Corners (in general)

[rpitchfo]

I think I've tried to articulate this in various threads over the years so I wanted to get my thoughts down in one place.

Corners in football need a rethink.

Every time the ball goes out for a corner the crowd roar the team on and the defenders come jogging up and the ball comes in and then well...out again.

and I Just think - what a big waste of everyone's time. The chances of scoring from a corner are for all intensive purpose Zero. Research and stats in this area of limited but here's a bit...

http://www.scienceofsocceronline.com/2010/12/corner-kicks-by-numbers.html

It also feels like it's getting worse. Teams seem to be getting better and better at defending corners to such an extent that it feels like your more likely to concede on the counter then gain any advantage from one. For a game that is meant to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team corners have become pointless, a complete waste of time, a unnecessary break in a game.

There needs to be a better way of promoting pressing into the final third of the pitch. Giving away a corner kick at the moment is tantamount to a good piece of defending.

Do teams just lack the creativity and imagination to come up with a new approach. Why hasn't football looked to borrow from American Football and try a variety of different corner routines rather than, 1 arm up front post, 2 arms up back post. Or is it not worth it?

Could football look at a penalty corner type approach?

Or is everyone happy with things as they are at the moment.

Edit: Another good article looking at over 13,000 corners....https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2014/06/17/what-is-a-corner-kick-worth-in-soccer/

 

[gav81]

Do you have any specific suggestions, rpitchfo, either rules or tactical?

I always wonder why attackers don't start their runs from a bit deeper to make it harder to track.

I also wouldn't mind a rule, like with goal kicks, where no player is allowed in the penalty area when a corner is taken. That would mean all players are facing the goal when the ball comes in giving an advantage to the attacking team.

Apart from that, the Scholes volley corner routine was good!

 

[Piratesoup]

Instead of fixing a system that's not broken and artificially make corners more dangerous (penalty corner), how about teams put in more effort than now to practice taking them? If you can get better at defending, you can get better at overcoming that defense as well.

 

[skidmark]

Instead of fixing a system that's not broken and artificially make corners more dangerous (penalty corner), how about teams put in more effort than now to practice taking them? If you can get better at defending, you can get better at overcoming that defense as well.

These stats about corners have been around for a while, so no doubt the clubs know about this; so it's a good question you ask. I guess it could be that the quality of defensive training is improving more rapidly than attacking training, or perhaps it's simply not worth the effort - with a limited amount of training time, and such low returns from corners, perhaps focusing training on other things is deemed a more effective use of time.

 

[Brightonian]

It does put an interesting spin on the typical frustrated reaction from fans when your team attempts any kind of short corner or lay-off corner routine. Clearly managers can see these set pieces are a waste of time at the moment and are trying to find ways to make them more productive. When the rewards are so low, why not try something different?

Ever since I was a kid I've wondered why no-one ever tries a lift like in a rugby line-out. Float the ball in nice and deep (out of the goalie's clutches) and way over everyone's heads then hoist Fellaini into the air to head it goalwards.

 

[VeevaVee]

Even though it's still unlikely to score, I'd just like to see a driven corner that penetrates the box on a consistent basis. I feel like if it can get it to below heading height in the middle of the box then things could get dangerous quickly, in a good way. It'd probably need a few players causing issues at the near side to allow the ball to get through. Meh, I dunno.

 

[gav81]

We can consider attacking vs defensive training but what really sways it is that the former must hit a 18m squared target whilst the latter has a 1,000m+ squared target (anywhere but the goal).

 

[Klopper76]

One of the worst things in football is when a professional footballer can't beat the first man when taking a corner kick.

 

[Kinsella]

I love corners - won loads of money on them.

 

[SomeRandomPerson]

Read a very interesting article on this a couple of years back basically covering the stats you are talking about, as in you basically have a negligible chance of scoring from corners. Will try to find it if I can.

What was interesting about it is that it also pointed out that the stats were one of the reasons Guardiola always encouraged his Barcelona side to take short corners. Of course, part of it may have been that his side were all about 5 ft tall, but the idea was that you take a short corner and then just play as you would from open play. Barcelona were of course so good from open play that it increased their chances of scoring greatly but when you look at the stats, I reckon most teams would be better off that way.

I wonder if that was part of the reason van Gaal always insisted on short corners too. After he got sacked, Daniel Taylor wrote an article about how the squad was tired of LvG ways and one of the things mentioned was his obsession with stats. So, for example, he always insisted that the attackers take a touch before shooting because apparently you have a better chance statistically to score that way. I imagine the short corners were just an extension of that line of thinking.

What was even more interesting was that (these were stats only from the premier league and the championship and only covered a couple of seasons but still) Joey Barton was, by some distance, the most adept at taking corners in the sense that QPR had, by far, the best conversion rate from them. Some of it probably had to do with how well their players attacked the ball but it was surprising nonetheless.

Ultimately though, while teams probably are better at defending them now, I'm also convinced the attackers aren't as good at them anymore. The number of teams in the league that just take terrible corners, often failing to beat the first man (as Adnan Januzaj demonstrated so well just yesterday) is just jaw dropping.

 

[Sarni]

Why should teams be heavily punished for giving away a corner and at the same time why should winning a corner be rewarded with a much greater chance to score than you'd have if you continued your attack? The idea of them is not to punish the defending team but to get the ball back in play.

 

[a_devil_inside]

One thing I would like to change is the keepers getting most of the calls go their way if a player challenges against him. It's a 50/50 but a lot of refs just give a foul.

 

[rpitchfo]

Why should teams be heavily punished for giving away a corner and at the same time why should winning a corner be rewarded with a much greater chance to score than you'd have if you continued your attack? The idea of them is not to punish the defending team but to get the ball back in play.

That's an interesting point. If you asked most fans whether a corner was a reward following an attacking opportunity or simply a mechanism to restart play I wonder what they would say.

 

[gav81]

That's an interesting point. If you asked most fans whether a corner was a reward following an attacking opportunity or simply a mechanism to restart play I wonder what they would say.

Listening to match commentary it is most often stated the attacking team "wins" a corner, suggesting it is, or should be, a reward.

That is opposed to a throw in where it is more often the understated, "[club name] throw".

Yet the way corners currently work is simply a mechanism to restart play.

Any thoughts yourself then, rpitchfo? You have set out the situation but not said what you see as the solution, if one is needed.

 

[jem]

It does put an interesting spin on the typical frustrated reaction from fans when your team attempts any kind of short corner or lay-off corner routine. Clearly managers can see these set pieces are a waste of time at the moment and are trying to find ways to make them more productive. When the rewards are so low, why not try something different?

Ever since I was a kid I've wondered why no-one ever tries a lift like in a rugby line-out. Float the ball in nice and deep (out of the goalie's clutches) and way over everyone's heads then hoist Fellaini into the air to head it goalwards.

This made me laugh for some reason!

 

[Zlaatan]

One thing that would make it a wee bit more interesting would be to decrease area of the 6 yard box (half as deep perhaps, it doesn't really serve a purpose anyway) and then add a rule saying that the keeper can't touch the ball outside that box before another player has touched it.

It would at least get rid of the hundreds of corners turning into nothing because the keeper has such an advantage in the air.

 

[Sarni]

Listening to match commentary it is most often stated the attacking team "wins" a corner, suggesting it is, or should be, a reward.

That is opposed to a throw in where it is more often the understated, "[club name] throw".

Yet the way corners currently work is simply a mechanism to restart play.

Any thoughts yourself then, rpitchfo? You have set out the situation but not said what you see as the solution, if one is needed.

I think it's just wording. In Polish there's usually no 'winning a corner', you just basically 'get a corner' and commentators frequently say 'team X will resume the play from a corner'.

Corners happen because the defending team prevent a goal scoring opportunity by a piece of fair and fine defending. It'd not be good IMO to punish them for sending the ball out of play and would create strange situation where defending team might prefer to not defend in fear of conceding a corner - would you rather allow your opponent to get a cross or reach the header or let them have a corner which will give them 20 - 30 per cent chance of scoring?

 

[Solius]

and I Just think - what a big waste of everyone's time. The chances of scoring from a corner are for all intensive purpose Zero. Research and stats in this area of limited but here's a bit...

 

[Keeps It tidy]

Very few actions in Football lead to goals. So no surprise that corners rarely lead to goals.

 

[Shiva87]

Listening to match commentary it is most often stated the attacking team "wins" a corner, suggesting it is, or should be, a reward.

That is opposed to a throw in where it is more often the understated, "[club name] throw".

Yet the way corners currently work is simply a mechanism to restart play.

Any thoughts yourself then, rpitchfo? You have set out the situation but not said what you see as the solution, if one is needed.

But that's similar to a free-kick. A team wins a free kick, but it also really a way to only restart the game from a place where the foul was committed. It isn't supposed to reward the attacking team as much as 'stopping the game' to penalize the fouling player. With the increasing quality of free kick takers, it has probably become more of a reward when a foul is committed in the attacking third.

Anyway, this debate also has another aspect. While statistically, corners may not be resulting in high conversion rates its generally the rule of football. The point of the corner kick really is to put pressure on the defending team. 1 mistake can cost a goal, so defending teams need to be well organized.