- How are the supercomputers doing in predicting this season – and what they should be looking at
- Arsenal Women Champions League Round 1 2024 the final games
If we look at the number of shots per game that some of the bigger clubs in the Premier League have we can see a huge difference. Obviously, we would expect clubs that were relegated to get in far fewer shots in a season, but the difference at the top end really is quite remarkable.
At the top of the shooting list last season was Liverpool with 790 shots. – which is 133 more than Arsenal put in – although we are immediately reminded that Arsenal scored more goals than Liverpool – which shows that Arsenal’s finishing ability was way above Liverpool’s. Liverpool took 9.19 shots per goal. Arsenal just 7.22
In fact, Liverpool took more shots per goal than Crystal Palace, whom I included in the table just to see the comparison with one of the teams from the lower reaches of the league table last season. If Liverpool’s shooting were more accurate they would be devastating (but best not to tell them that).
Among the bigger teams the number of shots last season varied from the 790 of Liverpool down to 517 for Aston Villa – Liverpool thus taking half as many shots again as Aston Villa. Yet Liverpool only scored 10 more goals than Aston Villa. So in terms of finishing Liverpool (so highly praised by the media on a daily basis) are an awful lot worse than Aston Villa.
In fact the measure of shots per goal is something I can’t recall seeing in the media, but it makes fascinating reading. I’ve only produced it for seven of the teams we often compare Arsenal with, plus the Palace as a comparator – but it is still fascinating.
So aside from Aston Villa being a lot more efficient at scoring from shots than other clubs, while being hampered by the lack of shots, what else do we find?
Some things are to be expected. The three clubs that have the most shots are the top three from last season – but not in the exact order of the league table.
But the bigger variation comes from shots per goal – to be clear how many shots does each team have to take before it gets a goal?
The variation here is very large from Aston Villa on 6.8 shots per goal, to Manchester United on 9.67 shots per goal. A difference of around 42%. In essence, it shows that if Manchester United ever managed to have players in its ranks who actually can hit the target with some power when they shoot they would most certainly start rising up the league table very quickly.
Of course winning games is not just about efficiency in turning shots into goals – but that certainly helps and if Liverpool (like Manchester United) ever did manage that become more efficient with their shooting (perhaps by taking one extra pass before actually having someone unleash a shot) then they would put in a much stronger challenge to Arssenal and Manchester City.
Indeed both Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur appear to be utterly woeful in terms of the number of shots they take for each goal they score.
| Team | Shots | Goals | Shots per goal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liverpool | 790 | 86 | 9.19 |
| Manchester City | 691 | 96 | 7.20 |
| Arsenal | 657 | 91 | 7.22 |
| Tottenham | 585 | 74 | 7.90 |
| Manchester United | 551 | 57 | 9.67 |
| Chelsea | 547 | 77 | 7.10 |
| Aston Villa | 517 | 76 | 6.80 |
| Crystal Palace | 456 | 57 | 8.00 |
Leaving aside Crystal Palace for a moment and concentrating on the top seven shooting teams, the difference between them is extraordinary – Liverpool took 273 more shots than Aston Villa in the course of last season – but only scored 10 more goals!
Of course what the teams all want is a greater efficiency in turning shots into goals, and then on top of that more shots. If Arsenal could take themselves up to Manchester City’s level of 691 shots (which is under one extra shot a game) that would of course edge them ever closer to Manchester City in the league table.
20 of Arsenal’s 38 games last season had a goal difference between the sides of no more than one goal (through which I include all the draws and the games which were won or lost by one goal).
So curiously despite scoring 91 goals last season, the majority of games were close. If some of that goal-scoring prowess seen in knocking in the big scores against Chelsea, Sheffield United, Burnley, Palace etc into an extra goal in the matches which we only won by one goal of which there were 12 last season, that could give us a goal difference better than Manchester City.
For as you might recall, both they and Arsenal had exactly the same GD last season.
The result of taking a shot in football in isolation only tells half of the story . For years we were accused quite rightly in my opinion of wanting to walk the ball into the net. Defences lined up , 2 rows of 4 and forced us to go wide , pass square , keep the ball , go back and start again . Had we taken a pop every now and again doubt would form in the minds of the defensive players and they would get unsettled and have to break their lines which would make room for penetrating runs . Just as centering the ball with players attacking the ball turns defences and there is nothing a centre back hates more than turning to face his own goal to make a clearance.
I think our players should be trained to be able to use both feet. Its frustrating at times to see Saka try to switch things to his left and he is denied or fumbles.
The number of shots, whilst always having the possibility of turning into a goal, is somewhat more spurious (as porter suggests) than conclusive. Equally shots per goal doesn’t take into account the quality of shot, positioning and likelihood of scoring. In terms of the number of shots, if half those shots are from poor angles 40 yards out with a wall of defenders in the way, they may be almost pointless. Equally most of your shots are ten yards out they probably stand a better chance of going in, even more so if they are from the penalty spot! We might well be comparing apples to oranges.
I think the concept of ‘expected goals’ is an effort to overcome this issue yet there are several different calculations for that all of which seem far from scientific…..I wouldn’t even pretend to know the answer to that conundrum though.
However again, I have to agree with porter in that varying one’s attempts from ‘trying to walk it in’ to “having a dig” from outside the area does mean that defenders are put in two minds and hence may create more opportunity/space. I have to say though that I’ve never coached/managed a team, I’m not qualified and I’m not an experienced, highly paid professional. Hence, unlike ALL football “journalists” and pundits and a percentage of fans, I’ll happily leave it to the experts rather than pretend I’m an expert.
The one thing that does annoy me intensely, however, is seeing a player pick up the ball 30 or 40 yards out and hearing a few thousand fans shouting “shoooot” as though they think that is the best option and that the players will take more notice of them than of the tactics their manager has versed them in. If I were a player, I think I’d actually find that off-putting rather than helpful……..but hey what do I know…..I don’t play FIFA and don’t have an Xbox 🙂
I’m sorry but this knocking of Arsenal because they try to walk the ball into the net is utter nonsense. It’s been going on for as long as I can remember.
Now given the consensus seems to be we have now stopped trying to walk the ball into the net, the following stats from 2021 seem to be an ideal point at which to make a judgement on our Premier League goal scoring exploits, to see just how badly this propensity to walk it in has affected us.
Oh look, we are the second top scorers in Premier League history with 1, 956
https://www.givemesport.com/1736055-top-10-teams-that-have-scored-the-most-goals-in-premier-league-history/
It appears we walked it in quite often.
The thing is, fans always like to see a shot, or a dig at goal. That’s natural. And of course when it does go in it looks spectacular. But coaches aren’t so emotional. They look at the stats and the stats show that the efficiency of shots per goal decreases the further out you are. They don’t care how it ‘looks’ they care about how many, and the closer you get to the goal the chances of scoring dramatically increases.
Okay, fans get frustrated when they see an opportunity to shoot from 20 yards, but I believe the average of goals per shot from that distance is about 10%. It is much more efficient to get closer and that may take 3, 4, 5 more passes, but in the end it’s worth it, it just gets a little frustrating when it doesn’t work.
When a player takes that shot and it whistles a foot over the bar or the keeper pulls of a great save, everyone still loves, despite the fact it didn’t go in, and more importantly despite the fact there was a better pass on which may of got us ’round the back’ and set up a closer opportunity.
Emotionally, it just isn’t so ‘frustrating’, for the crowd, but the coach will be pulling his hair out.
But overall playing through, around the back line and creating a chance from within 10 yards is the most efficient thing to do.
@ Nitram
If I remember correctly (which becomes more infrequent with age, I admit!) a few seasons ago we were accused of always trying to “walk the ball in”. Strangely, however, we also scored the most goals from outside the box……..funny old game!!
If only people dealt in facts rather than unsubstantiated opinion eh!!!
Mikey
I know. I’ve always seen it as just another way to ‘knock’ Arsenal.
Thanks to Wengers style of football I think we scored some of the best team goals I have ever seen. The Wilshere one against Norwich being the best of the bunch.
But as you say, we wasn’t averse to scoring from outside the box. Ramsey in Europe. Henry scored a few, as did Vieira, Podolski, Cazorla.
But I remember reading about this notion of ‘the closer you get’ being a specific tactic, many years ago, andI believe it was a quote from Wenger but I am struggling to find it.
Although I did find one article that goes into some depth on our tactics under Wenger, which opens with the following which makes specific reference to that Wilshere goal.
I’ve created what I think is a very good likeness of Wenger’s Arsenal tactics with several Arsenal-esque goals, both attacking-wise and on the counter attack.
However, The Hand Of God’s World Cup thread has me really wanting to try and replicate their tactics perfectly.
Arsenal.com has a very helpful feature where you can see the average positions of players and their passing/shooting/defensive/link-up stats. I’m not taking it as 100% gospel though, as evidenced by Sagna’s average position vs Aston Villa at home (first game of the season) – http://www.arsenal.com/match-menu/3630606/first-team/arsenal-v-aston-villa?tab=statscentre
But it’s a very useful tool to help me anyway.
Now the obvious first thing about Arsenal is that we play very differently away from home, so focussing on home games to create the tactics is necessary.
The first time I think most Arsenal fans would say that we really played the Arsenal way was home to Norwich in a 4-1 victory, famous for Wilshere’s stunning tiki-taka team goal, voted goal of the season by MOTD viewers, so I’m going to start by looking at this game.
So we have here our line-up and average positions;
This is the article in full. It’s quit in depth.
https://community.sports-interactive.com/forums/topic/319328-wenger-style/