Which is harder scoring or creating chances?

cjj

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2017
Messages
602
Supports
Spurs
It's Michael Owen.

He doesn't believe in passing, or even sharing credit. He's just in a grump because of that and that alone.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
30,780
Both are just as difficult in different ways.

Scoring goals has more pressure, creating chances needs a unique appreciation of space and timing.

I've played both roles and I'd say creating against good opposition is harder. Scoring is usually down to your own performance, where as creating relies on your striker being alive to the danger, and defenders not.

When you're in a bad period with low confidence though, scoring then can become a nightmare. You don't really get that with creating, you just keep chipping away and eventually it'll happen.
 

Redlyn

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
2,083
How do you score a goal without an assist? I can only think of penno/freekick and last touch coming from defending team, is there another scenario?

Rebound off GK and off the post are also unassisted, right?
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
18,322
I’d say scoring is more difficult. That’s why strikers/goalscorers generally cost more than other players.
 

Mrs Smoker

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
25,608
Location
In garden with Maurice
Supports
Panthère du Ndé
How do you score a goal without an assist? I can only think of penno/freekick and last touch coming from defending team, is there another scenario?

Rebound off GK and off the post are also unassisted, right?
I thought I had a nice way to credit assisters...

About assists...

Basically, same as today's fantasy footballs and optas and transfermarkts of the world are doing them. Though, with slight differences.

• shot on goal that was saved, blocked, or hit the woodwork, aka 'rebound'
• final pass or shot that makes the opposing player score an own goal
• foul for a free kick or penalty from which the goal is scored (directly from free kick)

And of course...

• final pass to a goal scorer

This is where I slightly differ from others, and with what I think is a bit fairer (or what I just like to believe).

1) After the pass, the scorer has to have three ball touches at most before shooting -- it's a bit arbitrary number, yeah, but feel it's still much better than nonsense such as Fabregas' "assist" (second video, at around 5:25) to Hazard in Chelsea's game vs Leicester or last season's Rooney's "assist" to RVP in a 4-1 win over Swansea. Feels just silly to brand those as assists, yet, they have been by...some weirdos.

2) If the pass is deflected, often from crosses for example, and the trajectory of the ball is altered by more than 45 degrees, the assist is not given. Less, assist given. 45 ain't bad, right?
I wrote to IFAB about it, they said we'll be in touch. That was 63 months ago.
 

SAFMUTD

Full Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
5,733
The answer for me is goal scorers although hybrid players will cost the most as seen with Neymar and United's version of Ronaldo.

There's a reason why Mbappe cost what he did and also a reason why Haaland is valued at a higher price than Sancho. Gareth Bale went for a record fee because of his goal scoring too.

The truth is the market went crazy after the Pogba transfer then completely lost all sense after the Neymar transfer. Transfer values made a lot more sense before those two transfers.

Goal scorers
Ibrahimovic to Barca - £40m + Eto'o
Bale to Madrid - £85m
Cavani to PSG - £55m
Aguero to City - £40m
Higuain to Napoli - £35m
Torres to Chelsea - £50m
Falcao to Monaco - £51m
Diego Costa to Chelsea - £32m
Suarez to Barca - £75m
Villa to Barca - £32m

Creators
Sneijder to Inter - £14m
Fabregas to Barca - £30m
James to Madrid - £63m
Mata to Manutd - £40m
Ozil to Arsenal - £42m
D.Silva to City - £24m
KDB to City - £55m
Hazard to Chelsea - £36m
Isco to Madrid - £25m
Di Maria to Manutd -£63m
Eriksen to Spurs - £13m
Cazorla to Arsenal - £10m
I think the main difference is that wingers tend to move more between clubs. Looking at the current 20 most valuable players today according to transfermarkt:

1-. Mbappe - 160M
2-. Kane -120M
3-. Haaland - 110M
4-. Salah - 110M
5-. Neymar - 110M
6-. Sancho - 100M
7-. TAA - 100M
8-. Mane - 100M
9-. Sterling - 100M
10-. De Bruyne 100M
11-. Bruno - 90M
12-. Kimmich - 90M
13-. Oblak - 90M
14-. Lukaku - 90M
15-. Rashford - 85M
16-. Son - 85M
17-. Ansy Fati - 80M
18-. Joao Felix - 80M
19-. De Jong - 80M
20- Messi - 80M

Purely goalscorers we have 3 in Kane, Haaland and Lukaku. Mbappe is an odd one since he plays mostly as a winger/second striker rather than a pure 9. All the other besides Oblak are creators and goal scorers, I think its hard to say weather a winger is a goal scorer or a creator since the position has developed a lot since Cristiano and now wingers are expected to contribute a lot more with goals than before. So from the purely creator point of view I think from the list you could only mention De Bruyne and De Jong, all the others including Bruno and Messi contribute so much with goals that calling them purely creators would be wrong IMO.
 

Redfrog

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
717
That is kind of pointless debate. And Owen and Fabregas are only saying what suits them as players.

Both are crucial. Goalscoring is pointing toward individual brillance and passing toward collective brillance. Football is a mix of that. You can both love football because a goal is well constructed by a team and because a player dribbled 10 players and scored a screamer.

But that question is too abstract and general. Some assists are brillant and some easy. The same can be said about goals. It is like asking if you prefer eggs or bacon ? But first without the latter don’t test the same.

Personally, I think you need both in football, but I am not a fan of tiki taka and I prefer to watch prime Brazil as you need the individual brillance and the collective brillance to have a total picture of football.
 

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
734
There is a reason clubs pay top dollars for guys who score goals than those who assist them.
 

NasirTimothy

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
797
Supports
Enyimba F.C.
It's an argument that is never going to have conclusive evidence either way.

However, down the years, I think goal scorers have been the more valuable, and generally, teams with world class finishers have dominated.

I'm thinking Lewandowski, Ronaldo, Messi (although he perfectly fits both), and further back you can pick any amount of traditional strikers who were the focal point of any successful team.

Historically, prolific goal scorers have sold for the most money, and the pressure to be the main goalscorer for a top club is more tangible in my opinion. But there's no right or wrong answer I don't think, just a matter of opinion.

Personally, I value a player like Kane over a player like De Bruyne, but of course the value of one is dependent on having the other in the team at the end of the day. Still, on the margin, if I only had the budget to buy one, I'd buy Kane.
First bolded bit is just not true. A cursory look at the list of record transfers shows that the players that go for the most money are typically extremely creative players who also can score goals. Players who just score goals are rarely the most valuable.

If it comes down to only creativity v only goals, I’m taking Zidane over Inzaghi or Shearer every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I’m also definitely taking peak DeBruyne (I think he’s slowed down a bit now) over Kane, it’s not even close.

I guess the most valuable player is the mythical number 10; not the 9 or the midfielder but the hybrid. The best examples of that are Pele and Messi.
 

Tomuś

Nani is crap, I tell you!
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
5,505
Location
Świdnik
Don't get the surprise with what Owen's saying. Only in the last few days we've had a dubious thread downplaying assists as credible statistics.
 

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
734
First bolded bit is just not true. A cursory look at the list of record transfers shows that the players that go for the most money are typically extremely creative players who also can score goals. Players who just score goals are rarely the most valuable.

If it comes down to only creativity v only goals, I’m taking Zidane over Inzaghi or Shearer every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I’m also definitely taking peak DeBruyne (I think he’s slowed down a bit now) over Kane, it’s not even close.

I guess the most valuable player is the mythical number 10; not the 9 or the midfielder but the hybrid.
How about peak Zidane and peak R9? Its not even a contest.

You just conveniently picked Zidane and Inzaghi.
 

NasirTimothy

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
797
Supports
Enyimba F.C.
How about peak Zidane and peak R9? Its not even a contest.

You just conveniently picked Zidane and Inzaghi.
Yeah I picked Shearer and Inzaghi because they’re pretty pure goalscorers. Even though R9 was prolific, he was also exceptionally creative, a tremendous dribbler.

I was contrasting a player that was creative but didn’t score much (Zidane) with players that scored a lot but were not particularly creative. I’d take the creative player because they can influence the game more without being reliant on service.
 

Nick7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
14,912
Location
Ireland
I would have said scoring goals but then I thought more about it and anything that would make me agree with Michael Owen is probably wrong.
 

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
734
Yeah I picked Shearer and Inzaghi because they’re pretty pure goalscorers. Even though R9 was prolific, he was also exceptionally creative, a tremendous dribbler.

I was contrasting a player that was creative but didn’t score much (Zidane) with players that scored a lot but were not particularly creative. I’d take the creative player because they can influence the game more without being reliant on service.
I guess my point was that if you're going to pick an exceptional midfielder to support your argument, you should also pick an exceptional striker to compare them against.

I would also add, as good as Zizou was, he got somewhat overrated since he retired. Seems to get better in retirement than when he was actually playing.
 

eire-red

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
984
First bolded bit is just not true. A cursory look at the list of record transfers shows that the players that go for the most money are typically extremely creative players who also can score goals. Players who just score goals are rarely the most valuable.

If it comes down to only creativity v only goals, I’m taking Zidane over Inzaghi or Shearer every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I’m also definitely taking peak DeBruyne (I think he’s slowed down a bit now) over Kane, it’s not even close.

I guess the most valuable player is the mythical number 10; not the 9 or the midfielder but the hybrid. The best examples of that are Pele and Messi.
OK, so the players who have sold for the most money are both prolific goalscorers and creators. Of course you will take a player who can do both, that wasn't really the point of discussion to begin with though.

Zidane is a strange example, he's one of the all time greats of the game. What about Kane vs Modric? Two world class players, but very different, and a bit more comparable.

As for peak De Bruyne vs Kane not even being close, I don't know what to say to that. Any team in world football would take either of them. It's impossible to say any one take on it is right.

If you're a team fighting relegation, do you take Zidane or Shearer? Which is going to keep you in the league? There is no one answer.
 

Infordin

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2016
Messages
3,634
Supports
Barcelona
I can name plenty of shit footballers who were great goalscorers. Inzaghi just to name one.

I cannot name a single technically limited footballer who was a great chance creator, because that doesn’t exist.

Creating is harder than scoring.
 

SadlerMUFC

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
4,121
Location
Niagara Falls, Canada
Goals and assists should be measured equally (or there abouts). In fact, the greatest hockey player of all time (sorry, I'm Canadian) put more emphasis on his assists than his goals and nobody will ever come close to his scoring and assists record...
 

NasirTimothy

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
797
Supports
Enyimba F.C.
I guess my point was that if you're going to pick an exceptional midfielder to support your argument, you should also pick an exceptional striker to compare them against.

I would also add, as good as Zizou was, he got somewhat overrated since he retired. Seems to get better in retirement than when he was actually playing.
Re Zidane, I’ve seen so many people on here say this, I don’t agree at all.

Is Shearer not an exceptional striker?
 

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
734
Re Zidane, I’ve seen so many people on here say this, I don’t agree at all.

Is Shearer not an exceptional striker?
Shearer was a fine striker, just not in Zidane's league. ZZ was a 3 time FIFA world player of the year.
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
7,625
I agree. The downplaying of what a quality forward does to get goals is quite funny
I think this is downplaying a forwards skillset and what you would see is the average joe getting marked out of games most of the time and squandering the vast majority of chances they do get , assuming you're talking about them trying to play at premier league and Cl level.
 

NasirTimothy

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2021
Messages
797
Supports
Enyimba F.C.
OK, so the players who have sold for the most money are both prolific goalscorers and creators. Of course you will take a player who can do both, that wasn't really the point of discussion to begin with though.

Zidane is a strange example, he's one of the all time greats of the game. What about Kane vs Modric? Two world class players, but very different, and a bit more comparable.

As for peak De Bruyne vs Kane not even being close, I don't know what to say to that. Any team in world football would take either of them. It's impossible to say any one take on it is right.

If you're a team fighting relegation, do you take Zidane or Shearer? Which is going to keep you in the league? There is no one answer.
Having seen what Zidane did for Cannes, I’d definitely take him over Shearer even with a relegation contender
 

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
734
So who would people pick between ZZ and R9? Both are very comparable in their own positions, both 3 time FIFA world player of the years, both world cup winners, both qualify for the "tag" of all time greats. ZZ has a CL trophy R9 never had.
 

Demyanenko_square_jaw

Full Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2017
Messages
531
I can name plenty of shit footballers who were great goalscorers. Inzaghi just to name one.

I cannot name a single technically limited footballer who was a great chance creator, because that doesn’t exist.

Creating is harder than scoring.
This way of analysing seems to assume that you could put take any great chance creator and put them up front and they would be able to do what a great poacher did, due to having superior passing/crossing skill and vision (and maybe dribbling too. It's just not true though. Instances of midfielders successfully becoming forwards of equal or superior effectiveness at the professional level are vanishingly rare.

The skillsets of a forward and midfielder just aren't so easily comparable in terms of difficulty. It's not even necessarily about technique, there is more to football than that.

Someone that is only good at poaching would be comparable to a creator that only has good passing and vision, but lacking talent in every other area. Both have always been a rarity among the best teams, but found more and more as you move down the levels.
 

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
734
This way of analysing seems to assume that you could put take any great chance creator and put them up front and they would be able to do what a great poacher did, due to having superior passing/crossing skill and vision (and maybe dribbling too. It's just not true though. Instances of midfielders successfully becoming forwards of equal or superior effectiveness at the professional level are vanishingly rare.

The skillsets of a forward and midfielder just aren't so easily comparable in terms of difficulty. It's not even necessarily about technique, there is more to football than that.

Someone that is only good at poaching would be comparable to a creator that only has good passing and vision, but lacking talent in every other area. Both have always been a rarity among the best teams, but found more and more as you move down the levels.
Yeah, to assume anyone can do what Inzaghi did is also lame. He was good at what he did, not many could do it.
 

Bigbusdutz

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Messages
13
How many chances are created per game and how many goals are scored per game there is your answer.

look at Brighton look pretty create plenty of chances but don’t have a striker to put them away
 

MileStolar

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
302
Location
Belgrade, Serbia
Put the best finisher in a team devoid of creativity and he'll drown and starve without ball.

Put the best creator in a team devoid of finishers and some are bound to bounce off of them.
 

OleBoiii

Full Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2019
Messages
4,015
Creating chances is statistically easier, hence why more big chances are created than goals scored.
This is a bit of a fallacy. By definition you can't score a goal without first having created a chance. Basically: it's impossible to have fewer chances than goals.
 

MileStolar

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
302
Location
Belgrade, Serbia
Creating chances is statistically easier, hence why more big chances are created than goals scored.
Well creating a chance is a requirement for a goal really, you can't have more goals than you create chances, you can't have more assists than goals, it's really not comparable in that sense...
 

P-Nut

fan of well-known French footballer Fabinho
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
19,007
Location
Oldham, Greater Manchester
This is a bit of a fallacy. By definition you can't score a goal without first having created a chance. Basically: it's impossible to have fewer chances than goals.
Well creating a chance is a requirement for a goal really, you can't have more goals than you create chances, you can't have more assists than goals, it's really not comparable in that sense...
Big chances of course you can, a pop shot can fly in, in fact I'd back that most of the goals that are scored don't come off the back of a big chance being created. Think the pass to Greenwood the other day, that wouldn't go down as a big chance created, but still resulted in a goal.
 
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
12,233
I really dislike the importance that we associate with ‘assists’ now.

more than often it will be the assist before the assist that’s far more important to the goal.

does the Argentine who passed the ball to Maradona in ‘86 get an assist before he dribbled past most of the team?

clearly players create goals, but I don’t like this fashion of goal contributions, it’s a terrible statistic whose importance seems to be equal to a goal.
 

The Original

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
945
Location
The Gambia
Sometimes, often, the thing that makes the goal possible is neither the goal nor the assist.

30 yard cutting pass to the 1st striker, 1st striker taps it to the 2ns striker who slots it home

The 30 yard cutting pass got the goal but doesn't get credited.
I was just going to post that assisting doesn't mean creating in the true sense. Creating is by far the hardest competency in football IMO as it requires a mix of vision and orchestration, seeing the picture others aren't, and having the technique to bring said vision to life.
 

RUCK4444

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
6,625
Location
$¥$¥$¥$¥$
I honestly think assisting a goal in a creative sense, to find that pass to open up an opposition defence can be a lot harder than putting it in the back of the net.

The goals are fixed, you know there location and over time you instinctively know their location relative to yours upon receiving the ball... that’s entirely different to making an assist where the variables are increased tenfold.

Movement of players relative to your own, vision to read the game and movement of teammates, the pass itself is often far more intricate/difficult than the finish to place it either side of a keeper.

I think a lot has been made of assists in stats recently however, proper, game changing assists are very difficult and probably under appreciated if anything.
To be clear I’m not talking a two yard square pass or a cut back, a ‘proper’ Bruno special is what I’m mostly referring to.
 

Kag

Full Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
16,677
Location
United Kingdom
There’s something almost intangible about the ability players have to just know where to be inside the box. See Cavani more recently. It seems less about the actual finishing (still difficult) and more about the movement that makes goal scoring occur that seems to be the hardest thing to do.

In my esteemed experience of weekly 7aside, I find pinging the ball about easier than actually finding myself in a position to score. So I’ll back Owen, which probably means I’m talking a load of old bollocks.