[Albion] We have the worst record for both attacking and defending set pieces this season

[schmunk]

Were those the seasons where we scored 34, and 35 goals - in total in the PL ?
Heady days compared to the goal famine of today where after 6 games we've scored 18 and last season only managed a mere 72.
Where did it all go wrong ?

Yes yes very good with your meaningless numbers but the basic fact is that if we were better at corners we would be much higher up the league.

 

[trueblue]

Agreed, Pascal's stats may be scewed by short corners, however he was second only to Kieran Trippier for xAG (Expected Assisted Goals) directly from corners last season. Trippier had an xAG of 4.8, Gross was second on 3.0. So he must be doing something right.

However, the short corners we persist with are in themselves a possible indication of a lack of competent set piece guidance.

Goals following corners made up 13.9% of all the goals scored in the Premier League last season.

But according to Opta only 32.6% of short corners led to a shot from that passage of play, and only 3.3% led to a goal.

Whereas for crosses that came directly into the box from a corner, those figures rise to 38.5% and 4.1%.

So unless the opposition has switched off and failed to cover the short corner, meaning we have a numerical advantage to exploit, why are we bothering with short corners?

So the difference between the type of corner leading to a goal is a puny 0.8%? Surely that then becomes pretty much meaningless when you then also consider some teams have lots of tall, aggressive players to attack the ball and we usually have 3 at most. No doubt our corners can improve but these sort of stats are a load of old guff.

 

[Reddleman]

Yes yes very good with your meaningless numbers but the basic fact is that if we were better at corners we would be much higher up the league.

I suspect I am being wooshed here but you cannot be serious?

 

[Monkey Man]

Might have been said already but surely just a function of a general lack of height in the squad?

I think I saw a stat this week that showed we have the shortest players in the PL. Or are at least in the relegation zone on that front.

So probably no surprise if we’re being beaten to inswinging balls in defensive and attacking situations in the box.

I rarely get excited by our corners these days but we score plenty of goals from open play so all good.

 

[Bakero]

Glenn Murray said in an interview last year that De Zerbi doesn't care about set pieces and training was dedicated to in-play movement and positioning. Like @Commander said above, perhaps there just isn't enough time to spend hours in set piece routines.

 

[chaileyjem]

Yes yes very good with your meaningless numbers but the basic fact is that if we were better at corners we would be much higher up the league.

to be fair we did have 17 !! corners v West Ham.

 

[schmunk]

to be fair we did have 17 !! corners v West Ham.

Exactly we should of one 18-3

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

So the difference between the type of corner leading to a goal is a puny 0.8%? Surely that then becomes pretty much meaningless when you then also consider some teams have lots of tall, aggressive players to attack the ball and we usually have 3 at most. No doubt our corners can improve but these sort of stats are a load of old guff.

You'd think so, but when you consider we take about 250 corners per season, 0.8% actually works out as 2 goals.

Statistically each premier league goal is worth a point, so that 0.8% could be the difference between relegation and survival or European football and mid table mediocrity.

 

[Machiavelli]

This is the Opta definition.

'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.'

They are refering to the attacking phase of play which continues only as long as the team is actively trying to score. As soon as an opposing player plays the ball, or an attacking player plays a pass that is purely aimed at retaining possession then the phase is over.

Thanks for this. And @Guinness Boy posed the question I had for your previous post.
I always had a 3% figure in mind for goals scored from corners but, presumably, that is direct goals from corners. I must say I do find that 13.9% figure high (I'm not disputing it, it just is way off from my perception -- which fails regularly, as this demonstrates). Beyond that, there's also goals from penalties, free kicks and open play, and I'd have thought that open play would be at least 70%.

 

[Machiavelli]

Exactly we should of one 18-3

I think this might just have answered the question from @Reddleman

 

[The Fits]

Glenn Murray said in an interview last year that De Zerbi doesn't care about set pieces and training was dedicated to in-play movement and positioning. Like @Commander said above, perhaps there just isn't enough time to spend hours in set piece routines.

Yup. We only have some much training time. I'd imagine back in the day there were standard ratios of how clubs split their training time which would have featured X many hours practising set pieces. RDZ clearly doesn't feel that that is time well spent.
He's not going to sacrifice time spent on possession, positional play, in play scenarios just because statistically we are underperforming both on attacking and defending set pieces. He'd argue that that results in less training time on the important stuff.
Now if we were 16th, couldn't keep the ball, couldn't hit a barn door then you could argue we need to refocus on the basics, but we are third and scoring for fun.
I genuinely think he would rather a corner taker booting it all the way back to the GK because he believes in 'his way' so fully.
Having said that, when we do decide to put a corner or free kick in the mixer Gilmour looks the best option and, as others have said, if you want the ball falling to anyone on the edge of the box it's Gross.

 

[We're the Stripes]

Yup. We only have some much training time. I'd imagine back in the day there were standard ratios of how clubs split their training time which would have featured X many hours practising set pieces. RDZ clearly doesn't feel that that is time well spent.
He's not going to sacrifice time spent on possession, positional play, in play scenarios just because statistically we are underperforming both on attacking and defending set pieces. He'd argue that that results in less training time on the important stuff.
Now if we were 16th, couldn't keep the ball, couldn't hit a barn door then you could argue we need to refocus on the basics, but we are third and scoring for fun.
I genuinely think he would rather a corner taker booting it all the way back to the GK because he believes in 'his way' so fully.
Having said that, when we do decide to put a corner or free kick in the mixer Gilmour looks the best option and, as others have said, if you want the ball falling to anyone on the edge of the box it's Gross.

I don't know if less time spent practising set-pieces necessarily explains the prolonged streak of headed misses from Dunk, Webster and co. from corners that were finding the net more frequently a few seasons ago. The ability is there, we're finding Albion heads with corners still. It just feels like a bit of an odd deviation from the average/what the stats suggest our chances should be yielding which we've otherwise solved under De Zerbi.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Thanks for this. And @Guinness Boy posed the question I had for your previous post.
I always had a 3% figure in mind for goals scored from corners but, presumably, that is direct goals from corners. I must say I do find that 13.9% figure high (I'm not disputing it, it just is way off from my perception -- which fails regularly, as this demonstrates). Beyond that, there's also goals from penalties, free kicks and open play, and I'd have thought that open play would be at least 70%.

This 13.9% figure feels about right to me. Sure, the classic Watson, Zamora, goal, type goal is actually fairly rare at the top level. But corners are much more dangerous than statistics suggest. Firstly they often lead to more corners, giving a second bite at it, but also often lead to penalties, own goals, scrambled second balls or a recycled ball back coming in as a cross as we saw at the weekend.

Corners are dangerous, it's just that we're not very good at them. Anyone who thinks they're not should look at the differences in the chart in the opening post in the thread

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Yup. We only have some much training time. I'd imagine back in the day there were standard ratios of how clubs split their training time which would have featured X many hours practising set pieces. RDZ clearly doesn't feel that that is time well spent.
He's not going to sacrifice time spent on possession, positional play, in play scenarios just because statistically we are underperforming both on attacking and defending set pieces. He'd argue that that results in less training time on the important stuff.
Now if we were 16th, couldn't keep the ball, couldn't hit a barn door then you could argue we need to refocus on the basics, but we are third and scoring for fun.
I genuinely think he would rather a corner taker booting it all the way back to the GK because he believes in 'his way' so fully.
Having said that, when we do decide to put a corner or free kick in the mixer Gilmour looks the best option and, as others have said, if you want the ball falling to anyone on the edge of the box it's Gross.

I think you're probably right. His style is complicated and must take a huge amount of drilling.

With a new batch of players to 'bring inside his idea' and teach his 'tactical disposition' he currently won't have the time to focus on set pieces, yet.

But fingers crossed we get to keep him for at least a couple more seasons with a settled squad and he gets to feel comfortable enough to spend some time on set pieces and show us what a genius mind like his can come up with.

Maybe for now the players could spend a little extra time after training practicing whipping in corners flat and fast? That would be a good start.

 

[trueblue]

You'd think so, but when you consider we take about 250 corners per season, 0.8% actually works out as 2 goals.

Statistically each premier league goal is worth a point, so that 0.8% could be the difference between relegation and survival or European football and mid table mediocrity.

But the point is who's to say we will score those 2 extra goals? Some teams are naturally better at scoring direct from corners because of the attributes of their players. We're not a big team.

 

[albionalex]

Why not? If neither a goal nor a shot came from it then it's not as effective as a cross directly into the box, from which a shot and or a goal was created, and should be measured as such.

I was basically asking the same question as Guinness Boy which your Opta post above answers

 

[pasty]

I don't know if less time spent practising set-pieces necessarily explains the prolonged streak of headed misses from Dunk, Webster and co. from corners that were finding the net more frequently a few seasons ago. The ability is there, we're finding Albion heads with corners still. It just feels like a bit of an odd deviation from the average/what the stats suggest our chances should be yielding which we've otherwise solved under De Zerbi.

I always used to include one of our central defenders, usually Dunk, to have a shot on target in all my bet builders on our matches, but don’t bother anymore.

 

[albionalex]

We got our first corner and it resulted in Gilmour failing to beat the first man.

 

[Bodian]

Don't think we concede from a set-piece today? We're improving!

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Don't think we concede from a set-piece today? We're improving!

I hear the word “improving” in Graham Potter’s voice every single time I read it now.