• 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

Pirate55 said:
So - are we in crisis? I think four wins in our first 6 games is Poch's best start in any season since he joined us. Or am I wrong?

But, but ....we are still not playing at all well. Brighton played into our hands in the first half by standing off us and letting us play. Even then we looked AVB-esque. Lots of possession and no threat. Fortunately, we were gifted a penalty to start the scoring. That got me thinking how fortunate we have been with key goals this season. Most of the key first goals (or game changers) have come from set pieces or deflections or own goals - for example:

Saudi Sportswashing Machine - opening goal from Verts came from a corner (and was scored thanks to goal-line technology)
Fulham - key goal from Trippier came from a free kick at a time we had lost the initiative it restored our lead.
Man U - first goal from a corner from Kane's head
Watford - first goal was a gift of an own goal from a Watford player
Pool - our goal was by Lamela from a corner
Inter - our goal was from a wicked deflection after a tame Eriksen effort
Brighton - our first goal was a penalty by Kane following a needless handball in the wall from Trippier's free kick

Conclusion. Virtually all our key goals this season have come from dead balls or had a large dollop of luck attached to them. We aren't scoring nearly enough of the key first goals from our own good outfield play. We really must start to improve our output from outfield play if we want to achieve anything this season. We need to get back to basics. High pressing in the opponents half to force them into mistakes. We can't continue to rely on this source dead ball source of good fortune (however welcome it might be) for the entire season.

If just goes to underline the point I have been making for yonks - dead balls are very very important. I hate to think where we would be without having scored from them this season.

PS similarly a lot of our concessions this season have also been headers from set pieces. We need to fix this asap.
Click to expand...
So... a lot of important stuff to work on in training. Attacking open play, pressing, defending, controlling games... But instead of focusing on those aspects in training you still want us to focus more on set pieces? Despite the obvious shortcomings in other areas of our play?
 
braineclipse said:
So... a lot of important stuff to work on in training. Attacking open play, pressing, defending, controlling games... But instead of focusing on those aspects in training you still want us to focus more on set pieces? Despite the obvious shortcomings in other areas of our play?
Click to expand...

As I have always maintained, it isn't an either/or situation, the two things aren't mutually exclusive. Or are you saying that set pieces haven't been important in our games so far this season - both for and against?
 
Even if it was either/or.

None of us know if spending 30 minutes on corners or on freekicks or on crossing or on free attacking play yields a better return.

All of these are low-return events. People say "only 0.00000001% of corners get goals" yet cannot say what percent of passing moves/through-balls get goals.
 
Bullet said:
Even if it was either/or.

None of us know if spending 30 minutes on corners or on freekicks or on crossing or on free attacking play yields a better return.

All of these are low-return events. People say "only 0.00000001% of corners get goals" yet cannot say what percent of passing moves/through-balls get goals.
Click to expand...
Yes we are. 70% of through balls into the box lead to a shot and 30% of those are goals (as of a few years ago). So one in every 5 through balls into the box will lead to a goal.

80% of cut backs lead to shots and about 20% of those are goals - so nearly one in 6 leading to a goal.

12% of corners lead to shots and about 12% of them are scored. Which is something like one in 60 or 70.
 
scaramanga said:
Yes we are. 70% of through balls into the box lead to a shot and 30% of those are goals (as of a few years ago). So one in every 5 through balls into the box will lead to a goal.

80% of cut backs lead to shots and about 20% of those are goals - so nearly one in 6 leading to a goal.

12% of corners lead to shots and about 12% of them are scored. Which is something like one in 60 or 70.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Hmm, I know you will have stats and evidence behind these, but it is hard to believe those numbers.

I'd have estimated 80% of through balls and cut backs are cut out.

If 1 in 5 through balls leads to a goal, you could try 20 through balls each game and get 4 goals? I find those numbers too high to believe.
 
Bullet said:
Thanks. Hmm, I know you will have stats and evidence behind these, but it is hard to believe those numbers.

I'd have estimated 80% of through balls and cut backs are cut out.

If 1 in 5 through balls leads to a goal, you could try 20 through balls each game and get 4 goals? I find those numbers too high to believe.
Click to expand...
Those are completed passes and my memory failed me on the initial post - it's all completed through balls, not just into the box.
 
scaramanga said:
Those are completed passes and my memory failed me on the initial post - it's all completed through balls, not just into the box.
Click to expand...
Should the set piece stats not be then based on set pieces that are completed and not just lumped into the box?
Seems like cherry picking to me.
 
glasgowspur said:
Should the set piece stats not be then based on set pieces that are completed and not just lumped into the box?
Seems like cherry picking to me.
Click to expand...
You can't make a direct comparison, because corners can't be said to have reached their intended recipient. In all but a few very rare scenarios, you can record whether or not a through ball or cut back reached the player that the passer was passing the ball to.

With the hit and hope methods like "putting it in the mixer" and corners there's no way of doing that.

A better way of explaining the point is to use overlayed xG maps for balls to head or feet from different areas. They essentially show that balls from wide (other than cut backs) are much lower probability than balls through the middle. Then the head/foot overlay shows how vanishingly small the chances of scoring a header are compared to scoring a pass to feet.
 
scaramanga said:
Those are completed passes and my memory failed me on the initial post - it's all completed through balls, not just into the box.
Click to expand...
So a completed through-ball, and a completed cutback, lead to shots? Who'd have thought! Perhaps we need to also consider how often a through-ball or cutback is completed?
 
glasgowspur said:
Should the set piece stats not be then based on set pieces that are completed and not just lumped into the box?
Seems like cherry picking to me.
Click to expand...

That is the problem for the overkill of stats that are floating around. They can and often are used by some to TRY and make a point, often wrongly.
 
Stats are very helpful but not that useful as so many love to think because players are not robots, they are predominantly white noise that is used by the of likes of Sky Sports News use to fill in time and the internet sports sites use to fill space.
 
StephenH said:
Stats are very helpful but not that useful as so many love to think because players are not robots.

Stats are just what the likes of Sky Sports News use to fill in time and the internet sports site use to fill space.
Click to expand...

Stats are a tool which can be helpful, but more often then not they are used as a holy bible by some who consider them to be infallible ( or who are trying to push agendas/points).
 
Bullet said:
So a completed through-ball, and a completed cutback, lead to shots? Who'd have thought! Perhaps we need to also consider how often a through-ball or cutback is completed?
Click to expand...
Not when we're talking about where to focus attention. Getting better at through balls (and all the related stuff like creating space) will return at a better rate than getting better at corners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back