Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

spudski

Why we aren't scoring...

Recommended Posts

Having players strong enough and skillful enough to keep the ball in and around the opposition area, would help increase the strike rate. Currently it's far too easy for the opposition to defend our powder puff attacks. If we're intent on playing a big mobile bloke that can't hold the ball, and supposedly to his strengths but, with nobody playing off of him, when the rest of the squad are fast more skillful players more used to inter passing, then there's little hope.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have always thought that scoring becomes a more difficult excercise if the team takes to the field with the mindset that the main priority is worry ,more about what the opposition is going to do, focussing on keeping things tight and not conceding, and think this is where we are at the moment.

That's not to say that defensive issues are unimportant, but with their minds full of negative or defensive messages, attacking players will feel inhibited and midfield players will be more concerned about their defensive responsibilities, so attacking inclinations tend to be suppressed. End result is midfield stops creating chances.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

I've been asking myself that question for the last 40 odd years 😀

Yeah, we did OK with crosses and goals a few years prior to that, when we had Skirton, Sharpe on the wings & J G 'The King Of The West Country' alongside Garland in and around the box.  (or have I got my rose tinted polaroid's of youth on again?)   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

It was Babysham when I was a lad .

A top knicker dropper . 

 

3 minutes ago, Frenchay Red said:

Not as potent as Babycham 😉

hmm, … 

'Cherry (popper) B' ?   cherry-b-cherry-wine-4x-11-3cl-pack-and-bottle.jpg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Northern Cider Ed said:

If only we had a lanky striker who was a beast in the air.

If we had one though we would probably sell him and then change our style to a crossing game.

Nobody would be that stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Snufflelufagus said:

Out of interest What is the highest percentage for goals scored? I'd guess set pieces which generally have a cross or two.

I’d guess shots on target. Which is also where we’re gojng wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WestMidsRed said:

 This stuff always hurts my brain. Up here in Stoke, we just know "hoof, smash! Ugh goal! Headbutt ref!" None of this technical percentage stuff.  

No offence.... It sounds like you're suffering from 'Tiny Penis Syndrome' ;)

 

(don't panic, that's just a bad case of lingering Pulis Hangover, you'll get over it ...... eventually!) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

No offence.... It sounds like you're suffering from 'Tiny Penis Syndrome' ;)

 

(don't panic, that's just a bad case of lingering Pulis Hangover, you'll get over it ...... eventually!) 

My missus said the same thing. Probably time I saw a doc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spudski said:

...imo...because we have become a team trying to score goals from crosses.

We are playing wider and wider when attacking...with Kelly and Elliason down the left, and either Pisano, Hunt and Weimann combining down the right, all trying to get a cross into the box.

More often than not Famara is in the box on his own...with Pato and Brownhill lurking on the edge.

Here's the rub...Stats prove 'Crossing' is the least effective strategy when trying to score.

Recent studies showed you score 1 goal from 64 crosses. With teams averaging approx. 19 crosses per game. So on average 1 goal scored from a cross per 3 games.

Crossing is difficult. There are many physical and technical abilities required to consistently cross accurate balls in the box. Speed, stamina, dribbling, precision, tempo, to name a few. The crosser and the receiver also need a lot of coordination between the two of them. Not easy.

In the five top European leagues (so it will be a lot less in the Championship), the average cross accuracy is 23.5% (the percentage of crosses actually delivered to a teammate). This means that more than 3 out of 4 crosses get lost (the ball is intercepted by an opponent, or goes out of the pitch).

Even when the ball is accurately crossed and directly goes to a teammate, the chances of scoring remain poor.

First of all, not every time a ball directly goes to a teammate, he is able to shoot. That happens slightly more than half of the times, 56% on average.

Secondly, as aforementioned, scoring from a cross is tough and entails outperforming the defence. The percentage of key passes from crossing becoming assists (i.e. a goal) is 11.9% on average. This is well below the total percentage of goals from key passes (14.1%).


Cross accuracy [23.5%]

x

Crosses translating into shots [56%]

x

Key passes from crosses becoming a goal [11.9%]

=

PROBABILITY OF SCORING A GOAL FROM A CROSS [1.6%].


This means that, on average, it takes 64 crosses to score a goal.

Obviously, from these stats you cannot take into account the number of times a goal is indirectly scored after a cross, like after a failed clearance by the opponents. However, does this really matter? The point is: should we really base our attacking strategy on exploiting the opponents’ defensive mistakes?

Is it no wonder our shots on target are so low using this ineffective strategy?

 

As much as it's nice to see interplay and crosses by Kelly and Elliason...and decent crosses from Pisano and Hunt...exciting to see them beat their opposite numbers....what's the point, when it's the lowest scoring strategy in football?

Easy to defend against...and even worse when you have an ineffective forward.

We've gone from being creative, and playing fast passing moves into and around the front of the box, making openings, leading to shots to a team reliant on crosses that wouldn't look out of place in the 80's.

 

We've just scored 4 goals in 2 games. From 4 crosses.

 

Don't worry about it too much, mate, LJ knows what he's doing.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snufflelufagus said:

Out of interest What is the highest percentage for goals scored? I'd guess set pieces which generally have a cross or two.

From research stats...

We believe that the coaches and managers may find the following result useful. Share of long passes in total passes and number of crosses played per game adversely affects goal scoring, but accuracy of long passes positively impact it. Technical perfection in long passes and passes in general is required, but strategically it is better to increase the number of shot passes played per long pass. This is what Johan Cruyff and his spiritual disciples in football strategy like Arsene Wenger or Pep Guardiola, have been saying for ages and we have seen great teams like Ajax (1971-74), Netherlands national team (1972-78), Barcelona (1992-94 and 2008 to present), Bayern Munich (2012 to present) and Arsenal (1997–2007) that successfully employed the strategy. In the season 2015-16 we have seen teams like Barcelona, Bayern, Dortmund, Manchester City, Arsenal, Paris Saint Germain etc. apply that strategy.

Number of crosses, per game, increases if a team tends to attack from the wide. While it is a might be a good strategy to employ full backs to go on occasional overlaps, playing from the wide reduces the goal scoring opportunity. When a team attacks from the wide, the centre backs of the opposition gets more time and can anticipate the crosses.

Basically... Share of long passes in total passes and crosses per game have significant negative impact.

So the more crosses you play into the box, you are less likely to score.

Our way of playing at the moment...is the least effective way to score in football. Stats back this up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Moments of Pleasure said:

We've just scored 4 goals in 2 games. From 4 crosses.

 

Don't worry about it too much, mate, LJ knows what he's doing.......

Lets see how this strategy pans out over the rest of the season 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im wondering if someone else is off in January and has let on what they will be getting,or the team are resenting the big 3s departure and their rewards. something is very wrong as the enthusiasm has gone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RumRed said:

Prosecco doesn’t cut it these days, you’re expected to cough up for pink champagne.

 

1 hour ago, Major Isewater said:

It was Babysham when I was a lad .

A top knicker dropper . 

 

1 hour ago, Frenchay Red said:

Not as potent as Babycham 😉

 

1 hour ago, WhistleHappy said:

 

hmm, … 

'Cherry (popper) B' ?   cherry-b-cherry-wine-4x-11-3cl-pack-and-bottle.jpg

If you're hung like John Holmes then all the above pale into insignificance against this........................

 

1 hour ago, Major Isewater said:

Johnson Out 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, downendcity said:

 

 

 

If you're hung like John Holmes then all the above pale into insignificance against this........................

 

 

the blocker on the net won't let me view porn ,alcohol or politics the grandchildren are safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

It was Babysham when I was a lad .

A top knicker dropper . 

Archers in the early 90’s.  If you wanted a second date you whipped out the Vienetta for ‘afters’.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RumRed said:

Archers in the early 90’s.  If you wanted a second date you whipped out the Vienetta for ‘afters’.

Malibu was moderately sucessful  in 80s

Edited by BobBobSuperBob
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spudski said:

From research stats...

We believe that the coaches and managers may find the following result useful. Share of long passes in total passes and number of crosses played per game adversely affects goal scoring, but accuracy of long passes positively impact it. Technical perfection in long passes and passes in general is required, but strategically it is better to increase the number of shot passes played per long pass. This is what Johan Cruyff and his spiritual disciples in football strategy like Arsene Wenger or Pep Guardiola, have been saying for ages and we have seen great teams like Ajax (1971-74), Netherlands national team (1972-78), Barcelona (1992-94 and 2008 to present), Bayern Munich (2012 to present) and Arsenal (1997–2007) that successfully employed the strategy. In the season 2015-16 we have seen teams like Barcelona, Bayern, Dortmund, Manchester City, Arsenal, Paris Saint Germain etc. apply that strategy.

Number of crosses, per game, increases if a team tends to attack from the wide. While it is a might be a good strategy to employ full backs to go on occasional overlaps, playing from the wide reduces the goal scoring opportunity. When a team attacks from the wide, the centre backs of the opposition gets more time and can anticipate the crosses.

Basically... Share of long passes in total passes and crosses per game have significant negative impact.

So the more crosses you play into the box, you are less likely to score.

Our way of playing at the moment...is the least effective way to score in football. Stats back this up.

It’s all about “packing” these days Spud.  Ask Jens.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, spudski said:

...imo...because we have become a team trying to score goals from crosses.

We are playing wider and wider when attacking...with Kelly and Elliason down the left, and either Pisano, Hunt and Weimann combining down the right, all trying to get a cross into the box.

More often than not Famara is in the box on his own...with Pato and Brownhill lurking on the edge.

Here's the rub...Stats prove 'Crossing' is the least effective strategy when trying to score.

Recent studies showed you score 1 goal from 64 crosses. With teams averaging approx. 19 crosses per game. So on average 1 goal scored from a cross per 3 games.

Crossing is difficult. There are many physical and technical abilities required to consistently cross accurate balls in the box. Speed, stamina, dribbling, precision, tempo, to name a few. The crosser and the receiver also need a lot of coordination between the two of them. Not easy.

In the five top European leagues (so it will be a lot less in the Championship), the average cross accuracy is 23.5% (the percentage of crosses actually delivered to a teammate). This means that more than 3 out of 4 crosses get lost (the ball is intercepted by an opponent, or goes out of the pitch).

Even when the ball is accurately crossed and directly goes to a teammate, the chances of scoring remain poor.

First of all, not every time a ball directly goes to a teammate, he is able to shoot. That happens slightly more than half of the times, 56% on average.

Secondly, as aforementioned, scoring from a cross is tough and entails outperforming the defence. The percentage of key passes from crossing becoming assists (i.e. a goal) is 11.9% on average. This is well below the total percentage of goals from key passes (14.1%).


Cross accuracy [23.5%]

x

Crosses translating into shots [56%]

x

Key passes from crosses becoming a goal [11.9%]

=

PROBABILITY OF SCORING A GOAL FROM A CROSS [1.6%].


This means that, on average, it takes 64 crosses to score a goal.

Obviously, from these stats you cannot take into account the number of times a goal is indirectly scored after a cross, like after a failed clearance by the opponents. However, does this really matter? The point is: should we really base our attacking strategy on exploiting the opponents’ defensive mistakes?

Is it no wonder our shots on target are so low using this ineffective strategy?

 

As much as it's nice to see interplay and crosses by Kelly and Elliason...and decent crosses from Pisano and Hunt...exciting to see them beat their opposite numbers....what's the point, when it's the lowest scoring strategy in football?

Easy to defend against...and even worse when you have an ineffective forward.

We've gone from being creative, and playing fast passing moves into and around the front of the box, making openings, leading to shots to a team reliant on crosses that wouldn't look out of place in the 80's.

 

You have been critical (overtly) of fans who suggested that Mr Johnson should have proceeded with that intent and progressed it last January via recruitment.

That crossing a football is a difficult means of scoring a goal needs no metrics to prove, or that it would be problematic for Bristol City will come as no surprise to many. 

In other threads months ago you failed to point out this flaw in Mr Johnsons plan, supported his tweaks, state Lee Johnson is using these changes to develop the players, and despite stating you finally now have doubts about recruitment, and that Mr Johnson is not a good man manager or motivator or tactician (recently) argue passionately that nobody can get more out of this squad than Mr Johnson.

Nobody …?

 

Edited by Cowshed
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

You have been critical (overtly) of fans who suggested that Mr Johnson should have proceeded with that intent and progressed it last January via recruitment.

That crossing a football is a difficult means of scoring a goal needs no metrics to prove, or that it would be problematic for Bristol City will come as no surprise to many. 

In other threads months ago you failed to point out this flaw in Mr Johnsons plan, supported his tweaks, state Lee Johnson is using these changes to develop the players, and despite stating you finally now have doubts about recruitment, and that Mr Johnson is not a good man manager or motivator or tactician (recently) argue passionately that nobody can get more out of this squad than Mr Johnson.

Nobody …?

 

We weren't playing like this months ago....it's been a more recent transition to rely so much on attacking from wide.

LJ has recruited...(or shall I say MA) to cover many bases it seems. To have 'Clubs' for every eventuality.

I don't know whether LJ has planned to play this way...or it has happened due to players either being injured or out of form.

Imo...we would still be playing with Pack and Smith centrally...and most likely Brownhill and Odowda wide of them, with Wiemann/Taylor and either Pato or Famara up front. Playing to a similar style to what we are used too.

Smith injured...imo has had a massive effect on how we've put teams out. Walsh wasn't deemed ready initially...and when played, proved he had some ability. Now injured long term...LJ is back to square one again trying to find a way to play with players he feels he can trust and are up to form.

I honestly don't believe LJ is playing our present way as his first choice of system. I believe he's trying to adapt ( unsuccessfully ).

You can argue the toss as to recruitment...we won't fully know until it's in black and white...but from what I've been told recently, and I've no reason to disbelieve, is MA has far more influence in recruitment than we think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, spudski said:

You can argue the toss as to recruitment...we won't fully know until it's in black and white...but from what I've been told recently, and I've no reason to disbelieve, is MA has far more influence in recruitment than we think.

So why has LJ publicly stated that he has the final say in transfer dealings.....or has he been told to say it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CityCiderEd said:

So why has LJ publicly stated that he has the final say in transfer dealings.....or has he been told to say it?

Who knows...but imo, he has less total say in who comes in, than we are led to believe.

Also take into account...when the board discussed sacking LJ last season, MA was 'alleged' to have voted to sack LJ.

Imo...a strong united front is being shown with our recruitment, but I think it's less than rosy behind closed doors.

Based on things I've been told...and I have no reason to disbelieve them. Just my opinion...us the public will never know fully unless it gets exposed openly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spudski, interesting question and take on things. The farce of 20 plus quality crosses fired in by Eliasson with no-one on the end has probably made you focus on that aspect of the game?

For me, its not as simple as an over-reliance on crosses. There were zero crosses from the right until COD came on. The lack of goals come from basic formation (too defensive), players not given licence to express themselves, little going through the mid, midfield lethargy, no hold-up number 9 from which a decent 10 can play off, centre backs laboured and too sideways in the initial build-up, square pegs in round holes (Weinmann is not a winger) and refusal to drop out of form players (Pack looks shattered) etc etc etc

We all watch Norwich, Sheffield U, Leeds, WBA, MiddB and Villa with some envy at the moment. There is a completely different look and feel to their game, their tempo, the collective press and play down the middle. Yes, they also ping balls in from wide but their attacking play in and around the box makes us look like poverty. That's why they score goals and we dont 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Our findings showed that most goals were scored when the type of feed was from a cross (43.7%). Griffiths  found that France, who was at that time considered the best international team in the World, created significantly more crosses than their opponents"

Taken from

 https://thesportjournal.org/article/analysis-of-goal-scoring-patterns-in-the-2012-european-football-championship/

which seems to contradict the OP's  statistical analysis.

  • Hmmm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Abraham Romanovich said:

" Our findings showed that most goals were scored when the type of feed was from a cross (43.7%). Griffiths  found that France, who was at that time considered the best international team in the World, created significantly more crosses than their opponents"

Taken from

 https://thesportjournal.org/article/analysis-of-goal-scoring-patterns-in-the-2012-european-football-championship/

which seems to contradict the OP's  statistical analysis.

76 goals from 31 games analysed from the polish and Ukrainian league in 2012!!!!! Really? 🤣🤣🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, spudski said:

76 goals from 31 games analysed from the polish and Ukrainian league in 2012!!!!! Really? 🤣🤣🤣

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to investigate the factors associated with goal scoring in top class football matches. Methods: 76 goals analyzed from 31 matches from the European football Championship in Poland-Ukraine in 2012.

Admittedly 2012 but far from the Polish/Ukrainian league and a detailed study indicating that the most succesful team scored most of their goals from crosses..

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of whose stats you believe anyone can see that we have a problem scoring,  even when we're dominating teams - and we do seem over-reliant on the one means of getting the ball into the box.

Just mix it up a bit lads, would be the message to take from this discussion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to mention- and I agree with decent chunks of the OP and crossing from further out being not too effective and particularly Sunday given Millwall were quite narrow in and around the box, have quite physical defenders- played to their strengths a bit. Now crossing as in low drilled crosses along the ground can cause real uncertainty and particularly as @Davefevs said a few days ago, width of the penalty area- then crossing can become quite a different weapon IMO.

You want to know why else we've had issues scoring though? Woodwork hit 12 times in 20 games, and while it's only once in the last 4 games, it has surely cost us points over the season. Hard to tell if that's luck or wastefulness really- maybe both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spudski said:

We weren't playing like this months ago....it's been a more recent transition to rely so much on attacking from wide.

LJ has recruited...(or shall I say MA) to cover many bases it seems. To have 'Clubs' for every eventuality.

I don't know whether LJ has planned to play this way...or it has happened due to players either being injured or out of form.

Imo...we would still be playing with Pack and Smith centrally...and most likely Brownhill and Odowda wide of them, with Wiemann/Taylor and either Pato or Famara up front. Playing to a similar style to what we are used too.

Smith injured...imo has had a massive effect on how we've put teams out. Walsh wasn't deemed ready initially...and when played, proved he had some ability. Now injured long term...LJ is back to square one again trying to find a way to play with players he feels he can trust and are up to form.

I honestly don't believe LJ is playing our present way as his first choice of system. I believe he's trying to adapt ( unsuccessfully ).

You can argue the toss as to recruitment...we won't fully know until it's in black and white...but from what I've been told recently, and I've no reason to disbelieve, is MA has far more influence in recruitment than we think.

Wide players were bought before the season started. They have played as have long standing squad members having similar roles. It is inconceivable that training and planning does not reflect this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

Wide players were bought before the season started. They have played as have long standing squad members having similar roles. It is inconceivable that training and planning does not reflect this.

Wide players were brought in to the squad...like I said...to cover all bases. LJ has said this when players brought in.

Do you honestly believe we would be playing as we are now if Smith was fit and playing?

Of course we are training a certain way...that's a given.

You totally ignore the rest of my post and it's sentiment.

Sick of sentences being taken out of paragraphs and misconstrued.

For what it's worth...if everyone was fit and available and in form,  we would be playing totally differently imo.

Goalkeeper and back four would be pretty much the same.

Midfield would be Brownhill, Pack, Smith, Odowda

Front from Pato, Weimann, Taylor, Famara

We'd play far more like last season...more narrow.

We are trying to find a way of playing that could be effective, with players that are on form, fit and in LJ's mind reliable.

I don't personally think it will work and be effective...the January window will be telling imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@spudski If all fit and available, you would drop Eliasson?

He's starting to come good this season, 1 goal and 4 assists- was him who put in the cross for our goal Sunday too in which case it's 1 and 5? More importantly he looked a regular threat and is young with room for growth.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, spudski said:

Wide players were brought in to the squad...like I said...to cover all bases. LJ has said this when players brought in.

Do you honestly believe we would be playing as we are now if Smith was fit and playing?

Of course we are training a certain way...that's a given.

You totally ignore the rest of my post and it's sentiment.

Sick of sentences being taken out of paragraphs and misconstrued.

For what it's worth...if everyone was fit and available and in form,  we would be playing totally differently imo.

Goalkeeper and back four would be pretty much the same.

Midfield would be Brownhill, Pack, Smith, Odowda

Front from Pato, Weimann, Taylor, Famara

We'd play far more like last season...more narrow.

We are trying to find a way of playing that could be effective, with players that are on form, fit and in LJ's mind reliable.

I don't personally think it will work and be effective...the January window will be telling imo.

 

Spudski you've just named a typical line up from this season with the exception of Smith (Elliason, who has improved enormously, being more or less a direct swap for O'Dowda) and said if that was the line up we'd be playing very differently.

If the way in which Smith plays is so important, surely one of the 47 purchases should have been capable of stepping into his role?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...