Crossing

[Sleepy1968]

1 hour ago, Sir Geoff said:

Exactly. People complain about our crossing, which is woeful, but even if it was great there's no one to get on the end of it. We probably should be keeping better possession and creating different types of openings.

All this talk of 1980s crossing disguises that it is the most inefficient way of creating scoring chances. Ask @spudski, he's been banging on about it forever. It's a bit concerning that we choose to sign a 'winger' (if that's what Mehmeti is) and it's down to the coaches to come up with better solutoins for creating scoring chances and train it out to the players. They can start by watching the prolific teams in the better leagues - see how they create openings - what can we emulate, adapt and learn from.

[Davefevs]

21 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

All this talk of 1980s crossing disguises that it is the most inefficient way of creating scoring chances. Ask @spudski, he's been banging on about it forever. It's a bit concerning that we choose to sign a 'winger' (if that's what Mehmeti is) and it's down to the coaches to come up with better solutoins for creating scoring chances and train it out to the players. They can start by watching the prolific teams in the better leagues - see how they create openings - what can we emulate, adapt and learn from.

Not having a go at you or Spudski…

The problem with banging on about crosses is it’s often done by quoting “bland” stats without context.  How about some further context like, goals from crosses from the touchline, to goals from crosses from the 18 yard line, where is relation to the touchline, etc.  Thats when you can start to draw better conclusions.

 

41 crosses / 0 goals

11 crosses / 3 goals all from crosses

 

16 crosses / 3 goals from crosses (4 goals in total).

I know not everyone has data / pics, but we all watch the game.  We don’t sit there counting crosses do we?  We reflect back on what we see and reach conclusions.

The first pic was Coventry (h) 0-0.  Controlled / Dominated large parts of the game, but they sat deep / narrow and made us cross from deep and wide.  Low percentage (of scoring) type crosses.

The second pic was Rotherham (a) 3-1, first game after WC.  All 3 goals came from crosses.  Two counterattack down the inside left.  The third was a short corner where we reversed the angle and Pring timed his run against a defence pushing out.

The third pic was Brum (h) 4-2.  Semenyo and Pring tore the Brum defence a new one!

To round it off….last night:

Not hugely dissimilar to Coventry - slinging in crosses from wide and / or deep.

 

 

[spudski]

Here are some statistical finds.

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/whats-point-crossing

https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/06/22/an-ineffective-tool/

https://theathletic.com/2521493/2021/04/17/we-need-to-talk-about-crossing/

https://www.statsperform.com/resource/the-art-of-crossing/

[Davefevs]

The StatsPerform data is really good.

Good to see the far post cross has some success too.

[Sleepy1968]

20 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Not having a go at you or Spudski…

The problem with banging on about crosses is it’s often done by quoting “bland” stats without context.  How about some further context like, goals from crosses from the touchline, to goals from crosses from the 18 yard line, where is relation to the touchline, etc.  Thats when you can start to draw better conclusions.

 

41 crosses / 0 goals

11 crosses / 3 goals all from crosses

 

16 crosses / 3 goals from crosses (4 goals in total).

I know not everyone has data / pics, but we all watch the game.  We don’t sit there counting crosses do we?  We reflect back on what we see and reach conclusions.

The first pic was Coventry (h) 0-0.  Controlled / Dominated large parts of the game, but they sat deep / narrow and made us cross from deep and wide.  Low percentage (of scoring) type crosses.

The second pic was Rotherham (a) 3-1, first game after WC.  All 3 goals came from crosses.  Two counterattack down the inside left.  The third was a short corner where we reversed the angle and Pring timed his run against a defence pushing out.

The third pic was Brum (h) 4-2.  Semenyo and Pring tore the Brum defence a new one!

To round it off….last night:

Not hugely dissimilar to Coventry - slinging in crosses from wide and / or deep.

 

 

I was thinking about crosses put in hopefully/aimlessly from out wide/deep without much control, and without any real expectation of a goal being scored. You know the 'we've run out of ideas' type of cross.

[Davefevs]

11 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

I was thinking about crosses put in hopefully/aimlessly from out wide/deep without much control, and without any real expectation of a goal being scored. You know the 'we've run out of ideas' type of cross.

Some of the articles spud linked, pretty much say exactly that.

[spudski]

48 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Some of the articles spud linked, pretty much say exactly that.

Exactly that...going wide, or getting to the bye line and cutting back...making a pass, rather than a hopeful cross is far more productive. 

It does my noggin in, when we do all the hard work getting into a passing opportunity in the final third and we choose to cross. It doesn't make any sense. 

We construct our football in the build up with fine detail. Passing, moving, passing back so as not to lose possession, recycling etc etc...yet in the final third, ping a hopeful ball into the box, that  usually has more defenders than forwards and a keeper that can come out and stretch and use his hands. 

It literally makes no sense to do it, especially when you look at the fine detail managers/ coaches go in to,  when developing play before the final third. 

They do that...then make it a hopeful ball, with very low odds of scoring from. 

It makes no sense to do it. 

Managers want to control games...not make it a lottery. 

[Numero Uno]

22 minutes ago, spudski said:

Exactly that...going wide, or getting to the bye line and cutting back...making a pass, rather than a hopeful cross is far more productive. 

It does my noggin in, when we do all the hard work getting into a passing opportunity in the final third and we choose to cross. It doesn't make any sense. 

We construct our football in the build up with fine detail. Passing, moving, passing back so as not to lose possession, recycling etc etc...yet in the final third, ping a hopeful ball into the box, that  usually has more defenders than forwards and a keeper that can come out and stretch and use his hands. 

It literally makes no sense to do it, especially when you look at the fine detail managers/ coaches go in to,  when developing play before the final third. 

They do that...then make it a hopeful ball, with very low odds of scoring from. 

It makes no sense to do it. 

Managers want to control games...not make it a lottery. 

A cross doesn’t have to be a lottery…..if you have the quality to pick a man out or hit the right area. Beckham proved that. We just don’t have the quality and proving your point for us the majority of crosses we score from are low crosses.

The bigger issue in terms of why crossing is low reward is that the ability to cross the ball with accuracy is not coached in the same way at youth level that playing passes here there and everywhere is.

[spudski]

30 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

A cross doesn’t have to be a lottery…..if you have the quality to pick a man out or hit the right area. Beckham proved that. We just don’t have the quality and proving your point for us the majority of crosses we score from are low crosses.

The bigger issue in terms of why crossing is low reward is that the ability to cross the ball with accuracy is not coached in the same way at youth level that playing passes here there and everywhere is.

When watching games across all levels, imo, the average standard of crosses, corners, set pieces is below what it used to be in the past. The delivery is often below par for what I'd expect from a Professional footballer, when compared to that of amateur football lower down the pryamids. 

However even with a cross into the box that has quality, you'll often have more defenders and a keeper that can use his arms and hands. Being able to jump, and use your hands negates a lot of what a cross brings. 

A pass is much more productive. 

[Major Isewater]

On 19/04/2023 at 11:23, Davefevs said:

As a club we are in transition (still).

As a team, our playing style is in transition also.  Nige is trying to evolve the style / system from counter-attacking to a bit more possession based.

We saw post-WC a number of goals come from wide players breaking into the box against an unstructured defence, crossing across / pulling back to the 6 yard box for onrushing forwards (and backtracking defenders) for the ball to end up in the net.

Rotherham (a):

Wells breaking into box, crosses, Wes Harding og

Conway breaking into box from Naismith outball, crosses, keeper parries it onto Joe Williams and into the bet

Stoke (h):

Pring drives into the box, crosses with venom, Wells bundled over the line via chest

Coventry (a):

Pring endeavour in inside left, cross, rebounds off of Scott, Semenyo swivels in from close range

Birmingham (h):

see Stoke, but Semenyo bundling in

Pring drives into box, Sykes tap-in from 6 yards.

etc

All goals scored from crosses against un-set defences.

 

Now we are finding with a bit more possession, we are having to create different types of chances.  We are doing that coming off a good run, but further injuries and suspensions have hit us.  Simple, possible reasons.  Pring playing LCB instead of LB has deprived us of his drive on the left wing. Dasilva has played well last few games (after being distinctly average previously), but he still offers nothing like what Pring does at LB, certainly attack wise.  Having to play Pring at LCB is a big loss to our threat.

Naismith, whether it is at LCB or CM / DM, his ability to pass quickly between the lines, or into channels is also a huge loss.  It affects Scott, whose also been out injured, because he wants the ball early so he can face up his opponents.

There are probably other nuances too that are affecting our attacking output.  Even losing Semenyo, who was a player who can create something out of nothing.

 

Lets see how Nige solves this over the summer.

 

 

 

Can’t beat a good box entry.

[Daniro]

Well I'm no statistician, but I tell you, Conway's goal on Saturday from that wonderful cross from Pring was sheer delight.     I get it,  9 times out of ten there'd be nobody in the right place or if there were, they'd mis-head it, but when it comes together like that, it is a thing of beauty.

 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

On 18/04/2023 at 22:41, BCFC Rich said:

I don't think that's true. He just doesn't consistently make the right choices - when to run, cross, cross early etc. He's just a little raw. His crossing and decision-making against Stoke was excellent - but I'd agree didn't do well with crossing today. 

You have to remember that Bell is a striker, not a winger. Strikers are generally not known for their crossing ability.

[mozo]

Two goals from crosses in one game ain't bad!

[Numero Uno]

5 hours ago, Daniro said:

Well I'm no statistician, but I tell you, Conway's goal on Saturday from that wonderful cross from Pring was sheer delight.     I get it,  9 times out of ten there'd be nobody in the right place or if there were, they'd mis-head it, but when it comes together like that, it is a thing of beauty.

 

 

Conway’s goal on Saturday proved that if you get the quality right you can score from crosses AND you don’t need a 6’9” lump on the end of them either. It’s the quality that needs to improve. Pring’s cross was as good as anything you see at Prem level, took two defenders out, had pace on it and just needed Conway to get a good connection.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Numero Uno

[mozo]

And another one!

[mozo]

40 minutes ago, mozo said:

And another one!

Make that two!