- Do Arsenal need to sell before buying any more players?
- Arsenal: Getting ready to start season 100 (twice)
By Tony Attwood
We’ve written a lot about penalties in recent times, so it is nice to see at last that the BBC has picked up on the issue of just what is going on with referees and their giving of penalties for and against Arsenal.
In fact, we started picking up on the issue as far back as 2017 – you can find an Untold article from that time here just in case you want the history!
But there have, of course, been lots of articles since, and to give you a preliminary before we look at today’s revelations, you might want to glance at “Penalties for an against Arsenal” (although also you might want to be sitting down and have a glass of something restorative by your side before you begin).
But don’t worry if you don’t have time for all this re-reading, because today we have the BBC putting up a piece saying
“Liverpool won and scored a league-high nine penalties, while Arsenal won and scored a paltry two.”
That is of course, taken directly from our findings (“research” is probably a bit strong since the numbers are freely available – it is just that the media refuse to publish any of it normally. So the BBC really is breaking ranks here).
And what the BBC has done, which we didn’t do, is to go further and show that “Arsenal had a better non-penalty shot conversion rate than Liverpool last season”. So this is not just the BBC going a bit pro-Arsenal for the first time since the 1930s, but noting that Arsenal’s problem is that referees simply don’t give Arsenal penalties in the same way that Liverpool and a few other clubs get them.
To put it bluntly, they say, “for a team that finished as high in the table as Arsenal to win just two penalties is unusual. In the past 10 campaigns, a side ending up with a points tally in the 70s has won an average of five penalties, while champions have won an average of eight.
“In fact, the last team to win so many points and so few penalties was Arsenal themselves back in 2015-16 when they also finished runners-up, winning just two penalties. Champions Leicester were awarded 13.”
Now that is very interesting because we spotted the fact that Leicester were getting a ludicrously high number of penalties that season, and we looked into why. We first highlighted Leicester’s numbers in 2020 and indeed on our home page we are still highlighting some of our work on this under “The great penalty scandal”
What we spotted among many other bits and pieces was a particular tactic of Leicester’s centre forward who would get the ball at the edge of the opposition penalty area and then, instead of heading for goal, would take the ball across the edge of the area. Inevitably, a defender would track behind him – and then suddenly and without warning or indeed reason, Vardy would do a 180-degree turn and begin to go in the opposite direction, travelling back the way he had come.
That move was, of course, generally unsuspected, so a defender rushing along behind him would inevitably collide with Vardy, and Vardy would get a penalty. It happened over and over again, until we wrote it up, and rather nicely for us, the word spread. Players stopped rushing up behind him, and referees realised they were being conned.
Of course, we then got deeper and deeper into the issue of Arsenal and penalties with articles like
- Penalties for and against. Are Arsenal being hard done by?
- Refs give far more penalties against Arsenal than other clubs, but why?
and many more. Although none of the mainstream media, except the BBC wanted to know about this. The Corporation, however, has started to take an interest with the story that notes Arsenal’s tiny number of penalties last season (two) and says, “In fact, the last team to win so many points and so few penalties was Arsenal themselves back in 2015-16 when they also finished runners-up, winning just two penalties. Champions Leicester were awarded 13.” As we indeed pointed out.
Here’s the chart the BBC then produce…
| Premier League 2024/25 | Liverpool | Arsenal |
| Penalties won | 9 | 2 |
| Penalties scored | 9 | 2 |
| Points won by penalties | +11 | 0 |
In terms of chances created, Arsenal were pretty close to the average: historically in the League, the percentage converted is 12%. Last season for Arsenal it was 11%. Not bad given the injuries to Saka, Martinelli, Odegaard and Kai Havertz.
Now, a 1% difference might not sound like much but given that Arsenal took 544 non-penalty shots over the course of last season, if they had created chances as good as the champions, they would have scored an additional five goals (1% of 544). Given that Arsenal drew 14 games last season, those five goals could have given the club 10 points, taking them to the same number as Liverpool.
In reality, the statistics overall show that the quality of the shots Arsenal were putting in last season wasn’t just slightly better than Liverpool, they were a lot better. As the article puts it “they overperformed their non-penalty xG by seven goals to Liverpool’s measly 0.5.”
In point of fact, the story has circulated that Arsenal were rubbish at finishing last season, while they were actually more ruthless in front of goal than any of the other top six clubs.
So why buy a new centre forward when the stats clearly show that it was not that which was the problem? This could be both a way of diverting the thoughts of defenders to get them to mark the wrong men and a way to shut the media up while ensuring that if Arsenal again suffer the ludicrous number of injuries to the forward line, they have another forward available. Until then, rotation could well help confuse the opposition as they never know what sort of attack their defence is going to face.
I would appreciate an answer to my question I asked in your previous post title do Arsenal………?
thank you.
There is just one massive Elephant in the room with all these penalty stats.
You actually have to be in the penalty box in order for the ref to award said penalty.
As Arsenal spend the vast majority of their attacking time P!33ing about left to right and back ward and forwards across the 18 yard box the actually touches in the box are what should be looked.
Charles.He doesn’t seem to do replies? Even enquired about purchasing stuff.Blank.Not even acknowledged.Oh dear.
Tony I see the quality of the commentariat on here has dipped considerably in the last few months. Perhaps the old-timers are off on holiday.
It’s hard to believe that the BBC of all places has hired some journalist who do the mathematics. What’s next? The Daily Mail? Of course that’s a ridiculous thing to wish for. Unfortunately it has taken the BBC ten years to figure out that Leicester were handed the title and that referees are the main reason we have not won the Premier League despite being so close.
Naturally, the naysayers will think otherwise and the truly daft will continue to bray for Arteta’s replacement. What a dangerous world we live in considering we have to share oxygen with members of the dumbest species on the planet.
I read the BBC article as well and was surprised they took their analysis further to show Arsenal were actually better finishers last season than Liverpool. They’re also suggesting that with Gyokeres up front the Gunners just may do it this campaign. They attribute the modest sum of 69 goals for the season to a lack of chances. They put up the numbers to prove the point. Solid reporting.
However, and it’s a big however, the article never mentioned the incredible number of injuries to Arsenal’s attacking players. A glaring omission in my view. Surely there would have been more chances created if the squad were healthier. They scored 91 goals in the League the previous season. But this is still a positive piece about AFC. Perhaps it will start a trend (he asked skeptically)?
The BBC article by Chris Collinson regarding chances created and penalties doesn’t mention Arsenal’s injuries to their front line players , which is relevant in my opinion .
Mark I would like to see some statistical basis for your assertion
Mark
Your assertion is not correct..i will give you an example last season vs Chealsea.Cucurella clearly handed the ball but Arsenal was denied a penalty…i bet any other team in the “big six”would have been awarded a spotkick.
You ask questions of a poster of a comment but as already noted, you don’t answer our questions.
Mark- Premier League 2024/5 Touches in opposition box
Manchester City- 1432
Liverpool- 1425
Arsenal- 1379
So Arsenal had 97% of Liverpools touches in opposition box. But got 22% of their penalties.
I didn’t answer the question about need to sell before buying because I don’t have enough informatioin on Arsenals finances. The club does not need to sell in terms of FFP for this season, but I am unclear about how the directors see the future. The club was profitble for many years, but in the last few years has become loss making, and I have no idea what their intentions are. Are they going to continue to run it at a loss, do they expect somehow to turn the run of loss making seasons into profit, or is there something else we don’t know about the club’s finances. If they are going for a profit, I can’t see where it is going to come from since every price has gone up and every avenue of income seems to be maximised. So it is an open question I can’t answer
Perhaps a loss from AFC offsets profits from the rest of KSE and thereby reduces corporate income taxes. I haven’t seen the books but it is possible. Surely as one of the most valuable sports conglomerates in the world they know a bit about Profit and Loss. In any case, I’m happy they’ve loosened the purse strings since becoming owners of the club.
An obvious foul on Lewis-Skelly prior to Spurs’ goal – nothing changes – we’re even being stitched up by referees in friendly matches