying to support with the lack of correlation?

 

[milo]

I wasn't saying that there was. Indeed, surely the lack of correlation indicates that some teams are better at converting corners into goals than others (there would be perfect correlation if every team was exactly as good as each other at defending and attacking corners).

What point of mine were you disagreeing with, and/or what point of your own were you trying to support with the lack of correlation?

I wasn't disagreeing with you.

I think that the difference is largely down to chance. Relatively few goals are scored from corners which means that even small variations seem more significant than they are.

 

[elltrev]

I wasn't disagreeing with you.

I think that the difference is largely down to chance. Relatively few goals are scored from corners which means that even small variations seem more significant than they are.

Maybe. Then again, sample sizes are pretty big - how many corners are taken in a single season across all teams, almost 6000?

Perhaps you're right though, when variation is so small. Would be interesting to see statistical significance analysis (for geeks like me).

Stats aside, what I find most annoying about our corners is when we take them short then try and cross the ball under pressure. Surely either take the cross under no pressure from the corner, or take it short and try and pass (rather than crossing).

 

[milo]

Maybe. Then again, sample sizes are pretty big - how many corners are taken in a single season across all teams, almost 6000?

Perhaps you're right though, when variation is so small. Would be interesting to see statistical significance analysis (for geeks like me).

Only about 3% of corners lead to a goal. Fans' expectations are of a higher return which I think leads to frequent criticism of corners.

If you look at clubs' returns season on season, it tends to fluctuate a fair bit with consistent returns uncommon.

There are fair number of links to statistical analysis in this thread which is why I moved the discussion here. The post I linked to when replaying to your earlier post includes scans of the section on corners in the Numbers Game.

 

[elltrev]

Only about 3% of corners lead to a goal. Fans' expectations are of a higher return which I think leads to frequent criticism of corners.

If you look at clubs' returns season on season, it tends to fluctuate a fair bit with consistent returns uncommon.

There are fair number of links to statistical analysis in this thread which is why I moved the discussion here. The post I linked to when replaying to your earlier post includes scans of the section on corners in the Numbers Game.

Yeah fair enough, don't disagree with any of that.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Only about 3% of corners lead to a goal. Fans' expectations are of a higher return which I think leads to frequent criticism of corners.

If you look at clubs' returns season on season, it tends to fluctuate a fair bit with consistent returns uncommon.

There are fair number of links to statistical analysis in this thread which is why I moved the discussion here. The post I linked to when replaying to your earlier post includes scans of the section on corners in the Numbers Game.

I get that; and that crosses in general are highly ineffective.

It's just that ours rarely even reach a white shirt, and often don't clear the first man.